tihxavy of Che theological ^eminarjp PRINCETON • NEW JERSEY FROM THE LIBRARY OF ROBERT ELLIOTT SPEER •d^D- J3^ w'^n .5',6383 .V /Uw/t. Jk^tsu/. DJ( P^. ^<^,^ cfyo-, A HISTOIiY AUG 31 1959 THE JEWISEL PEOPLE m THE TIME OF JESUS CHRIST. ^ EMIL SCHUEEK, D.D., M.A., PnOFESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT THE VNIVlCltsn Y OF GTKSSKX. Being a Second and Revised Edition of a "Manual of the History of J\"eiv Testament Times." ^irst Division. POLITICAL niSTOEY OF PALESTINE, FKOM B.C. 175 TO A.D. 135. TRAN'SLATKD BY KEV. JOHN MACPHERSON, M.A. voj. ir. NEW YOllK: CHARLES S C 11 I T, X E 11 ' S SONS. I 8 f» 1 . CONTENTS OF DIVISION I. VOL. 11. § IG Disturbances after Herod's Death, § 17. The Sons of Herod, ..... (a) Philip, B.C. 4-A.D. 34, .... His Territory under the Roinaii-^, a.d. 34-37, (h) Herod Antipas, B.C. 4-A.r). 3!». (c) Archelaus, B.C. 4:-a.d. 6, . . . Judea under Eoman Procurators, a.d. 6-41, . Disorders under Caligula in Alexandria, Disorders tinder Caligula in Judea, . Excursus I. The Census of Quirinius, Excursus II. The so-called Testimony of Josephus to Christ, § 18. Herod Agrippa I., a.d. 37, 40, 41-44, § 19. The Roman Procurators, a.d. 44-GG, § 19. Supplement, Agrippa II., a.d. 50-100, § 20. The Great War with Eome, a.d. 66-73, (1) Outbreak and Triumpli of the Revolution (a.d. 66), (2) The War in Galilee (a.d. 67), . (3) From the Subjugation of Galilee to the Siege of Jerusalem (a.d. 68-G9), . (4) Siege and Con([uest of Jerusalem (a.d. 70), . (5) The Conclusion of the War (a.d. 71-73), § 21. From the Destruction of Jerusalem to the Overtiiuow OF Bar-Cochba, . . . • • (l)The State of Affairs in Pale.stine from Vespasian to Hadrian, . . • • • (2) The War under Trajan, a.d. 115-117, (3) The Great Rebellion under Hadrian, a.d. 132-135, PACK 1 10 10 10 17 38 43 90 99 105 143 150 166 191 207 208 218 227 235 248 257 280 287 viii CONTENTS OF DIVISION I. VOL. II. APPENDICES I.-VIII. PAGZ T. History of Chalcis, Iturea, and Abilene, . . 325 II. History of the Nabatean Kings, .... 345 tIT. The Jewish and Macedonian Months compared with the Julian Calendar, ..... 363 IV. The Jewish Coins and Coins of the Eebellion, . . 378 (1) The Shekel 379 (2) The Coins of the Rebellion, . . . .383 V. Parallel Years op the Greek, Syrian, Roman, and Christian Eras, .... VI. Genealogy of the Seledcidae, VII. Genealogy of the Asmoneans, VIII. The House of Herod, Addenda to Division I. Vols. I. and 11. , . 393 399 400 401 403 § 16. DISTUEBANCES AFTER HEROD'S DEATH, B.C. 4. Sources. JosEPHUS, Antiq. xvii. 9-11 ; JFars of the Jews, ii. 1-6. Zonaras, Annates, vi. 1-2 (summary from Joseplius). Nicolas op Damascus in Miiller, Fragmenia Historicorum Graecarum, iii. 353 sq. ; Feder, Exceiyta Escurialensia, p. 67 sq. Literature. EwALD, History of Israel, v. 449-457. Geikie, Life and Words of Christ, 7th ed., London 1879, i. 263-272. Gratz, Geschichte der Juden, 4 Aufl. iii. pp. 246-253. HiTziG, Geschichte des Volkes Isi-ael, ii. 559-562. SCHNECKENBURGER, Zeitgeschichte, pp. 200-203. Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, 2 Aufl. i. 275-283. Lewin, Fasti sacri ad Ann. 4. Brann, De Herodis qui dicitur Magni filiis 'patrem in imj^erio secutis, pars 1, 1873 (treats only of the events of B.C. 4). Menke, Bihelatla%, Bl. V. " Judea and neighbouring countries in the time of Christ and the Apostles." By the last will of Herod, Arclielaus had been named his successor on the throne. Archelaus therefore made it his first business to secure the emperor's confirmation of his father's arrangement, and with this end in view he resolved to make a journey to Eome. But before he could start on such an expedition, he had to stamp out a rebellion in Jerusalem. The people could not so easily forget the execution of tlio two rabbis, Judas and Matthias, and violently insisted that Archelaus should bring to punishment the counsellors of Herod. Archelaus endeavoured at first in a conciliatory manner to dissuade the people from their purpose. But when he could not succeed in this way, the only result of his DIV. I. VOL. II. A 2 THE KOMAN-HEEODIAN AGE. proposals being the increase of the tumult, he resolved to crush the revolt by violence. He accordingly sent forth a detachment of soldiers against the people assembled in the temple, where the people who had flocked into Jerusalem in prospect of the approaching Passover festival were wont to gather at that season in great crowds. But the detachment sent was not strong enough to make way against the excited masses. A portion of the soldiers was stoned by the people ; the rest, together with their leader, took to flight. Archelaus was now obliged to call out his whole fighting force ; and only by the help of his entire army, amid great bloodshed, was he able to put down the rebellion.^ After Archelaus had thus by the exercise of force secured quiet, he hastened to Eome, leaving his brother Philip to act as administrator of the kingdom. Scarcely had he gone, when Antipas also started for Eome in order to press his own claims there. He had by the third and last will of Herod received only Galilee and Perea, whereas in the second will he had been appointed successor to the throne. He therefore now wished to represent to the emperor that to him, and not to Archelaus, did the kingdom properly belong. Many other members of the Herodian family were also present in Eome at the same time as Archelaus and Antipas, and these now mostly appeared against Archelaus, and expressed a strong desire that Palestine should now be put under immediate Eoman government ; or if this could not be, then they would rather have Antipas than Archelaus.^ Hence the sons of Herod plotted and schemed against one another in Eome. Augustus, in whose hands the decision lay, meanwhile convoked at his palace a consultative assembly, at which the opposing brothers were called upon to make a ^ Joseplius, Antiq. xvii. 9. 1-3 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 1. 1-3. 2 Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 9. 3-4; IFars of the Jews, ii. 2. 1-3. Nicolas of Damascus in Mailer, iii. 353. § 16. DI5TUKBANCES AFTER IIEROD's DEATH, B.C. 4. 3 statement of Uieir conflicting claims. A certain Antipater spoke on behalf of Antipas, while Nicolas of Damascus, formerly the minister of Herod, appeared on behalf of Archelaus. Each party sought to win over the emperor to his side, partly by advancing arguments, partly by insinuat- ing suspicions against his opponent. When Augustus had heard both parties, he inclined more to the side of Archelaus, and made a statement to the effect that he was most fit to ascend the royal throne. Yet he did not wish immediately to decide the matter, and so dismissed the assembly without issuing a final and formal judgment.^ But before the question about the succession to the throne had been decided in Eome, new troubles had broken out in Judea. Soon after the departure of Archelaus the Jews had again risen in revolt, but had been restored to quiet by Varus, the governor of Syria. Varus had then returned to Antioch, leaving behind him in Jerusalem a legion to maintain order. But scarcely had he gone when the storm broke out afresh. After Herod's death, pending the settlement of the question of succession to the throne, the emperor had sent to Palestine a procurator, Sabinus. But he oppressed the people in every sort of way, and behaved in all directions in the most reckless manner. Hence it was that a revolt broke out again immediately after the withdrawal of Varus. It was now the season of the Passover festival, and therefore crowds of people were present in Jerusalem. They were divided into three great divisions, and attacked the Ptomans at the three different points : on the north of the temple, south beside the race- course, and on the west of the city beside the royal palace. The keenest struggle took place, first of all, at the temple. Tlie Piomans pressed forward successfully into the tomple court ; but the Jews offered a most stubborn resistance, — mounted upon the roofs of the buildings which surround the temple court, 3 Josephus, Anti5 koivti QSTTd'hcoV '7ro>.ITilX STTi AT^SVOt TOV TivppOV dr/lP'/jd^Cil (pYlJiV il; O' fiOipol; T'/}ll QiTTot,7^ixv. On the antiquity of the Aleuadae and on the constitutional history of Thessaly generally, see Gilbert, Handhuch der griechischen Staatsalterthiimer, Bd. ii. 1885, pp. 5-17). Euripides therefore, at the close of his Alcestis, makes Admetus say : " I now command the citizens and every tetrarchy (or : ' and the whole tetrarchy ') to proceed with the dances and to bring forward the sacrifices," etc. (Euripides, Alcestis 1154: 'Aaro7; Is Tctayi r ii/t/eTru riTpup-/,iec, etc.). When King Philip of Macedon had reduced the whole of Thessaly under his rule, he set an eip/^u'j over every mpii {Hariwcration, I.e. : on §£ O/A/xtto? x.uff 'sx.oi,aTn>j TCtVTWJ TU'J y^OtpOlV Oe.pX'i'J't Ot, X-OnilTT/llS ^iQyj'hUKXIJi!/ OtKKOl n KXt ©roVoaTOJ tV TJ) /Lco'). With reference to this proceeding, Demosthenes says that Philip instituted tetrarchies in Thessaly (Demosthenes, Philipp. iii. 26 : «xx« QiTTxT^i'oi -jroi; 'ix-' > ^^X^ '^^' "TraKniiotg kocI Txg TToJ^a; ccvtuu ■TrxpyiOYiToti xxt nrpupxtx; KXTiarms"). While some doubt can be entertained as to the meaning of nrpxpx'ot. in Euripides, it clearly signifies in Demosthenes a province containing a fourth part of the kingdom (the government of a Tirpx;, whence also is derived TSTpxoxpx'x). We also meet with the expression in this original sense in Galatia. Over this country, according 8 THE EOMAN-TIEEODIAN AGE. these possessions for some twelve or fourteen years. She died to the description of Strabo, twelve tetrarclues ruled, tliat is, four over each of the three tribes of the Trocmi, Tolistoboii, and Tectosagae (Strabo, xii. 5. 1, p. 566 sq. ; less correctly in Pliny, Hist. Naturalis, v. 146). When the most of them had been massacred by Mithridates (Appian, Mithridat. 46), Pompey rearranged matters, so that over each of the three tribes there was set one tetrarch. Subsequently the number was reduced to two, and finally to one, the Dejotarus (Strabo, xii. 5. 1, p. 567 ; compare, in addition, the complete exposition of these relations in Niese, Ehein. Museum, Bd. 38, 1883, pp. 583-600). But although the title of tetrarch had wholly lost its original meaning, it was still retained ; for the title of king, which some assumed, applied, not to Galatia, but to other possessions (StraV.o, xii. 3. 13, p. 547, xiii. 4. 3, p. 625 ; Niese, Ehein. Museum). The title of tetrarch, completely stripped of its original signification, is met with also elsewhere very frequently in the Roman times. It was then used simply to indicate a small dependent prince, whose rank and authority was less than that of a king. Such tetrarchs seem to have been very numerous, especially in Syria. Compare Pliny, Hist. Naturalis, v. 74 : " intercursant cinguntque has urbes [Decapoleos] tetrarchiae, reg- norum instar singulae ; ihid. 77 : Decapolitana regio praedictaeque cum ea tetrarchiae ; ihid. 81 : Nazerinorum tetrarchia ; ihid. : tetrarchiaa duas quae Granucomatitae vocantur ; ihid. 82 : tetrarch iam quae Mam- misea appellatur ; ihid. : tetrarchias in regna descriptas barbaris nomini- bus," xvii. Josephus, Vita, 11 : sx.yovo; loif^ov roi Tripl rov Alfixuou Tsrpxpxovvro;. Antony made presents of " tetrarchies and kingdoms " (Plutarch, Antony, 36 : -TroTiMl; exapi^iro rsTpapxiot; >cxl fioiafXeias kSuuy (A-iycthuv). To the army of Varus in B.C. 4 belonged also auxiliaries which ^ ^xai'Aug VI 7tvs; nrpipx^i tots -Timpslxov (Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 10. 9, init.). In the time of Nero the " tetrarch and kings " in Asia were instructed to obey the orders of Corbulo (Tacitus, Annals, xv. 25 : " scribitur tetrarchis ac regibus praefectisque et procuratoribus . . . jussis Corbulonis oh- sequi"). And so generally during the Roman times besides the reges, the tetrarchae were very often referred to as minor princes of subordinate rank (e.g. Cicero, iji Vatinium, 12. 29 ; pro Balho, 5. 13 ; pro Milone, 28. 76 ; Fhilipp. xi. 12. 31 ; Caesar, Bell. Civ. iii. 3 ; Bell. Alex. 78 ; Horace, Satires, i. 3. 12. Further examples may be found in the literature quoted below). Besides the Galatian tetrarchs and the Herodian princes, we have particular information about the tetrarchs of Chalcis or Iturea : Ptolemy, Lj'sanias, Zenodorus (see about these in Appendix I.). When we consider the small importance of these minor princes, it is not to be wondered at that the title nrpipxri? is comparatively seldom met with on inscriptions and coins. On inscriptions, compare Corpus Inscript. Graec. n. 4033, 4058 ; Bullettino dell' Institxdo di corrisp. archeol. 1873, p. 365 sq, (both referring to Herod Antipas) ; Corp. Inscr. Graec. n. 4521. 4523 = Kenan, Mission de Phenicie, j^p. 317-319 (dynasty of Chalcis). Of coins, § 16. DISTURBANCES AFTER HEROD's DEATH, B.C. 4. 9 about A.D. 10, in the time of the procurator M. Ambivius, and bequeathed her property to the Empress Livia.'^ What had been the empire of Herod was therefore now parted into three territories, each of which has for a while its own history. besides those of Philip and Herod Antipas, we meet only with those of Ptolemy, Lysanias, and Zenodorus (see Appendix I.). — Compare generally : Stephanus, Thesaurus, s.v. Ttrpapx^; and Tirpapx'tx. ; Forcellini, Lexicon, s.v. tetrarches and tetrarchia ; Winer, ReahvorterhucJi, ii. 593 ; Keim in Schenkel's BibeUextcon, v. 487-490 ; Bohn, Qua condicione juris recjes socii liopuli Romani fuerint (1877), pp. 9-11 ; Niese, Galaiien und seine Tetrarchen {Rhein. M^iseum, Bd. 38, 1883, pp. 083-GOO), ^8 Josephus, Antig. xviii. 2. 2. § 17. THE SOXS OF HEEOD. a. Philip, b.c. 4-a.d. 34. His Territory under the EOMANS, A.D. 34-37. Sources. JosEPHUS, Antiq. xviii. 2. 1, 4. 6, 6. 10 ; JVars of the Jews, ii. 9. 1-6. On the coins, see below. Literature.^ EwALD, History of Israel, vi. 71-74, 347. Westcott in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible. "Winer, Eealworterhuch, ii. 250. Leyrer in Herzog's Eeal-Encydojjaedie, 2 Aufl. xi. G18. Keim, Jesus of Nazara, i. 258, 274 ; in Schenkel's Bibellexicon, iii. 40-42. Lewin, Fasti Sacri (see Index, p. 408). Brann, Die Sohne des Herodes, 1873 (reprint from the Monatsschrift ficr Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthuvis), pp. 77-87. The extent of the territory which Philip received is variously stated in different places by Josephus.^ Putting altogether, it embraced the districts of Batauea, Trachonitis, Auranitis, Gaulanitis, Panias, and, according to Luke iii. 1, also Iturea.'' ^ The most thorough treatise on Herod's sons and grandsons is the article by Keira in Schenkel's Bibellexikon. — The older literature is given by Reuss, Geschichte der heiligen Schriften A. T.'s, § 558. ^ Josephus, A7itiq. xvii. 8. 1, 11. 4, xviii. 4. 6 ; TFars of the Jews, ii. 6. 3. In the latter passage, undoubtedly, instead of 'lx/u.vnxu should be read HccvitoiOct., in accordance with Antiq. xvii. 8, 1, 11. 4. ^ Batanea corresponds to the Old Testament Bashan (jU's) ; Eusebius, Onomasticon, ed. Lagarde, p. 232 : Boso-av . . . uvrn Bctjotyirt; ii vvu x.x'hov- /^ivn BxToivcttiit. Yet the ancient Bashan was of larger extent than the modern Batanea'. By Bashan was understood the whole region on the other side of Jordan between Hermon on the north and the district of Gilead on the south, extending eastward as far as Salcha, on the southern 10 § 17. THE SONS OF IIEi;OD. 11 The districts named were not ancient tribal possessions of the Jewish people, but were in great part added to the Jewish elope of the Hauran. See Dent. iii. 10, 13 ; Josh. xii. 4, xiii. 11, 30, xvii. 1, 5 ; 1 Chron. v. 23. But within this district lay the later provinces of Trachonitis, Auranitis, and Gaulanitis ; so that thus Batanea is only a part of the ancient Bashan. Tlie expression, however, is sometimes used even by later writers in the wider sense ; e.g. Josephus, Life, 11 med. : /mra. ruv iv BxTX'jxicc Upa-x'^'-'tr'^''. Since the cities of Ashtaroth and Edrei are named as the chief cities of Bashan (Josh. xii. 4, xiii. 11, 30), it may he assumed that these also formed the centre of the modern Batanea. Edrei, later Adraa, the modern Der'a, lies almost exactly in the middle between the southern point of the lake of Gennezaret and the soutlieru end of the mountains of Hauran. That Ashtaroth and Adraa lay in Batanea is stated by Eusebius (Onomasticon, ed. Lagarde, pp. 209, 213, 263, articles' A(jtx pud Kxpuocsiu, 'Aarxpiid, and Kupvccst/ic ^ KmctpisS). The Gi'cek BxTxuciicc of Polybius, xvi., also corresponds to that of Josephus, Antiq, xii. 3. 3, and Ptolemy, v. 15. 26. Trachonitis or 6 Tpxx'^'-' (so Josephus, Antiq. xiii. 16. 5, xv. 10. 1 ; TFars of the Jews, ii. 6. 3 ; and the inscription of Mismie) is the rugged plateau south of Damascus, stretching on to Bostra, which is now called the Lejah. It lies, therefore, north-east of Batanea proper. Proof of this is afforded by the following data. On an inscription at Mismie, the ancient Phana, in the north of the Lejah, this place is characterized as /icr,rpox.ufii» ToD Tpcix'-"'°s {Corp. Inscr. Graec. n. 4551 = Le Bas et Waddington, Inscrip- tions, t. iii. n. 2524). Strabo speaks of the T/)«%a>5j as two hills in the neighbourhood of Damascus (Strabo, xvi. 2. 20, p. 756 : vvioKnurui I uvTyi; Ivo y.iyoy.i'jot "ho^oi Hpu-xuvH ', compare also xvi. 2. 16, p. 755). Eusebius places Trachonitis in the immediate neighbourhood of Bostra {Onomasticon, s.v. 'Izovpxix, ed. Lagarde, p. 268 : Tpxx'-'v'iTi: oi x.a,XslTcii vi ■zaoce.-'Ciiu.i'j-^ Xupoe, tJ] tpviuat tyi x-ctToi Biarpccv rvj; Aox/SiXi. Ibid. S.V. Kxyxd, p. 269 : nehxt Be kuI ht x.»i s/vu iv Tox-^uvt -^rhriiiov Boarcuv. Ibid, s.v. "YpxycwATi:, p. 298 : 'iartv oi kxI I'Triy.ituot, VioarpZiu kxto. t/iu 'ipvu^ov "Trpoi voTov u(; Wi Aot.utx.ax.iu). Also in a rabbinical treatise on the boundaries of Palestine the statement occurs : " Trachon, in the neighbourhood of Bostra" {jer. Shebiith vi. 1, fol. 36c; Tosephta Shebiith iv. ed. Zuckcr- mandel, p. 66, 10; ,S%/ire, section Ekeb, at the end. The Jerusalem Talmud has mVinb Dnnoi NJiairo, " Trachon, which borders on Bostra." Compare on the whole subject : Neubauer, G^ographie du Talmud, pp. 10-21 ; and, especially, Hildesheimer, Bcitriige zur Geographic Paliistinas, Berlin 1886 [on Trachon, pp. 55-57]). The Targums identify XJI^IO ^vith the biblical Argob {OnJcelos, Deut. iii. 4, 13 f.). Pliny speaks of Trachonitis as in the neighbourhood of Panias (Pliny, Hist. Naturalis, v. 74) ; Ptolemy (v. 15. 26) speaks of the TpaxuMrxt " i\px(ii; as dwelling to the east of Batanea. The latter passage is indeed explained by Waddington, Comptes 12 THE EOMAN-HEEODIAN AGE. territory in later times. The population was a mixed one ; and rendus de VAcademie des inscr. 1865, p. 102 sq., as meaning rather the reverse, namely, that Batanea proper lay to the east of Trachonitis ; but his exposition hardly commends itself. — In determining the meaning of Luke iii. 1, it is of interest to note that Philo, or rather Agrippa in the letter communicated by Philo, uses the abbreviated expression : ttju Hocx.xuuItiv "hiyoi/.ivYiu, to describe the whole territory of Philip, just as for the territories of Herod Antipas he uses the phrase : r'/jv TccXi'Xc/Jciv ; both a parte potio7-i, as in Luke. See Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, § 41, ed. Mangey, ii. 593 fin. Aurauitis is the pin mentioned by Ezekiel, xlvii. 16, 18 ; which also in the Mishna, Rosh hashana ii. 4, is spoken of as one of the stations for the five signals from Judea to Babylon. Some manuscripts of the Mishna have plin, others p^ri- Since the Hauran, according to the context of the Mishna, must be a mountain, Auranitis is undoubtedly the country round about the mountain peak, which now is called Jebel Hauran. Gaulanitis has its name from the town Golan, which in the Bible is reckoned in Bashan (Deut. iv. 43 ; Josh. xx. 8, xxi. 27 ; 1 Chron. vi. 56 ; Eusebius, Onoraasticon, ed. Lagarde, p. 242). Josephus distinguishes Upper and Lower Gaulanitis, and remarks that in the latter lies the city Gamala (Wars of the Jews, iv. 1. 1 ; according to the same passage, Gamala lay on the eastern bank of the lake of Gennezaret). According to TFars of the Jeus, iii. 3. 1, Gaulanitis formed the eastern boundary of Galilee. Hence Gaulanitis is practically within the same lines as what is now called Djaulan, embracing the lowlands east of the Jordan from its source down to the southern point of the lake of Gennezaret. A detailed description of it is given by Schumacher in the Zeitschrift des deutschen Falastina-Vereins, ix, 1886. The district of Panias, at the sources of the Jordan (see on the town Panias, Div. II. vol. i. pp. 132-135), had in earlier times belonged to Zenodorus, and before that to the kingdom of the Itureans (see Appendix I. at the close of this volume). So far the statement of Luke is not alto- gether incorrect, that Philip also ruled over Iturea. But that district formed, indeed, only a small portion of what had been the kingdom of the Itureans. The Itureans proper had their dwelling in the Lebanon (see Appendix I.), and during the period a.d. 38-49 were under the sovereignty of a certain Soemus (Dio Cassius, lix. 12 ; Tacitus, xii. 23), while at that same time Agrippa I. had in his possession the whole tetrarchy of Philip (Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 10, xix. 8. 2). Iturea proper cannot therefore have belonged to the domain of Philip (see Keim in Schenkel's Bihellexi- kon, iii. 41). Wetzstein's idea is certainly wrong, that Iturea is to be placed upon the eastern slope of the Hauran. Compare generally on the districts above named : Eeland, Palaestina, pp. 106-110, 193-203 ; Gesenius, Thesaurus, pp. 249 sq., 458 sq., 285 sq.; Hitter, Erdkunde, xv. 800-1001 ; Eaumer, FaUistina, p. 226 flf. ; the articles § 17. THE SONS OF HEKOD, 13 the non- Jewish, ^'.c. Syrian and Greek, element prevailed.* riiilip himself was certainly a real exception among the sons and on Basan, Traclionitis, Havran or Hauran, and Golan in tlic Biblical Dictionaries of Smith, Kitto, Fairbairn, Winer, Sclienkel, and Rielini ; r. W. Schultz in Herzog's Beal-EncydojMedie, 2 Aiifl. ii. 112-llG (article " Basan") ; Cless in Pauly's Eeal-Encydojmedie, vi. 2, 2038 f., art. " Tracho- nitis ;" Kuhn, Die stddtische und biirgerliche Verfassung des rom. Eeichs, ii. 381 f., 384 f.; Porter, "Historico-Geographical History of Bashan" (in Journal of Sacred Literature, new series, vol. vi. 1854, ])p. 281-313); Five Years in Damascus, 1855, ii. 250-275 ; Wetzstein, Eeisehericht iiher Hauran und die Trachonen, 1860, pp. 36 f., 82-92 ; Wetzstein's Excursus to De- litzsch's Commentary on Job; Waddington, ComjHes rendus de VAcade'mie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, 1865, pp. 82-89, 102-109. The treatise of Noldeke, Zeitschrift der DMG. 1875, p. 419 ff., deals with the sixth century after Christ. With reference to the southern limits of the tetrarchy of Philip this much may be accepted with confidence, that the region round about the cities now called Bosra and Salkhat, south of the Hauran, did not belong to his domain, as is proved by inscriptions discovered in these cities bearing the names of the Arabian kings Malchus and Aretas. See de Vogiie, Syrie centrale, hiscriiMons s^mitiques (1868), pp. 103, 107. On the other hand, Hebran, on the southern slope of the Hauran, still belonged to his territory ; for an Aramaic inscription found there is dated not according to the years of the reign of an Arabian king, but according to the years of Claudius : " In the month Tizri in the seventh year of the Emperor Claudius " = a.d. 46. See de Vogiie', p. 100. From this, there- fore, one may conclude that Hebran belonged to the domain of Philip, and that in a.d. 37 it was given over to Agrippa I., and was after his death placed under Roman administration. Compare the remarks of Le Bas and Waddington, Inscriptions, t. iii. n. 2286. * In Batanea, Herod the Great, in the last years of his reign, had settled a Jewish colony from Babylon, under the leadership of a certain Zamaris, and conferred on them the privilege of complete freedom from taxation, which was also, in all essential points, respected by Philij). See Antiq. xvii. 2. 1-3. For the history of this colony, compare also Josephus, Life, 11 ; De Saulcy, " Monnaies des Zamarides" (Numismatic Chronicle, 1871, pp. 157-181). These "coins of the Zamaridae" are in the highest degree problematical. — In Traclionitis, Herod the Great had settled 3000 Idumeans, to whom he assigned the task of maintaining the peace of the district against the robber ])ands which inhabited it. See Antiq. xvi. 9. 2. — The majority of the inhabitants, however, was pagan, as is proved by the large proportion of the Greek inscriptions of that region which are still preserved. Compare also, in general, JFars of the Jews, iii. 3. 5 : o'lKovot "hi etvrviv ^iyxhzi ' Xw^ouai n kxi 'S.vpot ; and, in addition, Div. II. vol. i. p. 4. 14 THE ROMAN-UERODIAN AGE. grandsons of Herod. While all the others, copying fathers and grandfathers, were ambitious, imperious, harsh, and tyrannical toward their subjects, nothing but what is honourable is told of Philip. His reign was mild, just, and peaceful. To the traditions of his father he remained faithful only in this, that he also sought renown in the construction of great buildings. The building of two cities by him is expressly reported. The ancient Panias, at the sources of the Jordan, north of the lake of Gennezaret, he rebuilt, with larger dimensions, and gave it, in honour of the emperor, the name of Caesarea. To dis- tinguish it from the well-known Caesarea by the sea, it was called Caesarea Philippi, under which name we are familiar with it in the Gospel history (Matt. xvi. 13 ; Mark viii. 27). The other city which he rebuilt was the Bethsaida^ situated at the point where the Jordan enters into the lake of Gennezaret, which, in honour of the daughter of Augustus, he named Julias.^ Josephus tells of him, incidentally, that he first dis- covered and proved that the supposed sources of the Jordan at Panias obtained their water by a subterranean passage from the so-called Phiala. Philip demonstrated this by throwing in chaff into the Phiala, which came out again at Panias.^ "We know, however, nothing more about his reign beyond what Josephus tells us in reporting his death : ^ " He had * To be distinguished, probably, from the New Testament town of that name. See, however, Div. II. vol. i. p. 136. ^ Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 2. 1 ; Wars oftIieJeu's,u.9. 