Seleucus Nicator founded Seleucia in 305 BC, in order to quickly make it a Metropolis he forced most of the population of Babylon to resettle there, there is a tablet dated to 275 BC recording this. It spent very little time as the actual Capitol of the Seleucid Empire, but it did spend most of the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC as a larger city then Antioch.
Diogenes of Babylon was a Stoic Philosopher commonly referred to as being "of Babylon" but he was actually born in Seleucia and neither city is where he spent most of his life, he was educated in Athens and obviously mostly lived there during his time as head of the Stoic School based in Athens until he died around 150-140 BC.
1 Maccabees 6:4 and 2 Maccabees 8:20 call a City in Mesopotamia Babylon even though it's population is Macedonian.
In 141 BC the Parthian Empire took it from the Seleucids and made it their western capital, but it remained a fully Hellenistic city.
Josephus's references to the city confirm that even the remaining Jewish diaspora of Babylon were in fact mostly living in Seleucia during the first century. The Jews of Seleucia and other northern Mesopotamian cities revolted during the Kitos War. That of course was a factor in Trajan destroying the City in it's original form in 117 AD.
Hadrian gave Babylonia back to Parthia however and they then quickly rebuilt Seleucia in a Parthian style. That version of the city was destroyed by Avidius Cassius during another war between Rome and Parthia in 165 AD. It then became a Sassanian city commonly called Seleucia-Ctesiphon. This city became the seat of the leading Bishop of the Ancient Church of The East who was formally called the Patriarch of Babylon.
If people really find it so unlikely Peter was in actual Babylon when he wrote his First Epistle simply because some first century sources make it sound like it was a mostly abandoned ruin already, then Seleucia is probably where he was. It was home to an important Jewish population and Paul calls Peter the Apostle to The Jews in Galatian 2:8.
The idea that Peter said "Babylon" in place of "Rome" to fool Roman officials who might read the letter is stupid.
1. He doesn't actually say anything bad about where he is, it's only the negative connotations the name of Babylon often has in the Judeo-Christian mind that makes it seem that way.
2. Roman customs officials would have known where the letter was actually mailed from. So using an easy to interpret as insulting name instead of the real name would have only caused problems.
If Peter meant by Babylon a city other then the exact same city where Hammurabi and Nebuchadnezzar ruled, it would have been the one other similar Greek texts were calling Babylon during the Greco-Roman Era due to being the regional capital and largest city of the region called Babylonia.
I also considered Seleucia-Ctesiphon/Babylon but there doesn't seem any much Biblical or historical/archaeological evidence for Peter being there. Babylon in Revelation surely means Rome (7 hills etc). The nature of Babel/Babylon matches Rome at the time as seen in these quotes: "all roads lead to Rome"; Cato expelled moneylenders, spoke against alien influences; Cicero calls Rome a city formed from confluence of nations; Lucan says Rome not peopled by its own citizens but by scourings of world; "complaint of indigenous natives that capital had attracted vices of the universe & manners of opposite nations"; Constantius marvels at the haste with which all human beings of the world flock to Rome.
ReplyDeleteThe centre is supposed to have moved from Babylon to Pergamos ("tower", Satan's throne) to Rome via Berosus etc.
Rome is portrayed in Peutinger map as centre of world with emperor on throne. Cathollic means "universal".
There is also little evidence for Peter being in Rome. As I too thought Peter meant he was also there I briefly thought Babylon might be Jerusalem. But afterwards I came to see and think 1 Peter 5:13 is only Peter passing on greetings from Babylon/Rome, and it doesn't necessarily mean he was also there himself. The actual greetings might even be one of these: Hebrews 13:24 or Philippians 4:22 or Titus 3:15 or 2 Timothy 4:21, andnd/or 2 John 13 or 3 John 14.
Peter "rock" is apostle to Jews, and Peter was the leader of the apostles (while James was head of the community), so surely he was in Israel. The 1st church Ephesus in Revelation has lots of analogous parallel matches with Jerusalem. "Rock" could even correspondond with Shetiyah stone on temple mount? Peter 1st of 12 may correspond with Judah 1st of 12? Peter is last heard of in Jerusalem/Judea or Joppa in Acts.
Always interesting posts and ideas here though.
Peter's letter simply telling people where he is shouldn't be interred through the lens of one's interpretation of a Symbolic vision.
DeleteWhere cna I read this passage from Berosus you refer to?
There is a limit to how much "Evidence" we cna find of Peter being anywhere. I oppose him going west because of the negative evidence. But unless he never left Antioch after reaching there he must have went somewhere.