Crimson Glory

Hi there!
In his novel "Julian (or via: amazon.co.uk)" Gore Vidal mentions that 30 years prior to the narrator's account (Julian himself) there were records in the archives of Rome about the life of Jesus or his age, but they were destroyed by Constantine's orders.

My question is: is there any information about this? I mean, about Constantine ordering the destruction of documents. I don't know, maybe Eusebius or Ammianus...

Toto

It's fiction, like the Da Vinci Code, but based on a different myth - the "Jesus as a pure Jewish reformer whose religious impulses were hijacked by thugs like Constantine" myth, as opposed to the "Jesus representing the feminine side of the divine" myth. So Gore Vidal can make up any details he finds plausible.

Roger Pearse

I can't say that I have ever heard of such a story about Constantine. If it exists, the obvious places to look would be the Caesars of Julian the Apostate and the New History of Zosimus.

On the latter, I gather that it is our only source for the end of the cult of the vestal virgins.

mountainman

Of course there is information about Constantine destroying documents. What do you want to know? I have read Gore Vidal's historical novel. It is an excellent introduction to the ground of the ancient history of the fourth century.

My bet is that Vidal may have been referring to the records of the life of Mani. He has Julian emphatic in calling christians not christians but in fact Galilaeans, a perjoritive term at the time roughly meaning "Jewish rebels".


Best wishes,


Pete

Larry Fox

You're being not a little unfair to Vidal. In everything I've read by him he generally mocks Jesus, not seeing him as a "pure reformer" at all. In Julian Vidal's character puts out the view that Jesus was a rebel who "turned to violence" and "tried to make himself king of the Jews. Quite correctly, our governor executed him." Agree with that belief or not, it's miles from the Da Vinci Code mentality; I don't think Vidal really cares much either way about Jesus.

The passage in question from Julian reads:
"The actual life story of the Galilean has vanished. But I have had an interesting time trying to piece it together. Until thirty years ago, the archives at Rome contained a number of contemporary reports on his life. They have since disappeared, destroyed by order of Constantine..." (p. 306, Ch. XVII).

mens_sana

Hello Larry,

If you liked Vidal's Julian, you might also like Robert Graves' King Jesus.

Crimson Glory

Thanks for the input, guys. I'll try to explore the Zosimus source.

I tend to agree with Larry. When I read the novel I never had the impression of the "Jesus as a pure Jewish reformer whose religious impulses were hijacked by thugs like Constantine" that Toto mentions but a sort of aristocratic despise towards a picayune character that never should be allowed out of Judea to poison the mind of the Roman empire.

In fact, I ask about this concrete passage because it was the one that led me in the first time towards the whole "historic Jesus" problem. I probably wouldn't be here asking more questions about this and a variety of related subjects if not for these few lines that Larry quoted so gently.

Crimson Glory

Can you please provide more information?
My interest is to know if there was some specific order to destroy documents and where is it recorded.

J-D

If you like King Jesus, you might also like The Nazarene Gospel Restored, by Robert Graves and Joshua Podro.

mountainman

(1) The Council of Nicaea

The Boss burns petitions in the presence of the attendees whom he had personally summoned to Nicaea, where the air is cool and where "the fear of God" was to be anticipated. This in writing from the Boss, Twice. Not once.

(2) Letter written after Nicaea by the Boss to "EVERYONE".

Here is the text:


POSTSCRIPT: Readers should be aware that Porphyry whom is to have his writings so burnt and people so executed for the concealment of Porphyry's writings (and Arius' writings -- some of the apochrypha!!!!) was one of if not the leading academic of his time. This opinion is derived from the concensus of scholars. Why is a military supremacist ordering the burning of the writings of an academic perceived by the people of the fourth century (and the people of the 21st century) as a leading academic? The Boss invented a new testament. And published it lavishly to sit amidst his basilicas.



(3) The very nasty Dear Arius where Are you Arius Letter

This letter should be studied in context with the new testament since the Boss had both published in his despotic rule.


(4) The burning of the books of Origen: when did this start? After Julian?


(5) The burning of the books of Mani and the Manichaeans: the twist of history might have it in fact that Constantine as a hostage in the court of Diocletian in the east (against the conduct of his father Constantius in the west) may have been instructed by Diocletian to enforce the 292 CE (approx) orders to burn the writings of the Manichaeans and the followers themselves and their families were also to be burnt.

The story of Jesus was pegged partly on the story of Mani.
Constantine was an inventive military supremacist.
He had single and absolute power and control of the empire
for a long time.

IMO it was he who invented christianity, because he was a Pontifex Maximus (since 312 CE) and when he became supreme in 324 CE and implemented this Nicaean agreement of some universal new and strange religion in 325 CE he had the whole place at Nicaea totally ringed by his army.

The attendees had to walk through a wall of swords.
Constantine's mininister of propaganda Eusebius tells us this.



(6) Knowledge Burning by the 4th Century Christians


(7) Also see Rassias


(8) The Apochrypha: See Arius above.

Constantine publishes his greek LXX with an inventive step appended as the new testament. The Hellenic empire retorts with the scathing series of texts now known (in majority) as the non canonical literature. All this stuff is majorly simply parody of the Constantine Jesus and the Twelve disciples plot. Arius could well have written the NHC 6.1 "The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles". Constantine was embarrassed by this literature. It was clever. It undermined the authority of the canon. His canon. The christian regime which he created, and which perpetuated itself via greed and the normal modes of custodianship over generations acquired with the christian emperors control and destruction of these tracts. But the fact of fiction was lost.

It is left to Cyril to say AGAINST JULIAN that it is just a conspiracy of the greeks.
Cyril was a censor of historical truth.



Best wishes,



Pete