Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Alexamenos graffito

The Alexamenos graffito is an ancient Roman wall inscription featuring a satirical depiction of a crucified figure with a donkey's head, worshiped by a man named Alexamenos, discovered in 1856 during excavations on the Palatine Hill in Rome.^[1]^[2] It was found in the Paedagogium, a facility associated with the imperial palace used for training slaves or gladiators, and is now housed in the Palatine Museum.^[1]^[3] The graffiti consists of two crudely sketched figures: a naked man affixed to a T-shaped cross bearing the head of an ass, approached by another figure raising his hand in a gesture of adoration, accompanied by the Greek text "ΑΛΕΞΑΜΕΝΟΣ ΣΕΒΕΤΕ ΘΕΟΝ," which translates to "Alexamenos worships [his] god."^[1]^[4] Dated to around AD 200, possibly extending into the second or third century, it represents the earliest known visual portrayal of the Christian crucifixion motif.^[1]^[5] Scholars interpret it as an act of derision against a Christian individual, mocking the worship of Jesus by likening the deity to a hybrid beast, likely alluding to pagan rumors or polemics—such as those equating Christian rites with onolatry (donkey worship)—prevalent in Roman society amid early Christian persecution.^[4]^[6] While alternative readings propose non-Christian contexts, such as depictions of demons or other cults, the predominant archaeological consensus views it as anti-Christian propaganda evidencing the social tensions and visibility of Christian communities in imperial Rome.^[7]^[8] The artifact underscores the crude, public ridicule faced by early believers, transforming a symbol of execution into one of faith despite hostility.^[3]

Description

Iconography and Form

The Alexamenos graffito consists of two crudely etched figures scratched into a plaster surface measuring 33.5 by 38 cm.^[2] The central figure represents a human form affixed to a cross, characterized by an elongated donkey's head with prominent ears, a short tunic covering the torso and loins, outstretched arms nailed to a horizontal crossbar, and legs positioned closely together below.^[5] The execution is rough and asymmetrical, with disproportionate limbs and minimal detailing, typical of impromptu incisions made by non-professional hands using a sharp tool.^[2] To the left of the cross stands a second figure, depicted in a simplified, stick-like manner with elongated limbs and a basic outline of the body, raising one arm in a gesture toward the crucified form.^[9] This worshiper's proportions emphasize thin, linear strokes, lacking anatomical precision or shading, which aligns with the informal aesthetic of ancient Roman graffiti found in public spaces.^[10] Stylistically, the graffito's crude line work and schematic forms parallel contemporaneous examples of Roman wall markings, such as those from Pompeii and Ostia, where figures are often rendered hastily with exaggerated features and minimal perspective to convey quick impressions rather than artistic refinement.^[3] These shared traits—irregular scratching depths, simplistic iconographic elements, and absence of polish—affirm the piece's authenticity as a vernacular artifact from imperial-era urban environments.^[7]

Inscription and Language

The inscription accompanying the Alexamenos graffito reads in Greek as ΑΛΕΞΑΜΕΝΟΣ ΣΕΒΕΤΕ ΘΕΟΝ, transliterated as Alexamenos sebete theon.^[8] This phrasing translates literally to "Alexamenos worships god," with "theon" denoting "god" in the accusative case and no definite article specifying a particular deity.^[2] The lettering exhibits crude, irregular forms typical of informal graffiti, lacking the precision of formal epigraphy, which aligns with spontaneous wall scratchings in ancient urban settings.^[2] Linguistically, the text employs Koine Greek, the Hellenistic dialect prevalent in the Roman Empire during the 2nd and 3rd centuries CE, reflecting everyday usage among diverse populations in Rome, including Greek-speaking residents and slaves.^[1] The verb form "sebete," derived from seboma ("to worship" or "to revere"), appears in the second person plural present indicative, potentially functioning as a mocking imperative or declarative statement in this context, though grammatical ambiguities arise from the informal script.^[8] No abbreviations are evident in the preserved text, and the absence of explicit identifiers for Christianity—such as references to Christ or specific theological terms—leaves the divine referent ambiguous solely from linguistic evidence.^[4] Paleographic analysis confirms the script's compatibility with mid-imperial Roman graffiti styles, emphasizing phonetic fidelity over orthographic polish.^[2]

