The Clementines, which are made up of the "Recognitions of Clement" and "The Clementine Homilies", are a unique religious romance purported to be composed by Pope Clement I. The story represents Clement's search and induction into the Christian faith by Peter. The Latin form is the "Recognitions of Clement" consists of ten books. It is a translation made from the Greek by Rufinus, who died in 410. (The Greek, from which it was translated, is no longer in existence). The Greek form is "The Clementine Homilies" consists of twenty books. It is preserved in two manuscripts. Two later epitomes of the Homilies exist also, and there is a partial Syriac translation, embracing Recognitions i-iii, and Homilies, x-xiv, preserved in two British Museum manuscripts, one of which was written in the year 411.
There is no doubt that there once existed a document that was used to construct Recognitions and Homilies. Large portions of the Homilies and Recognitions are almost word for word the same, especially at the beginning, and correspond in subject and more or less in treatment. However, other parts are contained only in one and appear to be referred to or presupposed in the other. It would be beneficial for the reader see on this site the
which presents the two versions in side by side columns according to theme.
The need to establish the true date of origin for the Clementines.
Although purported to be the words of Pope Clement as narrator, the Clementines have been summarily dismissed by scholars a pseudo works (pretended to be the actual words of Clement). Scholars have therefore placed the dates for these works from second century all the way up to the fourth century.
Unfortunately, many apocryphal works use this method of pretending to be the words of one or the other prophets or even Jesus, but this has been merely a style of exposition and not meant to deceive. Many examples of this form of exposition can be seen in the Nag Hammadi Library discovered in 1945, however the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Philip contained in this library do appear to contain the actual words of the speakers especially of Jesus.
Since Pope Clement is in fact a real person who lived in the first century AD, it ought to be logical to believe that it was written in the first century. However, what appears to most bother the scholars and the Church about the Clementines is the primacy of Simon Magus who only appears in a few verses in Acts as an initiate who is baptized by the disciple Philip (Acts 8:9-24).
The late third century Church scholar of the third century Eusebius went to great lengths to denounce Simon Magus as a heretic. The Clementines do in fact treat Simon Magus in an unfavorable light, but the Clementines do show him as a major opponent to Peter. The scholars question how an initiate of Philip could have attained such stature in such a short time. Although Simon appears to use tricks and magic, Peter also appears not to be without these himself.
What is most disturbing to Church authorities is that Clementines say that Simon Magus took over the organization of John the Baptist after his death. This would clearly give him the stature to be on an equal footing as Peter in their debates.
Another problem to the Church is the strong resemblance of Niceta and Aquila to James and John. If this is true then the influence of Simon Magus and his consort Helena on Jesus is immense. His consort Helena (Luna, Justa) clearly matches the Syro-Phoenician woman as her words in H.2.19 are directly from Matthew 15:21-28; Mark 7:24-30. She was the one female of the Gospels who appeared to speak with Jesus as his equal.
In fact it may be implied from this section in Homilies that the natural daughter of Helena is Mary Magdalene!!!
Is it a wonder that the Church as it did with the Dead Sea Scrolls has to resort to phoney dating to remove suspicion. Rather than face the problem with dealing with the implications of a whole new version of the early Church as described in Acts and Paul's epistles, the scholars and religious leaders have quickly pushed the writings later into the third or fourth century.
Once moved to a later century, it is easier to make the case that the content appears to be of the Ebonite origin. The Ebonites, who were active in the second to the fourth century, were condemned as heresy. Though the Ebonites have a strong similarity to Jewish Christianity, but after the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the crushing of the Bar_Kokhba revolt in 135 AD, there was not much left to be called Jewish-Christian. The Ebonites really began again from the dust of Jewish-Christianity and this sect's principles are clearly not contained in the Clementines.
Now that the Dead Sea Scrolls of 1947 and 1956 have come to light, it appears that a Jewish Essene faith did actually exist at Qumran. The efforts to try to place all the writings in Qumran to 150 BC are beginning to fail and more and more scholars are accepting that there is a similarity between that organization at Qumran and the early Christian Church.
