[I'm selling some books on eBay]

I need some cash, so I'm selling some books on eBay: They can be found here, if anyone is interested: Items for sale.

 

I am willing to take less than the Buy It Now prices, which is why I have the best offer option on there.

Thanks.

[Rome catacomb reveals "oldest" image of St Paul]

Thanks! I'd been looking for some decent pictures.

[Rome catacomb reveals "oldest" image of St Paul]

From Reuters:

Rome catacomb reveals "oldest" image of St Paul

 

ROME (Reuters) - Vatican archaeologists using laser technology have discovered what they believe is the oldest image in existence of St Paul the Apostle, dating from the late 4th century, on the walls of catacomb beneath Rome.

 

Vatican newspaper Osservatore Romano, revealing the find on Sunday, published a picture of a frescoed image of the face of a man with a pointed black beard on a red background, inside a bright yellow halo. The high forehead is furrowed.

 

Experts of the Ponitifical Commission for Sacred Archaeology made the discovery on June 19 in the Catacomb of Santa Tecla in Rome and describe it as the "oldest icon in history dedicated to the cult of the Apostle," according to the Vatican newspaper.

 

The discovery, which involved removing layers of clay and limestone using lasers, was announced a day before Rome observes a religious holiday for the Feasts of St Peter and St Paul.

 

Peter and Paul are revered by Christians as the greatest early missionaries. Converting on the road to Damascus following a blinding vision of Jesus, Paul took the Gospel to pagan Greeks and Romans and met his martyrdom in Rome in about 65 AD.

 

Early Christians in Rome buried their dead in catacombs dug into the soft rock under the city and decorated the underground walls with devotional images, often in the Pompeian style.

 

(Writing by Stephen Brown; Editing by Sophie Hares)

 

No photographs accompanied the article.

 

And:

 

Pope says bone fragments found in St Paul's tomb

 

By Stephen Brown

 

ROME (Reuters) - Pope Benedict announced on Sunday that fragments of bone from the first or second century had been found in a tomb in the Basilica of St Paul in Rome, which he said confirmed the belief that it housed the apostle's remains.

 

"This seems to confirm the unanimous and undisputed tradition that these are the mortal remains on the Apostle Paul," the pontiff said at St Paul's-Outside-the-Walls, on the eve of the Feasts of St Peter and St Paul celebrated on Monday.

 

Peter and Paul are revered by Christians as the greatest early missionaries. Converting on the road to Damascus following a blinding vision of Jesus, Paul took the Gospel to pagan Greeks and Romans and met his martyrdom in Rome in about AD 65.

 

Christian tradition had it that St Paul was buried together with St Peter in a catacomb on the Via Appia, before being moved to the basilica erected in his honor. For centuries it was believed that his remains were buried beneath the altar.

 

But it was not until a stone sarcophagus was discovered there in 2006 that Vatican archeologists could apply scientific research to the religious tradition.

 

The first results come during the "Pauline Year," when the Roman Catholic church has been celebrating the second millennium of the birth of the "Apostle of the Gentiles."

 

Pope Benedict gave details of the discovery, saying a tiny hole had been drilled in the sarcophaguus to permit inspection of the interior, revealing "traces of a precious linen cloth, purple in color, laminated with pure gold, and a blue colored textile with filaments of linen."

 

"It also revealed the presence of grains of red incense and traces of protein and limestone. There were also tiny fragments of bone, which, when subjected to Carbon 14 tests by experts, turned out to belong to someone who lived in the first or second century," said the pope.

 

FRESCOED IMAGE

 

The discovery of the bone fragments coincided with news that Vatican archaeologists had discovered what they believe is the oldest image in existence of St Paul, dating from the late 4th century, on the walls of catacomb beneath Rome.

 

Vatican newspaper Osservatore Romano, revealing the find on Sunday, published a picture of a frescoed image of the face of a man with a pointed black beard on a red background, inside a bright yellow halo. The high forehead is furrowed.

 

Experts of the Ponitifical Commission for Sacred Archaeology made the discovery on June 19 in the Catacomb of Santa Tecla in Rome and described it as the "oldest icon in history dedicated to the cult of the Apostle," according to the Vatican newspaper.

 

Early Christians in Rome buried their dead in catacombs dug into the soft rock under the city and decorated the underground walls with devotional images, often in the Pompeian style.

 

(Writing by Stephen Brown; editing by Ralph Boulton)

[Newcomer to Roman History - Recommended books?]

I'd recommend History of the Roman World: 753 to 146 BC and From the Gracchi to Nero: A History of Rome from 133 BC to AD 68 by HH Scullard.