Archaeological Context

Discovery and Excavation

The Alexamenos graffito was uncovered in 1856 amid excavations of the imperial palace complex on the Palatine Hill in Rome, specifically within the Paedagogium, a facility identified as a training school for imperial page boys, slaves, and gladiators' attendants.^[1] ^[11] The artifact consisted of a plaster fragment incised with the graffito, detached from an interior wall in one of the Paedagogium's rooms; contemporaneous records note no linked artifacts or structural features in the immediate deposit.^[1] Initial post-excavation handling involved basic documentation of the find in situ before its removal for preservation, with the fragment subsequently housed in the Palatine Museum (formerly the Palatine Antiquarium), where it remains on public display.^[1]^[12]

Site and Environmental Details

The Paedagogium, where the Alexamenos graffito was located, functioned as an imperial training facility for young male slaves (pueri delicati) within the Domus Augustana complex on the southwestern slope of the Palatine Hill, adjacent to the Circus Maximus.^[13]^[1] This structure, oriented northwest-southeast and parallel to the Circus Maximus, served utilitarian purposes for educating and housing slaves of diverse ethnic origins destined for service in the imperial household, fostering an environment of low social status marked by informal interactions and frequent graffiti production.^[14]^[15] The graffito appears on the plaster of an interior wall in a ground-level room (Room 7), consistent with spontaneous etchings by resident slaves or transient visitors in a confined, everyday space rather than public or ceremonial areas.^[5]^[16] Onomastic evidence from associated graffiti confirms the site's role in accommodating imperial slaves with varying literacy levels, indicative of a multicultural milieu where such markings proliferated among lower-status occupants.^[13] While situated amid the elite architectural grandeur of the Palatine's imperial palaces, the Paedagogium occupied a subordinate, functional zone dedicated to slave management, enabling cross-social exchanges among inhabitants potentially including those from Eastern provinces exposed to nascent Christian ideas.^[17]^[18]

Dating and Chronology

Methodological Approaches

The dating of the Alexamenos graffito relies primarily on stratigraphic analysis of the plaster layers in the Paedagogium on Rome's Palatine Hill, where the artifact was incised into a wall surface associated with the building's renovation phases.^[13] Excavations reveal that the structure, identified as a training facility for imperial slaves through contextual graffiti, underwent significant rebuilding under Emperor Septimius Severus between 193 and 211 CE, providing a terminus post quem for the plaster deposit.^[19] Associated ceramic shards and pottery fragments from the same stratigraphic levels, typical of Roman imperial sites, further constrain the chronology by matching typologies known from dated contexts across the empire.^[13] Paleographic examination of the graffito's Greek inscription, featuring crude, informal lettering such as the elongated alpha and epsilon forms, involves comparison to dated Roman graffiti and inscriptions from the 2nd to 3rd centuries CE, including those from Pompeii and Ostia.^[20] This method assesses letter proportions, ligatures, and scratching techniques against epigraphic corpora to infer relative chronology, though it remains probabilistic due to the variability of informal writing. Plaster composition analysis, including binder types and aggregate materials, supplements this by aligning the substrate with known Roman recipes from the Severan era, derived from comparative wall plasters in imperial complexes.^[13] Key limitations include the absence of organic materials in the graffito or adhering plaster, rendering radiocarbon dating infeasible, as this technique requires carbon-based samples.^[21] Thus, dating depends heavily on indirect contextual evidence like ceramics and historical records of the site's occupation, which can introduce uncertainties from reuse or disturbance of layers; no direct chemical or isotopic assays on the plaster have been reported to refine these beyond typological matches.^[13]

Estimated Timeline and Evidence

Scholarly estimates place the Alexamenos graffito in the late 2nd to early 3rd century AD, with a primary dating of circa 200 AD.^[1]^[2] This range reflects the graffito's recovery from the Paedagogium on the Palatine Hill, a structure built after 92 AD under Domitian's architect Rabirius, combined with its stylistic parallels to other dated graffiti in the same imperial complex, which exhibit comparable crude etching techniques and script forms from that era.^[2] Proposals for a 1st-century date, sometimes proposed based on the graffito's rudimentary style akin to pre-92 AD Roman scratches, face criticism for anachronism in the specific crucified ass-headed iconography, as onolatry accusations against Christians lack attestation before late 2nd-century sources like Tertullian's Ad Nationes (c. 197 AD), which explicitly refutes claims of worshiping a donkey-headed god.^[7] The post-Trajan era (after 117 AD) provides additional contextual support, marking increased Roman awareness of Christianity sufficient for such targeted mockery.^[1] Mid-3rd-century datings, tied to site refurbishments during Elagabalus's (218–222 AD) or Severus Alexander's (222–235 AD) reigns, are considered but deemed less probable, as the graffito's form better matches earlier layers of Palatine usage and aligns with contemporary literary slanders in Minucius Felix's Octavius (late 2nd/early 3rd century AD).^[8] These evidential chains—stratigraphic, stylistic, and historical—converge on circa 200 AD as the most defensible estimate.^[2]

