The Apostle Peter in Rome

Jesus’ chief disciple examined

In this blog post, Brown University Religious Studies professor Nicola Denzey Lewis answers frequently asked questions about the apostle Peter. Denzey Lewis appears in the CNN series Finding Jesus: Faith, Fact, Forgery, which aims to investigate artifacts that shed light on the world in which Jesus lived.—Ed.


 
What traditions connect the apostle Peter to Rome?

peter-el-greco

The Repentant St. Peter by El Greco. Photo: The Phillips Collection.

Jesus’ chief disciple, Peter (also called Simon Peter or Cephas), has been associated with Rome for nearly 2,000 years. The earliest testimony to the apostle Peter’s presence in Rome is a letter from a Christian deacon named Gaius. Writing probably toward the end of the second century C.E.—so, around 170 or 180 C.E.—Gaius tells about the wondrous things in Rome, including something called a tropaion (see below for more) where Peter established a church—in fact, the Church, the Roman Catholic church at the site where St. Peter’s Basilica is today. But there are other traditions besides Peter’s tropaion. One early Christian text, the Apocryphal Acts of Peter, recounts many things that Peter did in the city. At one point in Acts of Peter, Peter is taunted by a flamboyant heretic, Simon Magus. Simon challenges Peter to a flying contest around the Roman Forum, but Peter’s prayers make Simon crash to the ground, proving that Simon’s powers are not as great as his own. At the end of this text, Peter, not wishing to be martyred for his faith, flees from Roman authorities on the Via Appia leading out of the city. Rather unexpectedly, Peter meets Jesus, who is traveling in the opposite direction. He asks Jesus, “Where are you going?” Jesus tells Peter that he is going to Rome “to be crucified again.” Peter realizes, from this, that he cannot flee from his fate. “Where are you going?” in Latin is “Quo Vadis?” and there’s a medieval church in Rome called the Church of Quo Vadis at the spot where Peter met Jesus. To prove that his vision was real, you can still see there a bit of marble pavement which the faithful say miraculously preserve Jesus’ footprints.

Is it likely that the apostle Peter went to Rome and founded the church there?

Interestingly, the Bible says nothing about Peter ever traveling to Rome. When the gospels end, Peter is in Jerusalem. It’s the same in the Book of Acts. The apostle Paul, in his letters, also talks about meeting Peter in the eastern Mediterranean. After Jesus’ death, Paul says that Jesus’ brother, James, and Peter are the co-leaders of the “church,” or assembly, of Jesus-followers in Jerusalem. In short, there is no early textual evidence for Peter in Rome, so for some people, it’s very hard to believe that he ever traveled there. Not only is it a very long way, according to the New Testament, Peter was a fisherman who was not very educated and who spoke only Aramaic; he was not the type of person that might travel widely across the Roman Empire to a large city where Latin and Greek were the dominant languages. The absence of connection between Peter and Rome in the New Testament, the lack of references to him in our earliest Roman Christian literature, and what we know of Peter’s background and character all combine to make it unlikely, to my mind, that he ever went to Rome.

In the free eBook Paul: Jewish Law and Early Christianity, learn about the cultural contexts for the theology of Paul and how Jewish traditions and law extended into early Christianity through Paul’s dual roles as a Christian missionary and a Pharisee.

Is there any evidence that the apostle Peter died in Rome?

st-peter-basilica

St. Peter’s Basilica in Vatican City, the traditional burial site of the apostle Peter.

There is no solid evidence—textual or even archaeological—that Peter died in Rome. Starting around the end of the second century, Christian pilgrims went to see Peter’s tropaion. But a tropaion is not a tomb. The word itself is very unusual; sometimes translated as “trophy,” it means something like a war memorial or a cenotaph (i.e., an empty grave). It’s not the word used in the Roman Empire for a burial place. Yet this spot—which was originally in the middle of an ancient cemetery—was quickly understood as the place where Peter was buried. When it was excavated in the 1950s, archaeologists were shocked to find that there was no grave and no bones under the tropaion. Only later were some bones produced from that excavation, and it’s a fascinating story we talk about in Finding Jesus. Are these Peter’s bones? That appears to be a matter of faith. The official Vatican position, first stated in 1968, is that they might be.

