I have always thought it important to find a historical context for abstract theological ideas. I see "Titus" and "the Marcionite apostle" scaling the walls of Jerusalem in our Galatian address. There is a confrontation with Kipha (the denier of Christ i.e. Mark). Titus is the "comforter" and the shopata of the community, Simon the "false apostle" etc.
Once you accept the idea that the New Testament is an expression of tradition Jewish messianic ideas you necessarily have to abandon the European idea of a completely meek messiah etc. You also know a "king" had to appear who took his revenge on the "enemies of Israel." All those things manifest themselves in the "Simon" vs. "Mark" scenario of 66 - 72 A.D.
What I am saying is that you are certainly right that Simon did declare himself to be the "indicator" of Christ to his followers. Kepha might well have been interpreted as "stone" but to the followers of Mark he was the "six" i.e. the Creator and the "denier."
Let's begin with Josephus' version of the fate of the "false messiah" Simon at the end of the Jewish War. He writes that:
Now the last part of this pompous show was at the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, whither when they were come, they stood still; for it was the Romans' ancient custom to stay till somebody brought the news that the general of the enemy was slain. This general was Simon, the son of Gioras, who had then been led in this triumph among the captives; a rope had also been put upon his head, and he had been drawn into a proper place in the forum, and had withal been tormented by those that drew him along; and the law of the Romans required that malefactors condemned to die should be slain there.
Indeed Renan in his history of the Origins of Christianity describes it in more detail saying that the celebrations begun by the Romans ended with:
the living representation of the strange appearance of Simon and his capture—the pale visage and the haggard eyes of the captives disguised by the superb garments with which they clothed them In the midst was Simon being led with great pomp to death; then came the spoils of the temple, the golden table, the golden seven-branched candlestick, the veil of the holy of holies, and to conclude, the series of trophies, the captive, the conquered one, the culprit par excellence, the book of the Torah ... They arrived thus at the Sacred way. At the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus the ordinary termination of a triumph was reached. At the Clivus Capitolinus they made a halt to disembarrass themselves of the gloomy portion of the ceremony—the execution of the chief enemies. This odious custom was observed from point to point. Bar-Gorias, drawn out of the band of captives, was seen led away with a cord round his neck, amid most ignoble insults, to the Tarpeian rock, where they slew him. When a cry announced that Rome’s enemy was no more, an immense applause burst out and the sacrifices commenced. After the customary prayers the princes retired to the Palatine; the rest of the day was passed by the whole city in joy and festivity.
By "taking him to the Tarpeian Rock" Renan means they took him on top of a cliff and threw him down as a public spectacle in order to bash his brains on the "rock" below.
Now take a look at his "upside down" crucifixion in the Acts of Peter:
And when they had hanged him up after the manner he desired, he began again to say: Ye men unto whom it belongeth to hear, hearken to that which I shall declare unto you at this especial time as I hang here. Learn ye the mystery of all nature, and the beginning of all things, what it was. For the first man, whose race I bear in mine appearance, fell head downwards, and showed forth a manner of birth such as was not heretofore: for it was dead, having no motion. He, then, being pulled down -who also cast his first state down upon the earth- established this whole disposition of all things, being hanged up an image of the creation wherein he made the things of the right hand into left hand and the left hand into right hand, and changed about all the marks of their nature, so that he thought those things that were not fair to be fair, and those that were in truth evil, to be good. Concerning which the Lord saith in a mystery: Unless ye make the things of the right hand as those of the left, and those of the left as those of the right, and those that are above as those below, and those that are behind as those that are before, ye shall not have knowedge of the kingdom.
This thought, therefore, have I declared unto you; and the figure wherein ye now see me [in this manner] is the representation of that man that first came unto birth ... and if ye learn that in him alone ye exist, ye shall obtain those things whereof he saith unto you: 'which neither eye hath seen nor ear heard, neither have they entered into the heart of man.' We ask, therefore, for that which thou hast promised to give unto us, O thou undefiled Jesu. We praise thee, we give thee thanks, and confess to thee, glorifying thee, even we men that are yet without strength, for thou art God alone, and none other: to whom be glory now and unto all ages. Amen.
Now look carefully at the executioner of Simon - his name is Agrippa. Of course there is a "good Marcellus i.e. Marcion" inserted into the text but we can begin to see what is being described here.
Notice of course that no mention in "history" is ever made of Simon's supposed companion "John." He never existed he was invented by Josephus as a means of secretly pinning blame for the revolt on Mark. I won't get into this but what you should also see is that elements of Simon-Peter's execution have now been incorporated into the Coptic tradition regarding Mark dying at this very time.
Severus writes that:
And when he awoke, and morning had come, the multitude assembled, and brought the saint out of the prison, and put a rope again round his neck, and said : «Drag the serpent through the cattle-shed!» And they drew the saint along the ground, while he gave thanks to the Lord Christ, and glorified him, saying : «I render my spirit into thy hands, O my God !» After saying these words, the saint gave up the ghost.
Of course it is obvious what has now happened. The process of subordinating Mark to Peter has occured by overlapping the martyrdom of the latter on to the former. Why keep the rope pulling incident but not the fall from the rock? If you have ever seen the topography of Alexandria you see at once that there is no equivalent to the cliff where the rock appeared.
What I believe occured in Alexandria was the eventual consolidation between the "Simon" party (headed by Basilides) with that of the "Mark" party under the superficial banner of the latter.
Look at Clement (who knew more about Basilides than any other Church Father). He says explicitly that he was a hearer of Peter through Glaucius. The other Church Fathers say that he was a hearer of Simon but by now we both know that there is no difference here.
This would explain why Abu'l Fateh only knows of Simon from Christian sources. All the same, I think there must have been a real Samaritan with the epithet Simon connected with the word siman in a favourable sense by his followers. This person might well have been Markion, but somehow or other we still have to account for a real Samaritan from the town of Gitta We have to account for the wiping out of the record of the Church in Samaria with its Apostolic authority deriving from Phillip, not Peter. We have to account for the dead silence of Justin Martyr and all others of his time about Christians in Samaria.
Anyway that is my theory.
A sample of material from Stephan Huller's the Real Messiah. Buy it here