Perhaps there was not a sudden flowering of Christianity because of Jesus, but maybe the evolution of Christianity had happened earlier as the Jewish and Essene began to merge in to Jewish-Essene before Jesus and then after Jesus to Jewish-Christian, then to Christianity. The philosophy presented in the Clementines clearly appears to be a struggle within the groups to define what there difference was between Jewish-Christian and Christian. On that basis alone, its philosophy has to be from the 1st Century.
What this discussion sets out to do is to arrive at and to prove the date at which the original philosophy and biographies written by Clement were merged into a larger moral story. If a date for the writings that we now possess can be shown to be within the first century, then the Clementines will need to be given more attention. Their information would therefore be as important as Acts in revealing the history of the church after the Crucifixion.
There are two important issues that need to be resolved first.
A justification for rejecting an early date for the Clementines is that the mother Mattidia (Matthidia) shows up in the time of the Emperor Trajan as Matidia (68-119) who had no children and treated his niece like a daughter. Matidia's daughter married the Emperor Hadrian and another daughter was named Faustina. Thus the scholars say that the Clementines were written during the Nerva–Antonine dynasty. However, this ignores the fact that Faustina is female name and is not contained in the Clementines and that the Faustus male name was present prior to the first century.
Of most importance is that James is not James the Just, but James, son of Alphaeus i.e. Jonathan Annas
One of the main reasons that the Clementine Recollections and Homilies have been dismissed as pseudo works is because they were believed to have been written by a later sect of Ebonites that were the remainder of the off-shoot of Christian Church led by James the Just, the younger brother of Jesus. (For a while James the had been included in the Church, but later was rejected.)
However all this comes from the confusion of the name "James" for James, the brother of Jesus also known as James the Just and James, James of Alphaeus, listed as one of the twelve disciples of Jesus (Matthew 10:1-4, Mark 3:13-19, Luke 6:12-16, and Acts 1:13). The word "Alphaeus" being used for Annas as his father. Annas had five sons all who became High Priests and Annas was also connected to Caiaphas, the High Priest who was responsible for Jesus' Crucifixion, as Caiaphas had married his daughter (John 18:13). His second son Jonathan Annas is the same as James of Alphaeus (in contradiction to the scholars who have tried in vain to decipher his name). This connection can be made by associating "Nathaniel" in the Gospel of John (John 1:43-51) with James of Alphaeus (Annas' son Jonathan) since both Nathaniel and Jonathan mean "God given". Jonathan can also be correlated with the pseudonym "Dositheus" in Clementine Recollections R.2.11. Dositheus who is credited as the founder of the Sadducee sect, also means "God given".
It can therefore be seen that Jonathan Annas was associated with Jesus, but was a Sadducee priest like his father and brothers. Matthew, his younger brother, was also a Sadducee priest listed as a disciple of Jesus and was writer of the Gospel of Matthew. It is important to understand the word "publican/tax collector", as it was used in the Gospels, for it connects three important colleagues of Jesus. "Publican" was used as a pun for priests being tax collectors of "church tithes". Matthew (Matthew 10:3) was referred to as a "publican/tax collector" and so was Jonathan being "Levi" in Mark 2:14 with the connection being "son of Alphaeus" to James/Jonathan (not Matthew - the bad scholarly assumption); also, so was Zacchaeus in Luke 19:2. Zacchaeus in the Clementines then connects with Ananus, the youngest son of Annas (See his biography here).
Jonathan was High Priest March - October 37 AD (His deposing is shown in Acts 7:1-60 using his name as Stephen - also corresponding to Clementine Recollections R.1:70,71 proving that it was a symbolic death). It is therefore more likely that the James whom Clement and Peter sent dispatches to was Jonathan Annas and not James the Just. This shows that earliest version of the Clementines had have been written before Jonathan Annas' death in December 57 AD under the instigation of the Roman procurator Felix (See Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews 20, 163-165).
The dating of the writing of the Clementines could not have been before Simon Magus and Peter/Paul split up causing the Schism of the Churches in 44 AD, thus making Simon Magus the bad guy. However, the philosophical content is clearly from an earlier date shortly after the Pentecost when the Jewish Christians were developing a unique identity as Christians.