1. — On both cities, the time of their building and their subsequent history, see Div. II. vol. i. pp. 133-136. ' Josephus, JFars of the Jews, in. 10. 7. According to the description of Josephus, the " Phiala" can scarcely be anything else than the present Birket Ram. But then the story told by him is not possible, owing to the relative levels. See Eitter, Erdkunde, xv. 1. 174-177 ; Robinson, Later Biblical Researches, p. 400 ; Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 394 ; Guerin, Galilee, ii. 329-331 ; Schumacher, Zeitschrift des deutschen Falastina- Vereins, ix. 1886, p. 256 f. (with map). ^ Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 4. 6 : TiT^ivtcc . . . (/.irpiov iu oi; vjpx,i Trxptnaxuv rov TpO-TTOV KCCi XTpol.'/ l^OUU. AlXlT»l/ ftSV yUf TO Xa* il/ TYI yji T)5 UTTOriT^tl § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 15 sliown himself a person of moderation and quietness in the conduct of his life and government. He constantly lived in that country which was subject to him. He used to make his progress with a few chosen friends; his tribunal, also, on which he sat in judgment, followed him in his progress ; and when any one met him who wanted his assistance, he made no delay, but had his tribunal set down immediately, whereso- ever he happened to be, and sat down upon it and heard his complaint ; he then ordered the guilty, that were convicted, to be punished, and absolved those that were accused un- justly." — Of his private life we know only that he was married to Salome, daughter of Herodias, and that there were no children by this marriage.^ — According to his political principles, he was a consistent friend of the Eomans, and laid great value upon the favour of the emperor. Tiiis is shown not only in his giving to his cities the names of Caesarea and Julias, but also in his impressing upon his coins the images of Augustus and Tiberius, — this being the first instance in which any likeness was engraven on the coins of a Jewish prince.^" tTTOis^ro' 'TTporjOoi o' t)ixv xi/TO) avu cihtyoig tuv i'TrO^iKzuv, xxl toO dfiovov ti; ov Kpiuiii xecdi^ofifjo; ii> rxi; 6ooi; iTroyAvcv, oVo'rs r/j inron/Tixacc; eu '/cpnx yivono xiiTu t'TrtjioriQiiu, oi/osi/ it; uvx^fihoii xKTC sk rou o^io; iopvasug tov dp'Ji/ov Yj y.xl rv'/^oi ytvof/Ai/yi; Kxdii^o/nsvo; ij^poxTO, kxI rif^aoix; r£ iTrtrif/.x Toi; xhovai kxI ij^iit rov; xhiKu; iv syK>.'/j/.ixai y-vof^ii/ov;. — The judge's sitting upon the sella was a necessary formality, without which tlie decision would have no legal effect. Examples : Matt, xxvii. 19 ; John xix. 13 ; Acts xxv. 6 ; Josephus, JVars of the Jews, ii. 9. 3 (Pilate), ii. 14. 8 (Florus), iii. 10. 10 (Vespasian). Generally on the sella curulis and the sitting of the magistrate. Rein in Pauly's Real-Encyclopaedie, vi. 1. 9G0 ; ilomrasen, liomisches Staatsrecht, i. 315 ff. '■' Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 5. 4. 1" In explanation of this, it should be remembered that Philip's domain was predominantly pagan. — Compare on tlie coins: Eckhel, iii. 490 sq. ; Mionnet, v. 5G6 s'p ; Lenormant, Tresor de numismatiqite, p. 126, pi. Ix. n. 1-2 ; Madden, Histonj of Jewish Coinaye, pp. 100-102 ; De Saulcy, " Notes sur les monnaies de Philippe le tetrarque" (Annuaire de la Society Jrangaise de Numismatique et d'Archeologie, t. iii. 1868-1873, pp. 262-265) ; 16 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Philip died, after a reign of thirty-seven years, in the 20th year of Tiberius, a.d. 33-34, and was buried in the tomb built by himself. ^^ Hiy territory was then added to that of Syria, but retained the right of administering its own revenues ; " and was again, after a few years, made over to a prince of the Herodian family. The Emperor Caligula, immediately after his succession to the throne, in March a.d. 37, gifted the tetrarchy of Philip to Agrippa, a son of that Aristobolus who had been executed by his father Herod, and so a grandson of Herod and Mariamme.'^ Madden, Coins of the Jews, 1881, pp. 123-127 (tins is tlie most complete exposition); De Saiilcy, " Monnaie inedite de Philippe le tetrarque" (Anmiaire de la Societe fr. de. Num. et dJArch. t. v., or, seconde serie, t. i. fasc. 3, 1879, p. 181 sq.). — The coins have on the one side the name of Philip, OIAinnOT TETPAPXOT, with the image of a temple and the number of the year 12, 16, 19, 33, 37 (the number of the year IB = 12 in Madden, Coins, p. 125, and on an example in de Saulcy, Annuaire, v. 3. 181 sq., not given by Madden). The year numbers 26 and 29, given by Mionnet, are regarded by de Saulcy as false readings. The coins of the year 37 (first communicated by Madden, History, p. 102) belong to the last year of Philip, a.d. 33-34. The coins of the year 12 and 16 = a.d. 8-9 or 12-13, have on the obverse the head of Augustus and the inscription KAICAFI CEBACTfl (fragmentary) ; those of the years 19, 33, 37 have the head of Tiberius, with a similar inscription : those of 37 have the full name TIBEPIOC CEBACTOC KAICAP.— The temple engraved on all the coins is indeed the temple of Augustus at Panias which Herod the Great had built {Antiq. xv. 10. 3 ; Wars of the Jews, i. 21. 3). The type is therefore wholly pagan. — The image and name of the emperor are also found on the coins of many other dependent kings, from the time of Augustus onward ; yet there are still instances in which all allusion to the supreme imperial authority is wanting. See Bolin, Qua condicione juris reges socii 2)opuli Eomani fuerint, 1877, pp. 45-49. 11 Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 4. 6. — The 20th year of Tiberius began on the 19th August A.D. 33. The 37th year of Philip ended, if we reckon from Nisan to Nisan (compare vol. i. p. 465), in spring A.U.C. 787 = a.d. 34. Philip therefore died in the winter of a.d. 33-34, 1^ Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 4. 6. ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 10 ; JVars of the Jews, ii. 9. 6. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD, 1*7 h. Herod Antipas, b.c. 4-a.d. 39. Sources. JoSEPHUS, Antiq. xviii. 2. 1 and 3, 4. 5, 5. 1-3, 7. 1-2 ; Wars of the Jev:s, ii. 9. 1, 6. In the New Testament : Matt. xiv. 1-11 ; Mark vL 14-28 ; Luke iii. 19 f., ix. 7-9, xiii. 31, xxiii. 7-12. On the coins, see below. LiTERATDRE. Geikie, Life and Words of Christ, 7th ed. London 1879, i. 298-302, 500, ii. 182. EwAIiD, Histortj of Israel, vi. 74-80, vii. 241, 242. Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgescliichte, 2 Aufl. i. 284 fT., 325 ff., ii. 207 ff., 221 ff. Winer, Realwdiierlmch, i. 484. Wieseler, Chronological Synopsis of the Four Gospels, pp. 50, 159, 216. Also in Herzog's Real-Encyclopaedie, 2 Aufl. i. 465 f. Keim, Jesus of Nazara, i. 269, ii. 333, 340, 392, iv. 217, vi. 103. Also iii Schenkel's Bihellexikon, iii. 42-46. Gerlach in the Zeitschrift fiir luth. Theologie, 1869, pp. 32-53. Lewin, Fasti Sacri (see Index, p. 408). Brann, Die Sdhne des Herodes, 1873 (reprint from the Monatsschrift fiir Geschichte und Wisscnschaft des Judenthums), pp. 17-76. In the partition of their father's possessions, a larger slice tlian that given to Philip fell to the lot of his half-brother Antipas, or, as he is frequently called by Josephus, on the coins, and in the New Testament, Herod, to whom, as well as to Philip, was given the title of tetrarch.^ His territory, 1 Thus is he correctly named in Matt. xiv. 1 ; Luke iii. 19 ; on the other hand, he is incorrectly called fixatXiv; in Mark vi. 14. — Since Herod Antipas is the only Herod who bore the title of tetrarch, the two following inscriptions are nndoubtedly to be referred to him. They give evidence, at the same time, of his foreign travels : — (&) On the island of Cos (Corpus Inscript. Graec. n. 2502) : 'Hpuoov Tou ^otai'Kiu; viov, Ttrpoip'/,inv, DIV. I. VOL. II. B 18 THE ROMAN-HEEODIAN AGE. embracing Galilee aud Perea, was indeed broken up into two parts by the so-called Decaj)olis, which came in like a wedge between Galilee and Perea." But for this he was amply indemnified by the fact that the half of his domains con- sisted of the beautiful, fertile, and thickly-populated Galilee, with its vigorous and brave, though freedom-loving inhabit- ants.^ In point of character, Antipas was a genuine son of old Herod, — sly, ambitious, and luxurious, only not so able as his father.* In regard to his slyness we have unmistakable evidence from the life of Jesus, who, on a memorable occasion, attached to him tlie designation of '' that fox." ^ It was always necessary to have recourse to craft in order to keep the Galileans in order, and to guard the frontiers of Perea against the robber raids of the Arabians. For the defence of Galilee he rebuilt Sepphoris, that had been destroyed by fire by the soldiers of Varus (see above, p. 4), and surrounded it with strong walls. And for the defence of Perea he fortified Betharamphtha, and named it after the emperor's wife Livias {b) On the island of Delos {Bulletin de correspondance helleniqxie, t. iii. 1879, p. 365 sq.) : O S^,t40.C ' h\_8/\yociuV KCtl 0(] x,ci.~oix.o[i>ure; rvju vv)aov\ TlTpcip^nV clpir7l[; ifUCl!/ Koci iVVOi-"] u; T'^j f/f ia.vTOv\j . . . clui$r}x,{xu'\. 2 Compare the map in Menke's Bihelatlas. — On the Decapolis (Matt, iv. 25 ; Mark v. 20, vii. 31), see Div. II. vol. i. pp. 94-121. ^ Compare the description of Galilee in Josephus, Wars of the Jeivs, iii. 3. 2-3, 10. 8. ■* Josephus in Antiq. xviii. 7. 2, characterizes him as dyocTruu rviu ijTvx'iccv. * Luke xiii. 32. — Hofmann, SchrLftheu-eis, ii. 1. 315 ; Geilach, Zeitschrift fur luth. Theologie, 1869, p. 36 ; and Volkmar, DieEvangelien, 1870, p. 499 f., explain the use of the phrase " that fox,'"' not as a symbol of craftiness, but as that of open robbery and rapacity. See, on the other hand, Keim, Jesus of Nazara, iv. 344; and Hamburger, Real-Encydop. fiir Bihel und Talmud, Abth. i. (1870) art. " Fuchs." In the Talmud the fox is expressly designated as "being regarded as the sliest among the beasts," vi?J? piDISti' r,1\-;3L" npD {h. Bemchoth Q\h\ § 17. THE SONS OF IIEROD. 19 or Julias.^ He was also imdoubtedly induced by political motives to marry the daughter of the Arabian king Aretas/ He thought that in this way he would be better able than by all fortifications to secure the country against the inroads of the Arabians ; and perhaps it was Augustus liinisclt" who persuaded him to enter on this marriage.^ Like all the Herods, Herod Antipas delighted in magnificent buildings. In tliis direction he was particularly taken up with the idea of building a splendid capital, which he under- took during the time of Tiberius.^ He selected, as the site for his city, the most beautiful spot in Galilee, the western bank of the lake of Gennezaret, in the neighbourhood of the warm springs of Enmiaus. The choice of this spot was in one respect not a happy one. For just on that spot on whicli the city was built, as became apparent from the sepulchral monuments, was an ancient burying-ground, and the inhabit- ing of such a place was impossible to the Jews who strictly observed the law, since every contact with a grave occasioned ceremonial impurity of seven days.^" Herod was therefore obliged, in order to secure inhabitants for his city, to settle there by force many foreigners, adventurers, and beggars, so that the population was of a very mixed description. But in regard to. the beauty of the buildings nothing more perfect could be desired. It had, among other public structures, a * Joseplius, yljiii^. xviii. 2. ] ; JFars of the Jcus, ii. 9. ]. — On both citioH, and on the change ol' the narues Livias and Julias, see Div. II. vol. i. pp. 141-143. ' Josephus, Aniiq. xviii. 5. 1. — On Aretas and the Nabatean kings generally, see Appendix II. ** Compare Suetonius, Augustus, c. 48: " Reges socios etiam inter seniet ipsos necessitudinibus niutuis junxit, promptissiinus aflinitatis cujusijue atque amicitiae conciliator ct fautor." '•* On the time of the building of Tiberias, see Div. II. vol. i. pp. 143, 144. ^'* Num. xix. 16; Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 2. 3. More detailed jiai- ticulars about im])urity caused by giaves are given in Mishna Vhuloth xvii., xviii. 20 THE KOMAN-IIERODIAN AGE. ardBiov '^ and a royal palace, which, indeed, by its figures of animals gave offence, and during the war with the Iionians was sacrificed to the fanaticism of the Jews.'^ Also there was not wanting a Jewish Trpocrev^')], a fieyiarov ooKijfia.^^ The constitution of the city was wholly modelled upon the Hellenistic pattern. It had a council, ^ov\i], of 600 mem- bers, with an ap-^cov, and a committee of the Se'/ca irpwroi ; also Hyparchs and an Agoranomos. In honour of the emperor the new capital was named Tiberias.'* During the time of Pilate, a.d. 26-36, Antipas, together with his brother, successfully made complaints against Pilate on account of his having set up an offensive votive shield in the palace at Jerusalem.^^ And as he was in this instance the representation of the Jewish claims, he also did not venture otherwise, notwithstanding his paganish buildings at Tiberias, to break away completely from the traditions of Judaism, and even in this respect showed himself a true son of Herod. Prom the Gospel we know that he went up to the feast at Jerusalem (Luke xxiii. 7) ; and his coins, just like those of old Herod, have upon them no image.^® ^^ Joseplms, Wars of the Jews, ii. 21. 6, iii. 10. 10 ; Life, 17, 64. 1- Joseplms, Life, 12. ^^ Joseplius, Life, 54. I'' Compare on the building of Tiberias generally : Joseplius, Antiq. xviii. 2. 3 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 9. 1 ; Life, 9. For further details about llie city and the nature of its institution, see Div. II. vol. i. pp. 143-147. ^^ Philo, Legal, ad Cajum, sec. 30 (ed. Mangey, ii. 589 sq.). — Philo indeed )^ct; toiv /SasfT/Aeay" made themselves specially prominent in the business. Philip and Antipas were first of all intended by this .statement. Archelaus was no longer resident in Palestine after a.d. 6. But it remains questionable who the other two are. We know expressly from Antiq. xvii. 1. 3 ; Wars of the Jews, i. 28. 4, that there were still three sons of Herod who might be named in this connection : 1. Herod, son of Mariamme ; 2. Herod, son of Cleopatra ; and 3. Phasael, son of Pallas. ^'' On the coins of Herod Antipas, compare Eckhel, iii. 486-490 ; Mionnet, v. 566 ; Lenormant, Tre'sor de Numismatique, p. 125, pi. lix. n. 16-20; Cavedoni, Biblische Numisviatik, i. 53, 58-60; L&vy, Geschichte § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 21 The complaint against Pilate was probably not made berort> A.D. 3G." Also what we otherwise known of Herod Antipas belongs to the later period, somewhere in the last ten years of his reign. During that period he was almost wholly under tlie influence of a woman, vvlio occasioned to him a whole series of misfortunes. When once he made a journey to Eome, we know not for what jDurpose, nor exactly at what time, he started before the departure of his half-brother Herod, the son of Mariamme the high priest's daughter, who had been designated eventual successor to the throne in the first will of Herod (see vol i. p. 462). That Herod was married to derjiid. Munzev, p. 80 ; Madden, Hidory of Jewish Coinage, pp. 95-99 ; De Saulcy, Numismatic Chronicle, 1871, p. 254 ; Madden, Numismatic Chronicle, 1875, pp. 47-49 ; De Saulcy, Melanges de Numismatique, t. ii. 1877, p. 92 ; Madden, Coins of the Jews, 1881, pp. 118-122 (this gives the most complete list). — The coins fall into two classes : 1. The one class has the inscription HPriAOT TETPAPXOT, with the number of the year, 33, 34, 37, 38 ; on the other side the name of the city, TIBEPIA2. 2. The other class has tlie inscription HPnAIIS TETPAPXII2 ; on the other side, PAin KAICAPI FEPMANIKH. Of this second cla.ss then- are only three examples which can be with certainty identified, all with the year number MP or 43 — a. D. 39-40. Since this was most probably tin- last year of Herod Antipas, the existence of the year number 44, which some prefer to read, is extremely questionable. One of the two who con- tend for this date, Vaillant, is generally not to be depended on ; the other, Freret, describes a coin (in the Me'moires de VAcade'mie des Inscrip- tions et Belles- Lettres, alte serie, t. xxi. 1754, p. 293, according to a manuscript by Erland) which had on one side the inscription HPHAOT TETPAPXOT {sic), while the inscription on the other side was quite illegible. The coin seems therefore to have belonged to the first class, and it may be reasonably conjectured that instead of MA, 44, should be read AA, 34. Compare, however, what is said in vol. i. jx 465. — The coins of Antipas, with the name of the emperor, without his image, occupy a middle position between those of Herod the Groat, which have neither name nor image of the emperor, and those of Philiji, which have both. 1' This conclusion may be drawn from Philo, Legnt. ad Cajum, § 24 (ed. Mangey, ii. 569), according to which Tiberius, during the lifetime cf Ssjanus (who died A.D. 31), was unfavourably disposed toward the Jews, whereas after his death he became decidedly favourable to their religious peculiarities. 22 THE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Herodias, a daiigliter of Aristobulus, executed in B.C. 7.'* The issue of this marriage was Salome, the wife of the tetrarch Philip, who was then not the first husband, as the Gospels tell us, but the son-in-law of Herodias.^^ When now Antipas paid a visit to the house of his brother, he was fascinated by Herodias, and made his proposals of marriage, to which the ambitious woman readily assented. It was arranged that Herod on his return from Rome should divorce his wife, the daughter of Aretas, and should be married to Herodias. With this promise he proceeded on his journey to Eome. On his return, his wife, who had meanwhile obtained infor- mation about the proposed procedure, entreated him that he would have her sent to Machiirus, the strong fortress east of the Dead Sea, which then belonged to Aretas. Since Antipas 1^ Compare on Herodias, Winer, IIJFB. i. 486 ; Keini in Sclienkels Bibellexikon, iii. 46-49. ^^ Joseijlius, Antiq. xviii. 5. 4. — Philip is named as first liusLand of Herodias in Mark vi. 17. Tlie parallel passage, Matt. xiv. 3, omits the name in cod. D, and is put in brackets by Tischendorf (ed. 8), but is inclined, owing to the nnanimous testimony of all the other manuscripts, to hold it as genuine. In Luke iii. 19, on the other hand, where it is inserted in the textus receptus, it ought certainly to be struck out. — Since, according to Joseph us, not the tetiarch Philip, but the above-named Heroil, was the first husband of Herodias, the statement of Mark and Matthew is evidently a mistake. Many, indeed (among tlicm Winer, li JVB. art. " Philippius "), seek to explain away this mistake by assuming that they gave to this Herod the name Herod Philip, who therefore, distinct indeed from the tetrarch Philip, was meant by Mark and Matthew. But it must be admitted as very remarkable that the one name should be chosen by Josephus and the other by the New Testament writers ; and yet more peculiar would it have been had the old Herod two sons with the name of Philip. If we are to reason analogically from the use of the name Herod, whicli several of his sons had, such reasoning will not apply here: for that was the family name. And just as little to the purpose is the analogy of the two brothers, Antipater and Antipas, for these are actually f[uite different names. We can therefore come to no other conclusion than this, that it must be admitted that the two evangel- ists made a mistake. Comjiare Yolkmar, Theol. Jahrhh. 1846, pp. 363- 383 • Kwald, IliMoyji of Israel, vi. 77 ; Keim, Jesus of Kazara, ii. 390 ; Schcukel'a Bibellexikon, iii. 47. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 23 (lid not desire that his wife should know about his secret ])lans, he granted her wish. But scarcely had the daughter of Aretas reached Machiirus, when she fled thence to her father, and let him know what friendly intentions her husband entertained regarding her. From that moment the Arabian king took up an attitude of direct opposition to Herod Antipas.^** Nevertlieless Antipas seems to have proceeded immediately with his marriage with Herodias. At the time of this marriage, or soon thereafter, John the Baptist and Jesus Christ made their appearance, both of them carrying on their labours in the domains of Antipas, the Baptist in Perea,^^ Jesus in Galilee. Of John the Baptist, Josephus gives the following account :"' " He was a good man, ^<' Josepluis, Antiq. xviii. 5. 1. — On Macharus, see vol. i. p. 436, and § 20 toward the end. Macharus at all other periods, before and after, formed part of the Jewish territory. Alexander Jannaeus fortified it, as did also Herod the Great {Wars of the Jews, vii. 6. 2). Herod Antipas put John the Baptist in prison there. In the Vespasian war it was one of the best places of refuge for the rebels {Wars of the Jews, ii. 18. 6, vii. G). It is therefore very remarkable that it should tlien have belonged to the Arabian king. The words of Josephus are as follows : d; t6v Majja;- pai/vrot TOTS \a,l. tu -f, Bekker, conj. t6u r&ij Trarpi Mvry;g vTroTiKri. It is equally remarkable that Antipas should have guilelessly allowed his wife to go to this fortress belonging to the Arabian king. Or did he con- sciously agree to it in order to smooth the way for her flight, wishing thus to be rid of her 1 Josephus did not so conceive of the matter, for according to his representation Herod Antipas knew nothing of the meditated flight. Hitzig {Geschichte des Volkes Israel, p. 567) for these reasons regards the statement that Machiii'us then belonged to Aretas as an interpolation. It may be, however, that, on the contrary, some words have dropped out, or that Josephus himself made a misstatement through carelessness. -^ The scene of the Baptist's activity may have been, as Keim {Jesus of Xazara, ii. 2.31-2.3.5) su[)po?es, for the most part on this side of Jordan, therefore in Judea. But in any case he did actually work on the other bank in Perea is proved, not only by the fourth evangelist (i. 2, 8, iii. 26, X. 40), but also by the fact of the imprisonment by Antipas. This is admitted even by Keim, Jesus of Namra, ii. 265, 266. ^- Josephu.s, Antiq. xviii. 5. 2: Krstusi toZtov 'Wooihn; oLyotdov oLvOpix, y.xl Toii; 'lovoutovg KiXivovroi, ecoirxu iTrccaKoui/rx; koci tyi ^fioc ai)^'Kv,'>^wz oty.ui'. 24 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, botli as to righteousness towards one another and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism. For the washing would be acceptable to Him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away of some sins only, but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now, when many others came to crowd about him, for they were greatly moved by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion (for they seemed ready to do anything he should advise), thought it best by putting him to death to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it should be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Macharus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death."— This account by Josephus, if it really belongs originally to him, and the accounts of the New Testa- ment about the Baptist and his relation with the tetrarch Herod, mutually supplement one another. What Josephus says about the contents of the Baptist's preaching of repent- ance has indeed very much of the style of the cultured Grseco - Ptoman world. In this respect the short statements of the synoptic Gospels are truer and more reliable.^^ On the T^K (ixTTTiarJ oLvoOiKTViv uiiju (Pccvsla6»i, i^Vj itti tiuuv (ky.ocpToiQa'j irmponzYiaei XfUf^i^oiv, aAA' 10' ccyviiot rov auj^ciTo:, eirt S^ x,»l ty,; ipv^Vg itKoctoavtiti 'nrpoiKx.ix.ctSocpfii'jYig. K«i Tuu oLXhuu avarpe(pOfiS!/uu (^Kctl ydp v^pS/iactv £C7(' v'huaro'j TYi ccKpooiaii ru'j "Koyuv) Bs/uoef Ylpu^fi^ to g^i Toco'i/Og 'ttiSx.vov ociirov T'Jt; civdpMTroi; /nvj Ivl ccTrooruast Tiui (pipot (^•jravrot, yxp iux.=aav ai/f^jSov'Ai^ rfi imivov '7rpciS,oyTi;), t^oKii x-pihrov 'h'/unx-t, "jrptvri i/scmpov iS, oiiizov ysuiadxi, '7rpo'Koe,[iu'j oivxipfiu, V) f^iToe.j2oy\ii; yivoj^ivn; it; ras Trpocy^ucirx ifirsaai/ fiirct- i/oiiv. Kcti juiu vTvoi^'toe, tY' H/)iwSoy oitjy.ioi si; -zuv l\lxx,xipouuT» ■7riy,(pdii;, TO vpoiipnuiuov (Ppovpiov, tccOtt] KTi'vuvreii. 2* Compare, in explanation of the passage in Josephus : Volkmar, Jesus Namrcnus (1882\ \)-p. 332-334; Klopper, " Ein puar Bemerkungen § 17. THE SONS OF HEBOD. 25 other hand, it is highly probable that the real occasion of the imprisonment of the Baptist by Antipas was, just as Josephus states, fear of political trouble. The powerful popular preacher did undoubtedly produce a great excitement, which was indeed iirst of all of a religious kind, but certainly not without the mingling of a political element. For the masses of the people were not then able to keep separate their religious and political hopes. It is therefore quite credible that Antipas feared political troubles from the labours of the Baptist, and so, when he extended his activity to Perea, cast him into prison. Nevertheless the evangelists may be right (Matt. xiv. 3 f . ; Mark vi. 17 ; Luke iii. 19 f.) when they say that he did this because John blamed him for his marriage with Herodias. The two statements are not inconsistent with one another.^* — The place Avhere John was imprisoned is not named by the evangelists. From Josephus we learn that it was Macharus, the strong fortress on the east of the Dead Sea. It must then have been no longer in the possession of the Arabian king Aretas, as it was at the time of the flight zu dem Urtlieil des Josephus liber Johannes den Taufer" (Zeitschrift ficr JVissenschaftl. Tlieologie, 1865, pp. 1-28). — Also in the- almost unlimited literature on John the Baptist soiiie notice is, as a rule, taken of this passage in Josephus. See especially Keirn, Jesus of Nazara, ii. 201-266. The earlier literature is given in Winer, liealworterbuch, -dvt. "Joliannes der Taufer ;" Hase, Lehen Jesu, § 42 ; Keuss, Geschichte der heil. Schriften Alien Testaments (1881), § 561. ^* The genuineness of tlie passage in Josephus is but rarely vindicated (even Volkmar sets aside without more ado ; against this decision : J. Chr. K. V. Hoi'raann, Die hcil. Sclirift Neuen Testaments, 7 Thl. 3 Abtli. iJer Brief Jakohi, 1876, p. 4 f.). This, however, may be aUegod in its favour, that tlie motive for imprisoning and executing the Baptist are there reported in a manner so entirely different from the account in the Gospels. But since Josephus in other passages has been certainly inter- polated by a Christian liand, we cannot be here perfectly confident regarding its genuineness. Suspicion is awakened by the favourable estimate of John, who could have been viewed sympathetically by Josephus only u])on one side, as an ascetic and moral preaclier, but not as the projiliet of tlie coming Messiah who jiowerfully moved the people. 