Interpretations

Traditional Anti-Christian Reading

The Alexamenos graffito has traditionally been interpreted as a piece of pagan derision directed at a Christian adherent named Alexamenos, portraying him in the act of worshiping a crucified figure with a donkey's head, intended to equate Jesus Christ with the object of ancient slanders against Jewish and Christian practices.^[1] The inscription, in Greek, reads "Αλεξαμενος σεβετε θεον" ("Alexamenos worships his god"), accompanying an image of a robed figure raising one hand toward the cross while the crucified form displays exposed buttocks, emphasizing humiliation through rear view and animalistic features.^[2] This depiction aligns with recurring pagan tropes accusing Jews and, by extension, early Christians of onolatry, or ass worship, rooted in Egyptian anti-Semitic fabrications propagated by figures like Apion.^[1] Such accusations trace back to Apion's claims, refuted by Josephus in Against Apion (c. 97 AD), where he details Egyptian tales alleging that Jews venerated the severed head of an ass smuggled from a temple in Heliopolis, symbolizing stupidity and impurity to mock monotheistic exclusivity.^[1] Josephus recounts Apion's assertion that Antiochus IV Epiphanes discovered this "ass's head" in the Jerusalem Temple, later echoed by Roman historians like Tacitus in Histories 5.4, who linked Jewish origins to Egyptian expulsion for worshiping animal deities including the ass.^[1] In the Roman context of the graffito, likely carved by a fellow slave or guard in a pagan household on the Palatine Hill around the 2nd century AD, this imagery served to bully Alexamenos, highlighting social ostracism and contempt for Christian veneration of a crucified criminal-god in a society valuing martial virtue over executed provincials.^[2] The graffito constitutes the earliest surviving visual representation of the Christian crucifixion motif, predating any affirmative Christian iconography by over a century and attesting to the empirical reality of early believers' focus on Jesus' execution despite its scandalous implications under Roman law and culture.^[7] Unlike later Christian art that stylized or avoided direct crucifixion scenes until the 4th-5th centuries, this crude etching underscores the raw hostility Christians faced, where faith in a donkey-headed savior invited ridicule rather than reverence, reflecting broader patterns of informal persecution before formalized imperial edicts.^[4]

Alternative Hypotheses

One alternative interpretation posits the donkey-headed figure not as a mockery of Jesus but as a "naked demon" invoked in pagan magical or apotropaic practices, with Alexamenos depicted as engaging in superstitious worship of such an entity for protection or enslavement rituals common in Roman folk religion. This reading draws on the absence of explicit Christian iconography, such as crosses with titles or accompanying symbols like the chi-rho, which might be expected in a targeted anti-Christian satire, and instead aligns the imagery with broader Greco-Roman depictions of hybrid demons in defixiones (curse tablets) and amulets featuring bound, animal-headed spirits. Proponents argue this reverses the traditional narrative, suggesting the graffito could represent Christian or Jewish critique of pagan demonology rather than pagan derision of Christianity, though critics note the lack of direct epigraphic parallels for donkey-headed demons in such contexts and the figure's crucifixion pose, which evokes judicial punishment over magical binding. Another hypothesis frames the scene as interpersonal ridicule unrelated to religious devotion, portraying Alexamenos as a gambler ruefully "worshiping" a lost wager on a donkey-headed charioteer or racehorse from Roman circus betting, where onagri (wild asses) featured in ludus scaenicus events and folklore associated donkeys with folly or ill luck.^[22] This draws on the prevalence of gambling graffiti in Palatine Hill sites, including wager tallies and taunts among slaves or guards, and the donkey's symbolic role in Roman invective for stupidity, without invoking Christianity's crucified god, whose worship was not widely caricatured with animal heads until later heresiological accusations.^[22] The theory highlights the graffito's crude style and location in a guards' barracks, suggesting casual mockery among colleagues rather than ideological polemic, though it struggles to explain the explicit "worships his god" inscription, which implies veneration beyond mere loss. Fringe proposals link the imagery to non-mainstream sects outside orthodox Christianity, such as Gnostic groups or Elchasaite communities, where ass symbolism appeared in ritual or cosmological myths—drawing from ancient rumors of onolatry (ass-worship) leveled against Jewish and sectarian groups by figures like Apion—potentially satirizing mystery cult initiations involving animal masks or hybrid deities akin to Seth or underworld guardians.^[23] These interpretations emphasize the era's syncretic religious landscape, where donkey-headed figures echoed Egyptian theriomorphic gods or Sethian Gnostic emanations, but lack substantiation from contemporary texts or artifacts tying such motifs directly to the graffito's form, and are often dismissed for projecting later heterodox developments onto a potentially earlier, non-sectarian context.^[23] The absence of textual evidence for widespread Christian ass-worship before Tertullian's Ad Nationes (c. 197 CE) further weakens ties to proto-Christian groups, favoring interpretations rooted in ambient pagan folklore over targeted heresy.