 

They're both fairly straightforward reads; definitely worth your time, I think.

['Ancient text' seized in Israel]

From the BBC

 

Israeli authorities say they have recovered a papyrus document which appears to be nearly 2,000 years old.

 

The document measures 15cm by 15cm (6in by 6in), and contains 15 lines of ancient Hebrew script.

 

It appears to be a legal instruction, transferring a widow's property to her late husband's brother.

 

It was seized from two Palestinian men in a sting operation at a Jerusalem hotel, police said. The two could face several years in jail.

 

The Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) said on Wednesday that the scroll was an "exceptional archeological document, of the like but a few exist," reported Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

 

It said similar scrolls had been sold worldwide for sums as high as $5-10m (

[Ancient Sources]

I actually got giddy when I saw that Bill Thayer posted here. Does that make me a huge nerd? Welcome Mr. Thayer!

[Least favourite subject]

I think Neil was referring to our 'least fave' topics within Roman history.

3) Romano-British history - to be brutally frank.

 

I agree. Caesar's invasion interests me, but beyond that it doesn't really do anything for me.

[The Division of Alexander's Empire]

Okay, friends, I need some more recommendations. I'm looking for some authoritative--yet affordable--books on the division of Alexander the Great's kingdom on his death. I'm ill-informed on this period and would like to correct that. Is scholarship on this period plentiful?

[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]

Thanks everyone! I came across a few of the titles mentioned here, but right now they're out of my price range. A few of these, though, I should be able to track down. I really do appreciate the help, and if anyone has any more suggestions, please don't hesitate. I've become extremely fascinated with the period of the Maccabees and I'll never fully understand it if I can't wrap my head around Antiochus. I do own Cambridge Ancient History v. IX and there is an excellent essay in there about the Jews under Hasmonean rule. So that does help.

[The Roman Revolution]

Though it tells against my point I can't resist recounting a nasty academic put-down from a few years back. A speaker had given a lecture comparing Victorian and Roman marriage, paying plenty of attention to the parallels, and suggesting what this could tell us about Roman marriage.

 

One of the early 'questions' was from someone who recounted the story of a drunk who was found by a policeman on his hands and knees under a streetlight. The drunk explained that he had lost his wallet back in the alleyway, and was looking for it. 'Well, why are you not looking for it in the alleyway?' asked the policeman. The drunk replied 'the light is better here'.

 

I always recall this anecdote whenever I go hunting for evidence for ancient Rome in other eras.

 

That is fantastic! Do you mind if I steal--er, use it?

[What's the last book you read?]

I am now reading "The Chosen People" by John M Allegro.

 

For those of you who are unfamiliar with the name, Professor Allegro was part of the original team that translated the Dead Sea Scrolls.

 

Sounds interesting. Please let me know what you thought about it when you finish.

 

I, over the past couple months, have been interested in Judaea from Alexander the Great to the destruction of the Temple, and, a little later, the Bar Kochba revolt. Right now I'm reading From the Maccabees to the Mishnah by Shaye J.D. Cohen, and when I finish that I plan on reading, Heritage and Hellenism: the Reinvention of Jewish Tradition by Erich S. Gruen, a name familiar to some, if not most, on this board.

[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]

Indeed !

But I have read some books about his relationship with Rome and with Judaea, I will list if you want

 

Please do! It will be greatly appreciated.

[recommend me a book, O' great and learned peers]

I need reading material to pass away the summer.

 

Recommend me books or DVDs on the following areas:

 

• Early Christianity or Roman Catholicism
  
• Judaism in the Greco-Roman world
  
• Anything on Paganism I might not have already read
  
• Roman Slavery
  
• Biographies of Roman statesmen (aside from Caesar and Augustus)
  
• A Roman literati I have not already read (in English translation)
  
• A book on related cultures (Carthaginians, Persians, Germanic tribes, etc)
  
• Anything else on Roman history and culture that does not focus exclusively on the military
  

 

I'm 3/4 of the way through a book right now, entitled, "From the Maccabees to the Mishnah," which you might like. It details Judaism in the Second Temple period, including practices, beliefs, institutions, etc. An amazing and enlightening read; definitely worth checking out.

 

If you haven't read Eusebius, I'd recommend checking him out, too.

 

Pengiun has published a multi-volume history of the church, Volume 1 might interest you.

 

Hope that helps!

[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]

Does anyone know of a book or biography of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and his rule? I can't seem to find anything dedicated to him.