26 Tin: roman-herodiax age. of the first wife of Antipas, but in the possession of Herod Antipas himself. AVe do not indeed know in what way it had meanwhile come into his hands."^ — According to Josephus, it would seem as if the execution of the Baptist followed immediately upon his arrestment and imprisonment. But from the Gospel narrative we see that Herod kept the Baptist a longer time in prison, being undecided as to what he should do with him.^^ At last the decision was brought about by Herodias, the cliief foe of the rigid preacher of repentance. When on the occasion of tlie celebration of Antipas' birth- day" in the palace of Macharus, for there it was that the 25 Keim, Jesus of Nazara, ii. 382 ; Protestantische Kirchenzeitung, 1869, Nr. 51, col. 1218 f., conjectures that Antipas had gained possession of the fortress in the beginning of the war against Aretas. But even apart from the fact that this supposition is possible only if one places, as Keim does, the apprehension of the Baptist close upon the outbreak of the war with Aretas, i.e. in a.d. 34, it is not still probable tliat Herod should liave confined a political jDrisoner in a fortress that had been taken from the enem}^ The word of Wieseler therefore in the Chronological Synopsis, pp. 216-217 ; Beitriige, pp. 5, 13 ; Beweis des Glaubens, 1870, p. 166, that Aretas has been compelled at the bidding of Tiberius to surrender the fortress to Herod, is more forcible. — Gerlach, Zeitschrift ftir luth. Theologie, 1869, pp. 49-51, believes that the fortress had never really been in the ])ossession of Aretas, but that it was only the city of Macharus tliat for a long time lay under tribute to liim. In this form the hypothesis is clearly impossible, since the one thing without the other is inconceivable. On the otlier hand, the supposition is well grounded, that the city and fortress of Macharus never belonged to Aretas, and that the statement we have been discussing originated in an error of Josephus or a corruption of our test of Josephus. See above, p. 22. — The most extraordinary of all is the idea of Sevin, that Machiirus was still in the hands of Aretas when Herod Antipas imprisoned the Baptist, and had him executed in that stronghold of his father - in - law. Sevin, Chronologie des Lebens Jesu, 2 Aufl. p. 96 ; generally, pp. 90-96. 2* Matt. xiv. 5 ; Mark vi. 20 ; Matt. xi. 2-6 ; compare Keim, Jesus of I^azara, ii. 340-343; Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschirhie, vol. i. p. 331 ; Weiss, Marcnsevangelium, p. 217 f. ^'' The signification of yi'/tatai. (Matt. xiv. 6 ; Afark vi. 21) is matter of controversy. See Wieseler, Chronological Synopsis, p. 266 ; Beitrage, ]>. 182 f. ; Keim, Jestis of Nazara, iv. 223 ; Hausrath, N euteslamentlirhe ZeitgeschicJdey vol. i. p. 331 ; and the commentators on Matt. xiv. 6 ; Mark § 17. THE SOXS OF HEROD. 27 whole business was carried out,^'' a great banquet was given, the daughter of Herodias, Salome (she was still a Kopdaiov, vi. 21. Instead of the ordinary morning " birthday," many exjiositors understand it to mean the anniversary day of his accession to the throne." But an instance of tliis meaning cannot with certainty be got in the whole range of Greek literature ; and even the rabbinical material, from which they seek support, is very weak. The principal passage in Mishna Ahoda sara i. 3 : " The following are the festivals of the heathen : The Calendne and the Saturnalia and the xpccrmit; (D''D^D"lp), and the day of the yeviiricc of the king (a''D^D b^ H^D'^^i DV), and the day of birth and the day of death. So R. Meir. The learned say : Only a case of death, wherein there evi- dently apjjears the scorching of fire, is accompanied by an idolatrous sacrifice ; but where this is not the case there is no idol sacrifice." An explanation of tlie exjnessions used is not given in the Mishna. In the Palestinian Talmud {Jer. Ahoda sara i. fol. 39c), N''D"':''3 DV is interpreted l^y HT'^n mS "birthday." In the Babylonian Talmud (-Ba/<. Ahoda sara 10 ") there is a regular discussion over the meaning of the j)hrase, in which the reasons in favour of the meaning " birtliday " are brought forward, but finally preference is given to the interpretation : ti'po 13 pTDJ?OK' DV, " the day on which the king ascended the throne " (see Levy, A'euhebr. IForterbuch, i. 394'*, and the literal production of the whole discus- sion in the German translation in Ahodah Sarah, translated by Ferd. Chr. Ewald, 2 Ausg. 1868, p. 70 f.). Upon this only is grounded the interpretation, "the anniversary of the accession to the throne," adopted by many modern scholars. But since the Palestinians undoubtedly knew better about such matters than the Babylonians, who for the most part iiuly guessed without accurately knowing, the interpretation of the Babylonians should not be accepted when it is in opposition to all other instances. So also Dalman, Theolog. Liter aturzeitung, 1889, 172, in his review of Strack's Ahoda sara. Also the connection of the context of the Mishna is in favour of the interpretation "birthday." For D'D^OIp is most probably the anniversary of the obtaining of the government. Therefore S"'D''3''3 nuist be distinguished from it. But alongside of it is mentioned " the day of birth," as further investigation of the Mishna shows, not the anniversary of the birth, but only that particular day on which a child is born. On the custina of celebrating the birthday anniversary in general, see Pauly's Real-Encydopaedie, art. " Natalis dies ;" Mai'quardt, Das Priratlehen der llomer, Bd. i. 1879, p. 244 f. 2'* The Gospels of Matthew and Mark evidently assume that the banquet was given in the same place where the Baptist lay a prisoner. See Meyer on Matt. xiv. 10 ff. But that was Machiirus. And there the banquet may, in fact, have been given. For Machiirus had a beautiful palace, which had been l.nult by Herod the Great ( IFars of the Jews, vii. 6. 2). There is therefore no reason for transferring the scene to Julias, as is done by Wieseler, Chronological Synopsis, pp. 220, 221 ; 28 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Matt. xiv. 11; ]\raik vi. 22, 28; therefore not yet married to Philip), by her dancing so delighted the tetrarch, that he promised to fulfil to her any wisli she might express. At the instigation of her mother, she demanded the head of the Eaptist. Herod was weak enough to gratify the wish immediately, and to give orders that the Baptist should be beheaded in the prison at Machiirus.^* Jkitrage, p. 5. The Gospels are silent in regard to the place ; for from Mark vi. 21 it is not necessarily to be concluded, as Keim, Jesu!>- of Nazara, iv. 217 ; Bibellexikon, in. 48 ; and Volkmar, Die Evangelien, p. 3b'9, think, tliat Mark assumes Galilee, that is, Tiberius, as the scene of the trans- action. 2» Matt. xiv. 6-11 ; Mark vi. 21-28 ; Luke ix. 9.— In Mark vi. 22 some very important and authoritative tests, accepted by Westcott and Hort and Volkmar, read: t'^; ^w/xTpo; kvtov ' Upulidclog. According to this reading the maiden herself was called Herodias, and may have been a daughter of Herod Antipas, and not merely the daughter of Herodias. But a child of the marriage of Antipas with Herodias could not then have been more than two years old ; wherea.s, on the other hand, we know from Josephus that Herodias by her first marriage had a daughter called Salome {Antiq, xviii. 5. 4). Also in the Gospel narrative itself the maiden appears only as a daughter of Herodias. The statement, therefore, that would result from that reading of Mark, cannot in any case be regarded as historically correct, be that reading ever so old. — On the imprisonment and execution of the Baptist generally, compare Keiin, Jesus of Nazara, ii. 329 ff., iv. 215 flf. ; Sevin, Ghronologie des Lebens Jesu, pp. 124-128. — The narrative of the Gospels contains much that arouses suspicion ; especially that Salome is still designated a x-oooc-jiov, whereas we are informed by Josephus that she had been married long before a.d. 28-30 to the tetrarch Philip, who had begun his reign in B.C. 4, and had died in a.d. 34 (see above, p. 16). But just the weakest point in the Gospel story is proved on more careful examination to be not improbable. The facts derived from Josephus are gathered together in the following summary by Gutschmicl {Literarisches Oentralhlatt, 1874, p. 522, in his review of Brann's, Die Sohne des Herodes) : " Aristobulus, Salome's second husband, was a son of Herod of Chalcis, by Mariara, the daughter of Joseph and Olympias, a sister of Archelaus, who had married after B.C. 7, but before B.C. 4. Therefore, at the earliest, Miriam's son Aristobulus could not have been born before B.C. 5, and not likely before a.d. 14. This affords us incidentally dates for determining the age of Salome, whom we should not without necessity regard as much older than Aristobulus, since her second marriage, by which she was mother of three sons, was evidently one in wliich the partners were of similar age. Philip, her first husband, had in B.C. 4 or 3 § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 29 Even before John had been removed from the scene, the " Mightier" to whom lie had pointed, had already made His appearance, and had begun to preach the gospel in Galilee. He, too, could not remain unnoticed by the nobles of the land. Yet Antipas first heard of the deeds of Jesus after the Baptist had been put to death. Hence, tormented by his evil conscience, he felt convinced that the Baptist had risen again, and was continuing his dangerous and revolutionary work.^° In order to make sure whether this was so, he desired to see the miracle- worker who preached in Capernaum, and attracted all the people.^^ He meant in time to get rid of Him, not, however, by violence, but by craft. He won over to him the Pharisees, and got them to undertake the attempt to induce Jesus voluntarily to quit the country by representing to Him that Herod sought His life.'^^ The plan was indeed very craftily conceived ; but it failed in execution, because Jesus saw through it. Subsequently, indeed, Jesus did quit Galilee in order to take His death journey to Jerusalem, There also Antipas, who was at that time living at Jerusalem that he might keep the Passover, had the satisfaction of meeting with his mysterious subject. Pilate sent the prisoner to him, in order that he, as ruler of the province, might pronounce the reached such an age as to be capable of assuming the reins of govern- ment, and so must have been born at latest in B.C. 21. Thougli a great disparity of age between the two undoubtedly existed, we cannot, without making a most improbable hypothesis, suppose the difference to have been more than thirty years ; this would give as the latest date for the birth of Salome, a.d. 10." Gutschmid therefore assumes tliat Salome was born in A.D. 10, and regards it as quite possible that she was still a Kopaaiou in A.D. 28, and that in her nineteenth year she married Pliilip, who was in Lis forty-ninth year. 30 Matt. xiv. i f. ; Mark vi. 14-1 G ; Luke ix. 7-9. ^* Luke ix. 9. — Among the female followers of Christ tliere is mentioned the wife of an officer of Antipas (Luke viii. 3 : ' luiwa. yv-jvi Xov^x 'frrt- rprjTrov tlpahov). ^2 So at least is Luke xiii. 31, 32 understood by many expositors. Thia interpretation, too, is correct ; compare Keini, Jesus uf Nazara, iv. 344. 30 THE EOMAN-IIERODTAN AGK. death sentence clamoured for by the Jewish hierarchy. Antipas, however, would not lend himself to this scheme, but contented himself with pouring contempt upon Jesus, and sending Him back again to Pilate.^^ The chronology of the public ministry of the Baptist and of Jesus Christ, which has hitherto been based for the most part on Luke iii. 1 and John ii. 20, has been in recent times com- pletely turned upside down by Keim.^* Whereas previously almost the only subject of contention had been whether the year 30 or the year 31 was the year of Christ's death, Keim sets down the execution of the Baptist in the end of a.d. 34 (Jesus of Xazara, vi. 226, 232), the death of Clnist at Easter of A.D. 35 (Jesus of JVazara, vi. 232). His chief argument is the lollowing. Joseplms remarked (Antiq. xviii. 5. 2) that the defeat which Herod Antipas sustained in the war with the Arabian king Aretas in a.d. 36, was considered by the people as a judgment for the execution of John the Baptist. Accord- ingly, says Keim, the execution nmst be placed as near as possible to the year 36 ; and since, in view of the deposition of Pilate before Easter a.u. 36, Jesus must liave been put to death not later than Easter a.d. 35, and the execution of the Baptist must be put down as occurring in the end of tlie year 34. There is also one other reason for insisting upon this late dating of these events. The attack of Aretas upon Antipas was an act of vengeance on the part of Aretas, because his daughter had been divorced by Antipas. Hence both events must have occurred very nearly about the same time. And, seeing that the execution of the Baptist could not have occurred until after the divorce of the daughter of Aretas and the marriage with Herodias, the death of the Baptist and of Christ could not for this reason liave occurred in a.d. 29 and 30 respectively. Against this theory Wieseler particularly has urged a series ^^ Luke xxiii. 7-12. Compare Geilacli, Ziitschrift fiir lath. Tlwoloyic, 1869, pp. 40-42 ; Keim, Jesus of Nazara, vi. 103-105. 3* See Der fjeschichtliche Christus (3 Aufl. 1866), pp. 224-240 ; Jesus of Nazara, ii. 381, vi. 220 ; Protestantische Kirchenzeitung, 1869, Nr. 49 and 51. — Keim is supported by Holtzmann, Hausrath, Sevin, Schenkel, and in all essential points by Hitzig, who reckons indeed a.d. 36 as the year of Jesu.s' deatli. See the summary of conclusions in Keim, vi. 226, 240 ; also in Sevin, Chronologie des Lehens Jesu, 2 Aufl. 1874. — Against Keim, Bee especially: Wieseler, Beitrage (1869), jip. 3-16; Benris des Glauhenfj 1870, ])p. 163-173. § 17. THE SONS OF HFHOD. 31 of arguments which indeed are not all of a convincing character. He seeks especially as the ground of Agrippa's residence witli Antipas (see under § 18) to prove that the marriage with Herodias occurred at an earlier date. When Agrippa had been appointed by Antipas aguranonios of Tiberius, AnLi])as was already married to Herodias. Afterwards Agrippa was sent away by Antipas, and then stayed for a long time with Flaccus, the legate of Syria, and then went to Home, where he, or rather his freedman Eutychus, became intimate with the city prefect Piso (Antiq. xviii. 6. 2-5). Seeing then — so argues Wieseler — that Flaccus died in a.d. 33, Piso having previously died in A.D. 32, the marriage with Herodias must have taken place before a.d. 32, Wieseler thinks in a.d. 29. But we saw ah-eady that that Piso was not tlie man wlio died in a.d. 32, but a later one, and that Flaccus possibly, indeed probably, did not die till A.D. 35 (see vol. i. pp. 360-364). By these arguments, there- fore, nothing can be proved. But the rock upon which Keim's chronology suffered ship- wreck is the definite statement of Luke iii. 1, that the Baptist made his appearance before the public in the iifteenth year of Tiberius, i.e. betv/een August a.d. 28 and August a.d. 29 ; which statement indeed Iveim rejects as unworthy of belief. Tlie tendency now is not to overestimate the trustworthiness of Luke, and certainly in reference to the tracing of Quirinius he has erred grievously. But it is surely impossible that in this case an error of five full years should have been made. Evidently Luke took great care in examining into this particular (late. We have here therefore before us, not so much his opinion, as that of the entire Christendom of his time." Can it be thought possible that all Christendom was wrong to tlu; extent of five full years about the date of their Lord's death ? jMore powerful reasons must be given than those brought forward from Josephus before we can feel justified in adopting such a view. The reasons advanced by Josephus are indeed nothing less than convincing. This is at least correct, and also generally 3* Probably tbe result of Luke's investigations was this, that Christ died at Easter a.d. 30. From this datum lie then reckons back one year ; for he only allows one year for the public ministry (Luke iv. 19-21), and so reaches the 15th year of Tiberius as the date of the public appearance of the Baptist and Christ. — In any case it is the year 30 that John, ii. 20, points out as the date of Christ's death ; only that John, who assumes a two years' activity of Christ, places the beginning of His ministry in A.D. 28. Compare vol. i. p. 410. 32 THE ROMAN -HEEODIAN AGE. admitted, that the defeat of Antipas in a.d. 3G took place some- where about half a year before the death of Tiberius, in March a.d. 37. But that the people could not have regarded it as a divine judgment for the execution of the Baptist, seeing that that event was now seven years past, cannot be maintained. A couple of years more would in this matter make no difference. For Pharisaism was wont to discover such causal connections after the expiry of very long periods indeed. Further, that the divorce of the daughter of Aretas, followed by the marriage with Herodias, and the war with the Arabian king, must have followed immediately upon one another, still remains a point that cannot be proved. Joseplms says expressly, that only fiom the divorce is to be dated the beginning of the hostility lietween Antipas and Aretas (Antiq. xviii. 5. 1 : o d's apyj,v iX^pccg ravrriv 'xciyicdfj-svog), and that after additional reasons arose, such as contentions about boundaries. Even Keim himself admits the possibility of setting down the marriage to a.d. 32-33 {Jesus of Nazara, ii. 397). Why then not to the year 29, if once an interval of several years has to be admitted ? Hausrath, who in other respects agrees with Keim, put it back as far as the year 27, and in this way deprives himself of the main ground upon which he had supported his position {Neutestamentliche Zeitgcschiclite, vol. i. p. 326, 328). Upon the whole, therefore, we feel entitled to hold by the statements of the New Testament, and to place the death of Christ at Easter A.D. 30, that of the Baptist in a.d. 29, and the marriage of Herodias somewhat earlier, perhaps in a.d. 29, perhaps even some years earlier (Gutschmid, Literarisches Centralblatt, 1874, Sp. 523, places it about a.d. 26). The connection with Herodias brought little good to Antipas. The Arabian king Aretas could not forget that Antipas on her account had repudiated his daughter. The feud arising from this cause was increased through boundary disputes about Galaaditis, — for so we should read the name rather than Gamalitis.^® Finally, in a.d. 36 the misunder- 2^ The district of Gamala belonged to what had been the tetrarchy of Philip, and cannot therefore have been a subject of contention between Antipas and Aretas. On the other hand, the province of Galaaditis (Gilead) lay on the borders of their territories. But from TAAAAAITIS tlie other word TAMAAITIS might easily be made. Undoubtedly the text of the passage in question {Antiq. xviii. 5. 1) is defective. Compare Keim in the Protcstantische Kirchenzeitung, 1869, Nr. 51, col. 1218. § 17. THE SONS OF IIEKOD, 33 standing between the two neighbours broke out into the war which ended in the utter destruction of the army of Antipas.^" The conquered monarch had now no other resource but to complain of his victorious opponent to the Emperor Tiberius.^* Wlien Tiberius heard of the bold proceedings of the Arabian prince, he gave Vitellius, governor of Syria, express orders to gain possession of Aretas, dead or alive. Vitellius had indeed little heart to enter on the expedition, for he was not greatly drawn toward Antipas. But he could not oppose the imperial command, and so he prepared himself for the war against Aretas. After he had ordered his army to march round about Judea to Petra, he himself went on a visit to Jerusalem, where a feast was then being celebrated, probably that of the Passover.^^ He waited in that city three days. On the fourth, he received news of the death of Tiberius, which had taken place on 16 th March a.d. 37. He considered himself thereby released from his undertaking, and turned back with his army to Antioch.^^ Thus the defeat of Antipas remained un- avenged. About this time we find our Jewish tetrarch present on one occasion at the Euphrates during important negotiations between Vitellius and the king of the Parthians. But it seems that the account of this affair in Josephus is not free from error. We know, for instance, that in the years 35 and 36 the Parthian king Artabanus had to do repeatedly with the Eomans. His affairs seemed to be taking a favourable 3^ The date is derived from tins, that the defeat of Antipas, as what follows shows, took place not long — somewhere about half a year — before the death of Tiberius in March a.d. 37. 3** Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 5. 1. "3 Compare Keini, Jesus of Nazara, vi. 227 ; Sevin, Chronologie des Lchens Jesu, 2 Aufl. pp. 75-77. ^•^ Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 5. 1-3. Since the imperial legates had their office only at the personal will of the emperor, so, strictly taken, every command ceased with the death of the emperor. See Mommsen, lldmische Staatsrecht, 1 Aufl. ii. 1. 235, ii. 2. 873. DI\^ I. VOL. II. C 34 THE KOMAN-IIERODIAN AGE. turn when, by the threats of Vitellius and the revolt of his own subjects, he was obliged to betake himself to flight into the remoter provinces. In consequence of this, Vitellius, in the summer of a.d. 36, went to the Euphrates along with the pretender Tiridates, supported by the Eomans, and established him as king over the Parthians. Nevertheless, before the end of that same year, Artabanus returned, drove out Tiridates, and secured the government again to himself.*^ Subsequently Vitellius arranged a meeting with Artabanus at the Euphrates, at which Artebanus concluded a peace with the Eomans, and in pledge thereof, sent his son Darius to Eome as a hostage.*'^ At this meeting, according to Josephus, Herod Antipas was also present. He entertained Vitellius and Artabanus in a magnificent tent erected upon the Euphrates bridge, and hastened, as soon as the negotiations were concluded, to communicate the favourable result to the emperor, — a piece of officiousness which annoyed Vitellius at him exceedingly, since he had thereby completely anticipated his official report.'** — Thus Josephus places this meeting in the time of Tiberius, and considers that the quarrel arising out of this between Vitellius and Herod Antipas was the reason why Vitellius, after the death of Tiberius, immediately abandoned the campaign against Aretas. But Suetonius and Dio Cassius say expressly, and the silence of Tacitus, in the sixth book of his Annals, indirectly proves, that the meeting between Vitellius and Artabanus took place under Caligula. Josephus therefore is certainly in one particular in error. The only question is, in what particular. If it is correct that Herod *^ Tacitus, Annals, vi. 31-37, 41-44. With respect to the date, compare also : Annals, vi. 38 ; Dio Cassius, Iviii. 26 ; Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 4. 4. — The fixing of the date results from the statement of Tacitus. *^ Suetonius, Caligula, 14, Vitellius, 2 ; Dio Cassius, lix. 27 ; Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 4. 5. Besides Josephus, Dio Cassius, lix. 17, and Suetonius, Caligula, 19, speak of Darius as present in Rome in a.d. 39 ** Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 4. 5. S 17. THE SONS OF IIEKOD. 35 Antipas took part in the I'arthian negotiations on the Euphrates in the time of Tiberius, then these must have been the negotiations between Vitellius and Tiridates in the summer of A.D. 36 (Tacitus, Annals, vi. 37). But if it is correct that he took part in the negotiations between Vitellius and Artabanus, it cannot have been before the time of Caligula. The latter supposition is most probably the true account of the matter. For in summer a.d. 36 Herod was engaged in the war against Aretas.** If Antipas had his passion for Herodias to thank as the real occasion of his defeat and damage at the hand of Aretas, the ambition of this wife of his brought about at last the loss of his government and of his freedom. One of the first acts of the new Emperor Caligula on his taking the reins of govern- ment into his hands was to assign to Agrippa, the brother of Herodias, what had been the tetrarchy of Philip, together with the title of king. Agrippa at first remained still at Eome. But in the second year of Caligula, March a.d. 38 to March a.d. 39, he went to Palestine, and made his appearance there as king. The success of tlie adventurer, whose fortunes had once been at so low an ebb, and who had even himself sought aid at the hand of Antipas, excited the envy of Herodias, who there- fore insisted upon her husband seeking also from the emperor the royal title. Herod Antipas was not very much disposed to go forth on such an errand. At last, however, he was obliged to yield to the persistent entreaty of his wife, and proceeded to Eome, accompanied by Herodias, to prosecute ■** Compare Hitzig, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, ii. 568 ; Hausrath, Zeitgcschichte, 2 Aufl. ii. 209-211. Also Usslier and Tilleniont {Histoire des Empereurs, vol. i. Veiiise 1732, p. 139 sq., and note 4 on Caligula) express the same opinion. Compare on the Parthian liistory generally : (iutschmid, Geschichte Irans und seiner Nachbarldnder, 1888, and the literature referred to there on p. 171 f. A list of original documents is given in Clinton, Fasti liomani, ii. 1850, pp. 243-263. On the relations between the Konians and Parthians, see also Schiller, Gtsdiichte der rdni. Kaiserzeit, Bd. i. ; and Mounusen, Horn. GcSiJiicldi; Bd. v. p 339 ff. 36 THE ROMAN-IIERODIAN AGE. his suit. But they were immediately followed by a repre- sentative of i\gnppa, Fortunatus, with a document containing charges against Herod Antipas, in which he was accused of old and recent offences, of having made a compact with Sejanus (who died in a.d. 31), and with the Parthian khig Artabanus. In proof of these charges, his accuser pointed to the accumulation of arms made by Antipas. Both parties came at the same time before Caligula at Baiae. When the emperor had heard the petition of Antipas and the accusations against him, he asked Antipas how it was that he had made such a collection of arms. And when Antipas could give no proper account of this, Caligula credited also the other charges, deposed Antipas from his tetrarchy, and banished him to Lyons in Gaul. He wished to allow Herodias, as the sister of Agrippa, to live on her private estate. But the proud woman scorned the imperial favour, and followed her husband into his exile. As a new proof of imperial favour, the tetrarchy was conferred upon the accuser Agrippa.