Ongoing Scholarly Debates

The scholarly consensus favors interpreting the Alexamenos graffito as pagan derision of early Christian veneration of a crucified figure, predicated on the inscription's sarcastic phrasing—Alexamenos sebete ton theon autou ("Alexamenos worships his god")—which aligns with documented Roman mockery of Christian beliefs in literary sources such as Tertullian's Apologeticus, where pagans are noted ridiculing the cross as emblematic of criminal execution. This view gains evidential weight from the pre-Constantinian scarcity of crucifixion iconography in Christian art, reflecting theological reticence toward depicting Jesus' humiliating death until the fourth century, as analyzed in recent assessments of early Christian visual restraint; the graffito's donkey-headed figure evokes ancient accusations of onolatry leveled against Jews and, by extension, Christians, as recorded by Josephus against Apion.^[11] Contextual probability further bolsters this reading, given the artifact's origin in the Paedagogium, a facility for training imperial slaves and pages where Christian converts among lower strata are historically attested by the second century, rendering anti-Christian graffiti a plausible causal outcome of intra-cohort tensions.^[4] Challenges to this interpretation arise from the graffito's rudimentary execution, which permits visual ambiguity—the raised hand could signify salute or mockery, and the ass-headed crucified form might invoke Egyptian deities like Anubis or Seth rather than exclusively Jesus, as explored in alternative hypotheses positing Christian satire of pagan syncretism.^[7] Proponents of such reversals, including Peter Maser and contributors to recent volumes on Roman visual polemic, argue that the traditional view overemphasizes Christian victimhood, potentially anachronistically projecting later persecutions onto a neutral or intra-pagan scribal exercise; however, these alternatives strain against the inscription's personal targeting of "Alexamenos" as the apparent devotee, which ill-fits a Christian-authored lampoon of outsiders absent complementary evidence of such iconographic inversion in early sources.^[2] Empirically, the graffito's authenticity remains uncontroverted since its 1857 discovery, with plaster analysis and stratigraphic consistency affirming a second- or third-century date, yet interpretive disputes hinge less on fabrication doubts than on probabilistic weighting of motives amid sparse comparanda.^[8] Skeptical scholarship amplifying non-Christian readings often falters on causal misalignment with the site's servile demographics and the era's attested ridicule patterns, prioritizing ideological deconstructions over the cumulative fit of derisive tone, thematic rarity, and historical complaints; first-principles evaluation thus privileges the mockery hypothesis as likelier, barring novel epigraphic or paleographic breakthroughs.^[11]^[4]