The key source material for the story appears to come from "The Memoirs of Agrippina the Younger"
"Not one of the Empresses has made more noise than Agrippina. Everything connected with her was remarkable; her birth, her beauty, her faults, her good qualities, and her misfortunes. She was daughter of Germanicus, the delight of the Roman people, and of Agrippina, grand-daughter of Augustus, who was delivered of her in a town which was afterwards called the colony of Agrippina, and now Cologne. She was observed to have a double tooth on the right side, which Pliny looked upon as a certain presage of great fortune.
Agrippina had received from nature all the advantages of body and mind, that would have rendered her a most accomplished princess, if she had not degraded them by making a very bad use of them. Her beauty yielded to none in Rome. She had a majestic air, noble manners, and a lively and enterprising intellect, capable of the greatest undertakings, which she gave proof of in the refined vigor of those curious memoirs, which she composed upon her own adventures, and which were of no small service to Tacitus, the historian, when he wrote his Annals. But, on the other hand, her avarice was insatiable, her jealousy such as made her capable of the most cruel revenge; and especially, her ambition was without bounds, which was the principal, and perhaps the only cause, of all her crimes and misfortunes. Daughter, sister, niece, wife and mother, of Emperors or Caesars, from her cradle she had so violent a desire to rule, that she could set no limits to it. This vice was so ingrained in her very nature, that it corrupted all her actions, and produced in great abundance all sorts of crimes." (The Roman Empresses, Jacques Roergas de Serviez, 1679-1727)
The Memoirs of Agrippina the Younger
(Her memoirs were referred to by Tacitus quoted here: "The anecdote which is not related by historians, I have found in the memoirs of Agrippina the Younger, the mother of Nero, who left behind her a record of her own life and the fortunes of her family." (Tacitus Annals Book IV Chapter 53). Her memoirs are also mentioned in Pliny (NH 7 Chap 8)).
(These memoirs would probably be published after the death of Agrippina the Younger in March 59 AD)
Reviewing the dates of Clement, the future Pope, as the author of the Clementines
For Clement to be the author, as stated in the Clementines, then it had to be written before the death of Pope Clement. Immediately it can be seen that the assumed person for Clement does not fit. Unfortunately, due to the fact that "T. Favius Sabinus" occurs from a span of four generations and crosses the Arrecinian family line and that of the Flavian line, scholars have jumped on the following information:
Although archeological evidence found at the Basilica of St. Clement does point to: "Titus Flavius Clemens being St. Clement because the Clemens private property and at the same time was being used for Christian meetings and burials. Even more shockingly, this site was built over a house that probably belonged to the Flavians or other members of Clement's family before the fire of Rome, which Nero had blamed on the Christians.
The problem is that this T. Favius Sabinus would only be about thirty-five years old and would certainly not be born at the time of the twins Niceta and Aquila birth which will be set by this Inductive Reasoning. "The Church in Rome in the First Century", George Edmundson has suggested that the more appropriate future Pope Clement would as the brother in law of his sister (probably Plautilla or Arrecina Clementina): T. Flavius Sabinus:
This future Pope Clement would also have a brother M. Arrecinus Clemens and a sister Arrecina Terulla, wife of Vespasian. His father would be the distinguished M. Arrecinus Tertullus Clemens who may have been married to Plautia, the sister of Aulus Plautius, the conqueror of Britain, and Pomponia Graecina, who was accused of practicing a "foreign superstition" (Tacitus, Annals, xiii. 32) (Christianity) and wore black as a nun pretending to be in mourning for the murder of Julia, Drusus-Germanicus' daughter, by Messalina, the wife of Claudius.
This future Pope Clement's father M. Arrecinus Tertullus Clemens:
Since the dates for Pope Clement are unknown,we will assume the date 95 since this for the death of his nephew-in-law, T. Flavius Clemens. His other nephew-in-law T. Flavius Sabinus had also been killed the year before. Therefore it is safe to assume that Domitian was cleaning house. It was in fact this last attack on T. Flavius Clemens that brought his own death closer as Clemens' servant Stephanus avenged his master's death by assassinating the Emperor Domitian on 18 September 96 with the help of the members of the Senate.
