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.

I find these sort of questions too difficult to give a definitive answer. I doubt that a 'greatest' even existed. So many depend upon so many others to be even given a chance. Nevertheless, I will try my best. It depends. I think of many people when I think of Rome. Many never became leaders. Julian is atop my list, but I do regard him as an overly superstiscious and naive individual. I think of him when I think of what was lost to us in regards to genius, and the onset of ignorance. i.e. the growth of Christianity, the destruction of logic and the beginnings of the Dark ages. When I think of military arms, I think of Caesar, Augustus, Constantius, Constantine etc etc. But then, I am an enthusiast after all.

The worst Roman? That is a pretty big title for one to have to wear. There were certainly many who were bad. Sejanus, Caracalla, Commodus and Nero number amongst the more popular choices. How influential either one of these or others were in actually leading to the fall of them Empire, well, I think it is too hard for me to say. I believe there were too many other factors involved, including the general success of the human population explosion that grew and grew over the many centuries and forced its way into the Empire, as well as the growing sophistication of other nations or states. When I've read the history of the later Empire and the beginning through to the end of the Byzantine period, I see much foolishness where finance is concerned. Too many enemies, too higher price to pay for peace.....Money wasted on gifts for various lovers currently in the favour of whatever Emperor just happened tom be in charge at the time...All of it led to the fall. So I am left with my own personal choices of characters I have not liked in the descriptions I've read in the histories. Romans I dislike. Sejanus, Commodus, Caracalla, Valens, Theodosius, Gratian, Constantine, Constantius, Sulla, Cato the elder, Justinian, Theodora, Jovian, Leo I..... In fact there are many I dislike. It may be simpler to list those I do like.

Dominate into Byzantine for me. For reasons previously mentioned by others.

You are not alone. I hated her books. She writes as if what she is saying is the exact truth. She takes herself way too seriously! I am currently reading David Wishart's books. I began with Nero, and now I am reading the Marcus Corvinus series. I am up to Sejanus. I really like thse books. He has a nice sense of what I think Rome would have been like. He doesn't take himself too seriously either. I can hardly wait to pick these books up once I have set them down.

This is, I must admit, a sore point with me. The rough approximate estimate of people killed during the persecutions is around 2000, if what I have learned over the years is true. And if my memory serves. Now this was over the course of hundreds of years. More people than this could die in the games in a very quick time. Certainly more pagans were slaughtered as Christianity made its way to the top of the religious ladder than the oppossite. In fact hundreds of thousands were slaughtered by the Christians in the century following Theodosius. One must not forget that it went on for hundreds of years. Justinian finally made pagan worship a capital crime! He even tried to buy the Jews! Much is made of the "persecutions" by the Christian's themselves. They have always played the sympathy card. Begging ignorance and innocence whilst murdering millions over the course of centuries. There was no Roman religion, as far as I am aware, that commanded that non believers be killed. I am afraid many passages such as the following, have led to the death of millions. Exdodus 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me; The amount of church driven propaganda behind the stories of the persecutions cannot be underestimated. When one pools all the years of persecution together, there are less than 2 decades over the course of centuries. Also alot of the stories cannot be confirmed. If my understanding is correct, there is not a shread of archaeological eveidence to back the story of Nero's persecution. The number of Christian's actually in Rome at that time would have been few indeed. I have heard they numbered less than 0.05 of the total population of Rome, or less. All we have is from some writings that may or may not have been tampered with. It is a well known fact that the Bishop Eusebius was a known tamperer. Who actually claimed that to tell a lie on behalf of Christianity's cause was justified. People as long ago as Voltaire's time knew Eusebius had doctored Josephus. Oh well, this is not a religious discussion. I think the greatest factor in spreading Christianity was the army. They first spread the tale of Mithras. The god who was born 25 December to a virgin mother, had 12 apostles, was crucified, rose to Heaven to join Helios etc etc. It was just a simple matter to change the name of the god from Mithras, to Jesus and alter the story a little. In an age of illiteracy, this exchange would have easily passed unnoticed by the masses. And even if many did notice... well, modern history has taught us that if one repeats a lie often enough, it becomes truth.

I ticked a little bit of everything. Although to be honest, I don't really know. It began with me reading Greek philosophy as a youngster. That got me interested in Greek history. I remember well that I purposely held off from Roman history for a long time. I guess about 3 years. I knew that if ever I went in, I might never come out! Well, it seems I was right. I've been reading it for well over 20 years and love it as much today as I ever did. I have kind of moved on to Byzantium, but still keep in touch with Rome. My problem is that I often can't keep track of the names as time passes. If somebody were to ask me a detailed question about Scipio, or the Claudian's, I'd have to look it up. Although I'd know where to find the answer. The entire empire interests me. I can read Josephus with as much enthusiasm as Michael Psellus or Ammianus. I love it all.