Historical Significance

Evidence of Early Christian Presence

The Alexamenos graffito, discovered on the Palatine Hill in Rome and dated to approximately 200 AD, offers direct archaeological attestation to the presence of a named Christian, Alexamenos, within an environment linked to imperial administration and slave training facilities.^[1]^[2] The inscription mocking Alexamenos for worshiping a crucified figure with a donkey's head implies not only individual adherence but also the visibility of Christian devotional practices in a public or semi-public Roman setting, where such ridicule could occur among peers or colleagues.^[1] This material evidence corroborates textual accounts of Christianity's infiltration into Roman society, including elite circles. Pliny the Younger's letter to Emperor Trajan circa 112 AD describes Christians among provincial populations, including those in domestic and servile roles who participated in communal worship, suggesting analogous penetration in the capital by the early 2nd century.^[24] Similarly, the Martyrdom of Justin account, detailing the execution of philosopher Justin and companions in Rome around 165 AD, records an organized Christian group openly defending their faith before urban authorities, aligning with the graffito's indication of recognizable believers amid persecution.^[25] As one of the scant pre-300 AD artifacts explicitly depicting and naming Christian worship of a crucified deity, the graffito counters claims of Christianity's marginality or post hoc invention by demonstrating tangible, if derided, adherence during a period of sporadic suppression.^[26] The paucity of such early material traces—owing to Christians' avoidance of overt symbols under threat of reprisal—highlights the graffito's value in evidencing organic dissemination within Rome's underclass and administrative strata, independent of later institutional endorsements.^[26]

Roman Pagan Attitudes Toward Christianity

The Alexamenos graffito, carved around 200 CE in a guardroom on Rome's Palatine Hill, exemplifies grassroots pagan derision of Christian worship through the depiction of a donkey-headed figure on a cross, invoking the ancient slur of onolatry—worship of an ass—circulated against both Jews and early Christians.^[1] This caricature tied into Roman perceptions of Christianity as superstitio, an irrational and excessive foreign cult disruptive to traditional religio, as evidenced by Tacitus' description of it as a "pernicious superstition" (exitiabilis superstitio) in his Annals recounting Nero's persecutions.^[1] Suetonius similarly labeled it a "new and mischievous superstition" (superstitionem malam et novam), reflecting elite disdain for its Judean origins and refusal to integrate with civic rituals.^[1] The hybrid animal-god imagery underscored Roman xenophobia toward "barbaric" Eastern practices, contrasting with their preference for anthropomorphic deities that upheld social order, while the crucified form amplified contempt since crucifixion was reserved for slaves and rebels, deemed the "most cruel and most disgusting punishment" by Cicero.^[1] Pagan rhetorician Fronto captured this revulsion, arguing Christian faith was "foolish, inasmuch as they worship a crucified man, and even the instrument itself of his punishment," highlighting causal drivers rooted in cultural incompatibility rather than abstract tolerance.^[1] Such mockery in slave quarters illustrates informal enforcement of conformity through humiliation, absent imperial directive yet prefiguring organized hostilities under Nero and Domitian, where deviations from polytheistic norms threatened perceived communal stability. Empirical evidence from the graffito challenges narratives of inherent Roman pluralism, revealing instead pragmatic intolerance for monotheistic exclusivity that rejected sacrifices and emperor veneration, fostering suspicion of subversion without overt political threat.^[1] This bottom-up antagonism, leveraging slanders like the donkey-god rumor refuted by Tertullian in his Apology, stemmed from first-hand clashes in diverse urban settings, prioritizing empirical social cohesion over accommodation of "irrational" outliers.^[1]