[Mythological Personality test]

Back in July of '07 when I took this test and discovered I was "The Oracle," I couldn't bear to see that "fualt." Looking back at my old posting in this thread, I see that I had gone back in and edited that misspelled word within three minutes of doing the cut'n'paste.

 

-- Nephele

 

Of course they put that 'fualt' in there on purpose, so you suckers for this kind of 'personality tests' can feel very smug and 'analytical'.

 

Ouch. That's harsh. I didn't take this test seriously; I was bored, at work, and thought, 'what the hell. I have nothing better to do.'

[Crucifixion and Roman punishment]

Another point that's going to need a Bible scholar to resolve definitively... Let's agree to disagree why Jesus was crucified, but what about the two gentlemen he was crucified alongside? The English version of the Bible says 'thieves'. We might stretch this to 'bandits' or even, to get technical, Jewish 'listim'.

 

However, if these are defined in the Latin version as 'ladri' (thieves) then we have to accept that in a book designed for a Roman audience, in a section which those writing it wanted to be as credible as possible, people are reported as being crucified by the Roman authorities for being thieves.

 

In the research I've done, the Greek word used in the New Testament, lestai, means insurrectionists. It's typically translated into English as Thieves or Bandits to illustrate that Jesus was Crucified among the lowest of the low. Insurrectionists has led some scholars to speculate that those crucified alongside him were his conspirators in whatever "real" reason he was crucified. I'm not sure I buy that--because it's pure speculation--but it is interesting.

 

Another quote I found reads as follows:

 

lestai is a "Greek word that could mean 'freedom fighter/insurgent/zealot' to the Jews under occupation but 'bandit/terrorist' to the occupiers."

[Crucifixion and Roman punishment]

This is interesting. I found this in the book, Spectacles of Death in Ancient Rome by Donald G. Kyle, pgs. 168-169

 

Clearly there were executions in the area of the Esquiline, and the corpses may have been buried, dumped, or exposed nearby. Dumping on the Esquiline was primarily a way to dispose of the indigent and the abandoned dead of Rome. 90 Neither ancient texts nor Lanciani connect the Esquiline to arena spectacles. Moreover, torture, execution, abuse, and disposal were not confined to the suburbs. From Rome's earliest days such things took place in the Forum, and as the spectacles grew they were transposed to arenas in the heart of town. The more spectacles of death were concentrated within the city, and the more the city expanded, the less likely was it that deposition on the Esquiline or similar fields would be used for arena disposal. 91 Pits could provide a symbolic casting out, along with non-provision and probable prevention of burial by relatives, but the lustral quality of pits could be outdone. Other options must be considered, including crucifixion and fire.

 

Understandably, discussions of crucifixion often focus on the Christian Gospels and the debated historicity of the accounts of the death and disposal of Jesus, 92 but executions in Judea were perhaps adapted to local Jewish customs. Archaeology shows that death might be hurried and corpses of crucified men might be taken down at night and allowed burial in Judea, 93 and in Italy the case at Puteoli suggests that corpses were removed 'if' an order was given. Victims of crucifixion died slow, agonizing deaths, 94 and they were guarded-certainly until dead and probably longer.

 

Crucifixion should be seen as a form of exposure to the elements and beasts, for, outside Judea, it is unlikely that most corpses were taken down, let alone buried after crucifixion. In Petronius' story of the widow of Ephesus the governor of a Greek province ordered that some thieves be crucified near the tomb where a widow was mourning her buried husband. A soldier assigned to watch the crosses, 'to prevent anyone taking down a body for burial', of course, became preoccupied with the widow. While the soldier neglected his watch, the parents of one of the crucified men took down his corpse at night and gave it burial rites. The next day, seeing one of the crosses empty, the guard feared punishment, but he and the widow conveniently found a replacement. 95 Usually, then, to prolong the message of deterrence, corpses were simply left to suffer excarnation via animals and decay. This horrid but probably effective custom seems to have continued at medieval gallows. 96

[Crucifixion and Roman punishment]

Well, all right; I'm willing to concede that my discussion of the sources isn't relevant to this conversation. However, I still maintain that the entire Caesar/crucifixion-of-the-pirates story isn't relevant because it wasn't state sanctioned.

Then, I'm willing to agree that we disagree.

 

I disagree.

 

Just kidding.

 

I'll agree to that.

[Crucifixion and Roman punishment]

The major question is: Was it independently attested, or did the authors use a common source?

 

That aside, on its face, the story is suspect: It

[Crucifixion and Roman punishment]

It's possible the story is apocryphal. If not, this certainly isn't a case of state-sanctioned crucifixion, so I excluded it from the discussion.

