Toto

If this was, as charged, a forgery by the 15th century humanist and antiquarian Cyracus of Ancona, it would not be a coincidence. It would show that Cyracus used those sources.

spamandham

There were thousands of superstitions in Nero's day. No one could even count them all and shrines to gods filled the streets. New superstitions were a dime a dozen.

zhugin

Indeed it would, but Ramelli could not rule out authenticity, and said that this was not a forgery made for apologetic reasons.

zhugin

Which other new superstitions did Nero act against, according to historical record?

Doug Shaver

I have no opinion about that.

No. It doesn't come close to proving anything of the sort.

zhugin

"Mosheim and others, doubt the genuineness of this inscription, as not sufficiently established on the authority of Cyriacus Anconitanus, the first publisher; especially as the stone itself is not now to be found, and is not noticed by Spanish writers of eminence." (W. Hales, A New Analysis of Chronology and Geography, History and Prophecy, vol. 3, p. 551 [publ. 1830])

If this is true, the inscription would of course not be very trustworthy.

Roger Pearse

All these people are very long ago. What we need is a modern scholarly opinion.

zhugin

We have I. Ramelli, Note su una dubbia testimonianza epigrafica della persecuzione neroniana in Spagna - Hispania Antiqua (Valladolid), XXIV (2000).

Chili

Christianity still is a superstition: to believe that someone died for your sins so that you do not have to is an act of cowardice to appease the self created sin concept with the hope that things will go better after you die and that makes no sense at all. To me that is equal to life-time slavery to a self created image

spamandham

Christians, according to Tacitus. If we accept this at face value rather than concluding it's legendary, then we've established Nero's predilection to persecuting new religions. In no way does that imply that every time he persecutes a group, they are thus Christians.