References

[1]
Alexamenos Graffito
The Alexamenos graffito is the earliest representation of the Crucifixion, scratched on plaster around AD 200, found in 1856, and is in the Palatine Museum.
[2]
Alexamenos Graffito - Judaism and Rome
Jan 29, 2017 · Original Location/Place: Paedagogium of the imperial palace ... alexamenos-graffito. Visited: Sat, 10/25/2025 - 07:13. Search. Search.
[3]
Ancient Crucifixion Images - Biblical Archaeology Society
Mar 15, 2025 · The two graffiti were both discovered in Italy—one, the so called Alexamenos graffito, on the Palatine Hill in Rome and the other (pictured ...
[4]
(PDF) The Alexamenos Graffito - ResearchGate
PDF | On Jan 1, 2020, Felicity Harley-McGowan published The Alexamenos Graffito | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate.
[5]
The Palatine Alexamenos Graffito - Variant Readings
Jun 25, 2018 · Usually assigned to some point in the third century, it is among the earliest depictions of the crucifixion of Jesus and a Christian worshipper.
[6]
https://brill.com/display/book/9789004518148/BP000019.xml?language=en
[7]
[PDF] The Naked Demon: Alternative Interpretations of the Alexamenos ...
Since its discovery in 1856, the Alexamenos Graffito has given rise to a number of interpretations. By far the most popular is the interpretation of the ...
[8]
(PDF) Reassessing the 'Blasphemous' Graffito - Academia.edu
This paper focuses on the 'Blasphemous' Graffito found at the Palatine Museum at Rome, which appears to be mocking a Christian through depicting Jesus on ...
[9]
Searching for Alexamenos - by John Nelson - Behind the Gospels
Jul 12, 2024 · Often dubbed the Alexamenos Graffito, it is a slab of wall which displays two almost stick-like figures. On the left, there is a man with his ...
[10]
Roman Graffiti and the Evidence For the Depiction of Crucifixion in ...
Mar 21, 2021 · The infamous 'Alexamenos' graffito, depicting a young man saluting a donkey-headed figure tied to a cross, is often treated as the earliest ...
[11]
https://brill.com/display/book/9789004518148/BP000019.xml
[12]
Palatine Museum - Madain Project (en)
The rooms also feature the famous Alexamenos graffito, discovered in the Paedagogium in 1857. Initially housed at the Kircherian Museum and later ...<|separator|>
[13]
Reading the 'Pages" of the Domus Caesaris: Pueri Delicati, Slave ...
Jul 23, 2015 · The onomastics of the 'Paedagogium' graffiti corroborate the contentions that the building was a complex housing slaves of the imperial epoch ...<|separator|>
[14]
Context, Topography, Archaeology, and Dating of the Paedagogium
The Palatine Paedagogium is orientated northwest - southeast and is therefore more or less parallel to the Circus Maximus.
[15]
Reading the 'Pages" of the Domus Caesaris: Pueri Delicati, Slave ...
Graffiti in the Palatine paedagogium reveal diverse educational levels among imperial male slaves. The building housed a complex population of slaves from ...
[16]
Alexamenos - Soliloquy № 7
Now housed in an unfrequented corner of the Palatine Antiquarium Museum but once carved around AD 200 into the plaster wall in room 7 of the Paedagogium is the ...
[17]
The Palatine Graffito: A Mimic Interpretation L. L. Welborn Fordham ...
Discovered in 1856, a well known graffito from the Palatine Hill in Rome, dated to the third century AD, depicts a crucified figure with the head of an ass.<|separator|>
[18]
Folly of the Cross (Artful Devotion) - Art & Theology
Jan 28, 2020 · ... Alexamenos graffito ... paedagogium, a boarding school for imperial page boys, on the Palatine Hill, within the emperors' palace complex.
[19]
Palatine Hill - Madain Project (en)
The Palatine paedagogium is one of the two known and partially preserved slave schools in ancient Rome, other being the paedogogium ad caput Africae, on the ...<|separator|>
[20]
Archaeological Discussions - jstor
Alexamenos graffito, which is generally ascribed to the second c gem probably belongs to the third century if not to the second. Byzantine Plaques from ...
[21]
the case study of ancient graffiti (Tituli Picti) in the archaeological ...
May 29, 2020 · The study has provided suggestions on the proper way to conserve Tituli Picti over time. In the present work, several specimens of Campanian ...
[22]
Argument that the Alexamenos Graffito has nothing to do ... - Reddit
Apr 24, 2024 · The author discusses in passing the literary evidence from Minucius Felix and Tertullian, who attest the donkey-like characterization of the god ...Where to go for logical arguments that Jesus existed and is gods ..."Alexamenos worships his god" - ancient Roman graffiti mocking a ...More results from www.reddit.comMissing: dating | Show results with:dating
[23]
Tertullian and the Alexamenos graffito
Yes, the Alexamenos grapphito represents Jesus. But the Jesus of the Sethians, who considered Jesus as Seth the Son of Adam (=Son of Man). The Pagans didn ...Missing: non- theories
[24]
Pliny and Trajan on the Christians
Pliny the Younger was governor of Pontus/Bithynia from 111-113 AD. We have a whole set of exchanges of his letters with the emperor Trajan on a variety of ...Missing: households | Show results with:households
[25]
Justin Martyr -The Account of his Martyrdom - Crossroads Initiative
Jun 1, 2021 · The martyrdom of St. Justin took place in Rome during the reign of Emperor Marcus Aurelius around the year 165AD.
[26]
[PDF] The Archaeology of Early Christianity: The History, Methods ... - CORE
These historical circumstances have made even more significant the relative scarcity of systematically-excavated artifacts and buildings across the ...