^® Herod ** Joseplius, Antiq. xviii. 7. 1-2 ; JFars of the Jews, ii. 9. 6. The latter passage contains some inaccuracies, which are corrected in the Antiquities, namely : (1) According to the TFars of the Jews, Agrippa himself im- mediately followed Antipas to Eome, where, according to the Antiquities, he sent Fortunatus ; (2) According to the TFars of the Jevjs, Antipas was banished to Spain ; but, according to the Antiquities, to Lugdunum in Gaul. The difference in reference to the place is not to be explained away, whether one understands by Lugdunum the modern Lyons (which is certainly correct), or Lugdunum Conrenai-um, on the northern slope of the Pyrenees, which also belonged to Gaul (so, e.g., Schiller, Geschichte der rom. Kaiserzeit, i. 383). Lewin (Fasti Sacri, n. 1561) conjectures that tlio definite judgment of Caligula had not been given forth before his visit to Lyons in a.d. 40, and that Joseplius confounded the place where the sentence was given with the place of banishment, — an artificial hypothesis which only burdens Josephus with a more grievous error in order to exonerate him from a less serious one. The time of the deposition of Antipas is determined partly from A7itiq. xviii. 7. 1-2 compared with 6. 11, pjartly from xix. 8. 2. In the latter passage it is said of Agrippa : Tirrxpcc; jxiu ouu iTri Yctiov Kxiaocpo; ifiaai'Ksvaiv hiuvTOv:, r'?i; <>(7r^oy f^iv TST00tDX,'»; ih TpllTlXV clp^Ot.:, TU TiTXpTCf) di HCtl rT,V HpiJOOV VpOUil'hriillOIC. Seeing then that Caligula reigned from March a.d. 37 till January a.d. 41, § 17. THE SONS OF IIEROD. 37 Antipas died in banishment. A confused statement in Dio Agrippa obtained the tetrarcliy of Antipas in the beginninj^ of a.d. 40. — But, according to Antiq. xviii. 6. 11, Agrippa had returned to Palestine in the second year of Caligula, between March a d. 38 and March a.d. 39, and had the benefit of the trade winds {hmixi, Pliilo, In Flaccum, sec. 5, ed. Mangey, ii. 521), which from the 20th July blew for thirty days (Pliny, Hist. Nat. ii. 47). Consequently he may, since he had on his way paid a visit to Alexandria (Philo, I.e.), have arrived in Palestine about the end of September a.d. 38. Seeing then that the deposition of Antipas was closely connected with the appearance of Agrippa, it would seem that it must have taken place, if not in a.d. 38, at least in a.d. 39. In fact, it can be proved that it actually occurred not earlier and not later than the summer of a.d. 39. Not earlier: for the forty -third year of Antipas, of which we have coins extant, only began with 1st Nisan 792 a.u.c, a.d. 39. But also not later. Caligula was absent from Eome from autumn a.d. 39 till 31st August a.d. 40 on an expedition to Gaul, Germany, and Britain (Dio Cassius, lix. 21-25 ; Suetonius, Caligula, 17, 43-49 : his entry into Rome '■'■natali suo," i.e. 31st August, see Suetonius, Caligula, 8). Seeing then that the deposition of Antipas took place while Caligula was at Baiae, and seeing also, according to Josephus, Antiq. xix. 8. 2, that it cannot have occurred after the German campaign, it must have happened before that campaign, i.e. before autumn a.d. 39. It is indeed impossible that it should have taken place only after the German campaign, for Agrippa, from autumn a.d. 40 till Caligula's death, resided again near to the emperor (Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 35 if., ed. Mangey, ii. 584 ff. ; Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 7 ff. ; Dio Cassius, lix. 24 ; compare also § 17 c. and § 18 of the present work), whereas at the time of the deposition of Antipas he was in Palestine. It is also shown to be impossible by this other fact, that, according to Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 41, ed. Mangey, ii. 593, Agrippa was in autumn a.d. 40 already in possession of Galilee. Compare also Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 4, from wliich it may be concluded that Tiberias then no longer belonged to Herod Antipas. In a.d. 39 Caligula was twice in Campania (at Baiae and Puteoli). Tlie one visit is referred to in Dio Cassius, lix. 13 ; the other, in Dio Cassius, lix. 17. Seo also Suetonius, Caligula, 19. After his second absence, however, he was again at Rome on the occasion of his birthday, 31st August (Dio CassiuF, lix. 20 ; Suetonius, Caligula, 26), after which he went forth on the German expedition. The deposition of Antipas took place at Baiae therefore before the 31st August a.d. 39. But, seeing that Agrippa only oljtained the tetrarchy of Antipas in the beginning of a.d. 40 (Josephus, Antiq. xix. 8. 2), we may fairly assume, with Noris {0pp. ii. 622 sq.) and Wieseler (Chronologic des Apostolischen Zeitalters, p. 130), an interval of several months to have occurred between the deposition of Antipas and the conferring of his tetrarchy upon Agrippa, and that this latter event did not take place until the time of the Gallo- German campaign of 33 THE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Cassius seems to imply that he was put to death by Calisula."" c. Archelaus, B.C. 4-A.D. 6. His Territory under Eoman Procurators, a.d. 6-a.d. 41. SoURCEa. JosEPScrs, Antiq. xvii. 13, xviii. 1-4. 8 ; Wars of the Jews, ii 7-10. Philo, De legatione ad Gajum {Opera, ed. Mangey, ii. 545-600). On the coins, see below. Literature. EwALD, History of Israel, v. 449-457, vii. 235-257. Geikie, Life and Words of Christ, i. 263-272. Gratz, Geschichte der Juden, 4 Aufl. iii. pp. 253-271, 315-317, 341-344. HiTZiG, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, ii. 562 f., 573-583. Hausrath, Zeitgeschichte, 2 Aufl. i. 287-308, ii. 199-270. Keim, Jesus of Nazara, i. 253-262, ii. 223, vi. 79, 183, 227 ; and art. " Arclielaus " in Schenkel's Bihellexikon, iii. 38-40. Caligula. — Compare generally : Noris, De nummo Herodis Antipae {Opera, ii. col. 646-665) ; Sanclemente, De vulgaris aerae emendatione, pp. 307-315. — On the coins of Herod bearing what is supposed to be the year number 44, which would require an extension of his reign down to a.d. 40, see above, vol. i. p. 466, and the present vol. pp. 20, 21. Were the existence of this coin well established, we should be obliged, with Lewin, to assign the deposition of Antipas, not to the period of Caligula's residence at Baiae, but to the period of his Gallic campaign, and so to assume a serious error in Josephus. •^^ Dio Cassius, lix. 8 {Caligula): ^ KypiTr'zctv rov toD 'Hpu^ov ty-/o-jo5 tw •Ka-imav ccp^^fi Trpoarcc^ctc, rov oioi'K<^6v ij nxi zov viou (ivx, OTt ruv 'zxTB^itv d-TZiaTipriaiv, oiXKoi xeci x.XTi'!(pu.i,=. Although the relationship is not very clearly expressed, the reference can only be to Herod Antipas. To execute those whom he banished was a common custom with Caligula, Suetonius, Caligula, 28 ; Dio Cassius, lix. 18 ; Philo, InFlaccum, sec. 21, ed. Mangey, ii. 543 ; Lewin, Fasti sacri, n. 1562. — According to Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 9. 6, Antipas died in banish- ment in Spain. Instead of Spain we are to read, according to Antiq. xviii. 7. 2, Lugdunum in Gaul. For one has no right so to combine contradictory statements of Josephus that a later removal of the banished one from Lyons to Spain may be assumed. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 39 Gerlach, Zdtschrift fiir luth. Theologie, 18G9, pp. 30-32 ; Die romischcn Statthalter in Sijrien and Jud'ia, pp. 44-48, 53-65. Winer, Eealworterbuch, i. 82 f. (Archelaus), and ii. 261-263 (Pilatus). Brann, Die Sohne des Herodes, 1873 (reprint from the Monatsschrift fiir Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthuvis\ pp. 1-16. Lewin, Fasti Sacra, ad ann., 4 B.C. -41 a.d. MoMiiSEN, Rdmische Geschichte, v. 508 ff. Kellxer, Die rdmische Statthalter von Syrien und Judcia, 2. Art. Die kaiserlichen Procuratoren von Judlia {Zeitschrift fiir kathol. Theologie, 1888, p. 630 ff.). Kellner, Politische und administrative Zustdnde von Paldstina zur Zeit Christi {Der Katholik, 1888, i. pp. 47-63). A summary of the history during the time of Pompey. Menke, Bibelatlas, Bl. V. Special map of Judea and neighbouring coun- tries in the time of Pontius Pilate. Judea proper with Samaria and Idumea (including the large cities of Caesarea, Samaria, Joppa, and Jerusalem, but exclud- ing Gaza, Gadara, and Hippos) was in the partition assigned to Archelaus, the elder ' brother of Antipas, not indeed, as Herod had intended, with the title of king, but only with that of an ethnarch."^ Yet Augustus promised him the kingdom if he should prove himself to be worthy of it.^ Archelaus also, like Antipas, named himself on the coins and elsewhere by the family name of Herod.^ ^ Josephus, irars of the Jews, i. 32. 7, 33. 7. 2 He is inaccurately styled (ixai'Aiv; in Matt. ii. 22, and in Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 4. 3. ^ Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 11. 4 ; IVars of the Jews, ii. 6. 3. * By Josephus he is never indeed called Herod, but he is so called by Dio Cassius, Iv. 27. That the coins with the inscription IIPflAOT E0N.APXOT belong to him cannot be doubted, for no other Herodian besides him bore the title of ethnarch. Tliis was first of all recognised by Scipio Maffeius, Antt. Gall. p. 113 (quoted by Eckhel, iii. 484). Eck- hel is at least inclined to agree with him (" Forte verior est conjectura Scipionis Maffeii," etc.). It is now admitted b}' all scholars. Compare on these coins generally : Cavedoni, Bihlische Numismatik, i. 53, 57 f., ii. 32 f. ; De Saulcy, Eecherches, p. 133 sq. ; Levy, Geschichte der jUd. Miinzcn, p. 73 f. ; Madden, History of Jewish Coinage, pp. 91-95 ; Cave- doni in Urote's Miinzstudicn, v. 25 f ; De Saulcy, Numismatic Chronicle, 40 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Among the sons of Herod he procured for himself the worst reputation. His rule was violent and tyrannical.^ He set up and removed the high priests at his pleasure.^ He gave special offence by his marriage with Glaphyra, daughter of the Cappadocian king Archelaus. She had been married first to Alexander, the half-brother of Archelaus, executed in B.C. 7. See vol. i. p. 456 of this work. After his death she was married to Juba, king of Mauritania.^ Upon the 1871, pp. 248-250 ; ^raclden, Numismatic Cliwnide, 1875, 45 sq. ; Madden, Coins of the Jews, pp. 114-118. ^ 'n.iio'ruj x-cil Tvpetuvig are charged against liim in Antiq. xvii. 13. 2. Compare also Wars of the Jews, ii. 7. 3. " Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 13. 1. ' It is this same one who made himself known as a writer. Reports about him and the fragments of his writings are collected by Miiller, Fragmenta Histor. Graec. iii. 465-484. Compare also Clinton, Fasfi Hellenici, 2 ed. iii. 578 sq. ; Pauly's Real-Encyclopaedie, iv. 345 ; Nicolai, Griechische Literaturgeschichte, ii. 185 f. ; La Blanchere, De rege Juba regis Jubaefilio, Paris 1883, and the literature referred to there. — Juba as a child (/3^£(poj, App. ; xoimoyi v/i-x-io;, Plut.) was led in triumph by Caesar in B.C. 46 (Appian, ii. 101 ; Plutarch, Caesar, c. 55). In B.C. 29 he obtained from Augustus his father's kingdom of Numidia (Dio Cassius, Ii. 15). Four years later, in B.C. 25, Augustus gave him instead of that the lands of Bocchus and Boguas (Mauritania Tingitana and Caesariensis), and a part of Gatulia (Dio Cassius, liii. 26). He was still living in a.d. 18 (Miiller, iii. 466), and, as is proved by the evidence of the coins, did not die before A.D. 23 (Monimsen, Ephemeris epigr. i. 278 ; Marquardt, Romisches Staats- vertvaltung, i. 1881, p. 482 ; Riihl, Jahrbb. filr class. Philol. 117 Bd. 1878, pp. 542-544. Riihl succeeds in proving, in opposition to Niese in Hermes, xiii. 1878, p. 35 f , Anm., that Juba died in a.d. 23. Schiller in Bursian's Jahresbericht, xv. 497 f. ; Paul Meyer, Leipziger Studien zur class. Philol. ii. 1879, p. 72 ; Vogel, Philologus, Bd. 41, 1882, p. 517 ; La Blanchere, De rege Juba, p. 85 [all in favour of a.d. 23]. — The marriage with Gla- phyra occurred probably between B.C. 1 and a.d. 4, if the conjecture of Miiller is correct that Juba accompanied C. Caesar on his Oriental expedi- tion, and on that occasion became acquainted with Glaphyra. — An inscription at Athens, filled up as follows by Monimsen, probably refer to Glaphyra (fi'^/iemem ejngr. i. 277 sq.=: C'o?^^. Inscr. Attic, iii. 1, n. 549) :^ 'H (iQV'hVI KCtI [O 3^,M0j] (iotai'hcaaoi.v [y'Ka(pvpxv'\ ' Apx^y^Kov OV/[_XTipU, li'/Soc] yvvociKci [_dpiT-/i; ivfx,x\. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 41 dissolution of this marriage,^ Glaphyra lived in her father's house. There Archelaus became acquainted with her, fell in love with her, and took her to be his wife, for he divorced his own wife Mariamme. Seeing that Glaphyra had children by Alexander, the marriage was unlawful, and therefore gave great offence.^ The marriage was not indeed of long duration, for Glaphyra died soon after her arrival in Judea,^" after having had a remarkable dream, in which her first husband, Alexander, appeared to her, and made known to her her approaching death.^^ It will almost go without saying that Archelaus as son of Herod engaged upon great building enterprises. The palace at Jericho was restored in the most magnificent style. An aqueduct was built to lead the water necessary for the palm- groves, which he had laid out anew in the plain north of Jericho, from the village of Neara. He also founded a city, and called it in honour of himself Archelais.^'^ But these beautiful and useful undertakings could not recon- cile his sul>jects to his misgovernment. After tolerating his * Josephus says "after the death of Juba," -which, however, is wrong. See previous note. '■• Compare generally Antiq. xvii. 13. 1 and 4 ; JVars of the Jews, ii. 7.4. ^^ Mst' oKiyav tov ix.(pi^euc xp^'-">''i ^^'^ai'S of the Jews, ii. 7. 4. ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 13. 4 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 7. 4. ^2 Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 13. 1. — On the palm-groves near Jericho, see vol. i. p. 423 ; on the village of Archelais, see Div. II. vol. i. p. 122. It lay, according to the tabula Peutinger. (ed. Konr. Miller, 1888), on the road from Jericho to Scythopolis, 12 Roman miles north of Jericho, 12 + 12 Roman miles south of Scythopolis. Seeing that the actual distance lictween was somewhere about 15 Roman miles, an error has some- where crept into the figures. If we assume that the statement of tlie distance between Jericho and Archelais as 12 Roman miles is correct, then Archelais must have been a little south of Phasaelis, not north, as is generally supposed. The following fact is in favour of such a view. Archelais, like Phasaelis, was celebrated for its palm-groves (Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 2. 2 ; Pliny, Hist. Nat. xiii. 4. 44). "We may therefore actually seek the palm-groves anew laid out by Archelaus, for which he 42 THE EOMAN-HEKODIAN AGE. rule for more than nine years, a deputation of tlie Jewish and Samaritan aristocracy set out for Eome, in order to lay their complaints against him before Augustus. The points in their accusation must have been verj'' serious ; for the emperor felt himself obliged to summon Archelaus to Eome, and, after having heard him, to depose him from his government, and banish him to Vienne in Gaul in a.d. 6. To him also, as to his wife, his fate had been foretold by a remarkable dream.^^ The territory of Archelaus was taken under immediate Eoman rule, for it was attached to the province of Syria, but received a governor of its own from the equestrian order.^* In consequence of this arrangement the condition of Judea became essentially changed. Herod the Great and his sons had in spite of all their friendship for the Eomans considerable respect for and understanding of the national traditions and peculiarities of the Jews, so that they, apart from individual exceptions, did not wantonly wound the most sacred sensi- bilities of the people. Common prudence demanded in regard to such matters care and consideration. The Eomans, on the brought water from Neara, in the immediate neighbourhood of the Archelais founded by him. But Neara is most probably identical with the place called by Eusebius {Onomasticon, ed. Lagarde, p. 283) Noopa^, which was only 5 Roman miles distant from Jericho. Therefore also Archelias would not be too far from it. 13 Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 13. 2-3 ; Wars of the Jeios, ii. 7. 3 ; Dio Cassius, Iv. 27. Without mentioning the name of Archelaus, Strabo, xvi. 2. 46, p. 765, says that a son of Herod su tpvyfi S/srtXs/ -Trccpd toI;' A'AT^o/ipi^i Tu'hx-ra.i; x«/3wi/ oUmi". Vienne, south of Lyons, was the capital of the Allobrogi.— As regards the chronology, Dio Cassius, Iv. 27, places the banishment of Archelaus in the consulship of Aemilius Lepidus and Lucius Arruntius, a.d. 6. With this agree the statements of Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 13. 2, that it occurred in the tenth year, or, according to the Wars of the Jews, ii. 7. 3, in the ninth year of Archelaus. — According to a statement of Jerome, the grave of Archelaus was pointed out near Beth- lehem {Onoviasticon, ed. Lagarde, p. 101 : " sed et propter eandem Beth- leem regis quondam Judaeae Archelai tumulus ostenditur "). If this be correct, he must have died in Palestine. 1* Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 13. 5, xviii. 1. 1 ; Wars of the Jews. ii. 8. 1. § 17. THE SONS OF IIEROD. 43 Other hand, had scarcely any appreciation of what was pecu- liar to the Jewish nationality. As the religious views of the Pharisees and the accumulation of traditions which encom- passed the daily life of the people like a net were altogether unknown to the Eomans, they could not at all understand how a whole people would offer the most persistent resistance even unto death, and would suffer annihilation on account of merely ceremonial rites and what seemed matters of in- difference. The Jews again saw in the simplest rules of administration, such as the proposal of a census made at the very beginning, an encroachment upon the most sacred rights of the people, and from day to day the feeling more and more gained ground that the immediate government of the Eomans, which at the death of Herod they had wished for,^^ was irreconcilable with the principles of the theocracy. Thus, even had there been the best of intentions on both sides, the relations inevitably became strained and ultimately hostile. But tliis good-will was only partially exhibited. Those at the head of the government, with the exception of the times of Caligula, were indeed ready on their part to make con- cessions and to exercise forbearance in a very large measure. But their good intentions were always rendered nugatory by the perversity of the procurators, not infrequently also by gross miscarriage of justice on the part of these officials. Those subordinate officers, like all petty governors, were usually puffed up by a consciousness of their absolute autho- rity, and by their insolent demeanour at last drove the oppressed and burdened people to such a pitch of excitement that they rushed headlong with wild fanaticism into a war that plainly involved annihilation. Seeing that the political affairs of Judea during the period 15 Jo.^cphus, Aritiq. xvii. 11. 2 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 6. 2. 4 i THE KOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. A.D. 6-41 were in all essential respects the same as those of Palestine generally during the period a.d. 44—66, in the following exposition we take the two periods together, and make use of materials from the one period as well as from the other.^® Judea, and subsequently all Palestine, was not in the strict sense of the term incorporated with the province of Syria, but had a governor of its own of equestrian rank, who stood only to a certain extent in dependence upon the imperial legate of Syria,^^ It therefore belonged to the third class of imperial provinces, according to Strabo's classification.^^ And this third class is to be regarded as an exception to the rule ; for most of the imperial provinces were, just like the sena- torial provinces, administered by men of senatorial rank ; the greater provinces, like that of Syria, by men who had been consuls, the smaller ones, by those who had been praetors." Only a few particular provinces were in an exceptional manner placed under governors of equestrian rank, namely, those in which, on account of special tenacity in adhering to peculiar national customs, or on account of the rudeness and ^^ Compare Sibranda, De statu Judaeae provinciae sub procuratoribus, Franecq. 1698 (also in Thesaurus novus theol.-phihl., edd. Hase et Iken, ii. 529 sqq.). — Krenkel, art. "Verwaltung" in Schenkel's Bibellexikon, V. 601 f . ; Riehra's Handworterbuch, art. "Romer;" Mommsen, Rom. Geschichte, v. 509 fF. ; and generally the literature referred to on p. 38 of this volume. ^' Josephus, Wars of the Jevjs, ii. 8. 1 : rij? os ^ kp-/,iK(kw x'-^P'^^ «'V iTTix.pX'^v Tripiypot(^tiayi; Ivir poTtog rt? [1. rvji] i7nrix.Yi; Tctpcc ' Fu/auioi ; T«|s6;j Ku7:-uuio; Triftvi-eti. — Antt. xviii. 1. 1 : KuTTus/iOi . • . Tccyfiuro; ^* Strabo, xvii. 3. 25, p. 840 : sis «? l^^" 'J^if^'T^'-i rovg tTfti^iT^nijoi^ivovg vTriLTiKov; oLvhpot.;, u; »; Is ar potrYiyiKOv;, si; a; Ss jcxl i'TT'TrtKOv;. ^3 For further details, see vol. i. p. 347 of this work. — The designation of the imperial governor of Syria as " proconsul," as is done by many theologians {e.g. Gerlach, Hausrath, Krenkel), is an offence against the very rudiments of Roman antiquities. Only during the time of Pompey, down to B.C. 48, was Syria governed by "proconsuls." § 17. THE SONS OF IIEROD. 45 savage state of the country, the government could not be carried on by the usual methods. The best known example is that of Egypt. Elsewhere there were also territories inhabited by a still semi-barbarous people which were admin- istered in this manner.^" The usual title for such an equestrian governor was pro- curator, e'TTiTpoTTO';/'^ It seems indeed that Augustus, not only in Egypt, but elsewhere as well, preferred the tide jpraefadus, eTrapxo^.^^ Very soon, however, at farthest in the time of Claudius, except in the case of Egypt, the title 2iro- curator had become the prevailing one. Josephus, as a rule, designates the governor of Judea eViT/307ro9, sometimes CTrapxo'i or rijefioov^^ In the New Testament, 'ijje/j.Mv = pracses, is the term usually employed.'* That iTrirpoTro^ {procurator) is the correct title may be also proved by 20 The most important, besides Egypt, are mentioned by Tacitus. History, i. 11: "duae Mauritaniae, Raetia, Noricum, Tliracia et quae aliae procuiatoribus cohibentur." A complete list is given by Hirschfeld, Sitzxmgsbericlde der Berliner Akadeviie, 1889, pp. 419-423. — Compare also, Marquardt, Romische Staatsvenoaltung, i, 1881, p. 554 f. ; Liebenam, Beitrdge zur Venmltungsgeschichte, i. 1886, pp. 26-30. 21 Compare generally on the Praesidial-Procnrators : Mascovius, De procuratore Caesaris, Altorf. 1724 (also in his Opuscula jurid. et philol. 1776, pp. 1-30); Eein, art. "Procurator Caesaris" in Pauly's lieal- Kncydopaedie, vi. 1. 88-90 ; Winer, Bihlisches Bealworterbuch, ii. 276 ff. (art. " Procuratoren") ; Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung, Bd. 1, 1881, p. 554 fF. — The most comprehensive treatment of the subject is given by Hirschfeld, Die ritterlichen Provinzialstatthalter (Siizungsberichte der Berliner Akademie, 1889, pp. 417-442). 22 See with reference to this matter, Hirschfeld, Siizungsberichte, 1889, pp. 425-427. 22 'Er/rpoxcj in the following passages : Wars of the Jews, ii. 8. 1, 9. 2, 11.6 (in the parallel passage, Antiq. xix. 9. 2 : e-Tupxo;) ; Antiq. xx. 6. 2 ; Wars of the Jeics, ii. 12. 8. i'TrnpoTivuv, Antiq. xx. 5. 1. sttjtoox-^, Antiq. xx. 5. 1 fin., 11. 1 ; Wars of the Jexvs, ii. 12. 1, 14. 1. — gVao^or, Antiq. xviii. 2. 2, xix. 9. 2 (in parallel passage, Wars of the Jews, ii. 11. 6 : e9r £,«&>;/ means generally jjraeses, and is therefore used of governors of other orders. 2^ The decree of the Emperor Claudius in Josephus, Antiq. xx. 1. 2 : Kova-TTiu (PxZa r&i l^uu 'fTrirpoTru. — Tacit. Annal. XV. 44 : " Christus Tiberio imperitante per procuratorem Pentium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat." Ibid. xii. 54 : " praedas ad procuratores referre . . . jus statuendi etiam de procuratoribus." Cumanus and Felix are intended. — The material brought together by Hirschfeld in Sitzungsberichte, p. 425 f., seems to me insufficient to ground upon it the conclusion " that in Judea also in the earlier days of the empire the title of praefadus was used," although this may be admitted as possible. ^^ Marquardt, i. 555 f. -" Compare on these finance procurators (besides the literature given in note 21) : Eichhorst, Quaestionum e^ngraphicarum de procuratorihxLs imperatorum Eomanorum specimen, 1861 ; Hirschfeld, Untersuchungen auj dem Gebiete der romischen Verwaltungsgcschichte, Bd. 1, Die kaiserlichen Verwaltungsbeamten bis auf Diocletian, 1887 (a well- informing treatise); Liebenam, Beitrdge zur Verwaltungsgeschichte des romischen Kaiserreichs, i., Vie Laufbahn der Procuratoren bis auf die Zeit Diocletians, 1886. — Much material is supplied in the Indices to the Corp. Inscr. Lat. Com- jiare also Corp. Inscr. Grace, Index, p. 36 {s.v. tTrirpoTro; Ss/SaaTot/). Ilaenel, Corpus Lcgum, Index, s.v. procurator; Dirksen, Manuale latini- tatis fontium iuris civ. Rom. (1837), s.v. procurator. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD 47 his supreme power in cases of necessity.^* Writers have indeed sometimes expressed themselves as if Judea had heen incorporated into the province of Syria. But they do not continue consistent to such a view.'