6 ms·

> The fact that Secundio was buried rather than cremated contradicts the long-held idea that Roman funeral rites were followed strictly for fear of incurring th

> The fact that Secundio was buried rather than cremated contradicts the long-held idea that Roman funeral rites were followed strictly for fear of incurring the wrath of the gods. > Mount Vesuvius’ pyroclastic flows and poisonous fumes killed around 2,000 people in Pompeii and the neighboring city of Herculaneum.

ahmedfromtunis 5y ago
The joke is on you. Correlation does not imply causation. On a more serious note, I wonder how people reacted to his decision to forgo cremation at the time, especially since he is a priest himself; and if there were any discussions, even privately among his relatives, on how he can get away with it because of his status (if this was really the case). It's for moment like these, not the ones immortalized by historians, that I wish there is/was (does it even matter what tense to use) a time machine.
tus89 5y ago
I don't think strict beliefs and Rome were really a thing until a certain Eastern religion took over.
- aksss 5y ago
  Christianity wasn't granted legal protection until ~300AD. Prior to that, you could say that it was a strict belief that Christianity was verboten and its members subject to persecution (lions, crosses, etc). It would be another half-century before the empire started to codify what "Christianity" was in a "strict" sense (Nicaean creed, right?). The time period of Secundio's tomb is around AD 60 or so. As the article at pompeiisites.org says, "During the Roman period at Pompeii, funeral rites usually involved cremation, while only small children were buried." This burial of a 60 year old man stands out for a few reasons, but one of which is that it even exists at all given that it's contrary to custom of the pre-Christian age.
  - tus89 5y ago
    The persecution of Christianity by Rome is a myth and largely a response to it's regressive attempts to deprive others of religious freedom, and destroy classical civilization/education/philosophy more generally. I wonder how a crazed, uneducated mob that went around destroying churches and temples and murdering educated women would be treated in the US today? Rome was remarkably flexible and adaptive when it came to beliefs, including easily incorporating other religions into their belief structure, until one of them wanted to be the only one.
    - eloisius 5y ago
      If the writings of Porphyry, Emperor Julian, et al are to be believed, early Christianity was indeed the ISIS of the time. They were reported to systematically destroy temples, kill priests and at regular gatherings they would report their exploits to encourage each other in doing so.
      - hulitu 5y ago
        If we look at 20th century newspapers we can see that a lot of political enemies are categorised as terrorists.
    - linksnapzz 5y ago
      Rome was remarkably flexible; until you say you don't want a statue of Jupiter or the deified Augustus in your Temple...and of course, nobody named Julian the Apostate would ever have an axe to grind against Christians.
    - Natsu 5y ago
      That opinion itself is quite a shockingly revisionist statement, to simply wave a broad brush like that at a rather complex time period and then apply modern political coloring to ancient history. I see no attempt at nuance here, so taking this at face value, are we then to simply dismiss Pliny the Younger's writings to Trajan about persecution? Should we ignore Hadrian's note of slanderous attacks on Christians? Was Tacitus writing also 'myth' in saying that Nero blamed Christians for the fire in Rome? ...To get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Chrestians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. — Tacitus' Annals 15.44 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_t... This was a complex period in history, I would be wary of anyone making sweeping judgements or applying modern political coloring which acts to cloud issues rather than to illuminate history.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- otabdeveloper4 5y ago
  Historically false. Christians were persecuted in Rome because they refused to sacrifice to Divine Ceasar. Rome was very serious about worshiping Ceasar; the rest was optional. (Rome didn't have a "civil society" or "social contract" in any sense we'd recognize. Their laws were supposed to be divinely ordained, and refusing to acknowledge this was grounds for the death penalty. If you're imagining Rome as some sort of freedom of religion place like America with the First Amendment then you're sorely mistaken; think Soviet communism or China instead.)
  - vkou 5y ago
    How do you reconcile that claim with the polytheistic nature of religion in Rome, and it's practice of folding other religions into it, as it absorbed conquered cultures? Your parallels to 20th century governments miss the mark as much as the claims you are criticizing.

ahmedfromtunis 5y ago

The joke is on you. Correlation does not imply causation. On a more serious note, I wonder how people reacted to his decision to forgo cremation at the time, especially since he is a priest himself; and if there were any discussions, even privately among his relatives, on how he can get away with it because of his status (if this was really the case). It's for moment like these, not the ones immortalized by historians, that I wish there is/was (does it even matter what tense to use) a time machine.

tus89 5y ago

I don't think strict beliefs and Rome were really a thing until a certain Eastern religion took over.

aksss 5y ago
Christianity wasn't granted legal protection until ~300AD. Prior to that, you could say that it was a strict belief that Christianity was verboten and its members subject to persecution (lions, crosses, etc). It would be another half-century before the empire started to codify what "Christianity" was in a "strict" sense (Nicaean creed, right?). The time period of Secundio's tomb is around AD 60 or so. As the article at pompeiisites.org says, "During the Roman period at Pompeii, funeral rites usually involved cremation, while only small children were buried." This burial of a 60 year old man stands out for a few reasons, but one of which is that it even exists at all given that it's contrary to custom of the pre-Christian age.
- tus89 5y ago
  The persecution of Christianity by Rome is a myth and largely a response to it's regressive attempts to deprive others of religious freedom, and destroy classical civilization/education/philosophy more generally. I wonder how a crazed, uneducated mob that went around destroying churches and temples and murdering educated women would be treated in the US today? Rome was remarkably flexible and adaptive when it came to beliefs, including easily incorporating other religions into their belief structure, until one of them wanted to be the only one.
  - eloisius 5y ago
    If the writings of Porphyry, Emperor Julian, et al are to be believed, early Christianity was indeed the ISIS of the time. They were reported to systematically destroy temples, kill priests and at regular gatherings they would report their exploits to encourage each other in doing so.
    - hulitu 5y ago
      If we look at 20th century newspapers we can see that a lot of political enemies are categorised as terrorists.
  - linksnapzz 5y ago
    Rome was remarkably flexible; until you say you don't want a statue of Jupiter or the deified Augustus in your Temple...and of course, nobody named Julian the Apostate would ever have an axe to grind against Christians.
  - Natsu 5y ago
    That opinion itself is quite a shockingly revisionist statement, to simply wave a broad brush like that at a rather complex time period and then apply modern political coloring to ancient history. I see no attempt at nuance here, so taking this at face value, are we then to simply dismiss Pliny the Younger's writings to Trajan about persecution? Should we ignore Hadrian's note of slanderous attacks on Christians? Was Tacitus writing also 'myth' in saying that Nero blamed Christians for the fire in Rome? ...To get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Chrestians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. — Tacitus' Annals 15.44 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_t... This was a complex period in history, I would be wary of anyone making sweeping judgements or applying modern political coloring which acts to cloud issues rather than to illuminate history.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
otabdeveloper4 5y ago
Historically false. Christians were persecuted in Rome because they refused to sacrifice to Divine Ceasar. Rome was very serious about worshiping Ceasar; the rest was optional. (Rome didn't have a "civil society" or "social contract" in any sense we'd recognize. Their laws were supposed to be divinely ordained, and refusing to acknowledge this was grounds for the death penalty. If you're imagining Rome as some sort of freedom of religion place like America with the First Amendment then you're sorely mistaken; think Soviet communism or China instead.)
- vkou 5y ago
  How do you reconcile that claim with the polytheistic nature of religion in Rome, and it's practice of folding other religions into it, as it absorbed conquered cultures? Your parallels to 20th century governments miss the mark as much as the claims you are criticizing.