"[...] When he [Pepi II, after a reign of 94 years, the longest in history] died anarchy and dissolution ensued, the Pharaohs lost control, and feudal barons ruled the nomes independently: this alternation between centralized and decentralized power is one of the cyclical rhythms of history, as if men tired alternately of immoderate liberty and excessive order. [...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 4, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
""Hearken to that which I say to thee,
That thou mayest be king of the earth, . . .
That thou mayest increase good:
Harden thyself against all subordinates—
The people give heed to him who terrorizes them;
Approach them not alone.
Fill not thy heart with a brother,
Know not a friend; . . .
When thou sleepest, guard for thyself thine own heart;
For a man hath no friend in the day of evil.” (Amenemhet I, first ruler of the Twelfth Dynsasty, to his son)
This stem ruler, who seems to us so human across four thousand years, established a system of administration that held for half a millennium. [...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 4, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"[...] Amenemhet III, a great administrator, builder of canals and irrigation, put an end (perhaps too effectively) to the power of the barons, and replaced them with appointees of the king. Thirteen years after his death Egypt was plunged into disorder by a dispute among rival claimants to the throne, and the Middle Kingdom ended in two centuries of turmoil and disruption. Then the Hyksos, nomads from Asia, invaded disunited Egypt, set fire to the cities, razed the temples, squandered the accumulated wealth, destroyed much of the accumulated art, and for two hundred years subjected the Nile valley to the rule of the “Shepherd Kings.” Ancient civilizations were little isles in a sea of barbarism, prosperous settlements surrounded by hungry, envious and warlike hunters and herders; at any moment the wall of defense might be broken down. So the Kassites raided Babylonia, the Gauls attacked Greece and Rome, the Huns overran Italy, the Mongols came down upon Peking.
Soon, however, the conquerors in their turn grew fat and prosperous, and lost control; the Egyptians rose in a war of liberation, expelled the Hyksos, and established that Eighteenth Dynasty which was to lift Egypt to greater wealth, power and glory than ever before."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 4, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
“[...] The population along the river was divided into “nomes,”* in each of which the inhabitants were essentially of one stock, acknowledged the same totem, obeyed the same chief, and worshiped the same gods by the same rites.[...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 3, 1935
"[...] As all developing structures tend toward an increasing interdependence of the parts, so in this case the growth of trade and the rising costliness of war forced the nomes to organize themselves into two king- doms— one in the south, one in the north; a division probably reflecting the conflict between African natives and Asiatic immigrants. This dangerous accentuation of geographic and ethnic differences was resolved for a time when Menes, a half-legendary figure, brought the “Two Lands” under his united power, promulgated a body of laws given him by the god Thoth, established the first historic dynasty, built a new capital at Memphis, “taught the people” (in the words of an ancient Greek historian) “to use tables and couches, and...introduced luxury and an extravagant manner of life.”"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 3, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"[...] Herodotus has passed on to us the traditions of the Egyp tian priests concerning this builder of the first of Gizeh’s pyramids:
Now they tell me that to the reign of Rhampsinitus there was a perfect distribution of justice and that all Egypt was in a high state of prosperity;
but that after him Cheops, coming to reign over them, plunged into every kind of wickedness, for that, having shut up all the temples, ... he ordered all the Egyptians to work for himself. Some, accordingly, were appointed to draw stones from the quarries in the Arabian mountains down to the Nile, others he ordered to receive the stones when transported in vessels across the river. . . . And they worked to the number of a hundred thousand men at a time, each party during three months. The time during which the people were thus harassed by toil lasted ten years on the road which they constructed, and along which they drew the stones; a work, in my opinion, not much less than the Pyramid."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 3, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"Why did these men build pyramids? Their purpose was not architectural but religious; the pyramids were tombs, lineally descended from the most primitive of burial mounds. Apparently the Pharaoh believed, like any commoner among his people, that every living body was inhabited by a double, or 'ka,' which need not die with the breath; and that the ka would survive all the more completely if the flesh were preserved against hunger, violence and decay. The pyramid, by its height,! its form and its position, sought stability as a means to deathlessness; and except for its square corners it took the natural form that any homogeneous group of solids would take if allowed to fall unimpeded to the earth.[...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 3, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"Since the ka was conceived as the minute image of the body, it had to be fed, clothed and served after the death of the frame. Lavatories were provided in some royal tombs for the convenience of the departed soul; and a funerary text expresses some anxiety lest the ka, for want of food, should feed upon its own excreta .“ One suspects that Egyptian burial customs, if traced to their source, would lead to the primitive interment of a warrior’s weapons with his corpse, or to some institution like the Hindu suttee — the burial of a man’s wives and slaves with him that they may attend to his needs. This having proved irksome to the wives and slaves, painters and sculptors were engaged to draw pictures, carve bas- reliefs, and make statuettes resembling these aides; by a magic formula, usually inscribed upon them, the carved or painted objects would be quite as effective as the real ones. [...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 3, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"Finally the ka was assured long life not only by burying the cadaver in a sarcophagus of the hardest stone, but by treating it to the most pains- taking mummification. So well was this done that to this day bits of hair and flesh cling to the royal skeletons.[...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 3, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"[...] Civilization, like life, destroys what it has perfected. Already, it may be, the growth of comforts and luxuries, the progress of manners and morals, had made men lovers of peace and haters of war. Suddenly a new figure appeared, usurped Menkaure’s throne, and put an end to the pyramid-builders’ dynasty."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 3, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
“Since the radicals of one age are the reactionaries of the next, it was not to be expected that the men who created Egyptology should be the first to accept as authentic the remains of Egypt’s Old Stone Age; after forty 'les savants ne sont pas curieux' ('scientists are not curious,' quoting Anatole France). [...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 2, Segment 2, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
“The recovery of Egypt is one of the most brilliant chapters in archeology. The Middle Ages knew of Egypt as a Roman colony and a Christian settlement; the Renaissance presumed that civilization had begun with Greece; even the Enlightenment, though it concerned itself intelligently with China and India, knew nothing of Egypt beyond the Pyramids. Egyptology was a by-product of Napoleonic imperialism. When the great Cor sican led a French expedition to Egypt in 1798 he took with him a number of draughtsmen and engineers to explore and map the terrain, and made place also for certain scholars absurdly interested in Egypt for the sake of a better understanding of history. It was this corps of men who first re- vealed the temples of Luxor and Kamak to the modern world; and the elaborate Description de L'Egypte (1809-13) which they prepared for the French Academy was the first milestone in the scientific study of this for- gotten civilization."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"[Speaking of Champollion deciphering the Rosetta stone] It was one of the peaks in the history of history."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935
“[...] until the masterpiece of the great Queen rises [that is, the Mortuary Temple of Hatshepsut] still and white in the trembling heat. Here the artist decided to transform nature and her hills into a beauty greater than her own: into the very face of the granite cliff he built these columns, as stately as those that Ictinus made for Pericles; it is impossible, seeing these, to doubt that Greece took her architecture, perhaps through Crete, from this initiative race [that is, from the Eqyptian race]. And on the walls vast bas-reliefs, alive with motion and thought, tell the story of the first great woman in history, and not the least of queens."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 1, Segment 2, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"But the best remains adorn the eastern side of the river. Here at Luxor the lordly Amenhotep III, with the spoils of Thutmose Ill’s victories, began to build his most pretentious edifice; death came upon him as he built; then, after the work had been neglected for a century, Rameses II finished it in regal style. At once the quality of Egyptian architecture floods the spirit: here are scope and power, not beauty merely, but a masculine sublimity. A wide court, now waste with sand, paved of old with marble; on three sides majestic colonnades matched by Karnak alone; on every hand carved stone in bas-relief, and royal statues proud even in desolation. Imagine eight long stems of the papyrus plant— nurse of letters and here the form of art; at the base of the fresh unopened flowers bind the stems with five firm bands that will give beauty strength; then picture the whole stately stalk in stone: this is the papyriform column of Luxor. Fancy a court of such columns, upholding massive entablatures and shade- giving porticoes; see the whole as the ravages of thirty centuries have left it; then estimate the men who, in what we once thought the childhood of civilization, could conceive and execute such monuments."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 1, Segment 2, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