Peter's daughter, a virgin, by tradition called Aurelia Petronilla, a martyr, was buried in the Catacomb of Domitilla, indicating that she must have been adopted by Flavian Family. (See March 30AD Peter' mother-in-law cured.)
(1) M. Arrecinus Tertullus Clemens, Prefect of the Praetorian Guard in 41 A.D. (Josephus, ‘Ant.' xix. 1. 6, 7, and Tac. ‘Hist.' iv. 68.) It is from Josephus that we learn that Clemens was privy to the conspiracy of Chaerea and others against Caligula and connived at his assassination. It appears from Josephus that Herod Agrippa came to the Praetorian camp, where troops had acknowledged Claudius as emperor, and successfully acted as mediator between them and that portion of the army that obeyed the Senate (Josephus, ‘Ant.' xix. 3. 1, 3; 4. 1, 2, ff.). This information exclusively reported by Josephus may be taken to imply that Clemens had some connexion, possibly as a ‘God-fearer,' with the Jewish community at Rome, and that he was a friend of Herod Agrippa.
From Tac. ‘Hist.' iv. 68 it appears that this Prefect was so much beloved by his troops that his son's appointment as Prefect in 70 A.D. was hailed with joy in the camp, because the father's memory after so long an interval of time was still held in regard. Suetonius (‘Titus' 4) tells us that his name was Tertullus, that he belonged to the Equestrian order, and that his daughter Arrecina Tertulla was the first wife of the Emperor Titus. An inscription ‘CIL.' vi. 12355 gives his praenomen as Marcus.
(2) Plautia. The name of the wife of (1) is actually unknown. The reasons for assigning to him, as his wife, a sister of Aulus Plautius, the conqueror of Britain, are stated in Lecture VIII. Plautia would be the sister-in-law of Julia Pomponia Graecina, and a relative of Plautia Urgulanilla, the second wife of Claudius.
(3) M. Arrecinus Clemens, son of (1), described by Tacitus ‘Hist.' iv. 68 as ‘domui Vespasiani per adfinitatem innexum et gratissimum Domitiano, Praetorianis [Domitianus] praeposuit, patrem eius, sub Caio Caesare, egregie functum ea cura, dictitans, laetum militibus idem nomen.' The relationship with the Imperial Flavian House may be traced back to (8) Tertulla, the grandmother of Vespasian, by whom from childhood he was brought up. Tertullus Clemens (1) the Prefect was probably Vespasian's cousin and the companion of his boyhood. Arrecina Tertulla (5), daughter of (1) and sister of (3), married Titus (19). She died while Titus was quite young.
M. Arrecinus Clemens (3) was Consul Suffectus in 73 A.D. (‘CIL.' vi. 2016 and xiv. 2242) and a second time with L. Baebius Honoratus (‘CIL.' xii. 3637). This second consulship appears to have been most probably in 94 A.D. The Fasti Consulares are admittedly imperfect with regard to the names of the consuls suffect. But the names of both the ordinary Consuls Collega and Priscus and of the three suffects for 93 A.D. have been preserved. In 94 A.D. Asprenas and Lateranus were ordinary consuls. The most complete Fasti Consulares for the Flavian Period are found in a contribution by Asbach in Jahrbücher des Vereins von Altertumsfreunden im Rheinlande [Bonn] vol. 79, p. 6o ff. Asbach has only discovered the name of one Suffectus in 94 A.D., but he quotes Prosper as making Clement the colleague of Asprenas. It is almost certain that in a year when the Emperor did not assume the consulship there would be several Suffecti. In Muratori, Nov. Thes. Vet. Inscr. tom. i. p. cccxlv, the full list for 93 A.D. is preserved. Consules 93. Pompeius Collega, Cornelius Priscus, quibus