As I have already noted, this story was reported by three independent and regularly used classical sources, two of them regularly considered as particularly reliable. With all due respect, this story performs far better on this count than Jesus' crucifixion.

BTW, it is exactly because it wasn't state-sanctioned that this crucifixion is so relevant for this discussion.

 

The major question is: Was it independently attested, or did the authors use a common source?

 

That aside, on its face, the story is suspect: It

[Crucifixion and Roman punishment]

It seems that one of the better known anecdotes on Roman crucifixion has not been mentioned yet on this thread; the famous execution of a pirate crew from Pharmacusa by a private citizen, Caius Julius Caesar, at Pergame in 75 BC. Caesar's excuse was that Marcus Iuncus (or Iunius?), the Proconsul in Asia, failed to punish them; as we all know, the same pirates had previously held Caesar captive for weeks. Velleius, Plutarch and Suetonius agree all that Caesar crucified them; with (unintended?) irony, the latter adds that as a sign of his mercy, Caesar cut their throats previous to the crucifixion.

 

For any reason, I guess a hidden esoteric political explanation may be hypothesized for these crucifixions. Needless to say, I'm not aware of any source that would support such extraordinary idea; I don't think I would be able to add anything else.

 

I'd considered mentioning it the other day, but didn't think it was relevant to the conversation we were having. It's possible the story is apocryphal. If not, this certainly isn't a case of state-sanctioned crucifixion, so I excluded it from the discussion.

 

I do, however, find this point interesting.

 

But crucifixion no doubt also had a symbolic purpose : it was the most dishonourable kind of execution. Dishonourable to the victim himself but also to his relatives. The most honourable one being to be allowed to take your own life.

Formosus

[/color]

[Mythological Personality test]

Mine was:

 

The Oracle

0% Extroversion, 100% Intuition, 0% Emotiveness, 67% Perceptiveness

 

Heuristic, detached, and analytical to a fualt, you are most like The Oracle. You are able to tackle any subject with a fine toothed comb, and you possess an ability to pinpoint nuances and shades of meaning that other people do not have and cannot understand. Accomplishment and realization of ideas are, for you, secondary to the rigorous exploration of ideas and questions -- you are, first and foremost, a theorist. You hate authority, convention, tradition, and under no circumstances do you accept a leadership role (although, you will gladly advise leadership when they're going astray, whether they want you to or not). Abstraction and generalities are your interests, details and particulars are usually inconsequential and uninteresting. You excel at language, mathematics and philosophy.

 

You are typically easy-going and non-confrontational until someone violates one of the very few principles that you deem sacred, at which point you can fly into a rage. Although you possess a much greater understanding of process and systems than the people around you, you are always conscious of the possibility that you've missed something or made a mistake. You don't tend to become attached to particular theories, and will immediately discard mistaken notions once they're revealed to be incorrect (but you don't tolerate iconoclasts who try to discredit validated theories through the use of fallacies and bad data). Despite being outwardly humble, you probably think of yourself as being smarter than most other people. That's because you are. In fact, in your dealings with people your understanding of their motives is so expansive that you know what they're going to say before they say it, and in world affairs, you usually know what is going to take place before it actually does. This ability would make you unbeatable in debates if only you were a little less pensive about your own conclusions, and a little more outgoing.

 

Famous people like you: Albert Einstein, Charles Darwin, Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, John McWhorter, Ramanujan, Marie Curie, Kurt Godel

Stay clear of: Apollo, Icarus, Hermes, Aphrodite

Seek out: Atlas, Prometheus, Daedalus

 

 

It's funny that, in the first sentence, it says I'm analytic to a fault. And, scanning over it, I noticed--and scoffed--that fault was spelled incorrectly.

[Veracity of Gospels and other things]

I

[Veracity of Gospels and other things]

We know nothing about Jesus

[Veracity of Gospels and other things]

There is more than legend and some research is being done in the this area concerning Jesus. The tomb bearing his name dates from the period. Unfortunately I'm not aware of the details of this hypothesis yet but I'm interested to see what turns up. Don't get me wrong - if it turns out there's no evidence of Jesus in India then that's how it is. However, it is curious that Jesus had some very 'indian-style' things to say about the world (at least as far as they've survived the Roman rewrites)

 

I have read this before, the alleged influence of Eastern philosophy on Jesus' worldview, so to speak. But it is, I think, an unnecessary explanation. The stance that many historians take these days is that Jesus was a Jewish Apocalypticist (it is also an argument I believe to be extremely probable); in this light, everything he is alleged to have said in the New Testament makes sense.

If you