“[...] Only historians make divisions; time does not."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 1, Segment 1, 1935
"Nevertheless, what wealth these old Egyptians must have had, what power and skill, even in the infancy of history, to bring these vast stones six hundred miles, to raise some of them, weighing many tons, to a height of half a thousand feet, and to pay, or even to feed, the hundred thousand slaves who toiled for twenty years on these Pyramids! Herodotus has preserved for us an inscription that he found on one pyramid, recording the quantity of radishes, garlic and onions consumed by the workmen who built it; these things, too, had to have their immortality. (Diodorus Siculus, who must always be read sceptically, writes: “An inscription on the larger pyramid . . . sets forth that on vegetables and purgatives for the workmen there were paid out over 1600 talents”— i.e M $i6,ooo,ooo.) Despite these familiar friends [that is, the Pyramids] we go away disappointed; there is something barbarically primitive— or barbarically modern— in this brute hunger for size. It is the memory and imagination of the beholder that, swollen with history, make these monuments great; in themselves they are a little ridiculous— vainglorious tombs in which the dead sought eternal life. Perhaps pictures have too much ennobled them: photography can catch everything but dirt, and enhances man-made objects with noble vistas of land and sky. The sunset at Gizeh is greater than the Pyramids."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.8, Part 1, Segment 1, 1935 (italics added)
“[...] The oldest written records known to us are Sumerian; this, which may be a whim of circumstance, a sport of mortality, does not prove that the first civilization was Sumerian. Statuettes and other remains akin to those of Sumeria have been found at Ashur and Samarra, in what became Assyria; we do not know whether this early culture came from Sumeria or passed to it along the Tigris. The code of Hammurabi resembles that of Ur-engur and Dungi, but we cannot be sure that it was evolved from it rather than from some predecessor ancestral to them both. It is only probable, not certain, that the civilizations of Babylonia and Assyria were derived from or fertilized by that of Sumer and Akkad . The gods and myths of Babylon and Nineveh are in many cases modifications or developments of Sumerian theology; and the languages of these later cultures bear the same relationship to Sumeria that French and Italian bear to Latin."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 3, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"Egypt could well afford to concede the priority of Sumeria. For whatever the Nile may have borrowed from the Tigris and the Euphrates, it soon flowered into a civilization specifically and uniquely its own; one of the richest and greatest, one of the most powerful and yet one of the most graceful, cultures in history. By its side Sumeria was but a crude beginning; and not even Greece or Rome would surpass it."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 3, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
“The transition from writing to literature probably required many hundreds of years. For centuries writing was a tool of commerce, a matter of contracts and bills, of shipments and receipts; and secondarily, perhaps, it was an instrument of religious record, an attempt to preserve magic formulas, ceremonial procedures, sacred legends, prayers and hymns from alteration or decay. Nevertheless, by 2700 B.C., great libraries had been formed in Sumeria; at Tello, for example, in ruins contemporary with Gudea, De Sarzac discovered a collection of over 30,000 tablets ranged one upon another in neat and logical array As early as 2000 B.C. Sumerian historians began to reconstruct the past and record the present for the edification of the future; [...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 5, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"[...] Through these salvaged relics [i.e., tablets] we see the religious origin of literature in the songs and lamentations of the priests. The first poems were not madrigals, but prayers."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 5, 1935
"[...] Nothing has been created, it has only grown. [...]" (writing systems was the example)
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 5, 1935
"[...] The ruins have given us a great number of cylindrical seals, mostly made of precious metal or stone, with reliefs carefully carved upon a square inch or two of surface; these seem to have served the Sumerians in place of signatures, and indicate a refinement of life and manners disturbing to our naive conception of progress as a continuous rise of man through the unfortunate cultures of the past to the unrivaled zenith of today."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 5, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"[...] Here [in Sumeria], within the limits of our present knowledge, are the first states and empires, the first irrigation, the first use of gold and silver as standards of value, the first business contracts, the first credit system, the first code of law, the first extensive development of writing, the first stories of the Creation and the Flood, the first libraries and schools, the first literature and poetry, the first cosmetics and jewelry, the first sculpture and bas-relief, the first palaces and temples, the first ornamental metal and decorative themes, the first arch, column, vault and dome.
Here, for the first known time on a large scale, appear some of the sins of civilization: slavery, despotism, ecclesiasticism, and imperialistic war. It was a life differentiated and subtle, abundant and complex. Already the natural inequality of men was producing a new degree of comfort and luxury for the strong, and a new routine of hard and disciplined labor for the rest. The theme was struck on which history would strum its myriad variations."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 5, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
“King Ur-engur proclaimed his code of laws in the name of the great god Shamash, for government had so soon discovered the political utility of heaven. Having been found useful, the gods became innumerable; every city and state, every human activity, had some inspiring and disciplinary divinity. [...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 4, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"[...] Originally, it seems, the gods preferred human flesh; but as human morality improved they had to be content with animals. A liturgical tablet found in the Sumerian ruins says, with strange theological premonitions: "The lamb is the substitute for humanity; he hath given up a lamb for his life.[...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 4, 1935 (italics added)
OBVIOUS SUGGESTION THAT CHRIST AS "THE LAMB" IS BASED ON SOMETHING EARLIER
"[...] Enriched by such beneficence, the priests became the wealthiest and most powerful class in the Sumerian cities. In most matters they were the government; it is difficult to make out to what extent the patesi was a priest, and to what extent a king.
Urukagina rose like a Luther against the exactions of the clergy,
denounced them for their voracity,
accused them of taking bribes in their administration of the law, and
charged that they were levying such taxes upon farmers and fishermen as to rob them of the fruits of their toil.
He swept the courts clear for a time of these corrupt officials, and
established laws regulating the taxes and fees paid to the temples,
protecting the helpless against extortion, and providing against the violent alienation of funds or property. [...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 4, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
OBVIOUS SUGGESTION THAT CHRISTIANITY GOT ETERNAL LIFE, SIN, AND THE FALL FROM SUMERIA
"[...] Men will pay any price for mythology. Even in this early age the great myths of religion were taking form. Since food and tools were placed in the graves with the dead, we may presume that the Sumerians believed in an after-life. But like the Greeks they pictured the other world as a dark abode of miserable shadows, to which all the dead descended indiscriminately. They had not yet conceived heaven and hell, eternal reward and punishment; they offered prayer and sacrifice not for 'eternal life,' but for tangible advantages here on the earth.
Later legend told how Adapa, a sage of Eridu, had been initiated into all lore by Ea, goddess of wisdom; one secret only had been refused him— the knowledge of deathless life.
Another legend narrated how the gods had created man happy; how man, by his free will, had sinned, and been punished with a flood, from which but one man— Tagtug the weaver— had survived. Tag- tug forfeited longevity and health by eating the fruit of a forbidden tree."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 4, 1935 (italics and formatting added)
"The priests transmitted education as well as mythology, and doubtless sought to teach, as well as to rule, by their myths. [...]"
