Ancient Rome's Aristocracy & Its Role In
"...there was no writer, at least in the realm of history, who had not
made some false statement, and even pointed out the places
in which Livy and Sallust, Cornelius Tacitus, and, finally, Troguscould be
refuted by manifest proofs, he came over wholly to my opinion, and,
throwing up his hands, he jestingly said besides: "Well then, write as you will.
You will be safe in saying whatever you wish, since you will have as
comrades in falsehood those authors whom we
admire for the style of their histories."
(Historia Augusta, The Life of Aurelian, 2. 2)
It is thought that only a handful of emperors were related by blood, that is incorrect.
Ancient Rome was run by an oligarchy, and there was very little hope of truthful information being included in anything that was written because it all came from the oligarchy who had hidden motives behind them. There were no specific rules regarding who could publish written works for the public within the Roman Empire, both historical and religious. However, the only people that had the means to do so were those of the elite class. That limits who could have written any literature for public use, including the early Christian scripture.
Although the study of history today is an official science, the methods used in mainstream academia have only marginally improved since Roman times. It appears the methodologies used by the majority (not all) of mainstream scholars today, are taken from examples given by the ancient elite authors. The ancient authors wrote comments portraying how they were supposedly studying the work of other ancient historians.
The information on this site, and in the book, Creating Christianity a Weapon of Ancient Rome, presents evidence from primary, and respected, secondary sources, showing that the elite authors carefully crafted their histories and religious texts to include very important information that could not be seen from a superficial reading.
Included within the primary texts are complex literary elements, including:
Isopsephy; the practice of adding up the number values of the letters in a word to form a single number.
The use of multiple names to refer to one individual; the Roman senator of the first century, Gaius Calpurnius Piso (known for the Pisonian Conspiracy), and his wife Arria the Younger are referred to by multiple names, including - Titia Flavia Sabina, who had married Gaius Calpurnius Piso (35-65 C.E.) of the house of Calpurnii, who was also recorded as Caesenni Paeti,. Titia Flavia Sabina is also recorded as Arria the Younger, wife of Publius Clodius Thrasea Paetus (Gaius Calpurnius Piso),. Satria Galla (Titia Flavia Sabina/Arria the Younger), is recorded as the wife of Calpurnius Piso. Caecinia Arria is another name recorded for Titia Flavia Sabina/Arria the Younger. And Livia Cornelia Orestilla, second wife of Emperor Caligula (12 - 41 C.E.) in 36 or 37 C.E., previously married to Gaius Calpurnius Piso.
 The name ‘Paetus’ in regards to the marriage of Flavia Sabina (Arria the Younger) is shown as a name used by the Pisos - Flaviae T(iti) [f(iliae)]/Sabinae/Caesenni Paeti (uxori) CIL 14, 02830; although the name on the inscription looks to have been connected to the wrong Piso family member.
 Syme, Sir Ronald. 1969: Domitius Corbulo, JRS, Vol. 60, 27-39; Plin., Ep. 3.16.7
 Tac., Ann. 16.22, 34; Juvenal, 5.36
 Tac., Ann. 15.59
 Tac., Ann. 16.34, note 69
 Dio., Roman History, 59.8.7
 Kajava, Mika. 1984: The Name of Cornelia Orestina/Orestilla, Arctos, Vol. 18
 Suet., Caligula, 25.1
Vowel exchanging in names to create new names for one individual; A simple example to demonstrate this is in regards to the daughter of Gaius Calpurnius Piso and Arria the Younger. In history, their daughter is recorded as 'Fannia'. Her name would have been Flavia Arria, the feminine form of the name Flavius and Arria combined. The 'F' in 'Flavia' was used as an initial and left in front of her Arria name and the 'r's in her name were exchanged for 'n's, which created the name 'Fannia' (F.Annia). (ref- information regarding a 'C. Fannius' (most likely Arrius Piso) as a barrister, who wrote the biographies of Nero's victims, is given in the 'Prosopographia Imperii Romani' (Edmund Groag in PIR-2, F116). In there it reads:
"C. Fannius (v, 5). Barrister who wrote biographies of Nero's victims. Supposed a relative of Fannia, the daughter of the Patavine (P. [Publius] Clodius) Thrasea Paetus by his marriage with Arria, the daughter of A. [Aulus] Caecina Paetus (suff. 37) [T. Flavius Sabinus I]."
The late Sir Ronald Syme, regarded as the greatest historian of ancient Rome, who researched this information, stated in his paper 'People in Pliny': "Why she should be called 'Fannia', no clue."
In his publication, Emperors and Biography: Studies in the Historia Augusta, Syme gave 10 ways to decipher fictitious names. Contained in a chapter called 'Bogus Names', he stated: IX. Perverted names. "One example is clear. Using Suetonius, the author changed 'Mummia' to 'Memmia'. That is a mere trifle in the devices of the HA...One trick is to modify the shape of familiar names..." (ref- Emperors and Biography: Studies in the Historia Augusta. Clarendon Press. page 8.)
'I like this book very much! It is very well researched and backed up by historical literature that has been verified and reverified! It is not obscene nor derogatory in its intended analysis. It is just the unfortunate facts about human nature and those with excess power...'
- Book Review -
'Not a hard read. Author is skilled at arranging the complex and seemingly scattered cache of information and data into a graspable, memorable, and clear story. A formidable requirement for shelf life...'
- Book Review -
'A fascinating book which offers an intriguing non-religious explanation for the foundation of Christianity. The book uses primary evidence and support from other authors to back up its claims which, while initially sounding fantastic, becomes more realistic as the evidence gathers. Definitely not your average history!'
- Book Review -