^^ The investing the procurator with a military command, and with independent jurisdiction, of itself conferred upon him a position, in virtue of which he was, in regard to ordinary transactions within tlie limits of his province, as independent as the governors of other provinces. On the other hand, the governor of Syria had the right, according to his own discretion, to interfere if he had reason to fear revolutionary uprisings or the appear- ance of other serious difficulties. He would then take command in Judea as the superior of tlie procurator.'*^ 28 Compare Mommsen, Eomische Geschichte, v. 509, Anm. ; Hirschfeld, Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie, 1889, pp. 440-442. 29 Josephus says, Antiq. xvii. Jin. : rii; Si 'AoxsAaoy X'^'P'^s vTroTiMv: '7rpoavi^r,6ilavig rij liipuu. But when he also, in Antiq. xviii. 1. 1, calls Judea a ■TrpcadyiKYi riis '2vpix;, he evidently does not mean to describe it as a properly integral part, but only as an appendix or annex to the province of Syria. According to the Tl'ars of the Jews, ii. 8. 1, the territory of Archelaus had been made into a province, therefore with the privilege of independence, t?,; Bs ' Abx^'^^ov x^'P'^S ''V iT^xox''^'' '^ipiyooi.itiidr,;. In reference also to the state of matters after Agrippa's death, Josephus affirms distinctly that the governor of Syria was not set over the kingdom of Agrippa {Antiq. xix. 9. 2), while he immediately afterwards states that this governor had interfered in the affairs of that conwivy {Antiq. xx. 1. 1). — Tacitus refers, in a.d. 17, to Syria and Judea as two provinces alongside of one another {Annals, ii. 42 : "provinciae Suria atque Judaea), and says of the arrangements after the death of King Agrippa, Histonj, v. 9 : "Claudius . . . Judaeam provinciam equitilnis Romanis aut libertis per- misit." "When, therefore, he reports this same fact in another place {Ammls, xii. 23) in these words : " Ituraeique et Judaei defunctis regibus, Sohaemo atque Agrippa, provinciae Suriae additi;" that word additi is to be understood in the same way as the ^-poadiiKYi of Josephus. In no case t^hould any one conclude, as Bormann (see under § 18 fin.) has done, because Tacitus introduces this statement first in a.d. 49, when he should have previously brought it forward in a.d. 44, that affairs had undergone a change in a.d. 49. — Suetonius also wrongly designates Judea a province (Suetonius, Claudius, 28 : " Felicem. quern cohortibus et alls provinriaeque Judaeae ])racposuit "). '"Examples: Petronius {Antiq. xviii. 8. 2-9; Wars of the Jeics, ii. 48 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Whether this superior authority went so far that he might even call the procurator to account seems questionable, since, in the two cases in which this happened, the governor concerned had been probably entrusted with a special conimission.^^ The residence of the procurator of Judea was not at Jerusalem, but at Caesarea.^ Since the dwelling of the commander-in-chief or governor was called ^J7'ac^oriM/?i, the irpacTcoptov rov 'HpwZov in Caesarea (Acts xxiii. 35) was nothing else than a palace built by Herod, which served as a residence for the procurator. — On special occasions, especially during the chief Jewish feasts, when, on account of the crowds of people that streamed into Jerusalem, particularly careful oversight was necessary, the procurator went up to Jerusalem, and resided then in what had been the palace of Herod.^ The praetorium at Jerusalem, in which Pilate was staying at the time of the trial and condemnation of Jesus Christ (Matt, xxvii. 27; Mark xv. 16; John xviii. 28, 33, xix, 9), is therefore just the well-known palace of Herod, on the west side of the city.^* It was not only a princely dwelling, but at the same time a strong castle, in which at 10. 1-5), Cassius Longinus (Antiq. xx. 1. 1), Cestius Gallus (JFars of the Jews, ii. 14. 3, 16. 1, 18. 9 ff.). 2^ Of Vitellius, who deposed Pilate (Antiq. xviii. 4. 2), Tacitus {Annah, vi. 32) says : " Cunctis quae apud orientem parabantur L. Vitelliuin praefecit." Of Ummidius Quadratus, who sent Cunianus to Rome {Antiq. XX. 6. 2 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 12. 6), it is expressly said in Tacitus {Annals, -aii. 54): "Claudius ... jus statuendi etiam de procuratoribus dederat." 32 Josephus, Avtiq. xviii. 3. 1 ; Wars of the Jeivs, ii. 9. 2 (Pilate); Antiq. XX. 5. 4 ; Wars of the Jens, ii. 12. 2 (Cumanus) ; Acts xxiii. 23-33 (Felix) ; Acts XXV. 1-13 (Festus) ; Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 14. 4 fin., 15. 6 Jin., n. 1 (Floras). Tacitus, History, ii. 78: "Caesaream . . . Judaeae caput." 33 Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 14. 8, 15. 5 ; Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 38 (ed. Mangey, ii. 589 sq.). 3"* Compare the art, "Richthaus" in Winer, Realworterhuch, and Riehm, Handworterhuch. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 49 times (during the rebellion in B.C. 4, and again in a.d. 66) large detachments of troops could maintain their position against the assaults of the whole mass of the people.^^ Hence, also, during the residence there of the procurator, tlie detachment of troops accompanying him had their quarters within its walls (Mark xv. 16), With reference to the military arrangements, it deserves specially to be remembered that the Eoman army of the days of the empire was divided into two divisions of a thoroughly distinct kind : the legions and the auxiliaries.^^ The legions formed the proper core of the troops, and consisted only of Eoman citizens, for those provincials who served in the legions had obtained citizen rights. Each legion formed a compact whole of ten cohorts, or sixty centuries, altogether embracing from 5000 to 6000 men.^' The auxiliary troops consisted of provincials who, at least in the early days of the empire, did not as a rule possess the right of citizenship. Their arms were lighter and less harmonious than those of the legions ; often in this they were allowed to follow their own national usages. Tlieir infantry was formed into cohorts, whose strength varied from 500 to 1000 men; the cavaliy was formed into cdae, of similarly varying strength.^' Cohorts and alae were named after the nation from which they had been recruited.^^ In regard to the provinces administered by procurators, it may, as a rule, be assumed that in them, and under the S5 Joseplius, Antiq^. xvii. 10. 2-3 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 3. 1-4, 17. 7-8. Compare the description, Wars of the Jews, v. 4. 3-4. 36 Compare on the composition and nature of the Roman army generally, Marquardt, Eomische Staatsveriualtung, ii. 307-591. S7 Marquardt, ii. 859, 441. ^^ Ibid. 453-457. 83 So, to give only a few examples from Palestine and Syria, " Cohors Ascalonitarum, Canathenorum, Damasccnorum, Ituraeorum, Sebasten- orum, Tyriorum." Other cxamjdes in rich abundance are given in the indices to Corp. Inscr. Lat. A collection of materials is given by Mommsen, Ephemeris epicjr. v. 164-200. DIV. I. VOL. II. D 50 THE ROMAN-HERO DIAN AGE. command of the procurator, there would be only auxiliary troops.'*" This rule is also confirmed by the history of Judea. There were legions only in Syria ; in the time of Augustus three, from the time of Tiberius four.^^ But in Judea, down to the time of Vespasian, there were only auxiliary troops, and, indeed, mostly such as had been raised in the country itself.*^ The honour and burden of this levy lay only on the non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine. The Jews were exempted from military service. Tliis is abundantly proved to have been the state of matters, at least, from the time of Caesar," and, from all that we positively know about the ^0 Hirsclifeld, Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie, 1889, pp. 431-437 ; Marqiiardt, ii. 518. *^ Three legions under Augustus (Joseplius, Antiq. xviii. 10. 9 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 3. 1, 5. 1) ; four under Tiberius (Tacitus, Annals, iv. 5). Seeing that in Egypt under Augustus there were three legions, and under Tiberius only two, see Strabo, xvii. 1. 12, p. 797 ; Tacitus, Annals, iv. 5, there was meanwhile one of the Egyptian legions transferred to Syria (Pfitzner, -p. 24, conjectures that it was the Legio XII. Fulm.). — Of the four Syrian legions only two are known with certainty : the Legio VI. Ferrata (Tacitus, Annals, ii. 79, 81, xiii. 38, 40, xv. 6, 26) and the Legio X. Fretensis (Tacitus, Annals, ii. 57, xiii. 40, xv. 6). The other two were probably the Legio III. Gallica (Tacitus, A7inals, xiii. 40, xv. 6, 26 ; it had, according to Tacitus, Histortj, iii. 24, already fought under Mark Antony against the Parthians) and the Legio XII. Fulminata (Tacitus, Annals, xv. 6, 7, 10, 26). — See especially Momnisen, lies gestae div. Augusti, 2 ed. 1883, p. 68, note 2. Generally : Grotefend, art. "Legio" in Pauly's Eeal-Encydopaedie, iv. 868-901 ; Marquardt, Bomische Staatsvericaltung, ii. 430 ff. ; Stille, Historia legionum mcxilioriimque inde ab excessu divi Augusti usqite ad Vespasiani tempora, Kiliae 1877 ; Pfitzner, Geschichte der romischen Kaiserlegioncii von Augustus bis Hadrianus, Leipzig 1881. *^ Compare in reference to the garrisoning of Judea down to the time of Vespasian, Schiirer, Zeitschrift fiir wissenschaftliche Theologie, xviii. 1875, pp. 413-425 ; Egli, Zeitschrift, xxvii. 1884, pp. 10-22 ; Momnisen, Hermes, xix. 1884, p. 217, Anm. ; Hirschfeld, Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Alcademie, 1889, p. 433 f. ^' Josephus, Antiq. xiv. 10. 6: xa< oTria? fcinoil; i/.v)Ti oip^uu f<,iiTS OTpxT/iyo; }j TTpeufiivr'/ii; iv to.? opoi; rav ' lov^xt'uii hwrx [codd. ccviorei] cvfi/axxiav. Also Momnisen, Bomische Geschichte, v. 501, Anm. — The Jews of Asia Minor were freed from the conscription for military service of llie Pouipeiaus in B.C. 49 (Josephus, Antiq. xiv. 10. 13, 14, 16, 18, 19), § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 51 Palestinian troops down to the days of Vespasian, may also be assumed as certain throughout the imperial period, Eemarkable as this unequal treatment of the population may appear to us, it is in thorough correspondence with what is otherwise known regarding the Eoman procedure in the conscription. Indeed, in regard to the use made of the inhabitants and the confidence reposed in them, the provinces were treated in very diverse ways and varying measures in the matter of military service." For the period a.d. 6-41 we are witliout any direct information about the troops stationed in Judea. But it is highly probable that the Sehastians, i.e. the soldiers drafted in the region of Sebaste or Samaria, whom we meet with subse- quently, constituted even then a considerable portion of the garrison. In the struggles which followed the death of Herod in B.C. 4, the best equipped part of the troops of Herod fought on the side of the Eomans, namely, the Xe^aa- T7]i'ol rpia'^iXiot, under the command of Eufus and Gratus, the former of whom commanded the cavalry, the latter the infantry." The troops thus proved would be undoubtedly retained by Archelaus, and it is highly probable that, after his deposition in A.D. 6, they would be taken over by the Eomans, then, from a.d. 41 to a.d. 44, by Agrippa, and after his death again by the Eomans. The following also speaks in favour of this supposition. At the death of Agrippa in a.d. 44, the troops of the king stationed in Caesarea, which were Kaicrap6iastians. ^2 Further details on these matters will be found in the Zeitschrift fiir wissenschaftliche Theologie, 1875, pp. 416-419. — The title of honour, Augusta, which was borne by three legions, is rendered by the geographer Ptolemy by the word 2:,-3«(;r'^ (Ptolemy, ii. 3. 30, iv. 3. 30, ii. 9. 18). It is therefore not to be wondered at that this same title should have been similarly rendered in the case of an auxiliary cohort. — When the ala referred to by Josephus, although it consisted of Caesareans and Sebas- tians {Antiq. xix. 9. 2), is yet only called ala Sehastenorum {Wars of the Jews, ii. 12. 5), so likewise with the cohorts of similar composition the same meaning may be assumed, therefore cohortes Sehastenorum. The inscriptions also favour this view. 54 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. be understood.*^ Such a band would naturally not have served in Caesarea during the period a.d. 41—44 under the Jewish king Agrippa. But even in reference to a later period, it is after the above made investigations not probable. The story of the centurion Cornelius lies, therefore, in this respect under suspicion, the circumstances of a later period having been transferred back to an earlier period. That at some time or other a cohors Italica was in Syria is made perfectly clear by the evidence of an inscription (see note 53). We have hitherto become acquainted only with the state of the garrison of Caesarea. In other cities and towns of Palestine there were also small garrisons. At the outbreak of the Jewish war in a.d. QQ, we find, for example, a Eoman garrison in the fortified castle of Jericho and in Macharus.^* Throughout Samaria such detachments were stationed.'''* In the Great Plain there was a decurio;^^ in Ascalon (which, however, did not belong to the domains of the procurator) there were a cohort and an ala.^^ Vespasian, in the winter of A.D. 67-68, placed garrisons in all conquered villages and towns ; those in the former under the command of Decurions, those in the latter under the command of Centurions.*^ This " Compare Zeitschrift fur wissenschaftliche Theologie, 1875, pp. 422-425. — On inscriptions we meet with (see proofs in Mommsen, Ephemeris epigr. v. p. 249) : " Cohors I. Italica civium Eomanoriim voluntariorum " (Corp. Inscr. Lat. t. xiv. n. 181) ; " Cohors miliaria Italica voluntariorum quae est in Syria" (Gruter, Corp. Inscr. p. 434, n. 1); "Cohors II. Italica" {Corp. Inscr. Lat. t. vi. n. 3528). —In a passage in Arrian ("Acies contra Alonas " in Arriani Scripta minora, ed. Hercher, 1854) the expression ii oTTuoot. 5} ' Irot.'KiKYj is interchanf^ed with o/ 'lTaXo<'(ed. Blancard, pp. 102 and 99). According to this and according to the first-named inscription, it is probable that a cohors Italica consisted of Roman citizens of Italy. ^* Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 18. 6. "* Josephus, Wars of the Jews, iii. 7. 32 : (fpovpa,!; i/ Ixy.xpuTi; o'Kn iiti'Kri~ro. ** Josephus, Life, 24 : A/,3o^t/o; o lsx.Bilxp)co^ 6 rou fayd'hov moiov Tr,» *^ Jose])hus, JVars of the Jew::-, iii. 2. 1. *' Ibid. iv. 8. 1. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 55 was indeed an extraordinary proceeding, which we are not to regard as the rule in time of peace. In Jerusalem there was stationed only one coliort. For the 'xiXlap'x^o'i, so often referred to in the Acts of the Apostles (more exactly. Acts xxi. 31 : ')(^L\lap')(o/neci (Acts xxv. 11). We must therefore suppose that the procurator could judge even a Roman citizen, unless his prisoner lodged a protest. Only if the accused himself made the claim to be judged in Rome, was the governor obliged to give effect to his claim. But tliat the governor could himself do that is perfectly conceiv- able. For he was in every respect the representative of the emperor ; even his tribunal was called "Caesar's judgment-seat" (Acts xxv. 10: larai: iTTi Tw fi-/i^ctro; Koeiaotpc; fifii). It is therefore quite conceivable that an accused Roman citizen might voluntarily submit himself to such a tribunal as Paul at first did ; for the imperial tribunal of the governor afforded in ordinary circumstances the same protection as the imperial tribunal at Rome, and there could be no pleasure in merely lengthening out the proceedings by a jouruey to Rome. Only if the accused did not trust the impartiality of the governor, had he any interest in claiming the transference of the trial to Rome. Paul makes use of this privik'ge, when he sees that the procurator is going to judge him in accordance with Jewish ideas. — That this privilege extended only to Roman citizens an.ij; TihOVai Kxi tow aTiCpXVlTOV (pOpOU X,x\ TOU i/TTiO TUV oiXhUV. ^"' Marquardt, Staatsverwaltung, ii. 303. '"* Ibid. ii. 302. 105 Wiest'ler, Beitrdge z^cr richtigen Wiirdigung der Evangelien, 18C9, 70 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. note 100, it is expressly said, that for the incense exported from Arabia by way of Gaza a duty had also to be paid to the Eoman puUicani. From the universality of the system, it may be assumed that territorial princes like Herod Antipas would also make use of it. Even city communes like Palmyra did not have their customs collected by municipal officials, but vented them out to lessees.^"^ — The lessees again, as may be readily supposed, had their subordinate officials, who would usually be chosen from the native population. But even the principal lessees were by no means necessarily Eomans. The tax-gatherers of Jericho (Luke xix. 1, 2) and of Caesarea — Zaccheus and John — were therefore Jews. Since they are described as well-to-do and respectable people, they certainly cannot have belonged to the lowest class of publicans. ^^^ — The extent to which custom might be charged was indeed prescribed by the court ; but since these tariffs, as we see p. 78 f., seeks support for his theory from Josephus, Antiq. xiv. 10. 5 : /*^r= ioyo'hoi.^uai rivsi. But here the matters referred to are not the customs, but the revenue derived from the land-tax. Besides, these enactments of Caesar had long been antiquated in the days of the empire by the con- vulsions that had meanwhile occurred. ^"" In the decree of the Council of Palmyra with reference to the customs-tariff in the time of Hadrian {Hermes, xix. 490, compare note 97), it is said : In the older customs-tariff very many subjects were not intro- duced ; and so, in making the bargain with the lessee (rJi ftiffduan), the amount of custom wliich the tax-gatherer {t6u n'KuuovvTu) ought to levy has to be determined by tariff and use and wont. But over these ques- tions disputes constantly arose between the merchants and the lessees of the customs. Therefore did the council then conclude that the courts of the city should make a list of articles omitted, and in the next lease- contract (tk hyiaroe. ^laduast) should have them inserted, in addition to the consuetudinary tax (so that it would thus become a fixed sum). If this tariff be accepted by the lessee (tw fnaOovj^iuu), then should it, as well as the older tariff, be made generally kno^\Tl by being engraved on stone tablets. But the autliorities should take care that the lessee (roj/ f^iadov- y.ivov) should exact nothing Vjeyond the requirements of the law. 1"' The assertion of Tertullian, that all tax-gatherers were heathens {de piidicitia, c. 9), was rightly contested as early as by Jerome {Ejnst. 21 ad Daviasum, c. 3, Opera, ed. Valarsi, i. 72). § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 71 from the case of Palmyra, were in early times often very indefinite, abundant room was left for the arbitrariness and rapacity of the tax-gatherer. The advantage taken of such opportunities, and the not infrequent overcharges that were made by these officials, made them as a class hated by the people. Not only in the New Testament are the terms " publican and sinner " almost synonymous, but also in rabbinical literature tax-gatherers (Pppio) appear in an even less favourable light.^^^ — On the other hand, the people generally then, just as in the present day, were inventive of contrivances of ways and means for defrauding the ^0* According to Baba hinima x. 1, one should not take paymeut in money from the cash-box of the tax-gatlierers — should not even receive alms from them (because their money has been gained by robbery). If, however, tax-gatherers have taken away one ass and given another in exchange for it, or robbers have robbed him of his garment and given hira another for it, he ought to keep what is given, because it has already ceased to be his property (Baba kamma, x. 2). — According to Nedarim iii. 4, should one promise, in consequence of a vow, to robbers and tax- gatherers, he may dechire the thing the property of the priests or of the king, though it be not so! — Throughout, therefore, tax-gatherers (poDID) are placed in the same category as robbers. Compare also Wiinsche, Neue Beitriige zur Erlduterung der Evv. 1878, p. 71 t; Herzfeld, Handelsgeschichte der Jiulen, p. 161 ft'.; HRrnhnrgeT, Beal-JEncydopaedie, art. "Zoll;" Levy, Neuhebruisches Worterbuch, iii. 114. — That by pDDIO tax-gatherers in the proper sense are to be understood, is seen from the usage of that word ({arty might pass free at the next, say on the otlier side of the river. The ])hilological explanation is certainly beset with difficulty, since -\^'p else- where means "binding" (e.g. a knot on a string, or a joint in a human 72 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Within the limits, wliich were stated in the very regula- tions themselves, the Jewish people enjoyed even yet a very considerable measure of freedom in home affairs and self- administration.^^" — The oath of allegiance which the people had to take to the emperor, presumably on every change of government, was, if we may judge from analogous cases, more an oath of confederates than one of subjects, such as had been given even so early as the times of Herod.^^^ — The constitution as regards home affairs, during the age of the procurators, is characterized by Josephus, in opposition to the monarchial rule of Herod and Archelaus, in the words : ^^^ apiaTOKparia jxev rjv rj iroXtTeia, Trjv Be irpoaraaiav tov e6vovhisch€ Mittheilungen aus Oesterreich- Ungarn Jahrgang, x. 1886, p. 1 fF. The figures of the emperor were in the form of a medallion, and were usually attached to the signa. Among the legionaries, as well as among the auxiliary cohorts we hear of imaginiferi (see list in Cauer, Ephemeris epigr. iv. pp. 372-374). — The earlier procurators, therefore, had taken with them to Jerusalem only the signa which did not bear the figure of the emperor, that is, the common ones used for tactical purposes ; but Pilato took also those bearing the figure of the emperor. g 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. "79 "When Vitellius, the legate of Syria, took the field against the Arabian king Aretas, at the urgent entreaty of the Jews, he so directed the course of his march that the troops carrying the likeness of the emperor on their standards should not enter Jewish territory. ^^^ So far, then, as the civil enactments and the orders of the supreme authorities were concerned, the Jews could not com- plain of any want of consideration being paid them. It was otherwise, however, with respect to the practical carrying out of details. The average Roman official was always disposed to disregard all such nice, delicate consideration. And the unfortunate thing was, that Judea, especially in the last decades before the war, had had more than one governor who had lost all sense of right and wrong. Besides this, notwith- standing the most painstaking efforts to show indulgence to Jewish views and feelings, the existing relations were in themselves, according to Jewish ideas, an insult to all the lofty, divine privileges of the chosen people, who, instead of paying tribute to Caesar, were called rather to rule over all nations of the world.'*®* Their first administrative measures which they introduced there show how hard a task the incorporation of Judea into the empire proved to the Romans. Contemporaneously witii the appointment of Cojjonius, the first procurator of Judea, ^^^ Joseplius, Antiq. xviii. 5. 3. i2(ia This was, at least, the popular senLinient. From these religious premisses in themselves one might, indeed, arrive at the very opposite result, namely, that even the pagan government was of God, and that it must be submitted to so long as God wills. But this way of consideiing the subject was not in favour during the period a.d. 6-66, and, as the years went on, those who held it were in an ever-decreasing minority. Compare generally on the political attitude of Pharisaism, I)iv. II. vol. ii. pp. 17-19. 80 THE liOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. the emperor had sent a new legate, Quirinius, into Syria. It was now the duty of the legate to take a census of the popu- lation of the newly-acquired territory, in order that the taxes might be appointed according to the Eoman method. But no sooner had Quirinius, in a.d. 6 or a.d. 7, begun to carry out his commission, than he was met with opposition on every hand. Only the quieting representations of the high priest Joazar, who clearly perceived that open rebellion would be of no avail, led to the gradual abandonment of the opposi- tion that had already begun, and then the people with mute resignation submitted to the inevitable, so that, at last, the census was made up.^"^^ It was, however, no enduring peace, but only a truce of uncertain duration. Judas of Gamala in Gaulanitis, called the Galilean, who is certainly identical with that Judas, son of Hezekiah, of whom we have already learnt on p. 4, in company with a Pharisee of the name of Sadduc, made it his task to rouse the people into opposition, and in the name of religion to preach rebellion and revolutionary war. This movement had not, indeed, any immediate marked success. But the revolutionists got so far as to found now among the Pharisees a more strict fanatical party, that of the patriotic resolutes, or, as they called themselves, the Zealots, who wished not to remain in quiet submission till by God's decree the Messianic hope of Israel should be fulfilled, but would rather employ the sword in hastening its realization, and would rush into conflict with the godless enemy. ^^^ It is '^^ According to Joseplius, Antiq. xviii. 2. 1, in the 37th year of the aera Actiaca, i.e. autumn, 759-760 A.U.C., or a.d. 6-7. The Actian era begins on 2nd Sept. 723 A.u.c. or B.C. 31. '2s ZriKuTcti^ compare Luke vi. 15 ; Acts i. 13 ; Wars of the Jews, iv. 3. 9, 5. 1,6. 3, vii. 8. 1. — For the Biblico-Hebrai^ S3p we find in later Hebrew also ''X3P and jxjj? (see Buxtorf, Lexicon Ghaldaicum ; Levy, Chaldaisches Worterhuch; hevy, Neuhebraisches PFarterhuch). The Greek Kocumuoitos is constructed out of the later form of the word through the modification of the plural, N':s3p, as ought to be used in Matt. x. 4, Mark iii. 18, instead § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 81 to their machinations that we are to ascribe the nursing of the fires of revohition among the smouldering ashes which sixty years later burst forth in vehement flames.'