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 4, 1935
"Nevertheless, as in most civilizations, the women of the upper classes almost balanced, by their luxury and their privileges, the toil and dis- abilities of their poorer sisters. Cosmetics and jewelry are prominent in the Sumerian tombs. In Queen Shub-ad’s grave Professor Woolley picked up a little compact of blue-green malachite, golden pins with knobs of lapis-lazuli, and a vanity-case of filigree gold shell. This vanity-case, as large as a little finger, contained a tiny spoon, presumably for scooping up rouge from the compact; a metal stick, perhaps for training the cuticle; and a pair of tweezers probably used to train the eyebrows or to pluck out inopportune hairs. The Queen’s rings were made of gold wire; one ring was inset with segments of lapis-lazuli; her necklace was of fluted lapis and gold. Surely there is nothing new under the sun; and the difference between the first woman and the last could pass through the eye of a needle."
Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 4, 1935 (italics added)
"The Tarquins, meanwhile, had taken refuge at the court of Lars Porsena, the king of Clusium. By evert means in their power they tried to win his support, now begging him not to allow fellow Etruscans, men of the same blood as himself, to continue living in penniless exile, now warning him of the dangerous consequences of letting republicanism go unavenged. The expulsion of kings, they urged, once it had begun, might well become common practice; liberty was an attractive idea, and unless reigning monarchs defended their thrones as vigorously as states now seemed to be trying to destry them, all order and subordination would collapse; nothing would be left in the country but flat equality; greatness and eminence would be gone for ever. Monarchy, the noblest thing in heaven or on earth, was nearing its end. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 9 (italics added) OR "By this time the Tarquins had fled to Lars Porsena, king of Clusium. There, mixing advice with their entreaties, "They sometimes besought him not to suffer them, who were descended from the Etrurians, and of the same blood and name, to live in exile and poverty; at other times they advised him not to let this commencing practice of expelling kings pass unpunished. That liberty has charms enough in itself; and unless kings defend their crowns with as much vigour as the people pursue their liberty, that the highest must be reduced to a level with the lowest; there will be nothing exalted, nothing distinguished above the rest; and hence there must be an end of regal government, the most beautiful institution both among gods and men. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 9 (italics added) OR "Meanwhile, the Tarquinii had carried their complaints to Lars Porsena, king of Clusium; and there, mixing admonitions with intreaties, they at one time besought him that he would not suffer those, who derived their origin from Etruria, and were of the same blood and name, to spend their lives in poverty and exile; then warned him 'not to let this new practice of dethroning kings proceed without chastisement; adding, that liberty had in itself sufficient sweets to allure others to follow the example, unless kings would show the same degree of vigour, in support of kingly power, which the people exerted to wrest it from them: the highest ranks would be reduced to a level with the lowest: there would be no dignity, no pre-eminence among the several members of society: there would soon be an end of regal authority, which among gods and men had heretofore been held in the highest degree of estimation.' [...]" History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 9
"[...] Never before had there been such consternation in the Senate, so powerful was Clusium at that time and so great the fame of Porsena. Nor was the menace of Porsena the only cause of for alarm: the Roman populace itself was hardly less to be feared, for they might well be scared into admitting the Tarquins into the city and buying peace even at the price of servitude. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 9 (italics added) OR "[...] Never before on any other occasion did so great terror seize the senate; so powerful was the state of Clusium at the time, and so great the renown of Porsena. Nor did they only dread their enemies, but even their own citizens, lest the common people, through excess of fear, should, by receiving the Tarquins into the city, accept peace even if purchased with slavery. [...] Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 9 (italics added) OR "[...] Never on any former occasion were the senate struck with such terror, so powerful was the state of Clusium at that time, and so great the name of Porsena: nor were they in dread of their enemies only, but also of their own countrymen; lest the Roman populace, overcome by their fears, might admit the kings into the city, and for the sake of peace, submit to slavery. [...]"
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 9
"To secure their support, therefore, the Senate granted them [the Roman commons] a number of favours, especially in the matter of food supplies.
--Missions were sent to Cumae and the Volscians to purchase grain;
--the monopoly in salt, the price of which was high, was taken from private individuals and transferred wholly to state control;
--the commons were exempted from tolls and taxes,
--the loss of revenue being made up by the rich, who could afford it;
--the poor, it was said, made contribution enough if they reared children. [...]" Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 9 (italics added) OR "[...] Many conciliatory concessions were therefore granted to the people by the senate during that period. Their attention, in the first place, was directed to the markets, and
--persons were sent, some to the Volscians, others to Cumæ, to buy up corn.
--The privilege of selling salt, also, because it was farmed at a high rent, was all taken into the hands of government, and withdrawn from private individuals;
and the people were freed from port-duties and taxes;
--that the rich, who were adequate to bearing the burden, should contribute;
--that the poor paid tax enough if they educated their children.
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 9
(italics added) OR "[...] The senate, therefore, at this season practised many conciliatory measures toward the commons: their first care was applied to the markets, and
--people were sent, some to the Volscians, others to Cumæ, to purchase corn;
--the privilege also of selling salt, because the price had been raised to an extravagant height, was taken out of the hands of private persons, and placed entirely under the management of government;
--the commons were also exempted from port duties and taxes,
--that the public expenses might fall upon the rich, who were equal to the burthen,
--the poor paying tax sufficient if they educated their children. [...]"
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 9
"These concessions proved wonderfully effective, for during the misery and privation of the subsequent blockade the city remained united -- so closely, indeed,
--that the poorest in Rome hated the very name of 'king' as bitterly as did the great.
Wise government in this crisis gave the Senate greater popularity, in the true sense of the word, than was ever won by a demagogue in after years. [...]" Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 9 (italics added) OR "[...] This indulgent care of the fathers [that is, the Patricians, the Senate] accordingly kept the whole state in such concord amid the subsequent severities in the siege and famine,
--that the highest abhorred the name of king not more than the lowest;
---nor was any single individual afterwards so popular by intriguing practices, as the whole senate then was by their excellent government. Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 9 (italics added) OR "[...] This indulgent care preserved such harmony in the state, even during the people’s severe sufferings afterwards, from siege and famine,
--that the name of king was abhorred by all;
--nor did any single person, in after times, ever acquire such a high degree of popularity by artful intrigues, as the whole senate then obtained by their wise administration."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 9
"[...] The chief of these measures were the provision of the right of appeal to the people against a decision of the magistrates, and loss of all civil rights for anyone convicted plotting for the return of the monarchy. As Valerius was anxious to have all the credit for these popular measures, he did not hold elections for the consular office left vacant by Brutus' death until they were carried through. [...]" Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 8 (italics added) OR "[...] Above all, the laws regarding an appeal to the people against the magistrates, and that devoting the life and property of any one who should form a design of assuming regal authority, were grateful to the people. And after he had passed these while sole consul, so that the merit in them was exclusively his own, he then held an assembly for the election of a new colleague. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 8 (italics added) OR "[...] Such particularly, was that concerning an appeal to the people against the decrees of the magistrates, and that which devoted both the person and goods of any who should form a design of assuming regal power. These laws were highly acceptable to the populace, and having effected the ratification of them, while alone in office, in order that the credit of them might be entirely his own, he then held an assembly for the election of a new colleague. [...]" History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 8
