And they were both in error. Irenaeus claimed that Paul and Peter preached together and started the church in Rome. Eusebius also claims that Peter founded the church at Antioch which is not true. When Paul writes to the Romans in 58AD he mentions and greets many by name but never names Peter. He says in Romans 1:7 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, … an apostle to all who are in Rome, Beloved of God, called to be saints. He didn’t even mention Peter and calls himself the apostle to all who are in Rome.
Peter was the apostle to the Jews and spent most of his time in the eastern part of the Roman Empire. He was never in Rome.
CynicalBear:
And you know they were wrong How? How does Paul not mentioning Peter suggest he was not in Rome or did not eventually get to Rome. Nothing you cite from Romans 1 suggest that Peter never was in Rome. If you want to say, Peter was not in Rome in 58AD, that is about all you can say.
Those closer to time all indicate Peter was in Rome.