At 3:32 PM +0100 3/28/02, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
>But it is not strictly necessary that any pope did not exist: 300 years
>could be the sum of many little errors in the biographies of many popes.
>Imagining that historians extended some popes' lifes by a two or three years
>(maybe unintentionally, maybe to hide little periods of vacancy on the siege
>of Peter) is much more plausible than inventing 54 popes from scratch.
>
The semi-official Catholic chronology of papal succession lists St.
Peter as the first pope in Rome for about twenty-five years. (32-67
according to the Catholic Encyclopedia,
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm ) However, most historians
today think that Peter probably didn't get to Rome and if he did, he
wasn't there for more than about a year. I wouldn't be at all
surprised to find similar issues with the reigns of other popes.
--+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer | +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001) | | http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/bible2/ | | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Read Cafe au Lait for Java news: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ | | Read Cafe con Leche for XML news: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Mar 28 2002 - 11:46:48 EST