"The temple of Jupiter on the Capitol had not yet been dedicated, and the two consuls now drew lots to determine which of them should perform the ceremony. The lot fell to Horatius, and Publicola proceeded to conduct the operations against Veii. Publicola's relatives were unreasonably hurt that duty of dedicating so splendid a temple should fall to Horatius, and did everything they could to prevent it. When all else failed, and Horatius, with his hand on the door-post, was actually in the middle of his prayer, they broke in on the ceremony with the news that his son was dead, implying that while his house was in mourning he was not in a position to dedicate a temple. Horatius either did not believe the message, or showed extraordinary presence of mind -- which, we are not told, nor is it easy to guess; but in any case the news had so little effect that he merely gave instructions for his son's funeral and went on to complete the ceremony of dedication." Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 8 (italics added) OR "[...] Jupiter's temple in the Capitol had not yet been dedicated; the consuls Valerius and Horatius cast lots which should dedicate it. It fell by lot to Horatius. Publicola departed to the war of the Veientians. The friends of Valerius were more annoyed than they should have been, that the dedication of so celebrated a temple should be given to Horatius.Having endeavoured by every means to prevent that, when all other attempts had been tried in vain, when the consul was now holding the door-post during his offering of prayer to the gods, they suddenly announce to him the shocking intelligence that his son was dead, and that his family being defiled he could not dedicate the temple. Whether he did not believe the fact, or possessed such great firmness of mind, is neither handed down for certain, nor is a conjecture easy. Diverted from his purpose at this intelligence in no other way than to order that the body should be buried, he goes through the prayer, and dedicates the temple. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 8
(italics added) OR "[...] The temple of Jupiter in the Capitol had not yet been dedicated; the consuls Valerius and Horatius cast lots which should perform the dedication, and it fell to Horatius. Publicola set out to conduct the war against the Veientians. The friends of Valerius showed more displeasure, than the occasion merited, at the dedication of a temple so celebrated being given to Horatius. Having endeavoured, by every means, to prevent its taking place, and all their attempts having failed of success, when the consul had already laid his hand on the door-post, and was employed in offering prayers to the gods, they hastily addressed him with the shocking intelligence, that his son was dead, and insisted that his family being thus defiled, he could not dedicate the temple. Whether he doubted the truth of the intelligence, or whether it was owing to great firmness of mind, we are not informed with certainty, nor is it easy to conjecture; but he was no farther diverted from the business he was engaged in, by that information, than just to give orders that the body should be buried; and, still holding the post, he finished his prayer, and dedicated the temple.[...] History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 8
"[...] This completes the tale of Rome's achievements at home and abroad during the first year after the expulsion of the kings. For the year following the consuls were Valerius, for a second term, and Titus Lucretius."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 8 (italics added) OR "[...] These were the transactions at home and abroad the first year after the expulsion of the kings. After this P. Valerius, a second time, and Titus Lucretius, were elected consuls." Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 8 (italics added) OR "[...] Such were the transactions at home and abroad, which occurred during the first year after the expulsion of the royal family. The next consuls appointed were, Publius Valerius, a second time, and Titus Lucretius."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 8
"Oddly enough, however, though the engagement was indecisive, Tarquin and his Etruscans seem to have been suddenly overcome by despair of success, and the contingents of Veii and Tarquinii both dispersed during the night and went home, as if all were lost. There is a strange story that in the silence of the night after the battle a great voice, supposedly the voice of Silvanus, was heard from the depths of the Arsian wood, saying that the Etruscans had lost one more man in the fight than the Romans and the Romans were therefore victorious. Legends apart, there is no doubt that the Romans left the field as conquerors and that their enemies admitted defeat[.]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 7
(italics added) OR "After the issue of this battle, so great a terror seized Tarquin and the Etrurians, that both the armies, the Veientian and Tarquinian, giving up the matter as impracticable, departed to their respective homes. They annex strange incidents to this battle,—that in the silence of the next night a loud voice was emitted from the Arsian wood; that it was believed to be the voice of Silvanus: these words were spoken, "that more of the Etrurians by one had fallen in the battle; that the Roman was victorious in the war." Certainly the Romans departed thence as victors, the Etrurians as vanquished. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 7
(italics added) OR "Though such was the issue of the battle, yet so great terror took possession of Tarquinius and the Etrurians, that, giving up the enterprise as impracticable, both armies, the Veientian and the Tarquinian, retired by night to their respective countries. To the accounts of this battle, writers have added miracles; that, during the silence of the following night, a loud voice was uttered from the Arsian wood, which was believed to be the voice of Sylvanus, in these words: “The number of the Etrurians who fell in the engagement was the greater by one. The Romans have the victory.” The Romans certainly departed from the field as conquerors, the Etrurians as vanquished [.]"
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 7
"[...] [For] when at dawn next morning not a man of the Etruscan army remained to be seen, the consul Valerius marched back to Rome with the spoils of battle, to celebrate his triumph. Brutus was given as splendid a funeral as those early days could afford; but an even greater tribute to him was the nation's sorrow, of which the most poignant expression was given by the women of Rome, who mourned him for a year, as a father. It was their special tribute to his fierce championship of a woman's honour. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 7 (italics added) OR "[...] For as soon as it was light, and not one of the enemy was now to be seen, P. Valerius the consul collected the spoils, and returned thence in triumph to Rome. His colleague's funeral he celebrated with all the magnificence then possible. But a far greater honour to his death was the public sorrow, singularly remarkable in this particular, that the matrons mourned him a year,as a parent, because he had been so vigorous an avenger of violated chastity. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 7
(italics added) OR "[For] when day appeared, and not one of the enemy was to be seen, the consul, Publius Valerius, collected the spoils, and returned in triumph to Rome. He celebrated the funeral of his colleague [Brutus] with the utmost degree of magnificence which those times could afford; but a much higher mark of honour to the deceased, was the grief expressed by the public, singularly remarkable in this particular, that the matrons mourned for him as for a parent, during a whole year, in gratitude for his vigorous exertions in avenging the cause of violated chastity. [...]"
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 7
"[...] The passions of the mob are notoriously fickle, and Valerius, the surviving consul, soon lost his popularity and came not only to be disliked but suspected on the gravest possible grounds. Rumour had it that he was aiming at the monarchy. The reasons for suspicion were two: first, because he had taken no steps to supply the place of his dead colleage; secondly, because he was building himself a house on the top of the Velia, which might well, in such a position, be turned into an impregnable fortress. Valerius, deeply distressed by the prevalence of these unworthy rumors, called a mass meeting of the people, and, before mounting the platform, ordered his lictors, as a gesture of sympathy with popular feeling, to lower their rods. The gesture was well-received; the lowering of the fasces - the emblem of authority -- in the people's presence was taken as an admission that the majesty of power was vested in themselves rather than in the consul. [...]
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 7 (italics added) OR "[...] Afterwards the consul who survived [Publius Valerius], so changeable are the minds of the people, from great popularity, encountered not only jealousy, but suspicion, originating in an atrocious charge. Report represented that he aspired to the crown, because he had not substituted a colleague in the room of Brutus, and was building a house on the summit of Mount Velia, that there would be there an impregnable fortress on an elevated and well-fortified place. When these things, thus circulated and believed, affected the consul's mind with indignation, having summoned the people to an assembly, he mounts the rostrum, after lowering the fasces. It was a grateful sight to the multitude that the insignia of authority were lowered to them, and that an acknowledgment was made, that the majesty and power of the people were greater than that of the consul."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 7
(italics added) OR "[...] In a little time, the consul who survived [Publius Valerius], so changeable are the minds of the populace, from having enjoyed a high degree of popularity, became an object not only of jealousy, but of suspicion, attended with a charge of an atrocious nature: it was given out that he aspired at the sovereignty, because he had not substituted a colleague in the room of Brutus; and besides, was building a house on the summit of Mount Velia, which, in such a lofty and strong situation, would be an impregnable fortress. The consul’s mind was deeply affected with concern and indignation, at finding that such reports were circulated and believed; he therefore summoned the people to an assembly, and, ordering the fasces to be lowered, mounted the rostrum. It was a sight highly pleasing to the multitude, to find the ensigns of sovereignty lowered to them, and an acknowledgment thus openly given, that the majesty and power of the people were superior to those of the consul. [...]"