suffecti fuerunt. M. Lollius Paullinus, Valerius Asiaticus Saturninus. Horum uni suffectus erat, C. Antistius Iulius Quadratus. So in 94 A.D. M. Arrecinus Clemens and L. Baebius Honoratus were suffecti to Asprenas and Lateranus. The suffect mentioned by Asbach—Silius Italicus—may have taken the place of Clemens in the last months of 94 A.D. In some lists Arrecinus Clemens appears, however, as the colleague of Asprenas (see Dion Cassius, ed. Lipsiae, 1829, iv. p. 84). The ‘Chronicon Paschale' (extract given in Lightfoot, ‘Clement of Rome,' i. p. 110) has the following entries: 93 A.D. Domitian Augustus XIII and Flavius Clemens, 94 A.D. Asprenatus [Asprenas] and Lateranus, 95 A.D. Domitian Augustus XIV and Flavius Clemens II. This is an instance of that confusion of Arrecinus Clemens with Flavius Clemens which has been the fruitful source of difficulties. Flavius Clemens was consul only once and in 95 A.D., Arrecinus Clemens for the second time in 94 A.D. He was a member of the Imperial Council from 82 A.D. and also Curator Aquarum. His name appears ‘CIL.' vi. 199 xi. 428 and xv. 7278. He was put to death by Domitian 94 A.D. or 95 A.D. (Suet. ‘Domitian,' 11.)
(4) Plautilla. The ‘Acts of Nereus and Achilles' represent these martyrs as at first servants of Plautilla, the sister of Clement the Consul, and afterwards of her daughter Domitilla the virgin. The ‘Acts of Petronilla,' which are incorporated with those of Nereus and Achilles, state that these three saints were all buried in the crypt of Domitilla. That they were real historical persons has been proved in recent years by the discovery by De Rossi, Bull. di Arch. Crist. 1874, pp. 5 ff., 68 ff., 122 ff. &c. Roma Sotterranea, tom. i. pp. 130 ff. See also Lipsius, Apokryphen Apost. Geschicht. II. i. p. 205. of their memorials in the cemetery of Domitilla. It is at least possible, therefore, that Plautilla is likewise an historical person, and the presumption is increased by the fact that she is definitely in these Acts represented as the sister of Clement the Consul. De Rossi himself believed in her real existence, and many others have followed him in the assumption, which I have adopted, as also his suggestion that her mother's name was Plautia. I differ, however, in my interpretation of the words ‘sister of Clement the Consul' in making her the sister not of Flavius but of Arrecinus Clemens. If the historicity of the statement of the ‘Acts of Nereus and Achilles‘ about Plautilla be accepted, it should be accepted as a whole. Now stress is laid on the fact that the Plautilla of these Acts died in the same year as St. Peter suffered martyrdom. The words are explicit: ‘eodem anno dominus Petrus apostolus ad coronam martyrii properavit ad Christum et Plautilla corpus terrenum deseruit.' Plautilla therefore could not well be the sister of Flavius Clemens, the younger of the two sons of Flavius Sabinus, as these sons are described as children at the time of their father's murder in December 69 A.D. The hypothesis that she was the daughter of M. Arrecinus Tertullus Clemens the Praetorian Prefect of 41 A.D., and therefore sister of M. Arrecinus Clemens the Consul of 73 A.D. and 94 A.D., and that she was the wife and not the daughter of her cousin Flavius Sabinus, the brother of Vespasian, and that, through her, T. Flavius Clemens, her son, Consul in 95 A.D., obtained his cognomen, has about it impress of verisimilitude.
(5) Arrecina Tertulla.—The first wife of the Emperor Titus. She died quite young. See ‘CIL.' vi. 12355, 12357.
