I agree about Tacitus. I was merely making the point that there is a written reference to his existence. He was a bit of a one, old Tacitus, but it wasn't all bollocks.
Nowt wrong with Tacitus as a source necessarily, but there's a distinct possibility that his writings were tinkered with.
See edited post :-)
Ordinarily, I'd agree. But then there are a number of inconsistencies in the account that also don't really add up. Ultimately, I don't think it matters that much. Modern Christianity is so far removed from anything that the historical Christ *may* have taught, it barely matters whether he actually existed or not.