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 7
"[...] Valerius then began to speak: he dwelt on the good fortune pf his colleague [Brutus] who, having set Rome free, had held the highest office in the state, and had died fighting for his country at the very peak of his fame, before the breath of envy could tarnish its brightness. 'While I,' he went on, 'have outlived my good name; I have survived only to face your accusations and your hate. Once hailed as a liberator of my country, I have suck in your eyes to the baseness of traitors like Aiquilii and Vitelii. Will you never find in any man merit so tried and tested as to be above suspicion? How could I, the bitterest enemy of monarchy, ever have believed that I should face a charge of coveting a throne? If I lived in the fortress of the Capitol itself, could I ever have thought that my own fellow-citizens would be afraid of me? Can me reputation be blown away by so light a breath? Are the foundations of my honour so insecure that you judge me more by where I live than by what I am? No, my friends: no house of mine shall threaten your liberties. The Velia shall hold no dangers. I'll build my house on the level -- mor, I'll build it at the very base of the hill, so that you can live above me and keep a wary eye on the fellow-ciizen you mistrust. House on the Velia must be reserved for men better to be trusted with Rome's liberty than I am."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 7 (italics added) OR "[...] When they were called to silence, Valerius highly extolled the good fortune of his colleague [Brutus], "who after delivering his country had died vested with the supreme power, fighting bravely in defence of the commonwealth, when his glory was in its maturity, and not yet converted into jealousy.
That he himself [Valerius], having survived his glory, now remained as an object of accusation and calumny; that from the liberator of his country he had fallen to the level of the Aquilii and Vitellii. Will no merit then, says he, ever be so tried and approved by you, as to be exempted from the attacks of suspicion. Could I apprehend that myself, the bitterest enemy of kings, should fall under the charge of a desire of royalty? Could I believe that, even though I dwelt in the very citadel and the Capitol, that I could be dreaded by my fellow citizens? Does my character among you depend on so mere a trifle? Is my integrity so slightly founded, that it makes more matter where I may be, than what I may be. The house of Publius Valerius shall not stand in the way of your liberty, Romans; the Velian mount shall be secure to you. I will not only bring down my house into the plain, but I will build it beneath the hill, that you may dwell above me a suspected citizen. Let those build on the Velian mount to whom liberty is more securely intrusted than to P. Valerius." Immediately all the materials were brought down to the foot of the Velian mount, and the house was built at the foot of the hill where the temple of Victory now stands."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 7
(italics added) OR "[...] Attention being ordered, the consul [Publius Valerius] extolled the good fortune of his colleague [Brutus], who, “after having accomplished the deliverance of his country, and being raised to the highest post of honour, met with death while fighting in defence of the republic, when his glory had arrived at full maturity, without having excited jealousy: whereas he himself [Valerius], surviving his glory, was become an object of calumny; and from the character of deliverer of his country, had sunk to a level with the Aquillii and Vitellii. Will no degree of merit then,” said he, “ever gain your confidence, so far as to be secure from the attacks of suspicion? Could I have the least apprehension that I, the bitterest enemy to kings, should undergo the charge of aiming at kingly power? Supposing that I dwelt in the very citadel, and in the Capitol, could I believe that I was an object of terror to my countrymen? Does my reputation among you depend on so mere a trifle? Is my title to your confidence so slightly founded, that it is more to be considered where I am, than what I am? Citizens, the house of Publius Valerius shall be no obstruction to your freedom; the Velian mount shall be secure to you: I will not only bring down my house to the plain, but will fix it under the hill, that your dwellings may overlook that of your suspected countryman. Let those build on the Velian mount to whom ye can better intrust your liberty than to Publius Valerius.” Immediately all the materials were brought down from the Velian mount, and the house was built at the foot of the hill, where the temple of victory now stands."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 7
"News of the events had a profound effect upon Tarquin; disappointed by the failure of his grand design, he was filled with violent resentment against Rome. One way -- the way of treachery -- being blocked, he turned to the only alternative, the preparation of open war. For this purpose he visited the various Etruscan towns in order to solicit their support, and his best hopes of success were centred on Venii and Tarquinii.
(THE COMPLAINT)
'I am of the same blood as you,' -- so ran his argument -- 'yesterday I was a king in no mean kingdom; now I am a penniless exile. Do not let me perish with my young sons before your eyes.
-Other men have been abroad to rule in Rome;
-I, when the throne was mine, when I was extending Roman dominion by my conquests, was driven from power by a foul conspiracy in which my on kindred took part.
(CRITICISM OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED OFFICE OF CONSULSHIP)
-My enemies could find no worthy successor, no one man fit to reign; so they snatched at fragments of power -- broke it and divided;
(CRITICISM OF THE SENATE'S FINAL DECISION REGARDING HIS PROPERTY)
-they let the rabble, like a gang of thieves, plunder my wealth, that even the lowest might have a share of the guilt.
(THE REQUEST)
-It is my purpose to recover my country and my throne,
-to punish my ungrateful subjects.
-I appeal to you for aid.
-March with me to avenge the injuries you, too, have suffered in the past -- your many defeats in battle and the loss of your lands.'
The men of Veii were not deaf to this appeal; it touched them on the quick, and Tarquin's words were met by the sturdy response that every man was ready to wipe out the stain of old defeats and win back what they had lost in war."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 6 (italics added) OR "On these things being announced to him, as they had occurred, Tarquin, inflamed not only with grief for the frustration of such great hopes, but with hatred and resentment also, when he saw that the way was blocked up against stratagem, considering that he should have recourse to war openly, went round as a suppliant to the cities of Etruria,[:]
(THE COMPLAINT)
"that they should not suffer him, sprung from themselves, of the same blood, exiled and in want, lately in possession of so great a kingdom, to perish before their eyes, with the young men his sons.
-That others had been invited to Rome from foreign lands to the throne; (irony)
-that he, a king, extending the Roman empire by his arms, was driven out by those nearest to him by a villanous conspiracy;
(CRITICISM OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED OFFICE OF CONSULSHIP)
-that they had by violence divided the parts among themselves, because no one individual among them was deemed sufficiently deserving of the kingdom;
(CRITICISM OF THE SENATE'S FINAL DECISION REGARDING HIS PROPERTY)
-that they had given up his effects to the people to be pillaged by them, that no one might be free from that guilt.
(THE REQUEST)
-That he was desirous to recover his country and his kingdom, and
-to punish his ungrateful subjects.
-That they [the people of Veii] should bring succour and aid him;
-that they might also revenge the injuries done to them of old, their legions so often slaughtered, their land taken from them."
These arguments prevailed on the people of Veii, and with menaces they declare that now at least, under the conduct of a Roman general, their former disgrace should be wiped off, and what they had lost in war should be recovered."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 6 (italics added) OR "Tarquinius, on being informed of these transactions, became inflamed, not only with grief for the disappointment of such promising hopes, but with hatred and resentment; and finding every pass shut against secret plots, determined to have recourse to open war; and to that end, he went round to all the cities of Etruria, in the character of a suppliant, addressing himself particularly to the people of Veii and Tarquinii, intreating them,
(THE COMPLAINT)
“not to suffer him, who was sprung from themselves, and of the same blood; who was lately possessed of so great a kingdom, now exiled and in want, to perish before their eyes, together with the young men his sons.
-Others had been invited from foreign countries to Rome, to fill the throne;
-but he, when in possession of the government, and while he was employing his arms in extending the limits of the Roman empire, was expelled by a villainous conspiracy of men who were most closely connected with him;
(CRITICISM OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED OFFICE OF CONSULSHIP)
-who, because no one of their number was qualified to hold the reins of government, had forcibly shared the several parts of it among them,
(CRITICISM OF THE SENATE'S FINAL DECISION REGARDING HIS PROPERTY)
-and had given up his property to be plundered by the populace, to the intent that all might be equally guilty.
