Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Post by andrewcriddle » Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:11 pm

Eusebius in his Church History and Chronicle has Peter arrive in Rome in the reign of the Emperor Claudius. AFAIK he is the earliest writer to date Peter's arrival this early. A little earlier Lactantius has
His apostles were at that time eleven in number, to whom were added Matthias, in the room of the traitor Judas, and afterwards Paul. Then were they dispersed throughout all the earth to preach the Gospel, as the Lord their Master had commanded them; and during twenty-five years, and until the beginning of the reign of the Emperor Nero, they occupied themselves in laying the foundations of the Church in every province and city.And while Nero reigned, the Apostle Peter came to Rome, and, through the power of God committed unto him, wrought certain miracles, and, by turning many to the true religion, built up a faithful and stedfast temple unto the Lord.
The claim that Peter was in Rome in the time of Claudius is certainly unhistorical, was it introduced by Eusebius ?

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12699
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Post by Secret Alias » Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:20 pm

I think it has something to do with:

1. Simon Magus being in Rome under Claudius (in multiple sources)
2. that there was some kind of confusion or parallel between the two Simons

It might also be worth remembering that in the Clementine writings (as we both discussed in another thread) the Homilies seem to be the more original and have Clement hear an unnamed preacher in Rome. The question is why was this preacher left unnamed or unidentified? It's a would-be Chekhov's gun that never goes off. Given the fact there seems to be built into the Clementines the notion that Simon goes first and Peter follows him after and that this in turn is likened (as I remember) to the left always going out before the right, evil before good, imperfect before perfect and - of course - female before male - I think the idea that Simon visited Rome under Claudius must have been understood to be the first visit of a Christian to Rome. But I think later writers like Eusebius didn't like that or didn't follow that esoteric logic. In short - yes I think you're right about Eusebius.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8252
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Post by Ben C. Smith » Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:24 pm

andrewcriddle wrote:
Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:11 pm
Eusebius in his Church History and Chronicle has Peter arrive in Rome in the reign of the Emperor Claudius. AFAIK he is the earliest writer to date Peter's arrival this early. A little earlier Lactantius has
His apostles were at that time eleven in number, to whom were added Matthias, in the room of the traitor Judas, and afterwards Paul. Then were they dispersed throughout all the earth to preach the Gospel, as the Lord their Master had commanded them; and during twenty-five years, and until the beginning of the reign of the Emperor Nero, they occupied themselves in laying the foundations of the Church in every province and city.And while Nero reigned, the Apostle Peter came to Rome, and, through the power of God committed unto him, wrought certain miracles, and, by turning many to the true religion, built up a faithful and stedfast temple unto the Lord.
The claim that Peter was in Rome in the time of Claudius is certainly unhistorical, was it introduced by Eusebius ?
Could be.

During which principate do the pseudo-Clementines date Peter's arrival? Not that they predate Eusebius as they stand, but they are often thought to contain or summarize earlier accounts.

Also, do you think that sometimes chronological errors might have arisen innocently from the similarity of the full names of the Julio-Claudian dynasty?

Tiberius: Tiberius Caesar Divi Augusti filius Augustus.
Caligula: Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus.
Claudius: Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus.
Nero: Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus.

Also, what Secret Alias said. (Our posts crossed.)
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12699
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Post by Secret Alias » Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:27 pm

Thanks Ben

The context of Eusebius's statement is interesting to - viz. a meeting between Peter and Philo?
It is also said that Philo in the reign of Claudius became acquainted at Rome with Peter, who was then preaching there. [396] Nor is this indeed improbable, for the work of which we have spoken, and which was composed by him some years later, clearly contains those rules of the Church which are even to this day observed among us.
Quite baffling to speculate what sort of source Eusebius had in mind!
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12699
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Post by Secret Alias » Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:31 pm

Runia notes that Jerome expanded upon Eusebius's original statement:
The meeting with Peter took place when Philo visited Rome a second time for an audience with Claudius;9 the two men formed a friendship, and this is why Philo was so favourably disposed to the followers of Peter's disciple Mark
https://books.google.com/books?id=SPvsp ... us&f=false
Feldman adds the reference Jerome de viris illustribus 11 and cf 8. The meeting is alleged to have happened by Orosius at the beginning of Claudius's reign https://books.google.com/books?id=10pDA ... us&f=false
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12699
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Post by Secret Alias » Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:38 pm

