To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
It has traditionally been assumed that biblical writers considered Nero to be the Antichrist.. This book refutes that view. Beginning by challenging the assumption that literary representations of Nero as tyrant would have been easily recognisable to those in the eastern Roman empire, where most Christian populations were located, Shushma Malik then deconstructs the associations often identified by scholars between Nero and the Antichrist in the New Testament. Instead, she demonstrates that the Nero-Antichrist paradigm was a product of late antiquity. Using now firmly established traits and themes from classical historiography, late-antique Christians used Nero as a means with which to explore and communicate the nature of the Antichrist. This proved successful, and the paradigm was revived in the nineteenth century in the works of philosophers, theologians, and novelists to inform debates about the era's fin-de-siècle anxieties and religious controversies.
At least since the best-known attempt to locate the ‘place of Herodotus in the history of historiography’ – that of Arnaldo Momigliano, now more than sixty years ago – the story of Herodotus’s afterlife has tended to be told in linear terms. Herodotus had barely laid down his pen before Thucydides began highlighting his shortcomings. From that point on, the Father of History was ‘cut off from the stream of ancient historiography’, admired for his style rather than his reliability. ‘Defeated in antiquity’, however, Herodotus ‘triumphed in the sixteenth century’. Ethnography came back into vogue following the ‘discovery’ of the Americas and, as the explorers of the New World reported customs even more extraordinary than those described in the Histories, Herodotus was vindicated.