(THE REQUEST)
-He only wished to be restored to his own country and crown,
-and to be avenged on his ungrateful subjects.
-He besought them to support and assist him,
-and at the same time, to take revenge for the injuries which they themselves had sustained of old, for their legions so often slaughtered, and their lands taken from them.”
These arguments had the desired effect on the Veientians, every one of whom earnestly, and with menaces, declared that they ought now at least, with a Roman at their head, to efface the memory of their disgraces, and recover, by arms, what they had lost."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 6
"[...] While the hostile forces were still some distance apart, Arruns [Tarquin's son] recognized the consul [Brutus] by his lictors, and presently, coming near enough to distinguish his features, knew without a doubt that it was Brutus. 'There is the man,' he cited in a burst of anger, 'who drove us from our country! Look how he comes swaggering on, with all the marks of a power and a dignity which by right are ours! Avenge, O God of battles, this insult to a king!' Setting spurs to his horse, he made straight for the consul. Brutus was aware of the threat -- a general was expected in those days to play his part in the actual fighting -- and eagerly accepted the challenge. The two met with extreme violence, each without a thought for his own safety, intent only to strike his enemy down; and such weight was behind their thrust that the spear of each drove clean through his adversary's shield deep into his body, and both fell dying to the ground."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 6 (italics added) OR
"[...] Aruns [Tarquin's son], when he knew at a distance by the lictors that it was a consul, and on coming nigher discovered for certain that it was Brutus by his face, all inflamed with rage, he cried out, "There is the villain who has banished us from our native country! see how he rides in state adorned with the ensigns of our dignity! now assist me, gods, the avengers of kings." He put spurs to his horse and drove furiously against the consul. Brutus perceived the attack made on him; as it was honourable in these days for the generals to engage in combat, he eagerly offered himself to the combat. They encountered one another with such furious animosity, neither mindful of protecting his own person, provided he could wound his adversary; so that both, transfixed through the buckler by the blow from the opposite direction, fell lifeless from their horses, entangled together by the two spears. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 6 (italics added) OR "[...] Aruns, perceiving at a distance, by the lictors, that a consul was there, and afterwards, on a nearer approach, plainly distinguishing Brutus by his face, became inflamed with rage, and cried out, “That is the man who has driven us as exiles from our country; see how he marches in state, decorated with our ensigns: ye gods, avengers of kings, assist me!” He then spurred on his horse, and drove furiously against the consul. Brutus perceived that the attack was meant for him; and as it was at that time reckoned not improper for generals themselves to engage in fight, he eagerly offered himself to the combat; and they advanced against each other with such furious animosity, neither thinking of guarding his own person, but solely intent on wounding his enemy, that, in the violence of the conflict, each of them received his antagonist’s spear in his body, through his buckler, and being entangled together by the two spears, they both fell lifeless from their horses."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 6
"[...] the contingent from Veii, accustomed to defeat by Rome, was once more routed, while the men of Tarquinii, who had no previous experience against Roman troops, not only held firm but forced Rome to withdraw. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 6 (italics added) OR "The Veientians, accustomed to be discomfited by the Roman soldiers, were routed and put to flight. The Tarquinienses, who were a new enemy, not only stood their ground, but even on their side obliged the Romans to give way."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 6 (italics added) OR "[...] At length the Veientians, accustomed to be vanquished by the Roman troops, were routed and dispersed: the Tarquinians, a new enemy, not only kept their ground, but even, on their side, made the Romans give way."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 6
"[I] think it's important for us to recognize that the tongues that were spoken of in Acts chapter 2 were clearly authentic foreign languages. And you have a list of those languages in verses nine through verse eleven, of these different tongues in which the Gospel was proclaimed by not only the Apostles but also the others of the one hundred and twenty gathered in the upper room. And those true authentic foreign languages to Jews who did not understand those languages sounded like gibberish, which is why they said they were drunk; but to those who came from all parts of the world and truly did understand those languages, they recognized that nothing less than a genuine, unexplainable, supernatural miracle had taken place. I just think it's important at the outset of Church history that we emphasize that the beginning of the Church was authenticated by a true supernatural unexplainable miracle, and not by a bunch of guys speaking gibberish. [...] That will become relevant when we get to Pentacostal history in the twentieth century, but for now, we'll leave it there."
55:43 - 56:59
"In Acts chapter 6, we have deacons chosen, and this is because it has become too much for the Apostles to handle all of the day to day details of the Church. And I do think we have something of a paradigm here for the offices that are established and the way that those offices are to function. You have the Apostles functioning really as the elders/pastors of the Church, and it says there that their goal, their job, is to devote themselves to prayer and the preaching of the Word. And your job as an elder and a pastor is likewise to devote yourself to prayer and to the preaching and teaching of the Word. You bring alongside you faithful men as deacons who are willing to oversee the administrative tasks within Church ministry. I think you see that outlined here in Acts 6, and I think you see it fleshed out in Paul's epistles to Timothy and to Titus. But oftentimes the reason pastors experience what is called 'burnout' [...] is because they're not sticking to their God-ordained role of prayer and preaching, they're trying to do what God has designed deacons to do." 1:01:53 - 1:03:22
"I would say that in the minds of most people, [...] most Christians, their understanding of Church history kind of goes like this (and this may be representative of some of you as well): That the Apostle John was put on the isle of Patmos where he received a revelation from the Lord Jesus which he recorded for us, and which constitutes the last book of the New Testament. John then probably was released from Patmos, went back to Ephesus, and died shortly thereafter. And after the death of the Apostle John, Church history fell off a cliff and became Roman Catholic almost instantly, and it existed in this amorphous, dejected, heretical state for essentially the next 1400 years. There was a guy named Augustine or Augustin, and there was a guy named Aquinas -- and you've probably heard those names. There was a guy named Constantine, who debuted in The Da Vinci Code. And outside of that, nothing really happened. It was the Dark Ages, and it was completely enveloped in error and darkness.
Along came Martin Luther, a German monk in the 16th century, who, for reasons unknown to any of us, nailed 95 theses onto a castle door in Germany, sparked a Reformation, saved Church history, and gave us Protestant Evangelicalism. And after him came names like [John Calvin], and [John Knox], and [Charles Spurgeon?], and [Martyn Lloyd Jones], and [John F. MacArthur], and here we are. That's Church history, [... and] we are now part of the reformed conservative Evangelical Protestant Christianity.
Well I've got good news for you! There's a lot of things that happened in that 1500-year period before Martin Luther, and I think you're going to be encouraged over the course of this semester to find that Church history did not just drop off a cliff, that there were faithful men for many generations throughout Church history, really a line of faithful men all the way through to the Reformation, even during the High Middle Ages when things really started to get diluted and deformed even in Roman Catholic theology. So I think you're gonna find these first 1500 years to be fascinating, partly because most of you don't know anything about what happened during this period of time, and partly because you have misconceptions about what happened, and you've been led into thinking that the early Church Fathers [...] were somehow more Roman Catholic than they were Protestant, or that they somehow had twisted the Gospel into thinking that its salvation by works rather than salvation by faith alone. And we're going to spend quite a bit of time debunking that myth, and hopefully introducing to a heritage that belongs to you as a Bible-believing Evangelical Protestant Christian more so than any other branch of the Christian world today. It is your history, and it is not Roman Catholic history."