(6) Clement the Bishop.—In the ‘Clementine Homilies' and ‘Clementine Recognitions,' which are in reality Petrine romances derived from a common original and dating from the beginning of the third century, Clement is represented as a Roman by birth and of the kindred of Caesar. His father is a relative and foster-brother of an emperor, and his mother likewise connected with Caesar's family. The name of the father is Faustus (‘Homilies'), Faustinianus (‘Recognitions'), Faustinus (‘Liber Pontificalis'), of two elder brothers Faustinus and Faustinianus (‘Homilies'), Faustinus and Faustus (‘Recognitions'), of the mother Mattidia. Now these names belong to the period of Hadrian and the Antonines. Faustina (died 141 A.D.) was the wife of the Emperor Antoninus Pius, and her daughter of the same name (died 175 A.D.) was the wife of his adopted son and successor, Marcus Aurelius. Mattidia was the niece of Trajan, and her daughter Sabina the wife of the Emperor Hadrian. As the romances throughout make Clement to have been the disciple and companion of St. Peter and he is spoken of as being already grown up at the time of the Crucifixion, it will be at once perceived that the compilers of this Clementine literature were, in the use that they made of tradition, absolutely indifferent to chronological considerations. That they gave voice to a genuine tradition both as regards Clement's discipleship to St. Peter and his relationship to the family of the reigning Caesars is rendered in the highest degree probable from the fact that the Clementine story is merely a framework for the Ebionite or Helchasaite version of Peter's travels, preaching and controversies with Simon Magus, which forms the real subject-matter of this literature. [Hort, ‘Clementine Recognitions.'] M. Arrecinus Tertullus Clemens was the kinsman of Vespasian, and as that emperor was brought up not in his paternal home but by his grandmother Tertulla, it is quite possible that they were actually foster-brothers. Tertullus was one of the Flavian cognomina. Q. Flavius Tertullus was consul suffect. in 133 A.D. (‘CIL.' vi. 858). Plautia was a relative of Plautia Urgulanilla, the second wife of Claudius, her daughter Arrecina Tertulla the wife of Titus.
In the ‘Acts of Nereus and Achilles' Clement the Bishop is addressed as the nephew of Clement the Consul: ‘patris tui fuisse germanum.' In the Clementines he is represented as considerably the youngest of his family. It is for various reasons more probable that he was the younger brother than the nephew of M. Arrecinus Clemens, and such I have assumed him to be.
(7) T. Flavius Petro.—The name of the famous saint, Petronilla, who was buried in the Flavian cemetery of Domitilla, was probably derived from this Flavian cognomen. A crop of legends grew up around her name, as being a daughter of St. Peter. It is possible that she may have been a spiritual daughter of the Apostle, as having been converted and baptized by him.
(8), (9), (10). Titus Flavius Sabinus and his wife, according to Suetonius, left Italy to live among the Helvetii; their son Vespasian was educated by his grandmother Tertulla upon a family estate at Cosa in the Volscian territory. (Suet. ‘Vespasian,' 2, 3.)
(11) T. Flavius Sabinus, the elder son of (9) and (10). After serving the State in thirty-five campaigns with distinction (Tac. ‘Hist.' iii. 75) and having been Governor of Moesia for seven years, Sabinus was appointed in 57 A.D. Prefect of the City. He held this important office for twelve years continuously save for a brief interval in the short reign of Galba. As Prefect of the City he must have taken part (perhaps passively) in the persecution of the Christians in 65 A.D. and been the witness of the courage with which so many martyrs faced torture and a horrible death. Some have supposed that in his latter years he may to a greater or less extent have fallen under the influence of the Christian Faith. His whole career proclaims him to have been during the greater part of his life a man of action. Tacitus speaks of his being ‘invalidus senecta' and describes him at this stage as ‘mitem virum abhorrere a sanguine et caedibus' (‘Hist.' iii. 65). When the Vitellians stormed the Capitol, ‘Flavium Sabinum inermem neque fugam coeptantem circumsistunt' (‘Hist.' iii. 73). And again after his murder, ‘in fine vitae alii segnem, multi moderatum et civium sanguinis parcum credidere' (‘Hist.' iii. 75). All these traits do not prove much in themselves, but the fact that several of his descendants and relatives were undoubtedly Christians lends a certain probability to the supposition that this mildness, sluggishness, and unwillingness to resist arms in hand may have been due to the acceptance of Christian principles. Sabinus apparently did not marry till late in life, possibly not till after he settled at Rome in 57 A.D., as his children were quite young at the time of his murder in December 69 A.D. If Plautilla were his wife, she died four years before her husband, leaving two sons and a daughter, the younger son receiving his grandfather's cognomen Clemens.
