Further Proof Christianity was Born in Rome
Offline Rome finds oldest icons of four Apostles beneath its streets
June 24, 2010
Resurrected ... an archaeologist points to a watercolour of St Paul in the newly restored section of the catacombs of Santa Tecla.
SANTA TECLA, Rome: The earliest known icons of four of Christ's apostles have been found in an elaborately decorated chamber in a catacomb beneath the streets of Rome.
Scientists used laser technology to remove a crust of dirt and calcium deposits and bring to light the brightly coloured 4th century paintings of the saints John, Paul, Andrew and Peter.
The images adorn the ceiling of a vault, carved out of volcanic rock, which provided the last resting place for a rich Roman noblewoman who converted to Christianity after it was declared legal by the emperor Constantine.Archaeologists also found an early image of Christ, a painting of a naked Daniel with lions at his feet and a sketch of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead.
''John's young face is familiar, but this is the most youthful portrayal of Andrew ever seen, very different from the old man with grey hair and wrinkles we know from medieval painting,'' said Barbara Mazzei, the archaeologist from the Vatican's Pontifical Commission for Sacred Archaeology.
A balding St Paul is depicted with dark piercing eyes, a pointed black beard and a furrowed forehead, while St Peter has the white beard and sturdy look of a fisherman.
The archaeologists believe the images may have set the standard for all later depictions of the saints in Christian iconography.
They were discovered during routine restoration in the catacombs of Santa Tecla, a labyrinth of tunnels, galleries and burial chambers that lies hidden beneath a five-storey office in Ostiense, a residential area.
The catacombs were discovered when the office block was built in the 1950s. As the laser burnt the calcium off, John and Andrew appeared on the same ceiling panel as Peter and Paul.
''We already know earlier images of Peter and Paul from group paintings, but all previously known images of Andrew and John date to the mid-5th century,'' Dr Mazzei said.
The extreme fragility of the paintings means the catacombs are likely to be opened only to specialist academics.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/rome-finds-oldest-icons-of-four-apostles-beneath-its-streets-20100623-yz70.html
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
- Login to post comments
I saw this elsewhere. What was interesting to me was the new laser technology they used to remove the dirt. The other article talked about that a little more. What I want to know is, how do they know this is how the apostles really looked? They had been dead for at least 300 years when the paintings were done.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
it was 'revealed' to them...
It's not a toomah!
I think I've been punned!!
RCC started in Rome, no doubt...
Christianity? I'm fairly certain that it began as a collection of Orthodoxies (in addition to the founding of Nativity)-one of which traveled to Ethiopia to start Orthodox Tewahedo Church.
But then, I'm not a Sociology/Cultural scholar so take it at face value...
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
the christianity cult is the underlying substrate and the RCC is a layer, or faction, that came to have a separate identity over a long period of time as the early church splintered.
Can't imagine they called it the RCC in early days. 'Catholic' just means universal doesn't it? Anyone - John Paul? Iwb? What do you guys think?
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
Catholic does mean universal and adherents usually consider themselves Catholics rather than Roman Catholics.
Extracts from http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13121a.htm
Roman Catholic: a qualification of the name Catholic commonly used in English-speaking countries by those unwilling to recognize the claims of the One True Church.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm claims:
The combination "the Catholic Church" (he katholike ekklesia) is found for the first time in the letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, written about the year 110.
However, there are also claims that this epistle is a forgery, not written until the 4th or 5th century.
Where did the concept of Christianity originating in Rome come from? I haven't read this history anywhere. How does this article serve as evidence for that?
“Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.”
I haven't been following this particular argument and haven't seen it expressed explicitly before. What they are probably referring to is the formation of the church from a few persecuted followers in the middle east to the edifice it is today. That transformation definitely started in Rome.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
The first NT book was Mark, possibly written using a document called Q, in greek, with latinisms that you would expect a Roman to use. I read this somewhere and given the vagaries of NT origins it made sense to me.
Given the oldest bibles are from Rome and the Romans claim the apostle peter as their first pope, finding this sort of mural, dating back to the very early period of the church, to me further supports the notion a Roman wrote the NT.
I've always wondered about the Roman ownership of the christian faith. In any case, the NT was written in a foreign language, in a foreign country, by nobody knows who. Rome was the centre of the known universe.
That's my opinion only, with very arguable support. But nothing like this has ever been found in places like jerusalem, bethlehem or nazareth.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
10/4. I've just curious b/c I've never heard of such....
“Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.”
Like the article points out, the beginning of the 4th century means that Constantine was most likely emperor (~306). The Edict of Milan allowed this woman and many others to freely practice Christianity, which was becoming less of a cult and more and more of a cultural identity. Constantine further established this identity by writing it into the laws and favoring Christians over pagans in many areas (with some backlash later by emperor Julian). The earliest bibles are Roman because Constantine ordered the first bibles to be written (I do not think this is in dispute, but I could be wrong. I also believe they were written in Greek by hundreds of scribes). This established an orthodoxy, which I would then call "Roman Catholicism," although you wouldn't name it strictly so until, I believe, the Great Schism. It's just easier to call it Roman Catholicism because, it originated in Rome (not the seeds, but the orthodoxy), and was Catholic. It also nicely differentiates itself from Eastern Orthodox, and in my mind there's no reason to name the Church differently from pre-Schism to post-Schism.
I highly recommend the book Roman Realities by Finley Hooper. It's very readable and accessible for an academic book. Tons of insight on every stage of Roman development. I'm afraid when my professor last year was pressed with lots of questions regarding nascent Christianity and persecutions and how it all got started (and of course almost no questions the entire semester regarding the early formation of Rome and the Republic, or Roman mythology, ha!), he gave entire lectures on it, but I never came away really convinced that we'll ever figure out exactly where and when it all got started in regards to Rome. Rome was very cosmopolitan, and so was exposed to an incredible amount of popular religions. A really great case is that of Mithraism, whose history very nearly parallels Christianity and has many uncanny similarities. But at the same time, a large part of their tradition had been the Mysteries... cults. The very nature of this worship was very secretive, so evidence is all around but there's not enough explanation or context to have definitive answers. So unfortunately a lot of time the only thing to go on is not some Latin text, but a statue. Another good book that might provide clues as to the East-West connection of the self-resurrecting God myth is Adonis, Attis, Osiris.
But, there is no doubt in my mind that Roman Catholicism's inordinate reverence of Mary has to do with the tradition of almost monotheistic worship towards mother goddesses in Rome in various cults (Terra Mater, Juno, Cybele, etc.).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Christ_with_beard.jpg
One of the interesting bits was when Jesus was the Good Shepherd. You can see this kind of mural in the catacombs and a lot in the 4th century, but lots of which are much older than 4th century. Probably a far different religion (more like a weird cult) than the one St. Augustine or later Romans knew/practiced.
FYI, I was raised as Roman Catholic, and studied both Catholicism and Classics extensively in HS/college, but claim no authority in the subject... just a very interested scholar