Grant notes there Eusebius doesn't merely assert the claim he actually provides 'evidence' of the meeting:
The tradition is confirmed by the fact that the treatise, composed considerably later than the time of the visit, 'contains the rules of the church which are still observed in our time' (II. 17. 1). This confirmation obviously does not confirm. https://books.google.com/books?id=scNLA ... 22&f=false
In other words, Eusebius alleges that Philo learned from Peter about Mark's monasteries in Egypt.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Post by andrewcriddle » Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:52 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:24 pm
andrewcriddle wrote:
Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:11 pm
Eusebius in his Church History and Chronicle has Peter arrive in Rome in the reign of the Emperor Claudius. AFAIK he is the earliest writer to date Peter's arrival this early. A little earlier Lactantius has
His apostles were at that time eleven in number, to whom were added Matthias, in the room of the traitor Judas, and afterwards Paul. Then were they dispersed throughout all the earth to preach the Gospel, as the Lord their Master had commanded them; and during twenty-five years, and until the beginning of the reign of the Emperor Nero, they occupied themselves in laying the foundations of the Church in every province and city.And while Nero reigned, the Apostle Peter came to Rome, and, through the power of God committed unto him, wrought certain miracles, and, by turning many to the true religion, built up a faithful and stedfast temple unto the Lord.
The claim that Peter was in Rome in the time of Claudius is certainly unhistorical, was it introduced by Eusebius ?
Could be.

During which principate do the pseudo-Clementines date Peter's arrival? Not that they predate Eusebius as they stand, but they are often thought to contain or summarize earlier accounts.
The main text of the pseudo-Clementines ends with Peter and Clement still on the way to Rome. The letter of Clement to James which is associated with the pseudo-Clementines refers to Peter's arrival in Rome and death but does not give a clear date. The Acts of Peter seems to have Peter arriving in Rome to combat Simon Magus during the reign of Nero.
Also, do you think that sometimes chronological errors might have arisen innocently from the similarity of the full names of the Julio-Claudian dynasty?

Tiberius: Tiberius Caesar Divi Augusti filius Augustus.
Caligula: Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus.
Claudius: Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus.
Nero: Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus.

Also, what Secret Alias said. (Our posts crossed.)
I think the names of the Emperors were confused but Eusebius seems to have a general agenda of providing Rome Alexandria and Antioch with bishop lists all going back to the time of Claudius. (Eusebius may not have been deliberately deceitful, he was trying to reconstruct long ago events with limited data,)

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8252
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Post by Ben C. Smith » Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:55 pm

andrewcriddle wrote:
Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:52 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:24 pm
During which principate do the pseudo-Clementines date Peter's arrival? Not that they predate Eusebius as they stand, but they are often thought to contain or summarize earlier accounts.
The main text of the pseudo-Clementines ends with Peter and Clement still on the way to Rome. The letter of Clement to James which is associated with the pseudo-Clementines refers to Peter's arrival in Rome and death but does not give a clear date. The Acts of Peter seems to have Peter arriving in Rome to combat Simon Magus during the reign of Nero.
Know what? I was actually thinking of the Acts of Peter, confusing their storyline with the pseudo-Clementine one. Okay, so that was Nero. Never mind. :)
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Post by andrewcriddle » Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:56 pm

Secret Alias wrote:
Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:31 pm
Runia notes that Jerome expanded upon Eusebius's original statement:
The meeting with Peter took place when Philo visited Rome a second time for an audience with Claudius;9 the two men formed a friendship, and this is why Philo was so favourably disposed to the followers of Peter's disciple Mark
https://books.google.com/books?id=SPvsp ... us&f=false
Feldman adds the reference Jerome de viris illustribus 11 and cf 8. The meeting is alleged to have happened by Orosius at the beginning of Claudius's reign https://books.google.com/books?id=10pDA ... us&f=false
I regard Jerome as entirely dependent upon Eusebius here.

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12699
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Peter in Rome and Eusebius

Post by Secret Alias » Wed Jun 06, 2018 3:02 pm

While Irenaeus does not explicitly say so it is implicit that Simon Magus must have been in Rome during the reign of Claudius:
Such was his procedure in the reign of Claudius Caesar, by whom also he is said to have been honoured with a statue, on account of his magical power.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

Post Reply