(12) The Emperor Vespasian appears to have been in considerable poverty at two periods of his life. His eldest son, Titus (19), was born December 30, 39 A.D.: ‘prope Septizonium sordidis aedibus cubiculo vero perparvo et obscuro.' (Suet. ‘Tit.' 1.) Yet a few years later we find him being educated in the palace with Britannicus. It is suggested that this change may have been partly brought about by the influence on behalf of his kinsman of the Praetorian Prefect Arrecinus Tertullus Clemens. At a later period, before he went as Proconsul to Africa in 61 or 62 A.D., he was in such bad circumstances that he had to mortgage his entire property to his brother in order to raise money. (Tac. ‘Hist.' iii. 73.) His wife (13) and his daughter (22), both named Flavia Domitilla, predeceased him. His younger son Domitian (25) seems when Vespasian was abroad in Africa and Judaea to have lived with his uncle Sabinus and to have been under his care. Titus (19) was, while still a youth, married to his relative Arrecina Tertulla (5). Domitian (25), born October 25, 51 A.D., was twelve years younger than his brother. From the end of December 69 A.D. to the following June as Praetor with full consular power he with Mucianus exercised in the absence of Vespasian in Egypt and Titus in Judaea the imperial authority at Rome.
(15) Flavia Domitilla, spoken of by Eusebius, ‘Chronicon' (Jerome's Lat. vers. ed. Schöne ii. p. 163), thus:—‘Scribit Bruttius . . . Flaviam Domitillam Flavii Clementis consulis ex sorore neptem in insulam Pontianam relegatam, quia se Christianam esse testata est.' A similar reference derived no doubt from the same source is found in ‘Hist. Eccl.' iii. 18, where the meaning of the word neptem is made clear: Φλαυΐαν Δομετίλλαν . . . ἐξ ἀδελφῆς γεγονυῖαν Φλαυΐου Κλήμεντος, ἑνὸς τῶν τηνικάδε ἐπὶ Ῥώμης ὑπάτων. Eusebius states that this took place in the fifteenth year of Domitian, but, as I have pointed out in Lecture VIII, it is almost certain that Eusebius has here misread his authority and that the Consul to whom Flavia Domitilla was niece was Arrecinus Clemens the Consul of 94 A.D., and not Flavius Clemens the Consul of 95 A.D. The family of Flavius Sabinus (11) were children in 70 A.D.; it is scarcely possible therefore that this Flavia Domitilla should have been old enough to occupy such a position of importance as is here assigned to her, and still more so in the ‘Acts of Nereus and Achilles.' In those ‘Acts' she appears as the daughter of Plautilla, sister of Clement the Consul, and is clearly a woman of property with chamberlains of her own. In the ‘Chronicon Paschale' the same passage of Bruttius, about the persecution of the Christians by Domitian, as Eusebius quotes is referred to, but the notice of it appears under the fourteenth year of Domitian, which began in September 94 A.D. The banishment of this Domitilla to the island of Pontia I believe to have taken place at the end of 94 A.D., after Arrecinus Clemens was Consul and before Flavius Clemens entered on his consulship. The fact that Eusebius neither in the ‘Chronicle' nor ‘Ecclesiastical History' makes any mention of the execution of Flavius Clemens or the banishment of his wife seems to me inferential evidence that his authority Bruttius did not here record an event which Eusebius could scarcely have overlooked in one or other of his two historical works. In my Table of the Flavian Family I have made Flavia Domitilla [the virgin] the daughter of FIavius Sabinus (15) and of Plautilla (4), the sister of Arrecinus Clemens (3). I have further suggested in Lecture VIII that after the murder of Sabinus, Plautilla being already dead, the maternal uncle (3) undertook the charge of the orphan children. The two sons as they grew up would in due course be cared for by the Emperor Vespasian, as being the nearest male representatives of his family, his own two sons having no male heirs, the daughter remaining still in the wardship of the maternal uncle who had brought her up. It would be only natural therefore in such circumstances for Bruttius to speak of her as the niece of Arrecinus, rather than as the sister of Flavius.