^^ Of Coponius and some of his successors little more is known to us than their names. Altogether there were seven procu- rators who administered Judea during the period a.d. 6—41 : (1) Coponius, probably A.D. 6-9 ; (2) Marcus Ambivius, probably a.d. 9-12 ; (3) Annius Eufus, probably a.d. 12-15 ; (4) Valerius Gratus, a.d. 15—26; (5) Pontius Pilatus, a.d. 26-36 ; (6) Marcellus, a.d. 36-37 ; (7) Marullus, a.d. 37-41,^^° The long period during which Valerius Gratus of the received KavKviTn;- — In the Mishna, Sanhedrin ix. 6, and Aboth derabbi Nathan c. 6, we have ps<3p or D''N3p- In the former passage, however, are meant, not political, but religious zealots. — Compare gener- ally : Oppenheim, "Die Kannaim oder Zeloten" in Fiirst's LiteraturUatt des Orients, 1849, col. 289-292 ; Pressel, art. "Zeloten" in Herzog's Beal- Encyclopaedie, 1 And. xviii. 485-489 ; Derenljourg, Histoire de la Falestine, p. 238 ; Holtzmann in Schenkel's Bibellexikon, v, 707-709 ; Keuss, Ges- chichte der heiligen Schriften der Alten Testaments, § 560 ; Hamburger, Eeal- Encyclopaedie far Bibel und Talmud, 2 Abth. i)p. 1286-1296 ; Sieffert in Herzog's Real- Encyclopaedie, 2 Aufl. xvii. 488-491 ; Wolf, Curae philol.; Kuinoel, Fritzsche, Meyer, Bleek, and other commentators, on Matt. x. 4. 129 Compare generally : Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 1. 1 and 6 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 8. 1; Acts v. 37. Art. "Judas" in the Biblical Dictionaries. Chr. Alfr. Korner, "Judas von G&mnla." {Jahreshericht der Lausitzer Pre- diger-Gesellschaft zu Leipzig, 1883-1884, pp. 5-12). — Also the descendants of Judas distinguished themselves as Zealots. His sons James and Simon were executed by Tiberius Alexander (^niig. xx. 5. 2) ; his son Menachem (Manaim) was one of the principal leaders at the beginning of the rebellion in A.D. 66 {Wars of the Jews, ii. 17. 8-9). A descendant of Judas and relative of Menahem of the name of Eleasar conducted the defence of Masada in a.d. 73 {Wars of the Jews, ii. 17. 9, \A. 8. 1 ff.). — A literary memorial of the views and hopes of the Zealots is the Assumptio Mosis, which had its origin about that time (see Div. II. vol. iii. pp. 73-80), which goes so far in the way of prophecy as to say that Israel will tread on "the neck of the eagle," i.e. of the Eonians (10. 8). Compare Div. II. vol. ii. pp. 144, 183. 130 Compare Josephus, ^n%. xviii. 2. 2, 4. 2, 6. 10 /re. — The period during which the first three held office cannot be quite exactly determined. That of the two following is fixed by the facts that Valerius Gratus was in office for eleven years (Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 2. 2) and Pontius Pilate DIV. I. VOL. II. F 82 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. and Pontius Pilate held office was owing to the general principles on which Tiberius proceeded in his appointment of governors. In the interest of the provinces he left them as long as possible at their posts, because he thought that gover- nors acted like flies upon the body of a wounded animal ; if once they were gorged, they would become more moderate in their exactions, whereas new men began their rapacious proceedings afresh.^^^ Among those named, Pontius Pilate is of special interest to us, not only as the judge of Jesus Christ, but also because he is the only one of whom we have any detailed account in Josephus and Philo.^^^ Philo, or rather Agrippa I., in the letter which Philo communicates as written by him, describes for ten years (xviii. 4. 2). But Pilate was deprived of Ids office before Vitellius was in. Jerusalem for the first time, i.e. shortly before Easter A.D. 36, as results from a comparison of Antiq^. xviii. 4. 3 with xviii. 5. 3. The period during which the last two held oflQce is determinedly this, that MaruUus was installed immediately after the accession of Caligula in March a.d. 37 (Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 10 fin.). — Eusebius afiirms (Hist. Eccl. i. 9) that Josephus sets the date of Pilate's entrance upon office in the twelfth year of Tiberius, a.d. 25 and 26, which is only so far correct, that this conclusion may be deduced from Josephus. ^^^ Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 5. — Tiberius' care for the provinces is also witnessed to by Suetonius {Tiberius, 23 : "praesidibus onerandas tributo provincias suadentibus rescripsit : boni pastoris esse tondere pecus, non deglubere"). Tacitus also, in Annals, i. 80, iv. 6, speaks of the long periods granted to governors. For an estimate of Tiberius, compare L'specially Keim's article in Schenkel's Bihellcxihon, v. 528- 535. ^32 Compare in regard to him, besides the literature referred to on p. 38 : Mounier, De Pontii Pilati in causa servatoris agendi ratione, Lugd. Bat. 1825 ; Leyrer, art. " Pilatus" in Herzog's Beal-Encyclopaedie, 2 Aufl. xi. pp. 685-687 ; Klo])per in Schenkel's Bibellexikon, iv. 581-585 ; Penan, Life of Jesus, chap, xxvii. : "Fate of the Enemies of Jesus ;" Warneck, Pontius Pilatus der Richter Jesu Christi. Ein O'emalde aus der Leidens- c/eschichte, Gotha 1867 ; Rosieres, Ponce Pilate, Paris 1883 ; Woltjer, Pontius Pilatus, scne studie, Amsterdam 1888 ; Arnold, Die neronisclie Christenverfolgung, 1888, pp. 116-120 (on the mention of Pilate in Tacitus, Annals, xv. 44) ; Gustav Adolf Muller, Pontius Pilatus der fUnfte Pro- curator von Judaea und Pichier Jesu von Nazareth, Stuttgart 1888 (gives at pp. v-viii a list of the special literature on Pilate from the beginning of the art of printing down to the present time, more than a hundred names) § 17. THE SONS OF IISROD. 83 him as of an " unbending and recklessly hard character " {rr]v (fivcriv uKa/XTrr)^ Kol fiera tov av6dSov.uv avf^fictpTvpet, zci; anfMx.'ieis (peiaxuv T«f (iotai'Kix.oL; tou Ui'Kccrov vvKzap h rZ hpo) dvccduvxi). Compare in regard to this question, Div. II. vol. iii. p. 349. ^^* Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 3. 2 ; TVars of the Jews, ii. 9. 4 ; Eusebius, Hist. Ecdes. ii. 6. 6-7. — The length of the aqueduct is given by Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 3. 2, at two hundred stadia ; in Wars of the Jeivs, ii. 9. 4, at four hundred ; so at least is it in our text of Josephus, whereas in his rendering of the latter passage Eusebius {Hist. Ecdes. ii. 6. 6) makes it three hundred stadia. In any case, according to these measurements, there can be no doubt that the reference is to the aqueduct from the so-called pool of Solomon south-west of Bethlehem. From thence to Jerusalem two aqueducts were built in ancient times, of which the ruins of the one are discernible ; the other is still preserved in comparative completeness. 1. The former is the shorter, and runs upon a higher level ; it begins south of the pool of Solomon in the Wady Bijar, then goes through the pool, and thence without any further deviations straight to Jerusalem. 2. The one that is still completed is longer and lies lower ; it begins still farther south in the Wady Arrub, passes then also through the pool, and thence with great windings to Jerusalem. The latter conduit is certainly § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 85 The New Testament also contains hints about the popular uprisings in the time of Pilate. " There were present at that season," so runs the narrative in Luke xiii. 1, "some that told Jesus of the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices." This statement is to be understood as indicating that Pilate had put to the sword a number of Galileans while they were engaged in the act of presenting their offerings at Jerusalem. But nothing more definite as to this incident is known. And just as little do we know about " those who had made insurrection, and had committed murder in the insurrection " (Mark xv. 7 ; comp. Luke the more modern ; for, on account of the more remote derivation of the water, the aqueduct running on the higher level could no longer be used, and so a new one had to he built. Its length, owing to the long windings, reaches to about 400 stadia, altliough the direct line would measure much less than half that distance. When it had become dilajiidated, during the Middle Ages, earthenware pipes were placed in it. In its original form it was probably identical with the building of PiUte. Many, how- ever, owing to the absence of any trace of the characteristics of Roman building, hold it to have been still older than the time of Pilate, and suppose that Pilate only restored it. But this theory is directly in opposition to the words of Josephus. That the aqueduct of Pilate ran along the course taken by this water conduit, may be regarded as highly probable. — In the Jerusalem Talmud we find the statement that an aqueduct led from Etam to the teniple {Jer. Yoma, iii. fol. 41, in Light- foot, Descri^otio tevipli, c. 23, Opera, i. 612). In fact, Etam (DD^y), according to 2 Chron. xi. 6, lay between Bethlehem and Tekoa, unquestionably at the spring which is now called Ain Atan, in the immediate neighbour- hood of Solomon's pool (compare Miihlau in Riehm's Handworterbuch, art. " Etam ; " Schick, Zeitschrift des deutschen Palastina - Vereins, i. 152 f.). — The most exact description of the present condition of the two conduits is given by Schick, " Die Wasserversorgung der Stadt Jerusalem " {Zeitschrift des deutschen Palastina- Vereins, i. 1887, pp. 132-176, with map and plans). — Compare also : Ritter, Erclkxmde, xvi. 272 ff. ; Tobler, Topograjyhie von Jerusalem, ii. 84-95 (very full in its historical material) ; an anonymous article, "Water Supply of Jerusalem, ancient and modern" (Journal of Sacred Literature and Biblical Record, new series, vol. v. 1864, pp. 133-157 ; Zschokke, "Die versiegelt Quelle Salomos" {Theolog. Quartal- schrift, 1867, pp. 426-442) ; The Recovery of Jerusalem, 1871, pp. 233-267 ; and generally the geographical literature mentioned in vol. i. pp. 16-20. 86 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. xxiii. 19), to whom among others that Barabbas belonged, whose liberation the Jews demanded of Pilate. Probably to the later days of Pilate belongs an occurrence about which we are informed in the letter of Agrippa I. to Caligula, which is communicated by Philo. Pilate had learnt from the outburst at Caesarea that the setting up of the figures of the emperor in Jerusalem could not be carried out against the stubborn resistance of the Jews. He thought he now, at least, might attempt the introduction of votive shields without figures, on which the name of the emperor was written. Such shields, richly gilt, did he set up in what had been the palace of Herod, which Pilate himself was now wont to occupy, " less for the honour of Tiberius than for the annoyance of the Jewish people." But the people would not tolerate even this. First of all, in company with the nobles and with the four sons of Herod, who were then present in Jerusalem attending a feast, they applied to Pilate in order to induce him to remove the shields. When their prayer proved unsuccessful, the most distinguished men, among whom certainly were those four sons of Herod, addressed a petition to the emperor, asking that he should order the removal of the offensive shields. Tiberius, who plainly perceived that it was a piece of purely wanton bravado on the part of Pilate, ordered the governor on pain of his severe displeasure to remove at once the shields from Jerusalem, and to have them set up in the temple of Augustus at Caesarea. This accordingly was done. " And thus were preserved both the honour of the emperor and the ancient customs of the city." ^'^ 136 piiiioj Be Legations ad Cajum, sec. 38, ed. Mangey, ii. 589 sq. — That the incident occurred in the later years of Pilate is probable from the decisiveness of the tone of Tiberius ; for, according to Philo, Leg. ad Cajum, sec. 34, ed. Mangey, ii. 5G9, Tiberias assumed a friendly attitude toward the Jews only after the death of Sejanus in A.D. 31. Sejanus was, according to Philo, an arch-enemy of the Jews. To his influence is § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 87 At last by his utter recklessness Pilate brought about his own overthrow. It was an old belief among tlie Samaritans that on the mountain of Gerizim the sacred utensils of the temple had been buried since Moses' times.^" A Samaritan pseudo - prophet once promised in a.d. 35 to show these sacred things if the people would assemble on Mount Gerizim. The light-minded multitude gave him a hearing, and in great crowds the Samaritans gathered together armed in the village of Tirathana at the fort of Mount Gerizim, so that from thence they might ascend the mountain and behold the sacred spectacle. But before they could carry out their project, they were arrested by Pilate in the village by a strong force, a portion of them was slain, a portion hunted in flight, and again another portion cast into prison. Of those imprisoned also Pilate had the most powerful and the most distinguished put to death.^^^ But the Samaritans were convinced that no revolutionary intentions lay to the basis of their pilgrimage to Gerizim, and so they complained of Pilate to Vitellius, the legate in Syria at that time. Their complaints had actually this result, that Vitellius sent Pilate to Eome to answer for his conduct, while he made over the administration of Judea to Marcellus.^^^ ascribed both the expulsion of the Jews from Rome in A.r>. 19, and the harsh treatment of Pilate in Judea. ^*'' Compare also: Petermann in Herzog, Real - Encyclopaedie, 1 Aufl. xiii. 373 ; Kautzsch, Herzog, Real-Encylop. 2 Aufl. xiii. 346, 348. 1^8 Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 4. 1. ^^^ Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 4. 2. Pilate must have taken about a year on his jouiney from Judea to Rome, for he did not arrive in Rome until after the death of Tiberius {Antiq. I.e.). His subsequent fortunes are not told by Josephus. — The Christian legend makes Pilate either end his own life by suicide, or suffer death at the hands of the emperor as punishment for his proceedings against Christ. 1. In regard to the story about his suicide, Eusebius refers in his Church History to the Greek chroniclers, who "have made a list of the Olympiads together with the occurrences that took place in each " (Hist. Eccl. ii. 7 : iampovaiv 'E'h7.r,'juv oi T»s 'OXv^wTTixocc; ci/iix roii x-xto, ^pivov; Tmrpxyfiinois utxypx-^xnTi;). 88 THE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Soon thereafter, at the Passover festival of a.d. 36/'*'' Vitellius himself went to Jerusalem, and won for himself on In tlie Chronicle he mentions as his source "the Roman historians (Eusebius, Chronicon, ed. Schoene, ii. 150 sq. : (a) According to the Armenian : " Pontius Pilatus in varias calamitates implicitus sibi ipsi manus inferebat. Narrant autem qui Romanorum res scriptis mandaverunt." (b) According to Syncellus, ed. Dindorf, i. 624 : Ilourio; niot.rix, TO iA.iyoe, 'TTihlov ' liptxovvroi duTix-pv. The Jordan Valley is also intended in 1 Mace. v. 52 ( = Josephus, Antiq. xii. 8. 5): ii; to ttsS/ov to l^k-yct Kotrx. vpoau-Kov Bxidaocv (where Keil, against Grimm, gives the correct explanation). The Plain of Jezreel was not reckoned down to Beth-sean or Scythopolis, but rather Mount Tabor lay, according to Jose- phus, Wars of the Jews, iv. 1. 8, " between Scythopolis and the Great Plain." — A third plain, namely, that of Asochis, north of Sepphoris (see vol. i. p. 296), appears in Josephus, Life, 41 ^in.., to be designated too as the " Great Plain." But this was really attached to the Plain of Jezreel, and ought to be reckoned along with it ; for only upon this hypothesis is the very passage referred to, Wars of the Jews, iv. 1. 8, intelligible.— In the case referred to in our text the plain beginning at Ptolemais is the one intended. Vitellius caused his army to march through it in a south- easterly direction, then presumably across the Jordan, continuing the march on the other side farther to the south. 1^3 Pliilo, De Legatione ad Cajum, sec. 32 (Opera, ed. Mangey, ii. 580) : Tcci'u ■^a.pxXccfiovTi rriv iiye/aoviofj 'Trponoi tuv kxtm, Ivpi'xv xTrxvrau iif^u; (jwyjadnusu, Ovm'h'hiov rore . . h rri itohiL lictrptiiovro;, &> rx Trspl tovtuv ix.oi/,iaSr> ypv-^^arx. . . . YlpuTOV to vifiiTtpou Upov eli^xro tx; v'Trip TJj; cipxiig Vxiov dujixg. Compare on the sacrifices also sec. 45, Mangey, ii. 598. On the oath : Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 5. 3. See further on this point, vol. i. p. 445. ^** Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 7. 2 fin. : Tciio; le rou ^Av vpZrov htxvr6i> KXi Tov f^vi; TTXPV /ii£yxMKa,Kx.ov iiyif^covog. The reading is indeed doubtful in several places. The prae- nomen Aii'hnv, however, seems from a fac.^mile by Lepsius to be quite certain. It was so given also by Letronne ; but the Corp. inscr. Grace. reads Av\_x.iov]. — Flaccus is also mentioned, in Corp. Inscr. Graec. n. 4957, lin. 27. ^^* Philo, In Flaecum, secs. 3-4, Opera, ed. Mangey, ii. 518-520. — On the death of young Tiberius, see also Philo, Legal, ai Cajum, secs. 4-5, Mangey, ii. 549 sq. ; Dio Cassius, lix. 8 ; Suetonius, Caligula, 23. On the death of Niivius Sertorius Macro (after the overthrow of Sejanus, A.D. 31, praefactus piraetorio, see Pauly's Real-Encyelopaedie, v. 402) ; Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, secs. 6-8, Mangey, ii. 550-554 ; Dio Cassius, lix. 10 ; Suetonins, Caligula, 26. — The death of Tiberius, according to Dio Cassius, I.e., occurred in a.d. 37 ; that of Macro in a.d. 38. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 93 Although, as Philo has assured us, he avoided everything calcuL^ted to produce a commotion, the mere appearance of a Jewish king was an offence to the mob of Alexandria. Agrippa was first of all treated with indignity and insult in the gym- nasium, and then exposed to ridicule in the performances of a pantomime. A man called Karabas, suffering from mental derangement, was decked in uniform similar to the king's dress, and was mockingly greeted as king, the people address- ing him in the Syrian as Mdpiv, Lorcl.^^^ The mob, however, once roused to riot, was not disposed to be pacified. They now insisted upon placing statues of the emperor in the Jewish synagogues, called by Philo simply irpoaevxaL riaccus did not venture to oppose them, but rather agreed to all the demands of the enemies of the Jews. These again, the more the governor seemed disposed to yield to them, became the more extravagant in their demands. Flaccus gave permission successively to the setting up of images in the synagogues, to the pronouncing of the Jews, by an edict, no longer in the enjoyment of the rights of citizens, and, finally, he gave his sanction to a general persecution of the Jews.^^" Dreadful sufferings were now endured by the Jewish population of Alexandria. Their houses and warehouses were plundered ; the Jews were themselves maltreated, murdered, the bodies mutilated ; others publicly burned ; others, again, dragged alive through the streets. The synagogues were, some of them destroyed, others profaned by the setting up of the image of Caligula as a god ; in the largest synagogue the image of Caligula was set up on a high damaged Qitadruja, '*9 Philo, In Flaccum, sees. 5-6, etl. Mangey, ii. 521 sq. 1°" Philo, In Flaccum, sees. 6-8, ed. Mangey, ii. 523-525. — Philo distin- guishes in the career of Flaccus three stages: (1) Sec. Q fin.: sTrnpi'Trst TTotyjoaadcei rr,v oLucidmiu. (2) Sec. 8 init.: o'hlyodi vsTioov ii/iiepxt; ri^Yiii 'Kp6-/pxf^l^oc., a (jv ^i'jov; x.ul i'^fi'/'vict; ijcicc; cc'TTsxx'hsi ; (3) ilnd. urxova] To7g 'Trporipoig x.xi Tpnou 7rpoi:6ri>cii/, i(pii; u; iv a.'huaii to7; tdc'hovai -zopSiiv 'lofJiot/c/t/j. 94 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. which they had dragged thither from the gymnasium.*'^ The governor Flaccus not only let all this go on without inter- fering, but also himself proceeded with severe measures against the Jews, for which, according to Philo, he had no other reason than the refusal of the Jews to take part in the worship of the emperor. He caused thirty-eight members of the Jewish Gerousia to be carried bound into the theatre, and there to be scourged before the eyes of their enemies, so that some of them died under the infliction of the lash, and others were thrown into long and severe illnesses.^^^ A centurion was commanded to search with a select band through the houses of the Jews for arms. Jewish women were compelled before spectators in the theatre to partake of swine's flesh.^*^ riaccus had even before this shown his hostility to the Jews by failing to send to the emperor, as he had promised to do, but retaining in his own possession, a petition from the 1^^ Phmdering of houses : Philo, In Flaccum, sec. 8, eel. Mangey, ii. 525 ; Legal, ad Cajum, sec. 18, ed. Mangey, ii. 563. — Massacre of the Jews: Philo, In Flaccum, sec. 9, ed. Mangey, ii. 526 sq. ; Legal, at Cajum, sec. 19, ed. Mangey, ii. 564. — Destruction and profanation of the synagogues or proseuchae : Legal, ad Cajum, sec. 20, ed. Mangey. ii. 565. — The plunder- ing, according to Philo, In Flaccum, sec. 11, ed. Mangey, ii. 531 init, extended to four hundred houses. — In Div. II. vol. iii. p. 349, following Mangey's note, ii. 564, and Kostlin in Theologische Jahrbb. 1854, p. 398, I expressed myself to the effect that the persecution described in the Legal. ad Cajum is another than that described in the treatise In Flaccum. Subsequent examination of the facts, however, has convinced me that the two are identical, as I had previously, with many others, maintained in the first edition of this work. The details are so precisely the same that tlieir identity cannot be doubted. Compare especially, In Flaccum,, sec. 9 ; Legal, ad Cajum, sec. 19. Sometimes there is even a verbal agreement, as, Li Flaccum, sec. 9, ed. Mangey, 527 : (ppvyctu/x, av'h.'hiyovTig kk'ttvu to ■^t^sov ij TTvpl lts(phipov ; and Legal, ad Cajtim^ sec. 19, ed. Mangey, ii. 564 : o/ B« ilu,iJ:>.sicroi kuttvu to ■z'hiou »j irvpi oisl^dsipQUTO rij; (ppv/oc.vii'^ovg v'Kri;. It does not, however, give one the impression of literary dependence. The relationship is, from a literary point of view, very free, as it would naturally be if the same writer described at different times the same incidents. 1*2 Philo, In Flaccum, sec. 10, ed. Mangey, ii, 527-529. 1*3 Philo, In Flaccum, sec. 11, ed. Mangey, ii. 529-531. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 95 Jewish community, in which an explanation was given of the attitude of the Jews in reference to the honours demanded by the emperor. This writing was first sent up by Agrippa, with a statement of the reason of the delay .^^^ We are not in possession of any detailed information as to the circumstances of the Alexandrian community after the severe persecution of the autumn of a.d. 38 down to the death of Caligula in January a.d. 41. In autumn of a.d. 38 Flaccus was suddenly, at the command of the emperor, carried as a prisoner to Eome, and banished to the island of Andros in the Aegean Sea, where subsequently he was, together with other distinguished exiles, put to death by the orders of Caligula.^^* Who his successor was is imknown.-*^® It may be accepted as highly probable that the Jews did not get back their synagogues during Caligula's lifetime, and that the worship of the emperor continued a burning question, and one '•'■'* Philo, In Flaccum, sec. 12, ed. Mangey, ii. 531, 532. i^s Philo, hi Flaccum, sees. 12-21, ed. Mangey, ii. 532-544. — The chrono- logical data for the incidents above recorded converge upon the autumn of A.D. 38. Compare Lewin, Fasti sacri, n. 1534-1538. Agrippa arrived at Alexandria favoured by the trade-winds {hvjjiot, In Flaccum, sec. 5, ed. Mangey, ii. 521), which blow from the 20th of July for the .space of thirty days (Pliny, Hist. Nat. ii. 47. 124, xviii. 28. 270). The scourging of the thirty-eight members of the Jewish Gerousia took place on Caligula's birthday {In Flaccum, sec. 10, ed. Mangey, ii. 529), i.e. on the 31st August (Suetonius, Caligula, 8). The departure of Flaccus, which occurred soon after this, took place during the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles {In Flaccum, sec. 14 init. ed. Mangey, ii. 534) ; therefore in September or October. — The year 38 is obtained from the two following facts : (1) Agrippa returned from Rome to Palestine in the second year of Caligula (Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 11). (2) The Jewish warehouses were plundered when they had been closed on account of the mourning for Drusilla, the sister of Caligula (FhUo, In Flaccum, sec. 8, ed. Mangey, ii. 525). But she died in A.D. 38 (Dio Cassius, lix. 10-11). ^*6 According to Dio Cassius, lix. 10, Caligula had appointed Macro governor of Egypt. But he, while still Flaccus was governor of Egypt, was compelled to commit suicide (Philo, In Flaccum, sees. 3-4, ed. Mangey, ii. 519). He therefore never actually entered upon his governorship. Compare generally on the governors of Egypt, Corpus Inscr. Grace, t. iii. p. 310 sq. 96 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE involving the Jews in danger. In a.d. 40, probably in spring, in consequence of the still continuing conflicts between the heathen and Jewish population of Alexandria, an embassy from both parties went to the emperor to complain against one another, and seek to win over the emperor to their side. The leader of the Jewish embassy was Philo ; the leader of his opponents was the scholar Apion. The result was unfavour-. able to the Jews. They were ungraciously received by the emperor, and were obliged to return without having effected their object. So Josephus briefly tells the story .-^^ A few incidents connected with this embassy are also told by Philo in his work about Caligula. But it is difficult to obtain any definite information from these fragmentary notices. With- out having referred to the sending of one of the two embassies, Philo first of all states that the ambassadors of the Alex- andrians won over completely to their interests the slave Helicon, a favourite of Caligula. When the Jews perceived this, they made similar endeavours on their part, but in vain.-^^* They then concluded to pass on to the emperor a written statement, which contained the main points embraced in the petition shortly before sent in by King Agrippa. Caligula received the Jewish ambassadors first of all in the Campus Martius at Eome, and promised to hear them at a convenient time.^^^ The ambassadors then followed the em- peror to Puteoli, where, however, they were not received.