Julian, good has sent you this email from http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php. From Essis Niagn Email:essis2@yahoo.fr Dearest, Good a thing to write you. I have a proposal for you-this however is not mandatory nor will I in any manner compel you to honour against your will. I am Niagne E Essis,19years old and the only daughter of my late parents Mr.and Mrs.Niagne. I have a younger brother Charles who is just 14 and half years old. My father was a highly reputable busnness magnet-(a cocoa merchant)who operated in the capital of Ivory coast during his days. It is sad to say that he passed away mysteriously in France during one of his business trips abroad year 12th.Febuary 2000.Though his sudden death was linked or rather suspected to have been masterminded by an uncle of his who travelled with him at that time. But God knows the truth! My mother died when I was just 4 years old,and since then my father took me so special. Before his death on Febuary 12 2000 he called the secretary who accompanied him to the hospital and told him that he has the sum of Sixteen million four hundred thousand United State Dollars.(USD$16.400,000) left in fixed deposit account in one of the leading banks in Africa. He further told him that he deposited the money in his name,and finally issued a written instruction to his lawyer whom he said is in possession of all the necessary but legal documents to this fund and the bank.I am just 19 years old and a university undergraduate and really don't know what to do. Now I want an account overseas where I can transfer this funds. This is because I have suffered a lot of set backs as a result of incessant political crisis here in Ivory coast.The death of my father actually brought sorrow to my life. Sir,I am in a sincere desire of your humble assistance in this regards.Your suggestions and ideas will be highly regarded. Now permit me to ask these few questions:- 1. Can you honestly help me as your daughter? 2. Can I completely trust you? 3. What percentage of the total amount in question will be good for you after the money is in your account? All that I require from you is an empty account from you. Please,Consider this and get back to me as soon as possible. Thank you so much. My sincere regards, Miss Niagne E Essis Please do response through this email address

Etruscan pottery was said to be very very nice. And yes, Persia was already an established enemy, and I think young Al' had a point to prove.

Here is a list of 10. In no particular order. Julian Trajan Titus Vespasian Severus Caesar Tiberius Marcus Aurelius Hadrian Constantine the Great

Actually, if we include Byzantium, Justinian ruled and lived in Constantinople, the Empire lasted until 29 May 1453. Taken from http://www.fact-index.com/j/ju/justinian_i.html Religious policy Justinian's religious policy reflected the imperial conviction that the unity of the empire unconditionally presupposed unity of faith; and with him it seemed a matter of course that this faith could be only the orthodox. Those of a different belief had to recognize that the process which imperial legislation had begun from Constantius II down would now vigorously continue. The Codex contained two statutes (Cod., I., xi. 9 and 10) which decreed the total destruction of Hellenism, even in the civil life; nor were the appertaining provisions to stand merely on paper. The sources (John Malalas, Theophanes, John of Ephesus) tell of severe persecutions, even of men in high positions. But what proved of universal historic account, was the ruling whereby the emperor, in 529, abrogated philosophical and juridical instruction at the Academy of Plato of Athens, thus putting an end to this training-school for Hellenism. And the Christian propaganda went hand in hand with the suppression of paganism. In Asia Minor alone, John of Ephesus claimed to have converted 70,000 pagans (cf. F. Nau, in Revue de l'orient chretien, ii., 1897, 482). Other peoples also accepted Christianity: the Heruli (Procopius, Bellum Gothicum, ii. 14; Evagrius, Hist. eccl., iv. 20), the Huns dwelling near the Don (Procopius, iv. 4; Evagrius, iv. 23), the Abasgi (Procopius, iv. 3; Evagrius, iv. 22) and the Tzani (Procopius, Bellum Persicum, i. 15) in Caucasia. The worship of Ammon at Augila in the Libyan desert (Procopius, De Aedificiis, vi. 2) was abolished; and so were the remnants of the worship of Isis on the island of Philae, at the first cataract of the Nile (Procopius, Bellum Persicum, i. 19). The Presbyter Julian (DCB, iii. 482) and the Bishop Longinus (John of Ephesus, Hist. eccl., iv. 5 sqq.) conducted a mission among the Nabataeans, and Justinian attempted to strengthen Christianity in Yemen by despatching thither an ecclesiastic of Egypt (Procopius, Bellum Persicum, i. 20; Malalas, ed. Niebuhr, Bonn, 1831, pp. 433 sqq.). The Jews, too, had to suffer; for not only did the authorities restrict their civil rights (Cod., I., v. 12), and threaten their religious privileges (Procopius, Historia Arcana, 28); but the emperor interfered too in the internal affairs of the synagogue (Nov., cxlvi., Feb. 8, 553), and forbade, for instance, the use of the Hebrew language in divine worship. The recalcitrant were menaced with corporal penalties, exile and loss of property. The Jews at Borium, not far from Syrtis Major, who resisted Belisarius in his Vandal campaign, had to embrace Christianity; and their synagogue became a church. (Procopius, De Aedificiis, vi. 2). The emperor had much trouble with the Samaritans; refractory to Christianity, as they were, and repeatedly in insurrection. He opposed them with rigorous edicts, but yet could not prevent a fresh outbreak against the Christians from taking place in Samaria toward the close of his reign. The consistency of Justinian's policy meant that the Manicheans too sufferred severe persecution, experiencing both exile and threat of capital punishment (Cod., I., v. 12). At Constantinople, on one occasion, not a few Manicheans, after strict inquisition, were executed in the emperor's very presence: some by burning, others by drowning (F. Nau, in Revue de l'orient, ii., 1897, p. 481).