The sudden condemnation to death of Arrecinus Clemens by Domitian, as recorded by Suetonius (‘Domit.' 11), may well have been connected with the same causes which led to his niece Domitilla's banishment, i.e. her profession of the Christian faith and her contumacy in refusing to marry at the Emperor's bidding.
(22), (23), (24) Dion Cassius (lxvii. 14) relates that Domitian put to death his cousin Flavius Clemens while consul [Suet., ‘Domit.' 15, says almost before his consulship had ended] and that he sent his wife Flavia Domitilla, also a relative, into exile on the island of Pandateria. Suetonius does not mention the wife's banishment, but remarks that ‘this violent act—i.e. the execution—very much hastened his own destruction' and then tells us of the tyrant's assassination by Stephanus the steward of Domitilla. Philostratus (‘Apollonius,' viii. 25) in his account says that Stephanus was the freedman of Flavius Clemens' wife. Quintilian, who was the tutor of Flavius Clemens' young sons (of very tender age, Suet. ‘Domit.' 15), makes it clear that their mother was the daughter of Domitian's sister: ‘cum vero mihi Domitianus Augustus sororis suae nepotum delegaverit curam' (‘Inst. Orat.' Prooem. 2). This sister of Domitian died before her father Vespasian became Emperor in 70 A. D. For epigraphic evidence of the existence of this Flavia Domitilla, wife of Flavius Clemens, see ‘CIL.' vi. 948, 8942 and 16246. The first of these as restored by Mommsen stands:
The name of the NEPTIS is given in ‘CIL.' vi. 8942:
There were thus four Flavia Domitillas: the wife of Vespasian (13), her daughter (22), her granddaughter (24), and her niece (15).
Other significant dates
Summary of possible dates for the writing of the Clementines
By analyzing all these dates, the Clementines that evolved into "The Recognitions of Clement" and "The Clementine Homilies" would need to have been written between 59 AD (the death of Agrippina the Younger) and 95 AD (the death of Pope Clement). In the Inductive Reasoning that follows, all the pieces of the Clementines can be put together.
The Key to the Creation of the Clementines is found in
As shown above, Julia the Elder's situation matches
Julia Livilla situation matches the timeframe for Peter's rescue
The Faustus name began with the children of the Roman dictator Sulla who preceded Julius Caesar.
Aligning the twins Niceta and Aquila as brothers to Clement
Align the in-law relationships between them requires understanding the intrigue.
Having reached our Inductive Reasoning conclusion that the Clementines Story belongs in the first century, it is now possible to declare its information as more than a made-up story, containing many valid facts. It gives insight on John the Baptist, James and John, Simon Magus, Helena (the Syro-Phoenician woman), Mary Magdalene, Bernice, Clement, Ananus the Younger (Zacchaeus), James (the brother of Jesus), Peter, and the early missionary journeys, structure, and practices of the Christian Church.
The most interesting insight obtained from this research is the intertwining of Christianity with Roman aristocracy. There were many documented martyrs among them. Inroads were made with Pomponia Graecina who influenced her sister Plautia who influenced her husband M. Arreinus Tertullus Clemens, Prefect of the Praetorian Guard, to get rid of Caligua who was threatening Jews and Christians which set the stage for King Agrippa of Judea to persuade the Senate to approve Claudius. The Emperor Vespasian was brought up by the same grandmother as M. Arrecinus Tertullus Clemens, the father of Pope Clement. This grandmother was Tertulla (Junia Tertia, mistress of Julius Caesar with blood connections to Brutus and Cassius his killers). Queen of Judea, Bernice, had an affair with Titus the son of Vespasian and almost married him. This is the Titus who destroyed the temple of Jerusalem! Niceta and Aquila are James and John of the lineage of Augustus Caesar and Mark Antony. It is any surprise that Roman Christianity succeeded in influencing the world!
(On this site, see side by side source versions of Clementine Recollections and Homilies.