1:38 - 5:10
"God is at work in history. Conversely, history is a testimony to God's sovereign providence. [...] Think of Church history not as, again, a bunch of dates and dead people. Think of Church history as an exciting unfolding of the tapestry of God's sovereign providence as He fulfills His Gospel promises generation after generation after generation."
5:40-7:10
"It is another misconception about Church history that studying Church history and loving Church history is going to put Church history into a position of competition over and against the authority of the Bible. The reality is the more you study Church history the more you realize that the Church desperately needs an unchanging standard of truth if it is to remain pure and not get embroiled in compromise. So Church history, I've found, actually underscores a commitment to the authority of scripture; it does not compete against it."
7:38 - 8:10
"[...] Church is history is our history as members of the body of Christ. [...] When we study the history of the Church, we are not merely studying people, places, and events; we are the history of the bride of Christ, and we are part of that bride, we are part of the Church. When we study Church history then we come to see who we are, where we've come from, and how we fit into the flow of God's kingdom-work in the world. [...]"
9:41 - 10:17
"[... You] must be careful not to disconnect yourself from Church history. You are part of Church history. We have this temptation think of Church history as everything that happened before us, because we're not part of history, we're living in the Present, we're living in the Modern Age. (Which is kind of ironic, every generation thinks that it's the Modern Age.) The reality is [...] will continue to be part of Church history either until we go home to Heaven or until Christ comes back and Church history ends. [...] But in any case, for right now, we are part of Church history, and understanding our connectedness to those who've come before us is part of having a right perspective on what we are called to do."
11:07 - 12:10
"[...] 1 Peter 1:8 "Though you have not yet seen him, you love him; and though you do not see him now but believe in him, you rejoice greatly with joy inexpressible and full of glory." The New Testament is full of this idea of passing on the truth faithfully from one generation to the next generation. As Paul told Timothy, "Guard that which has been entrusted to you." And we see that principle lived out generation after generation in Church history. The doctrine of God's preservation of the truth, not miraculous preservation, but providential preservation, is illustrated throughout Church history. We see it specifically with the doctrine of canonicity, how the Canon was collected and defended over those first few generations of the history of the Church. [...]"
13:26 - 14:21
"Because, just as we are encouraged by the history of truth, we are also warned by the history of error. The New Testament is full of warnings about false teaching, [...] refuting it in the first century and warning that it would come in the centuries that followed. When we study Church history, we not only learn the history of truth, we also learn the history of error. We see for example where the cults originated, and we have the benefit of seeing orthodoxy defended and the truth being preserved. One of the interesting things that we'll see in the first 500-year period in Church history is really the origination of ancient heresies, almost all of which have been regurgitated in modern-day cults. We'll see Gnosticism, which shows up again, in form, as New Age theology, as Word of Faith theology, as Mormonism, as Christian Science -- Gnosticism's pretty much everywhere because it's the exaltation of human wisdom above the revelation of God. Then we have the legalism of the Judaizers, which shows really in cult groups like the Seventh-Day Adventists, which were very much a cult group when they started. We see the denial of the deity of Christ in the Arians (Arianism), and of course we see that regurgitated not only in Mormonism, but also probably most closely in the modern Jehovah's Witness-Watchtower movement. So learning a little about Church history and the history of error really equips you well when you're at home on a Saturday and your doorbell rings and two guys who look like seminary students but are holding bike helmets are standing there ready to argue with you about something as basic as the deity of Christ. [...] This stuff really is practical, I promise. It's not just learning about the past, it's learning about the past because it has import for the present."
14:24 - 16:26
Foxe's Book of Martyrs
"[...] There are countless illustrations of godly men and women throughout the history of the Church who remained faithful to the Gospel in the midst of persecution, in the midst of temptation, and the potential to compromise. [...] There's a lot of negative examples in Church history as well, and we're going to see some of those negative examples. We're going to see times when men who really knew much better defected to false forms of theology, to heresy; or when they gave in to what they really knew were unbiblical practices, and we're going to see the detrimental ramifications of that level of compromise, and I hope that will serve as a warning to you men as you think about your future ministries."
17:43 - 19:39
"Every Christian to a certain extent is called to be an apologist -- that's what 1 Peter 3:15 says, that we are called to give a 'defense' (the Greek word from which we get the word 'apologetics'), we are called to give a defense for the hope which is in us. And yet specifically Church leaders must be those who are equipped to defend and protect the flock from false teaching. Dr. McArthur in chapel on Tuesday said that part of protecting the sheep means hunting the wolves (I don't know if that's a quote but that's a summary of what he said). And that involves Apologetics. Understanding just a little bit of Church history gives you a huge advantage when it comes to responding to Greek Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Islam, or any of the modern American cults. And modern American cults would be anything from Seventh-Day Adventism to Christian Science to Scientology to Mormonism to Jehovah's Witnesses to the Word of Faith segment of broader Pentacostalism. Knowing just a little but of Church history, you can stand your ground and go toe to toe with any of those groups, because I guarantee you Church history is on your side. Now, the Bible more importantly is on your side, but isn't it nice to know that you don't have to give any ground to those who espouse error, in particular the Roman Catholics. Because it is a common Protestant conception that Church history belongs to the Catholics and the Bible belongs to us. Well, yes, the Bible belongs to us, and Church history also belongs to us. So don't give it to them."
20:46 - 22:28
"[...] I think it's important to realize that we're not the first generation to get it right. So remember that earlier generations of Christians lived much closer to the time of the Apostles, and that we should treat their writings seriously, and that we should take time to learn from them. It's important to realize that we are part of something much bigger than ourselves, our local congregations, or even the Evangelical movement as it exists today. We are part of something that's much bigger than just American Christianity, and I think that's especially important to those of us who were raised here in the United States. Because sometimes we think that Church history and American history are somehow synonymous. They are not. American history represents only 200 years of a 2000-year period of time in which God has been working through the Church.
To realize then forthly that every generation of believers is greatly affected by the time and culture in which they live, this is something that we'll see in Church history, such that they themselves do not realize the effects, and then in turn to ask ourselves what effect our own culture has on our application of Biblical truth. I think this is one of the most helpful things we can learn from Church history. We look at the early Church Fathers and we see them highly influenced by Platinism, and we think Platinism is absolutely and totally ridiculous, 'how in the world could they have allowed themselves to be so influenced by this clearly unbiblical philosophy? We look at the time of the Reformation, and we see some of the violence that characterized even Protestant reformers, and we think 'how in the world could they have allowed themselves to be so violent in their response to those with whom they disagreed?' And then we get to the twenty-first century and we act as through we are completely unbiased and unaffected by our own culture. If Christ tarries for another few generations, future generations of Church historians will look back on our time and they will point to things in our culture and they will say, 'how in the world could the Church have been so influenced by ... fill in the blank?' And it's, I think, a really useful exercise for us to ask ourselves, what are those things in our culture that we have allowed to so influence us that we're actually being unbiblical in these particular areas?'"
22:56 - 25:24
"What the Church is doing today when it tries to reinterpret Genesis 1-11 through a Darwinistic evolutionary paradigm is the exact same thing that guys like Clement of Alexandria and Origen were doing when they said the Bible should be interpreted allegorically in order to fit a Platonic philosophy. It's just that it's not Platinism, it's Aristotelianism, because the materialism that undergirds non-supernatural Darwinistic evolutionary thought is Aristotelian at it's core. So we're involved at integrating Greek philosophy into Christianity; we've just given it the name 'science' rather than the name 'philosophy.'"