^^'* Only at a later period — we know not how much later — the ^^^ Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 1. — According to Josephus the two em- Ijassies consisted each of three men ; according to Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 46, ed. Mangey, ii. 600, the Jewish embassy consisted of five men. 158 Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sees. 25-26, ed. Mangey, ii. 570 (Helicon) ; ibid. sec. 27, ed. Mangey, ii. 571 (the ambassadors of the Alexandrians) ; ibid. sees. 27-28, ed. Mangey, ii. 571 sq. (how the Jewish ambassadors vainly entreated Helicon to secure them an audience). ^^^ Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 28, ed. Mangey, ii. 572 (the narrator here speaks evidently, in the first person, of himself). luo Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 29, ed. Mangey, ii. 573. § 17. THE SONS OF HEBOD. 97 promised audience took place at Eome, in the gardens of ^laecenas and Lamia, at which the emperor — while he inspected the works that were going on, and gave orders regarding them — caused the Jews to keep moving on always behind him, throwing out to them now and again a contempt- uous remark, amid the applause of the ambassadors of the other party, until at last he dismissed them, declaring that they were to be regarded rather as foolish than as wicked men, since they would not believe in his divinity.^^^ ^'^^ Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sees. 44-46, ed. Mangey, ii. 597-600. — In the narrative of Pliilo, it is remarkable that he speaks about the complaints of the Alexandrian and Jewish ambassadors in Rome without having made any mention of the sending of the embassies. Possibly there is some gap in the text that has come down to us. So Massebieau, Le classement des oeuvres de Philon [Biblioth^que de VEcole des Hautes Etudes, Section des Sciences religieuses, vol. i. Paris 1889], p. 65 sqq. But this hypothesis seems to me quite unnecessary ; for Philo does not by any means propose to tell the history of this embassy, as one might suppose from the false title, which was not given by Philo himself. His theme is rather the same as that of Lactantius in his treatise, De Mortibus Persecutorum : that the persecutors of the pious are punished by God. So correctly Masse- bieau. As with Flaccus, so also with Caligula — first of all his evil deeds are enumerated, and then the divine retribution ; only this second half of the treatise about Caligula is no longer extant. The Jews are here, there- fore, not the principal figures, but Caligula ; and so the Jewish embassy from Alexandria to Rome is quite a subordinate matter. From this point of view, also, other difliculties are probably to be explained. Caligula was absent from Rome on an expedition to Gaul from the autumn of A.D. 39 till the 31st August A.D. 40 (see above, p. 36). Did the twice- repeated reception of the embassy take place before or after the expedi- tion 1 According to Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 29, ed. Mangey, ii. 573 fin., the ambassadors made the sea journey during the winter {xnf^uvoi f/Aaov). Since the business on which they were engaged had become a matter of burning interest in consequence of the great persecution of autumn a.d. 38, we would naturally at first fix the date of the journey in the winter of a.d. 38-39. This view is favoured by the circumstance that the written apology which the ambassadors laid before the emperor is said to have been of similar contents with that "shortly before" (xpo o'hiyov) sent by Agrippa, on the occasion of his visit to Alexandria {Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 28, ed. Mangey, ii. 572), which undoubtedly refers to the same aftair as has been nanated above on p. 95. For these reasons Lewin, Fasti sacri, n. 1539-1540, places the setting out of the embassy in the end DIV. I. VOL. II. G 98 THE R0MA2. 40, the question may be raised whether their winter journey should not be referred to the late autumn of A.D. 40 ? This is the opinion of Gratz, expressed in his treatise referred to above on p. 91. This date, however, would be too late, since it could not then be explained how the ambassadors first heard in Puteoli of events which had occurred in Palestine as early as the beginning of summer. It is therefore to be assumed that the ambassadors made their journey in the end of the winter of a.d. 39-40, waited in Rome for Caligula's return, and in autumn were received by him. So Tillemont, Histoire des Empereurs, t. i. p. 457 ; Delaunay, Fhilon d^ Alexandrie, p. 180; also Noris, Opera, ii. 659 sq. ; and Sanclemente, De vulgaris aerae emenda- tione, p. 313. Sanclemente opposes Noris' opinion, that the audience described by Philo, sees. 44-45, occurred before the going down to Puteoli referred to in sec. 29. But whether we accept this combination or that, in any case we fail to discover in Philo's exposition not only an account of the sending out of the Jewish-Alexandrian embassy, but also a full and comprehensive account of what befell it in Rome. Still more singular is it that Philo should have communicated nothing about the state of affairs in Alexandria itself from autumn a.d. 38 till Caligula's death, so that it is not explained why the embassy did not start till eighteen months after the great persecution. But all this may be satisfactorily explained if we accept what we said above as to the purpose of the writing. § 17. TIJE SONS OF HEROD. 99 Claudius, was to issue an edict by which all their eailier privileges were confirmed to the Alexandrian Jews, and the unrestricted liberty to practise their own religion was anew granted them.^'''' AVhile the Alexandrian embassy to Eome waited for the imperial decision, a serious storm burst upon the mother country of Palestine. It had its origin in Jamnia, a town on the Philistine coast which was mainly inhabited by Jews. When the heathen inhabitants of that place, in order to show their zeal for Caesar and at the same time to aggravate the Jews, erected a rude altar to the emperor, this was imme- diately again destroyed by the Jews. The incident was reported by the imperial procurator of the city, Herennius Capito,^^ ' to the emperor, who, in order to avenge himself upon the refractory Jews, gave orders that his statue should be set up in the temple of Jerusalem.'^* As it was foreseen tliat such an attempt would call forth violent ojDposition, the governor of Syria, P. Petronius, received a command to have the one half of the army ^^* stationed " on the Euplirates," i.e. in Syria, in readiness to proceed to Palestine, in order by their assistance to carry out the will of the emperor. This moderate and reasonable man obeyed the childish demand M'ith a heavy heart during the winter of a.d. 39—40. While he was getting the statue prepared in Sidon, he gathered about him ^^^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 5. 2. ^•^2 He was not as Philo names him: (p6puv iKTioyev; rZv r^s 'lov- outx;, but only o t^; 'lotfivetxg sx/Vpo^oj (Josephus, Jriiig. xviii. 6. 3). Jamnia was merely a private estate of the emperor (Antiq. xviii. 2. 2). — Should not ako in the text of Philo 'lctfcyii»s be read instead of ' lovditicig ? 1** Philo, Legal, ad Cajum, sec. 30, ed. Mangey, ii. 575 sq. ^*'' According to Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 2, two legions ; according to Wars of the Jews, ii. 10. 1, three. The former statement is the correct one ; for in Syria there were four legions (see above, p. 50). When therefore Pliilo, sec. 31, says " the half," this agrees with Jo?ej)hu.s, Antiq. xviii. 8. 2. 100 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. the heads of the Jewish people, and sought to persuade them to yield with a good grace ; but all in vain.^^ Soon the news of what was proposed spread over all Palestine, and now the people assembled in great crowds at Ptolemais, where Petronius had his headquarters. " Like a cloud the multitude of the Jews covered all Phoenicia." Well arranged, divided into six groups — old men, able-bodied men, boys, old women, wives and maidens, the mass deputation appeared before Petronius. Their mournful complaints and groans made such an impression upon Petronius that he resolved at all hazards to make the attempt to put off the decision for a time at least.^^ The full truth, that he really wished to have a stop put to the whole business, he dared not indeed write to the emperor. He wrote him rather that he entreated for delay, partly because time was required for the preparing of the statue, partly because the harvest was approaching, which it would be advisable to see gathered in, since otherwise the exasperated Jews might in the end destroy the whole harvest. When Caligula received that letter, he was greatly enraged at the dilatoriness of his governor. But lie did not venture to give expression to his wrath, but wrote liini a letter of acknowledgment in which he praised his prudence, and only advised him to proceed as quickly as possible with the preparation of the statue, since the harvest would be already about an end.^^ 166 philo, Legal, ad Cajtim, sec. 31, ed. Mangey, ii. 576-579. — The date is determined by the fact that tlie negotiations following at Ptolemais took place during harvest, therefore between Passover and Pentecost and in the year 40, as the current report declares. But since, according to Antiq. xviii. 8. 2, Petronius had gone into his winter quarters at Ptole- mais, he must have gone there in winter, a.d. 39-40. Josephus' words are certainly calculated to give one the impression that these events did not occur till the winter of a.d. 40-41. See vol. i. p. 365. ^^' Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 32 f., ed. Mangey, ii. 579-582 ; Jose- phus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 2 ; IFars of the Jews, ii. 10. 1-3. 168 Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sees. 33-34, ed. Mangey, ii. 582-584 Thi? § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 101 Petronins, however, did not even yet proceed with any vigour in the matter, but entered anew into negotiations with the Jews. Yea, even late in autumn, down to the season of sowing in November, we find him at Tiberias besieged for forty days by crowds of people to be numbered by thousands, who besought him with tears that he would yet save the country from the threatened horror of temple desecration. When at length Aristobulus also, the brother of King Agrippa and other relatives of his joined their prayers to those of the people, Petronius resolved to take the decisive step of asking the emperor to revoke his order. He led his army back from Ptolemais to Antioch, and set before the emperor, in a letter which he sent for this purpose to Caligula, how upon grounds of equity and prudence it would be advisable to recall the offensive edict.^"^ Meanwhile affairs at Eome affecting matters in question had taken a more favourable turn. King Agrippa I., who in spring of the year 40 had left Palestine, met with Caligula in Rome or at Puteoli in autumn, when the emperor had just returned from his German campaign.^^" He had as yet heard correspondence does not occur to be identical with that spoken of by Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 2 ; for the latter had taken place before the proceedini^s at Ptolemais. i«9 Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 3-6 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 10. 3-5. The recall of the army is merely mentioned in Wars of the Jews, ii. 10. 5. ^^f* That A!:];rippa had left Palestine as early as spring may be deduced from this, that he knew nothing of what had been going on in Palestine when he arrived in Rome. He cannot, however, have been in company with Caligula in Gaul, as Dio Cassius, lix. 24, conjectures, but must have gone first to Eome or Puteoli, some time after the return of Caligula from his campaign on 31st August a.d. 40. For had Agrippa's intervention that was crowned with success already occurred in Gaul, it would not have been only after Caligula's return, and after they had followed the emperor to Puteoli, that the Alexandrian ambassadors would have first heard the sad news about the affairs of Palestine, as was the case (Philo. Legal, ad Cajum, sec. 29, ed. Mangey, ii. 573). The intervention of Agrippa must therefore have taken place after that time. It therefore follows from this that Petronius, late in autumn, in the time of sowing, 102 THE ROMAX-HEKODIAN AGE. nothing of what was going on in Palestine. But the glance of the emperor's eye assured him that he was nursing secret wrath in his heart. When he sought in vain for the cause of such feelings, the emperor observed his embarrassment, and let him know in a very ungracious tone what the cause of his displeasure was. The king on hearing this was so horror- stricken that he fell into a fainting fit, from which he did not recover till the evening of the following day.^^^ On his recovery he made it his first business to address a supplica- tion to the emperor, in which he endeavoured to persuade him to recall his order by showing that none of his predecessors had ever attempted anything of that sort."^ Contrary to all expectation, the letter of Agrippa had the desired effect. Caligula caused a letter to be written to Petronius, command- ing that nothing should be changed in the temple at Jeru- salem. The favour was certainly not unmixed ; for along with this order there was an injunction that no one who should erect a temple or altar to the emperor outside of Jerusalem should be hindered from doing so. A good part of the concession that had been made was thus again with- drawn ; and it was only owing to the circumstance that no one took advantage of the right thus granted, that new disturbances did not arise out of it. The emperor, indeed, soon repented that he had made that concession. And so, as he made no further use of the statue that had been prepared at Sidon, he ordered a new one to be made in Rome which and not long before Caligula's death, therefore somewhere about Nov- ember, petitioned for the revoking of the order. He cannot therefore have then had in his hands Caligula's decision in reference to the matter ; and this cannot in that case have been agreed upon in Rome earlier than some time in September or October. — That the intervention of Agrippa took place in a.d. 40 is made plain on general grounds from the contents of his supplication, in which he designates himself as already in possession of Galilee (Philo, Legat. ad Cajuvi, sec. 41, ed. Mangey, ii. 593). '"1 Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 35, ed. Mangey, ii. 584-586. '■2 Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sees. 36-41, ed. Mangey, ii. 586-594. § 17. THE SONS OF HKROD. 103 lie intended himself, in his journey to Alexandria which he had in prospect, to put ashore on the coast of Palestine as he passed, and have it secretly brought to Jerusalem."' Only the death of the emperor that soon followed prevented the carrying out of this enterprise. For the person of Petronius as well as for the laud of Judea the death of the emperor was a favourable occurrence. When, further, Caligula, after he himself had arranged for the stopping of proceedings, received the letter of Petronius expressing the wish referred to, he fell into a furious passion about the disobedience of this officer, and caused a command immediately to be issued, that as a punishment for that he should take away his own life. Soon thereafter, however, Caligula was murdered, 24th January a.d. 41 ; and Petronius received the news thereof twenty - seven days before the messengers arrived with the order for self-destruction ; for these, in consequence of unfavourable weather, had been three full months upon their way. There was now just as little idea of carrying out the order for self-murder as there was of setting up the statue in the temple of Jerusalem.'^* The new emperor, Claudius, who had been raised to the throne by the soldiers, immediately upon his accession gifted 1^' Philo, Legat. ad Cajum, sees. 42-43, ed. Mangey, ii. 594, 595. The projected journey to Alexandria is also mentioned in sec. 33, ed. Mangey, ii. 583, and in Suetonius, Caligula, c. 49. — A somewhat different account of Agrippa's intervention is given by Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 7-8. According to him, on a particular occasion when Agrippa had won the special good will of the emperor by means of a luxurious banquet, Caligula demanded of the Jewish king that he should ask of him any favour that he desired, whereupon he besought the emperor for the revocation of the order to set up his statue in the temple of Jerusalem. The result, according to Josephus, was the same, namely, that the prayer was granted. ^^* Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 8-9 ; IFars of the Jewx, ii. 10. 5. — Compare abo, generally, the Jewish tradition in Derenbourg, p. 207 sq. The order of succession in time of the different incidents recorded may be set forth in something like the following arrangement. It must be 104 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. April or May A-D. 40 : June August End of September : to Agrippa, besides the dominion which he already had possession under Caligula, Judea and Samaria, so that now here presupposed that the transmission of news from Eome or Gaul to Jerusalem, and vice versa, would ordinarily take about two months : — Winter, a.d. 39-40 : Petronius receives orders from Caligula to set up his statue in the temple at Jerusalem, and goes with two legions into Palestine. When harvest was at hand, the negotiations were opened at Ptolemais. First report of Petronius to Caligula (Philo, Legal, ad Cajum, sees. 32-33 ; Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 2 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 10. 1-3). Caligula receives Petronius' first report, and answers him, urging him to make haste (Philo, sec. 34). Petronius receives Caligula's answer, but still puts off the final decision. Agrippa pays a visit to Caligula at Rome or Puteoli ; learns of what had happened, and inter- venes. Caligula sends to Petronius the order to put a stop to the undertaking (Philo, Legal, ad Cajum, sees. 35-42 ; Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 7-8). Beginning of November: Negotiations at Tiberias in time of sowing ; Petronius prays the emperor to desist from Betting up the statue (Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 3-6 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 10. 3-5). Petronius receives the order to put a stop to the undertaking. Caligula receives the petition of Petronius to desist from setting up the statue, and sends him the order to take away his own life (Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 8). Caligula is murdered. Petronius receives the news of Caligula's death. Petronius receives the letter Avith the order for self-destruction (Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 8. 9 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 10. 5). This table may still be regarded as essentially correct, even if in some cases the time taken for a letter to travel from Italy or Gaul to Palestine, and vice versa, might be somewhat shorter. On the average the time may be put down at between one or two months. It deserves, however, to be taken into consideration that Caligula was in summer still in Gaul, and that in winter news travelled slowly and irregularly. The most difficult point in our chronology is this, that Agrippa as well as the Alexandrian Jewish embassv did not hear of Caliarula's order with reference to tha End of November : Beginning of January A.D. 41 : 24th January a.d. 41 Beginning of March : Beginning of April : § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 105 again all Palestine, to the same extent which it formerly had under Herod the Great, was united in the hand of a Herodiau."* ExcuESUS I. — TuE Valuation Census of Quirinius, Luke ii. 1-5. Literature.^ Greswell, Dissertations upon the Principles and Arrangement of a Harmony of the Gospels, 3 vols. Oxford 1830, vol. i. pp. 443-524. By the same author, Supplementary Dissertations, Oxford 1834, p. 114 sqc^. These works have not been accessible to me. Fairbairn, Hermeneutical Manual, Edinburgh 1857, pp. 461-475. *HuscHKJE, Ueber den zur Zeit der Geburt Jesu Christi gehaltenen Census, 1840 (125 pp.). *Hdschke, Ueber deri Census und die Steuerverfassung der fruheren romischen Kaiserzeit, 1847 (208 pp.). *WiESELER, Chronological Synopsis of the Four Gospels, Cambridge 1864 (Original, 1843), pp. 95-135. Winer, Realworterbuch, arts. " Quirinius " and " Schatzung." GuMPACH, "Die Schatzung" {Studien und Kritiken, 1852, pp. 663-684). LiCHTENSTEiN, Lebensgeschichte des Herrn Jesu Christi, 1856, pp. 78-90. temple of Jerusalem earlier than sometime in September (see above, ])p. 98 and 101) ; whereas, according to Philo, the affair was already matter of common talk in Palestine in harvest time, as early as April or May. Tillemont had for this reason given up the later statement of Philo as unhistorical (Histoire des empereurs, t. i. Venise 1732, p. 630 sq.. Azotes sur la mine des juifs, note ix.) ; so also in recent times, Gratz Monatsschrift, 1877, p. 97 ff., 145 ff. = O'eschichte der Juden, Bd. iii. 4 Aufl. ]i. 759 ff. But the statements of Philo are on this point so definite and detailed {Legat. ad Cajum, sec. 33, ed. Mangey, ii. 583 : iv dx,/^^ ftiv yu.fi rov Toi> oiTov ycccp-Tcov ilvoit, etc., comjiare also sec. 34 fin., ed. Mangey, ii. 584) that it seems very risky to have recourse to such violent measures. ^'* Josephus, Antiq. xix. 5. 1 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 11. 5. ^ The most complete monographs are those marked with an asterisk. — The earlier literature is given by Hase, Leben Jesu, § 23 6; Huschke, 1840, p. 8 ; Winer, Realworterbuch, ii. 292-294 ; Meyer on Luke ii. 2 ; Gumpach, Studien und Kritiken, 1852, p. 663 f. The more recent especially in Lecoultre, De censu Quiriniano (1883), p. 7 sq., and Sieffert in Herzog's Real-Encyclopoi'die, 2 AuH. xiii. 455. 106 THE EOMAN-IIERODIAN AGE. KuHi-ER, art. "Schatzung" in Herzog's Eeal-Encyclopaedie, 1 Aufl. xiiL 1860, pp. 463-467. Bleek, Synoptische Erklarung der drei ersten Evangelien (1862), i. 66-75. GoDET, Commentary on Gospel of St. Luke, 2 vols. Edin. 1875, vol. i. pp. 120-129. Meyer on Luke ii. 1, 2 ; also the revision by Weiss ; and generally the Commentaries on Luke's Gospel. Strauss, Leben Jesu, 1864, pp. 336-340 ; Die Hallen und die Ganzen, 1865, pp. 70-79. Aberle, "Ueber den Statthalter Quirinius" {Tub. TJieoIog. Quartalschrift, 1865, pp. 103-148 ; 1868, pp. 29-64 ; 1874, pp. 663-687). HiLGENFELD, " Quirinius als Statthalter Syriens " {Zeitschrift fur u-issen- schaftliche Theologie, 1865, pp. 408-421 ; 1870, pp. 151-167). Gerlach, Die romischen Statthalter in Syrien und Judcia, 1865, pp. 22-42. LuTTEROTH, Le r(fcensement de Quirinius en Jud^e, Paris 1865 (134 pp.). EoDBERTUS, " Zur Geschichte der romischen Tributsteuem seit Augustus " (Hildebrand's Jahrbiicher fiir Nationalokonomie und Statistik, Bd. iv. 1865, pp. 341-427 ; Bd. v. 1865, pp. 135-171, 241-315 ; Bd. viii. 1867, pp. 81-126, 385-475. On the passage in Luke, Bd. v. 155 ff.). EwALD, History of Israel, vi. pp. 155-157. Keim, Jesus of Nazara, ii. 116-123. Ebrard, Gospel History. *Wieseler, Beitrage zur richtigen TV-iirdigung der Evangelien, 1869, pp. 16-107. By same author, Studien und Kritiken, 1875, pp. 535-549. Farrar, Life of Christ, vol. i. p. 7, note ; vol. ii. p. 450. Caspari, Chronological and Geographical Introduction to the Life of Christ, pp. 34-38. *ZuMPT, Das Geburtsjahr Christi, 1869, pp. 20-224, Woolset, " Historical Credibility of Luke ii. 1-5 " (New Englander, 1869, pp. 674-723. This paper has not been accessible to me). By the same author : Review of Zumpt's Geburtsjahr Christi in the Biblio- tlieca Sacra, 1870, pp. 290-336. Very carefully done. Steinmeyer, "Die Geschichte der Geburt des Herrn und seiner ersten Schritte im Leben" (Apologetische Beitrage, iv.), Berlin 1873, pp. 29-41. Sevin, Chronologie des Lebens Jesu (1874), pp. 20-39. Schenkel's Bibellexikon, Bd. v. pp. 23-27, art. " Quirinius " by Weizsacker, and pp. 398-405, art. " Steuern " by Kneucker). Hehle, Tlieolog. Quartalschrift, 1875, pp. 666-684 ; 1876, pp. 85-101 (review of Zumpt's Geburtsjahr Christi). § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 107 Marquardt, Romische StaatsvencaltuTvj, Bd. ii. 1876, pp. 198-216(2 Aufl. revised by Dessau und Domaszewski 1884, pp. 204-223). Keil (1879) and Schanz (1883) in their Commentaries on Luka lliESS, Das Gehirtsjahr Christi (1880), pp. 66-78. — By the same author, Nochmals das Geburtsjahr Jesu Christi (1883), pp. 59-68. HoFMANN (J. Clir. K. von). Die heilige Schrift Nenen Testaments zusammen- hangend untcrsucht, Thl. viii. 1 (1878), p. 46 ff. ; x. (1883) p. 64 ff. Lecoultre, De censu Quiriniano et anno nativitatis Christi secundum Lucam evangelistam, Lausannae 1883 (100 pp.). A review of it in Theologische Literaturzeitung, 1883, p. 481. PoLZL, art. "Census" in Wetzer and Welte's Kirchenlexikon, 2 Aufl. B(L iii. 1884, pp. 1-7. SiEFFERT, art. "Schatzung" in Herzog's Real- Encyclopaedic, 2 Aufl. xiii. 1884, pp. 446-455. MoMMSEX, Res gestae divi Augusti, ed. 2, 1883, pp. 175-177. — By the same autlior, Romisches Staatsrecht, ii. 1 (1874), pp. 391-394. Unger, " De censibus provinciarum Romanarum " (Leipziger Studien zur class. Philologie, Bd. x. 1887, pp. 1-76). Mainly a collection of inscriptions in wliich tax-collectors are mentioned. It has been mentioned above, at p. 79, that after the banish- ment of Archelaus the imperial legate, Quirinius, arrived in Judea, and there, in a.d. 6 or 7, proceeded to make a census, i.e. a list of the inhabitants, and a reckoning of their landed property, for the purpose of apportioning the taxation. The evangelist Luke, ii. 1—5, makes mention of a valuation census such as that made by Quirinius ; but he places it in the last days of Herod the Great, that is, somewhere about ten or twelve years earlier tlian that census was really made. It is a matter of debate how this story is related to the similar one recorded by Josephus ; whether there were actually two diflerent valuations in Judea conducted by Quirinius, or whether Luke has erroneously set down the valuation that was made in a.d. 7 in the last years of Herod the Great. In order that we may be in a position to form a deliberate judgment on this much - debated question, and generally on the credibility of the narrative of Luke, it is necessary first 108 THE KOMAN-HEROLIAN AGE. of all to understand, at least in its most general outlines, the Roman system of taxation during the days of the empire. The original Eoman census, as it was drawn up during the period of the republic,^ was strictly confined to the enrolment of Eoman citizens. It consisted of a list of Roman citizens and their possessions, made for a double purpose : (1) The regulating of military service, and (2) the levying of the direct taxes. The party whose property had to be valued was obliged to present himself before the censor and give in a statement of his possessions ; but it was the custom that the father of the family should pay taxes for himself and for the whole family. In the time of the republic there was no one regular valuation census of the subjects of the Roman nation. Valuations were indeed made here and there ; but these had no intimate connection or coherence with one another nor with the census of the Roman citizens.' In the days of the empire, as even before in the days of the republic, the census of Roman citizens had completely lost its original significance ; for the Roman citizens, i.e. therefore all Italy and the colonies with Italian privileges, were no longer sufficient for military service, and also no longer paid direct taxes.