Julian

Cheers mate. Thanks. Julian

Thank you for posting this. I'd not heard this news. Julian

Yes, it is certainly a great ending. One that would please Augustus no end, I'm sure. I have not had time to visit recently and so do not know if this list has been posted, but it may help some of our younger members or others unable to buy Loeb classics. Latin and Greek authors on the web

You know that list is all well and good, but I humbly pose the question; did Rome fall at all? Considering the influence the Vatican still has upon humanity, I think the question valid.

Hello. I would like to buy busts of famous Romans. Does anybody know of an online store where I can do this? Many thanks. Julian

How ironic he was killed as a result of the Earth spewing its innards.

Hello Primus. Thanks for responding. I understand your position. Sadly today we have no solid proof either way as to whether Nero persecuted Christians or not. This is why I have not stated anything as factual and have left my position open ended. That is the reason I said there is no 'real' evidence. Perhaps I should have said 'physical' evidence. All we have is hearsay, written some time after the event. Hardly solid proof of anything. As I am sure you would agree. I do not think Tacitus wrote so as to punish Christians. Christianity at that time being a very small and unimportant cult in Rome, would hardly warrant an attack from Tacitus. I do however think it possible that a long running family feud (If memory serves, the Julio Claudians were no friends of Tacitus's forebears) may have led to Tacitus placing undue blame upon Nero. Nero was more likely to have had information as to how the fire began then we do. Nero was not in Rome at the time, as we know, and he did respond well to the crisis once he learned of it. His 'fiddling' while Rome burned is no more true than any other hearsay we possess. I believe we need to always consider the attitude of those who survived the Julio Claudians, and their willingness to portray its members as dissolute, simply as a means of ruining the family's reputation, and to assuage any ill feeling on the part of the general population after the familiy's downfall and slaughter. Our problem today is that we have no real way of confirming or denying the unknown or known facts. Whatever they may be. We can however use later history as a guide as to how Tacitus' books may have been used by the Christian apologist ghost writers. We do know that many books were later doctored and changed, many destroyed completely. So as far as I can tell, both possibilities are worth mentioning, i.e. that Nero persecuted Christians, and that he did not. Current discoveries in archeaology being on the latter side. I personally lean toward Christian propagandists writing fictional biographies and doctoring texts. But I make no claim that this was so. Just a possibility. And as such, is only based on this individual's opinion.

I believe this idea is unsupported by any known facts. In many ways, this view shows the relevance of the opening post.

Yes, Psellus was very arrogant. Did he write honestly? I believe so. I think he was tremendous and certainly the most important historian after Ammianus. I learned so much from him. I've not read him in years though. I must get back to him, now that I think about it.

Very true.

How curious a post the above. Who copied and archived much of Latin literature while educational standards all but disappeared in the former Roman Empire? The Benedictines preserved much of Roman agricultural science as well. Not really. Just who was it who lowered the educational standards in the first place, and placed Biblical study in its place? The Christians. At least in the west. But even in the east many books were burned. I hardly think they are worthy of being congradulated for their destruction.

Did Augustus persecute the followers of Ahura Mazda, the God that became Mithras and then Jesus Christ? No.

Bacchus of course!!! "((hic))" I am an Australian after all.

First of all, there is no real evidence that Nero ever persecuted Christians. Indeed, aside from Diocletian, I doubt they were "persecuted" at all to any real degree. Punished for political subversion, yes. Religion, no. People who have studied the history of Christianity in detail would be aware that the many stories and biographies of the martyrs, were fictional accounts written as late as the 9th century. We must always remember the dictum of the Bishop Eusebius. "It is perfectly fine to lie on behalf of Christianity, as long as that lie helps Christianity." Quoted loosely. The idea that Nero persecuted Christians is based in a history that, a; may have been doctored, b; was wrtitten by a member of a family opposed to Nero's. There is no physical proof regarding this persecution at all. In fact at this date there were more than likely virtually no Christians in Rome. If there were, Christianity being an apocalyptic cult, they may have been responsible. History shows us that Christians destroyed and slaughtered millions of non Christians once they had gained power. It may not be too bigger leap to believe that Christians did set fire to Pagan temples Rome. They did so during Julian's reign and then into the following centuries. Even unto this present day. It's happening in India as I write. See this site for details. I have, for many years now, thought that the persecution was actually carried out by Christianity upon Paganism. It is nothing but very clever propaganda on the part of the church that has resulted in the popular idea that Christians were persecuted. My histories tell me that Christians began their long running persecution of non Christians in the late 4th century.

I believe the truth is that there is no single or simple answer.