Tyro

I do not either believe this is about Christians - it's much too early. Only odd with an unknown name.

Minimalist

The praenomen (Gaius, Publius, Marcus, etc.) was not generally used except among family or close friends. In many cases it was simply abbreviated (G. Julius Caesar or P. Sulpicius Quirinius ). In the inscription you provided, " M. T. Drusi " would indicate Marcus and Titus. "Tiberius" would have been "Ti."

Yes, Chrestus could be be the base word, Chrestus adopted by someone, becomes Chrestianus. Suetonius makes reference to a person named "Chrestus" being a bit of a troublemaker in his Life of Claudius. Who knows. It just struck me as odd that the adoption form of the name showed up at that point.

Tyro

So Chrestianus would have ment "of Chrestus"? It could make sence. Nevertheless, the word Chrestianus is unknown before Tertullian's Apologeticum.

Minimalist

Um.... excuse me but,


You just dated it to the late first century BC or early first century AD. That's what 36 BCE to 37 CE means. That is well before Tertullian.

Minimalist

Well, if used as a name (which it certainly could have been in the case at hand), it would mean that someone named Chrestus was adopted and added "ianus" to his name to indicate that adoption. I wouldn't go much further than that.

The cognomen for Romans was usually, at least early on, indicative of some trait....almost a nickname. For example, Q Minutius Rufus probably had red hair. It would be the modern equivalent of calling him "Red."
"Chrestos" as defined in the article seems ideally suited for the purpose of being a cognomen.

Tyro

I seem to have read the article not very thorough. It says (in note 26) that "a person, a watchman in the Cohors Vigilum, used the cognomen Chrestianus: Herennius Chrestianus". Nevertheless, he seems to be the only one then, except this Jucundus. It is a very rare name.

Minimalist

Maybe not a lot of people deserved the cognomen "the Good?"

Tyro

Regarding Tertullian I ment that he in his Apology wrote (c. 197) that the Christians were called Chrestianus. Apparently it wasn't so awful to be called so in Rome in 205 CE, or perhaps this Herennius was taunted by the other soldiers, who were calling him a Christian.

In any case one single person in 205 CE, when Christianity was spread, I don't think absolutely certainly explains Jucundus Chrestianus in >=37 CE.

Clivedurdle

Has anyone proposed jesus the christ means jesus the useful freed happy slave?

Was he a eunuch?

Minimalist

I always thought that, in Latin, the way to make something plural was to add an "i." Radius. Radii. Alumnus. Alumni. Locus. Loci. I am sure there are exceptions to the rule, though.