Why are there two places in Rome where the apostle Peter was supposedly buried?

This is another fascinating thing we explore in Finding Jesus. Most people know about Peter’s traditional burial site at St. Peter’s. But it turns out that there’s a second site in Rome where pilgrims went for hundreds of years, which was known as the Memoria Apostolorum (the Memorial to the Apostles). It’s off the Via Appia at the modern site of the Catacombs of San Sebastiano, and you can still go and visit it today, although the memorial itself is largely built over. What’s amazing is that the site preserves around 600 graffiti scrawled by Christian pilgrims in the early Middle Ages, most of them prayers to Peter and Paul, the joint patron saints of Rome. It certainly looks like people believed that Peter was buried there, but excavators found no evidence of a tomb there, either! As far as I can tell, this leaves us with two options: Either Peter’s body was at both these sites at one point and moved from one to the other, or Peter’s body was never at either site, but people still associated him with the site. It didn’t always take a body or a tomb for a site to be sacred, after all.
 


 
This Bible History Daily feature was originally published on March 31, 2017.
 


 
nicola-denzey-lewisNicola Denzey Lewis, Visiting Associate Professor in the Department of Religious Studies at Brown University, specializes in Gnosticism, Late Antiquity, Roman social history, the history of Christianity, and women and gender. Her recent publications include Cosmology and Fate in Gnosticism and the Graeco-Roman World (Brill, 2013) and Introduction to “Gnosticism” (Oxford Univ. Press, 2013).
 


 

Related reading in the BAS Library:

Pheme Perkins, “Peter: How a Flawed Disciple Became Jesus’ Successor on Earth,” Bible Review, February 2004.

“Peter in Rome,” Bible Review, February 2004.

David R. Cartlidge, “The Fall and Rise of Simon Magus,” Bible Review, Fall 2005.

Not a BAS Library member yet? Join the BAS Library today.
 


 

Posted in People in the Bible.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Add Your Comments

5 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  • mary says

    Birger A. Pearson documents “redactions”, “additions”, “deletions” in the “Acts of Mark”, in the 4th and 5th century by Rome and Paris. Said by Eusebius it was done by Rome. The Coptic church of Egypt says the same. Someone took the Acts and don’t know who took them. Peter was with Mark in Babylon Fortress, Cairo(now), Egypt with all the Apostles in the 3rd missionary journey to Egypt and all Africa. This is a hoax about Peter. He never left his Apostles.

  • Iloveyeshua says

    Satin is sifting everyone like wheat. Stick to the pure word of the Bible. Follow the commandments of Gods son Yeshua and ask for guidance, understanding and wisdom. Worship god in purity and obey him.

  • George says

    Many of the early traditions are oral history and some are eventually verified. As the leader of the Church on earth, Peter would have (and had to for safety) traveled extensively. There is no reason Peter would not have visited Rome. Paul expanded and existing church in Rome. With Paul off on whatever he did after his release from prison (I cannot dispute a western missionary expedition without Dr. Luke), there is no reason for Peter to not have gone to Rome. All we know for certain is that Peter didn’t return to Jerusalem (because people make a point of saying he didn’t).

    I encourage everyone to take my position: “If the Gospels were not written by the authors, I am happy to accept your claim if you can give me the name of the real author.” I sleep well at night.

  • George says

    Peter had to speak Greek because he worked to sell his harvest. Trade was in Greek. Peter had to speak some Greek. Over the decades of his ministry, I am sure he might have acquired a better understanding of that language but his Gospel is written by John Mark for him. Let us not forget this point.

  • Mark says

    Why cant we find Peter’s last words he spoke at his crucifixion. What happened to them? Too contradicting. I know that a roman scribe was supposed top be at his death and recorded his last words but now you can’t find them on the internet, WHY?

  • 1 8 9 10


    Some HTML is OK

    or, reply to this post via trackback.


Send this to a friend

Hello! You friend thought you might be interested in reading this post from https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org:
The Apostle Peter in Rome!
Here is the link: https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/the-apostle-peter-in-rome/
Enter Your Log In Credentials...

Change Password

×