In the 12th and 13th centuries, the Waldenses condemned these excesses and, Bible in hand, explained that Peter had never been to Rome. Centuries later, exponents of the Protestant Reformation argued in a similar vein. In the 18th century, famous philosophers considered the tradition groundless, both historically and Scripturally. The same point of view is shared by capable scholars, Catholic and others, down to this day.

Yet, why not stick to the facts recorded in the Bible, the only source of firsthand information about Peter? From God’s Word it is clear that, in obedience to the directions he received from the governing body of the Christian congregation in Jerusalem, Peter carried out his work in the eastern part of the ancient world, including Babylon.​—Galatians 2:1-9; 1 Peter 5:13; compare Acts 8:14.

When writing to Christians in Rome, about 56 C.E., the apostle Paul greeted about 30 members of that congregation without even mentioning Peter. (Romans 1:1, 7; 16:3-23) Then, between 60 and 65 C.E., Paul wrote six letters from Rome, but Peter is not mentioned​—strong circumstantial evidence that Peter was not there.a (Compare 2 Timothy 1:15-17; 4:11.) Paul’s activity in Rome is described at the end of the book of Acts, but once again, no reference is made to Peter. (Acts 28:16, 30, 31) Consequently, an objective examination of the Biblical evidence, free of all preconceived ideas, can lead only to the conclusion that Peter did not preach in Rome.b