Re: Tacitus and the Christians (Re: Will the real Biblical Israel ...

On Nov 9, 2:49 pm, Tiglath <te...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 8, 4:37 pm, ADR <aretz...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

There is no indication at all that the people of Rome
regarded Nero as the man responsible for the fire.

There is no indication at all for people like you, who never went near
a history book.

But when you do go near a history book, it might be a good idea to
read more than just one paragraph from it.

<snip> "For a
rumor had spread that, while the city was burning, Nero had gone on
his private stage and, comparing modern calamities with ancient, had
sung of the destruction of Troy."

Cassius Dio says (62.18.1) that Nero ascended the roof of the Palatine
palace while in a lyre-player's garb (_kitharodikēn labōn_) and sang
the "Capture of Ilium," while Suetonius claims (_Nero_38.2) that he
sang it while atop the tower of Maecenas (in the Gardens of Maecenas)
dressed in his stage costume (_scaenico habitu_). Notice that Tacitus
has Nero singing "on his private stage," i.e., at a less exhibitionist
venue than the summit of a palace or tower. Who, then, are we to
believe as to where he was or what he wore?

Tacitus, in any event, does specify that the alleged incident was a
rumor.

<snip> "This new conflagration caused
additional ill-feeling because it started on Tigellinus' estate in the
Aemilian district. For people believed that Nero was ambitious to
found a new city to be called after himself."

   -- The Annals of Imperial Rome by Tacitus, Book XV.

Yet if you would have read the entire account of the fire you would
have seen that Tacitus relates that some sources attributed the fire
to accident and others blamed Nero, and that Tacitus is not sure that
Nero was guilty (_Ann._15.39_; see Z. Yavetz, "Forte an dolo principis
(Tac. Ann. 15.38)," in B. Levick, ed.,_The Ancient Historian and His
Materials_, Farnsborough, 1975, 181-97).

Without certainty, then, we can only say that perhaps Nero was
innocent or maybe he was guilty of burning Rome. It just so happened
that one version of events came to be the accepted one, one that
seemed consistent with the character of the emperor, especially as it
had been selectively presented and misrepresented by hostile
senatorial chroniclers whose order was engaged in an ongoing and
losing struggle for power and survival within the 'new' reality of
autocracy.

Whether we can abscribe ulterior motives or not to Tacitus for his
clear indications that the people of Rome thought Nero had started the
fire, it has nothing to do with whether such indications exist.  They
do.  Read them.

Yes, there are "clear indications" in Tacitus that people suspected
Nero, but there are not clear indications that people in reality
suspected him. The dislike of Nero by the aristocrats was never shared
by the common people, and in fact he was enormously popular among the
latter, even decades after his death. Read up on the subject.

To automatically brand a liar one of the most respected Roman
historians just because of his perceived political inclinations is a
bit of a reach.

Hyperbole doesn't mask your unfamiliarity with this aspect of
historiography. It is established that information in Tacitus (and all
the ancient sources, for that matter) must be scrutinized. While he is
more reliable than most sources, his history has many factual errors,
and elsewhere he dissumaltes or doesn't tell the whole story,
resulting in distorted and misleading accounts of persons and events.
He shares the biases and prejudices of his class and is a creature of
his time (one that culturally is more alien to us in the modern era
than might be readily apparent).

 Let us see evidence or better reasons to deem Tacitus
a liar than those offered so far.

Let us first read up a bit more about topics we wish to make
categorical pronouncements on.

Christopher Ingham

.

Relevant Pages

  • Our Neronian Leader
    ... in history), this most transparent of Presidents, after opening the ... If only the Roman Emperor Nero had had such an over-the-top adoring ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: Tacitus and the Christians (Re: Will the real Biblical Israel ...
    ... regarded Nero as the man responsible for the fire. ... But when you do go near a history book, it might be a good idea to ... Since when is a rumor not an indication? ... Yet if you would have read the entire account of the fire you would ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Who Is 666?
    ... written NRWN QSR or NRW KSR in Hebrew. ... normal to write Nero as we do in English, ... part because our method of doing history had not developed yet and in ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: Logic in Schools
    ... > The alleged violinist was Nero, not Caesar. ... My knowledge of history is shockingly inadequate; ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: everyone else is doing it
    ... Christians set fire to Rome during the reign of Nero. ... Which evidence would that be? ... Please don't refer to ... Tacitus, since he doesn't seem to take those claims all that seriously. ...
    (talk.origins)