25:57 - 26:39
"We all come to history with preconceived ideas, and the reality is that no historian can be entirely objective, it's impossible to be entirely objective. Well that's okay with me, because I'm not going to try to be objective. How's that for stating it upfront? I have a very clear goal in this class, and that is to show how Church history fits with what I believe the Biblical Gospel is and what I believe the Bible proclaims in terms of those priorities that God had in fulfilling the Great Commission. So I'm not really that interested in being purely objective, because pure objectivity is impossible to achieve anyway. So why try? So, we're going to come at Church history from a very particular viewpoint which is to say, [...] We believe that the Bible is our ultimate authority and we believe that the Biblical Gospel is a gospel of faith alone, in Christ alone, based on his work on the cross alone. [With that in mind], we will then interpret Church history[.]"
28:02 - 29:24
"[There] can be a tendency to be a little bit arrogant in our [speaking generally] approach[.] The contemporary temptation always is to think that whatever's happening now is better than what was happening way back when. And we have to approach history with a little bit of humility, recognizing that we have a lot to learn from men and women in the past whom God used mightily for His purposes. And when we sit at their feet, we can really benefit."
29:40 - 30:18
"Please make sure to include Biography as part of your regular reading."
30:46 - 30:53
"I just wanted to make a connection between what we are attempting to do in this class and what you will one day be doing -- maybe some of you already are doing -- in the pulpit. One of the primary, if not the primary, objectives at the Masters Seminary is to train you men how to preach. That preaching starts with interpreting the Word of God correctly, and then being able to take that correct interpretation and put it into a format in which you can deliver it effectively to the people of God through the power of the Spirit so that their lives are changed."
32:35 - 33:11
"For the record, the Protestant reformers themselves -- Luther, Swingley, Calvin, Knox, and others later, Chemnitz and others -- these men were very interested in what the Church Fathers had to say on things. In fact, if you read Calvin's Institutes he quotes from the Church Fathers almost as much as he quotes from the Bible. He quotes from Augustin over 100 times. So if you think that it is impossible or incongruent for a Protestant to also love Church history, then you don't understand really what Protestantism is, because the Protestant Reformation was about recovering Church history, not about abandoning it."
"The question of the Tarquins' property was brought up in the Senate for reconsideration. This time indignation prevailed; the Senate refused to restore it, and refused to confiscate it officially; instead, they let the people loose on it to take what they pleased, hoping that once the lower orders had stained their hands with the gold of kings they would lose for ever all hope of making peace with them again. [...]" Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics added) OR "The question concerning the restitution of the tyrants' effects, which the senate had formerly voted, came again under consideration. The fathers, fired with indignation, expressly forbad them either to be restored or confiscated. They were given to be rifled by the people, that after being made participators in the royal plunder, they might lose for ever all hopes of a reconciliation with the Tarquins. [...]" Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics added) OR "With respect to the effects of the princes, which they had before ordered to be restored, the business was now laid before the senate for re-consideration; and they, actuated entirely by resentment, decreed, that they should not be restored, but converted to the use of the state. They were, therefore, given up to the commons as plunder, with the intent, that these, after such an act of violence against the princes, as the seizing of their effects, might for ever lose all hope of reconciliation with them.[...] History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 5
"When everything that belonged to the Tarquins had been pillaged and gutted by the populace, the traitors received their sentence, and their punishment. It was a memorable scene: for the consular office imposed upon a father the duty of exacting the supreme penalty from his sons, so that he who, of all men, should have been spared the sight of their suffering, was the one whom fate ordained to enforce it. The condemned criminals were bound to the stake; all were young men of the best blood in Rome, but only the consul's sons drew the eyes of the spectators; the others, for all the interest they aroused, might have come from the gutter. There was pity for their punishment, and greater pity for the crime which had brought it upon them; in which heart was a sort of incredulous sorrow for such treachery at such a time: that these young men, in the very year when Rome was liberated -- and by their father's hand -- when the newly created consulship had fallen first to a member of their own family, should have brought themselves to betray the entire population of Rome, high and low alike, and all her gods, to a man who had once been a haughty tyrant and now, from his place of exile, was planning her destruction! The consuls took their seats on the tribunal; the lictors were ordered to carry out the sentence. The prisoners were stripped, flogged, and beheaded. Throughout the pitiful scene all eyes were on the father's face, where a father's anguish was plain to see." Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics added) OR "After plundering the tyrants' effects, the traitors were condemned and capital punishment inflicted. Their punishment was the more remarkable, because the consulship imposed on the father the office of punishing his own children, and him who should have been removed as a spectator, fortune assigned as the person to exact the punishment. Young men of the highest quality stood tied to a stake; but the consul's sons attracted the eyes of all the spectators from the rest of the criminals, as from persons unknown; nor did the people pity them more on account of the severity of the punishment, than the horrid crime by which they had deserved it. "That they, in that year particularly, should have brought themselves to betray into the hands of Tarquin, formerly a proud tyrant, and now an exasperated exile, their country just delivered, their father its deliverer, the consulate which took its rise from the family of the Junii, the fathers, the people, and whatever belonged either to the gods or the citizens of Rome." The consuls seated themselves in their tribunal, and the lictors, being despatched to inflict punishment, strip them naked, beat them with rods, and strike off their heads. Whilst during all this time, the father, his looks and his countenance, presented a touching spectacle, the feelings of the father bursting forth occasionally during the office of superintending the public execution." Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics added) OR "After the people had made plunder of the effects of the princes, the traitors were condemned and executed. And the execution was the more remarkable on this account, that his office of consul imposed on a father the severe duty of inflicting punishment on his own sons; and that he, who ought not to have been present as a spectator, was yet the very person whom fortune pitched on to exact the penalty of their offence. The youths, all of the first distinction, stood tied to stakes, but the sons of the consul entirely engaged the eyes of the spectators, as if the others were persons unknown; and people felt compassion, not only for their punishment, but even for the crime by which they had brought it on themselves: to think that “they could, during that year particularly, have been induced to entertain a design of betraying their country, just delivered from tyranny, their father its deliverer, the consulship, which had commenced in the Junian family, the patricians, commons, in a word, whatever Rome held in highest veneration, into the hands of one who was formerly a tyrannical king, now an enraged exile.” The consuls mounted their [108] throne, and the lictors were sent to inflict the punishment: after stripping the criminals naked, they beat them with rods, and beheaded them; whilst, through the whole process of the affair, the looks and countenance of Brutus afforded an extraordinary spectacle, the feelings of the father often struggling with the character of the magistrate enforcing the execution of the laws. [...]" History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 5
PUNISHMENT...
VS REWARD
"After the execution, the informer was rewarded; in addition to a gift of money he was granted his liberty with citizen rights. It was hoped that this measure might double the effect of the execution as a deterrent. The informer is said to have been the first slave to be emancipated by touching with the vindicta (staff); some think that the vindicta was derived from his name, Vindicius. It was the custom subsequently to regard all slaves who were freed in this way as admitted to the rights of citizenship."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics added) OR "Next after the punishment of the guilty, that there might be a striking example in either way for the prevention of crime,
a sum of money was granted out of the treasury as a reward to the discoverer;
liberty also and the rights of citizenship were granted him.
He is said to have been the first person made free by the Vindicta; some think even that the term vindicta is derived from him. After him it was observed as a rule, that those who were set free in this manner were supposed to be admitted to the rights of Roman citizens."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics and formatting added)
OR "[...] Justice done to the offenders, in order to exhibit a striking example for the prevention of crimes, in their treatment of the several parties, they gave, as a reward to the discoverer of the treason, a sum of money out of the treasury, his freedom, and the rights of a citizen. This man is said to be the first who was made free by the Vindicta.* Some think that the term “Vindicta” was taken from him, his name having been Vindicius: after him, it obtained, as a rule, that whoever was made free in that manner, should be considered and admitted a citizen."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 5