* When therefore Augustus, Claudius, and Vespasian still made valuation rolls of Roman citizens, 2 Compare on the census of citizens in the time of the republic, Rein, art. " Census " in Pauly's Real-Encyclopacdie, it. 247-257 ; Zumpt, Da.s Geburtsjahr Christi, pp. 97-116 ; De Boor, Fasti censorii, Berol. 1873 ; Mommsen, Ramisches Staatsrecht, ii. 1 (1874), pp. 304-442 ; E. Herzog, Geschichte und System der romischen Staatsverfassung, Bd. i. 1884, pp. 754-797. 3 Compare on the provincial census of the times of the republic, Zumpt, Geburt^ahr Christi, p]). 114-116; Marquardt, liomische Staatsverwalturt^, ii. 175-197 (2 Aufl. revised by Dessau und Domaszewski, pp. 180-204). •* Compare on the citizen census of the days of the empire : Zumpt, Geburtsjahr Christi, pp. 116-129 ; De Boor, Fasti censorii, pp. 30-33, 96-100 ; Mommsen, Romisches Staatsrecht, 1 Aufl. ii. 1, pp. 310-312, 391 fl". ; ii. 2, p. 1012 f. — The last citizen census which was fully carried cut, was that of Vespasian in a.d. 74. § 17. THE SONS OF HEKOD. 109 this was done only for statistical purposes, or on account of the religious festivities associated therewith, but not for taxa- tion purposes. Fundamentally dififerent was the census of the provinces, the main purpose of which was to regulate the levying of the taxes." Even in this direction there existed in the earlier days of the empire a very great diversity ; ^ but in general even then those principles had become pretty well established which in later juristic documents {Digest. L. 15: Be censibus) are assumed as everywhere prevailing. From these we learn that there were for the provinces two kinds of direct taxes: (1) The property-tax on possessions in land, trihutum soli or agri, and (2) The poll-tax, tributum capitisJ The former was paid partly in kind, partly in money.^ Under the latter, the tributum capitis, there seems to have been summed up various sorts of personal taxes, such as the income - tax, which varied according to the amount of the • Compare, on the provincial census during the days of the empire, the works and treatises referred to above by Huschke (1847), Rodl^ertus, Zumpt (pp. 147-175), Marquardt, Unger ; and, in addition : Rein, art. " Tributum" in Pauly's Real-Encyclopaedie, vi. 2, pp. 2125-2129 ; Zacharia von Lingenthal, " Zur Kenntniss des romischen Steuerwesens in der Kaiser- zeit " (Memoires de I'acaJ/niie imperiale des sciences de St. Pdersbourg, 7 serie, t. vi. No. 9, Petersb. 1863) ; Bernh. Matthiass, Die romiscJie Grundsteuer mid das Vectiyalrecht, Erlangen 1882. The two last deal especially with the later period of the empire. ^ Zumpt, Gehurtsjahr Ckristi, pp. 156, 176, 187, 211 f. Compare also: Marquardt, liomische Staatsverwaltung, ii. 185-196. ^ That there were only these two kinds of direct taxes is plain from Digest. L. 15. 8. § 7 (from Paul in beginning of third century) : " Divus Vespasianus Caesarienses colonos fecit, non adjecto, ut et juris Italic! essent ; sed tributum his remisit capitis ; sed Divus Titus etiam solum immune factum interpretatus est." — Compare Appian. Likjca, 135 : tok oe Xoi-TTol; (popou uptaotv i-irl tyi yij kou iTrl TOti cuf^ocim ; Dio Cass. Ixii. 3 ; Tertullian, Apologet. 13 : " agri tributo onusti viliores, hominum capita stipendio censa ignobiliora." Pauly's Real-Encyclopaedie, vi. 2. 2126. 8 According to Josephus, IVars of the Jews, ii. 16. 4, " the third part of the world," that is. North Africa, with the exception of Egypt, yielded yearly so much grain, that from it the needs of the city of Rome could be supplied for eight months ; and from the city of Alexandria four months. 110 THE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. income, and the poll-tax proper, which was of equal amount for every caput? In Syria, e.g., there was raised in Appian's time a personal tax, which amounted to one per cent, of the valuation.^" This was therefore properly an income-tax. When, on the other hand, Josephus reckons from the poll-tax that Egypt, with the exclusion of Alexandria, had a popula- tion of seven and a half millions, he is evidently referring to a tax of the same amount for every caput}^ At any rate, during the earlier days of the empire, the taxes levied were of the most diverse kinds.^^ Women and slaves had also to pay the poll-tax. Only children and old men were exempted. In Syria, e.g., men from the age of fourteen and women from the age of twelve years, and both up to the age of sixty-five years, ^ Huschke, Census der Kaiserzeit, p. 175 If. ; Marquardt, Edmische ataatsverwaltung, ii. 185-196. ^** Appian. Hyr. 50: IIo,w7rs5;oj — t^v ^iyiim/iv 'ttoXiv ' lepoao'Kvfctit kx\ a-yiuTotTYiv Btiirot; KXTiax»->ptv, v]» 8j) »«( UrQT^sf^.ot'iog 6 T^purog Aiyvmrov SixaiKivg xx9'>]p7iKSi, Kotl OvecTrxirtxuog civ6i; olKiaSthoiv KureaKctipi, x.ui 'A^pioti/og ocvdt; lit tfiov. Koc( diet ruvr iativ ^lovOatioi; ctTrotaiu 6 (popo; TU!f au/nxrav (ixpvTipog TVjg otKhrig 'Trspi'jiKiXg. "T&trri 0£ xxl '2vpotg xoti K/A/^/j' Irjjff/o;, iKXrooTTi rov riutifiXTO; iKocarai. — Instead of ■srso/o/- Kictg (a conjecture of Musgrave adopted by Bekker) the codd. have ■:rip.ovatoi;, which is meaningless, although it is still defended by Huschke, Census der Kaiserzeit, p. 135. The coiiectness of the conjecture is proved by the context. Appian means to say : On account of the battles under Vespasian and Hadrian, the Jews had to pay a higher poll-tax than the other neighbouring peoples, namely, than the Syiians and Cilicians, who pay an annual poll-tax in the form of a percentage of the sum of the valuation. From Josephus, Wars of the Jews, vii. 6. 6, Dio Cassius, Ixvi. 7, however, we know that the increase consisted in this, that the lilpxxi^ov, which had before been paid as a temple-tax (Matt. xvii. 24), after the destruction of the temple had to be paid to the Roman.s. ^^ Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 16. 4 : AiyvTrrog — - z-:vt7ikovtcc -T^pog rctig iTTotx.oaioc.ig i)(,ov(!et fcvpiocoxg dvBpuTrav oix'^ "^^v ' A'Ai^a-uhpuxv xocTdtKoui/TUv, ug 'ivianv tK rr,g Kuff SKxaTYiv x,i(pcc'hY,u iiaCpopoi; Tix.[4.yi- pcta&cti. ^^ Of Northern Africa, Josephus says {}Vars of the Jews, ii. 16. 14): x"""'? ruu tTinaluv Kxpwav, to ptrialv oktu to x,oi,t(x, rriv Vupcriv ir'Kv^dog xpi'po^oi, x.xi i^a6ev -jrcturoiug (()opo'hoy ov vr *i, kxi txIc xP-'""! "^^^ ijysuovixg ■7rxpix,9vaiv trcifxu; rx; ilar] or not, it is difficult to say, since important authorities may be cited in favour of both readings.^^ At any rate the order irpcoTT] eyevero is to be '1 Compare in explanation, besides the commentaries : Wieseler, Bdtrage, pp. 18-32 ; Zumpt, Geburt^ahr, pp. 90-96, 188 ff. ; Lecoultre, Ve censu Quiriniano, pp. 11-27. "2 So Wieseler, Beitriige, pp. 20-22. 2' So Paulas, Hug, and others. ** Compare Wieseler, Beitrdge, p. 19 f. ; Zumpt, Geburtsjahr, pp. 84-86 ** The majority of MSS. has the article : it is wanting in BD, also in n, § 17. THE SONS OF HEKOD, 113 maintained over against tlie isolated readings iyevero Trpcorr] (x) and iyevero airoypa^r] irpcoTr} (D). For the sense it is almost indifferent whether one insert the article or not ; for in the former case it would he translated : " This taxing took place as the first ; " and in the other case : " This took place as the first taxing," ^^ while Quirinius was governor of Syria. But it may now be asked, in what sense Luke uses the term " first." Does he mean to say that it was the first general imperial valuation,^ or the first Eoman valuation in Judea,^^ or that it was the first among several made by Quirinius ? ^^ The first of these explanations would make Luke assume a number of general imperial valuations. But if, as will appear, even the one imperial valuation census under Augustus is problematical, a frequent repetition of such a census would be yet more problematical. We shall therefore do well in not unnecessarily attributing this serious error to the evangelist. The first tenable explanation then is that mentioned above in the second place. We shall then have to stand by it, if it can be proved that Quirinius only made one valuation census for Judea, and that also Luke intended to refer to that one. Provisionally, therefore, we may assume this as the sense of the words, that the general imperial valuation census ordered by Augustus for Judea was the first which had been made there by the Eomans, and that it took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria. In this case the only point that we must still, according to p. Ill, leave undecided is, whether the valuation census was subsequently repeated at regular Avliich reads uvTini> a'7ro'ypu," See Div. II. vol. i. p. 252. The 15th Ab, on which, according to the Mishna, Taanith iv. 5, "those of unknown descent" brought the wood for the altar of burnt-offering, is elsewhere designated as the day of the general wood bringing. Only particular tribal houses brought it on special days. With these tribal houses are also related the remnants of a register of generations still continued down to the times of Christ (Div. II. vol. i. p. 219 f.). ** As is still assumed by Wieseler, Beitrdge, pp. 46-49, and Zumpt, O'ebart^ahr Christi, p. 203 f. 122 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. III. A Eoman census could not have been made in Pales- tine during the time of King Herod. Apologetical : Huschke, Census zur Zeit des Geburis Jesxi Christi, pp. 99-116 ; Wieseler, Chronological Synopsis, pp. 82-92 ; Beitrdge, pp. 79-94 ; Zumpt, Geburtsjahr Christi, pp. 178-186, 212 f. "When Quirinius in a.d. 7 undertook to make a census in Judea, this was quite in order; for Judea had then been converted into a Eoman province. On the other hand, Luke would have us believe that a Eoman census had been made in Palestine, at a time when Palestine, under Herod the Great, was still an independent kingdom, though under the suzerainty of Eome. After all that we have come to know about the position of the regcs socii toward the Eoman s, and especially in regard to the position of Herod, this seems impossible. Pompey had indeed laid the land of Judea under tribute ; ^^ and Caesar had rearranged the system of taxation by means of a series of edicts.^^ Even Antony had imposed upon Herod a tribute when he appointed him king.^* But even granting that Herod had continued to pay this tribute under Augustus, it could not even then be supposed that a Eoman valuation census should have been made in his country. Such an arrangement in regard to the internal administration might indeed have been ordered in Palestine after it had become a province, but not so long as it was the territory of a rex socius. In order to make the matter conceivable an attempt has been made to point out similar cases, in which presumably in the domain of a rex socius a Eoman census was made. Thus reference is made to a passage in Tacitus about a ^2 Josephus, Antiq. xiv. 4. 4 ; Wars of the Jews, i. 7. 6. ^3 Josephus, Antiq. xiv. 10. 6. Compare also above, vol. i. p. 379. ^* Appiau, Civ. v. 75 : hryi Ss ttj kuI (ixai'Ki*;, ov; loKifiikattsv, ivl ^i'hceiov ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 8. 1 : t/; dvvip Tx'ht'Ka.'iog 'lovhu;; ii. 17.8 : lov<)ci, Toi KxXouf<,ivov FaAiXciiou ; Acts of Apostles v. 37: 'lovlx; o Yoc.'hi'hou'j:. ^^ Josephus, Autiq^. xviii. 1. 1 : Trap-^;/ Ss kuI Kvp'Jiviog ii; r^v 'lovlxi'uv, irpaaSyiKviu t^j Ivpixg yivofiii/iju, xTrortfiYioof^iyo; re xvrau rx; ovat'xs xxl ccTToOuiTo/niuo; rx 'Apxy)>.xov xpvy-ot'Tx. — Shortly before Josephus says, xvii. 13. 5 : TTtf^Tirxi Kvpyjuio; vro Kxiaxpo;, ccwnp V77xrix,6g, »voTi/nyn6f/,i:/og r» iv 'S.vpix Kxl rciv ' Apx.i'hxov xTroho^aof^iuo; oIkov. In fact, Quirinius did make valuation returns, not only in Judea, but also elsewhere in Syria, as the inscription of Q. Aemilius Secundus, which in earlier times was erroneously treated as spurious, proved, according to which Secundus by the order of Quirinius made a census at Apamea. See above, vol. i. p. 357. But of the Palestinian districts Jaseplius distinctly names only tliose that were tlien included in the province.— It is also to be observed that the Pharisees who put the question to Jesus about the tribute money 124 THE ROMAN-IIEEODIAN AGE. and the designation of Judas as the Galilean is, on the contrary, to be explained by the fact that Judas, belonging to Gamala in Gaulanitis,*^ which may readily be reckoned to Galilee in the wider sense, organized this revolt, not in Galilee but in Judea, and was now named by the inhabitants of Judea after his native country, " the Galilean." ^° In order to prove the subject position of Herod and the consequent possibility of a Eoman census in his domains, it has been pointed out that he was not allowed independently to declare war;^^ that he besought permission of the emperor for the execution of his son ; ^^ that his subjects also had to take the oath of allegiance to the emperor ; ^^ that his will required the emperor's confirmation ; ®^ yea, even the wrestling games in honour of Augustus and the temples erected to the emperor are requisitioned to aid the proof of the possibility of a census.®"" As if any one ever had supposed anything else but that the Jewish vassal kings were undoubtedly dependent upon the Eoman emperor. Even from the Jewish coins Wieseler thinks that he can gather material for the vindication of Luke.®® In regard to this it is eminently deserv- ing of notice that there are Palestinian coins of Augustus with the year numbers 33, 36, 39, 40, 41, which, reckon- ing according to the Actian era of a.u.c. 723, would belong are those of Judea (Matt. xxii. 17 ; Mark xii. 14 ; Luke xx. 22). Galilee at that time paid no xiivao; or (p6po<;. *^ Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 1. 1. ^<* That this is correct is made quite evident, especially from Wars of the Jews, ii. 8. 1, where Judas is called civrip TuTity^eiio;, •which can mean nothing else than a native of Galilee. ^1 Josephus, A7itiq. xvi. 9. 3. ^* Josephus, Antiq. xvi. 10-11, xvii. 5. 7, xvii. 7. '^^ Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 2. 4. Compare on this oath, ahove, vol. i. p. 445. It had, as one may conclude, according to the analogy of the oath formula of Assus, not the form of the oath of a subject, hut that of a confederate. "* Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 8. 4, 11. 4-5. 6* Wieseler, Beitrage, pp. 90-92. «« Beitrage, pp. 83-89. § 17. THE SONS OF IIEIIOD. 125 to the age of Arche]aus, therefore to the time when Judea was still under native princes. But these numbers are probably to be reckoned according to the Augustan era of 1st January A.u.c. 727, according to which the year 33 would correspond to A.u.c. 759.^ — It is quite irrelevant when reference is made to the fact that Augustus enrolled Herod among " the pro- curators of Syria, and commanded that everything should be done in accordance with his judgment ; " *^ for from this it follows, not that Herod occupied the position of a subject,^^ but, on the contrary, one of high trust on the part of his patrons and friends. A similar explanation may also be given of the threat once uttered by Augustus under extreme provocation when he said {Antiq. xvi. 9. 3) that " whereas of old he had used him as his friend, he should now use him as his subject," on irakai, ■^p(o/jLevo<; avrw <^l\g'Xt/:/TO, Kxlaapos avroli x.ov(ptaiv •4'Yi(piact/iiivov Oioi to jMSJ (rvvccTroar^vaii tw Tio/tJ) 'TT'hYiSvi. Compare Wars of the Jews, ii. 6. 3. 85 Beitrcige, p. 99. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 129 treated of throughout is only the revenues of the native princes, Archelaus, Antipas, and Philip ; and the mere absence of any reference in this place to a Eoman tax speaks strongly in favour of the idea that no such tax was then paid, — Finally, the argumentation is particularly acute, by means of which Zumpt has discovered in Josephus the sought for census, prior to the acknowledged one of a.d. 7. He says ^^ that from the account of Josephus with reference to the census of a.d. V, it follows " that Quirinius then only taxed the property of the Jews, therefore those who were poor and without property were not taken into consideration," But now since the poll-tax existing in the time of Christ presupposes also a list of those without property, such a list must have been drawn up previously, even under Herod. In reference to this statement there are only three things that require to be proved: (1) that Quirinius taxed "only the property " of the Jews ; (2) that in Palestine in the time of Christ a poll-tax was in force even for those without pro- perty ;^^ and (3) that this poll-tax had been introduced as early as in the time of Herod. In reality, then, Josephus knows nothing of a Eoman census in the time of Herod. We may not indeed be inclined ordinarily to lay any weight on argumcnta e silent io ; but in this case the argument is of some importance. In regard to no other period is Josephus so well informed, in regard to none is his narrative so full, as in regard to the last years of Herod. It is scarcely conceivable that a measure so calculated to cut into the very marrow of the people as a Eoman census of that period should have been passed over by him, while he faithfully describes the census of a,d. 7, which occurred in a *^ Gehurtsjahr CJiristi, p. 201 f. ^^ According to Appian, Syr. 50 (see above, p. 110), it seems rather that the poll-tax in Syria existed only in the form of an income- tax. DIV. I, VOL. II, I 130 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. period of which Josephus knew practically nothing.^ It ought also to be remembered that a Eoman census could not have passed off without leaving any trace behind, but must have occasioned a rebellion as well as that of a.d, 7, yea, much more, because in this case the latter would have been nothing new. The latter argument, indeed, Zumpt thinks to invalidate by making the census in the time of Herod into an innocent registration (airoypacf)')]) of the people for the purpose of the poll-tax, whereas the census of a.d. 7 was a property valuation {air or (fir] a l<;), and just for that reason was so offensive.^ — The poll-tax had to be paid as tribute to the lioraans, whereas the expenses of the internal government of the country had to be met by the property-tax.^° But it is in contradiction of all known facts that the tribute to be paid to the Eomans should have consisted simply in a poll-tax of equal amount in the case of each caput. Appian says expressly that the Syrians paid a poll-tax of one per cent, of the sum of the valuation.®^ If, therefore, a Eoman tax had been imposed throughout Palestine, it would certainly not have been a mere poll-tax. And even were this granted, it would still be a Eoman tax. There must then have been a numbering of the people, who would have made the imposi- tion of this, just as much as a valuation census of the people, the occasion of a tumult. But, finally, that distinction between the airoypac})'^ referred to by Luke ii. 2 and the aTTOTiixrjai'i of A.D. 7 completely breaks down before the fact that the latter which occasioned the revolt of Judas of Galilee ** Compare above, vol. i. pp. 88, 89. ^^ So also Rodbertus as early as 1865 in Jahrbiicher fur NationaloJconomie und StatistiJc, v. p. 155 ff. '" Zumpt, Geburtsjahr Christi, pp. 196-202. Wieseler also bad previously expressed a similar opinion (Chronological Synopsis, p. 96, compare p. 84 f., p. 90 f.), whereas subsequently be reverted to th-^ idea of a poll- and land- tax (Beitrage, p. 98 ff.). ^1 Appian, Syi-. 50 (see above, p. 110). Compare also the grain pro- duce of Africa and Alexandria, p. 110. § 17. THE SONS OF HEKOD, 131 is referred to by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles v. 37 in the same words as the so-called numbering of the people in the time of Herod, and the a7ro'ypa(f)7j is simply mentioned as an evident proof that he means in both passages to refer to the same fact. The most decisive argument, however, against a census in the time of Herod is this, that Josephus characterizes the census of A.D. 7 as something entirely new and previously unheard of among the Jews. When we find Zumpt attempting to repre- sent the novelty as consisting only in the property valuation (airorifiTjacs), and Wieseler thinks that what was new and offensive lay merely in the form of the valuation, namely, the judicial examination (^ aKp6aaL] Trpoorrj iyevero T'/}9 Kvprjviov ^vptw; rjv eKkoyrj or elairpa^i'i. In conclusion, that view also is in con- tradiction to the history ; for Quirinius, in A.D. 7, levied the taxes, not merely on the ground of an earlier valuation, but first of all, and chiefly, he was then engaged in making an diroTLfirjaL'^}^^ '" Ebrard, Gospel History, Edinburgh, 1869, pp. 136-142. ^^* New and oi'iginal is the discovery of Godet, who accentuates ocvt*) but expounds as follows {Commentary on St. Luke, vol. i. pp. 128, 129) : "Luke breaks off to remark that prior to the well-known enumeration which took place under Quirinius, and which history had taken account of under the name of the first, there had really been another, generally lost 138 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. 4. Seeing then that nothing can be gained by exegetical arts, the attempt has finally been made, even without any such, to vindicate the account of Luke as historical by having recourse to historical combinations. Indeed, Hengstenberg, since the discovery of the famous inscription which afforded evidence of the twice-repeated governorship of Quirinius in Syria, thinks that every difficulty has been wholly removed.'^^^ That the inscription in reality proves nothing is quite self- evident after the description we have given of it above (see vol. i. p. 353). But also with the twice-repeated governor- ship of Quirinius in Syria, which is quite probable even apart from the inscription, nothing is gained toward the vindication of Luke ; for even the first governorship of Quirinius cannot sight of, which was the very one here in question ; and thus that it was not unadvisedly that he spoke of a census anterior to the first. In this way (1) the intention of this parenthesis is clear ; (2) the asyndeton between vers. 1 and 2 is explained quite in a natural way ; and (3) the omission of the article ij between uTroypxCpii and -Trpurn, which has the effect of making ^ ct'Troypetcpvi Trpurn a sort of proper name (like ii ex/!7ToX^ TrpuTn, hvripm), is completely justified."— Consequently Godet translates : " As to the census itself called the first, it took place under the government of Quirinius." ^'5 Compare Evangelische Kirchenzeitimg, 1865, col. 65 f., where he ex- presses himself about Strauss as follows : " He is so utterly unfamiliar with the state of matters in those times that he quite confidently repeats the old objection against the taxing of Luke, that Quirinius had not entered upon the governorship until several years after Herod's death, without having any suspicion of the fact that the question has long ago entered upon quite another stage by the discovery of a later inscription which affords evidence that Quirinius was twice governor in Syria. This inscription w^as described as early as 1851 by Bergmann in a special treatise, and has been reprinted in so accessible a book as the Tacitus of Nipperdey. But Strauss knows nothing of it." — And Hengstenberg, we add, seems to have known nothing of the following facts : (1) That in 1865 the inscription had been known for a hundred years ; (2) that it had been used by as early a writer as Sanclemente, in a.d. 1793, in vindication of Luke ; (3) that it absolutely does not contain a testimony to Quirinius having been governor twice; and (4) that even with a twice -repeated governorship of Quirinius nothiog is gained in the way of justifying liuke. § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 139 at the earliest have begun till at least half a year after the death of Herod (see above, p. 133), whereas, according to Luke, Quirinius must have been governor in the time of Herod. Zurapt ^^^ and, after him, Polzl,-^^'^ relying for support on a passage in Tertullian,^^^ seek assistance by assuming that the census was begun by Sentius Saturninus, B.C. 9—6, carried on by Quinctilius Varius, B.C. 6—4, and brought to an end by Quirinius during his first governorship. From Quirinius, as the completer of the work, it has received the name ; where- fore also Luke says that it was made under him. So far then as Tertullian is concerned, Zumpt himself says in another part of his work ^^^ that the Church Fathers " generally are wanting in all historical sense in the stating of the Gospel narrative." On their statements, therefore, nothing can with safety be built. But in other respects Zumpt's theory is only a falling back upon the theory of Gumpach and others, referred to under No. 3. The matter then stands so, in Zumpt's opinion, that either in place of iyeveTo we must put a verb like eTeXiaOr], or instead of Quirinius must be put the name of that governor in whose term of office the fact recorded by Luke, the journey of Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem, took place ; ^^° for Luke does indeed intend by mentioning the name simply to determine the time of which he speaks. Thus, as the words imply, the representation that the birth of Jesus Christ took place in the time of Quirinius is necessarily fundamental to the hypothesis, which, however, is impossible. Above all, it is inconceivable that the airoypacfiy, in the way 11*' Gehcrtsjahr Christi, pp. 207-224. ^'^ Wetzer and Welte's Kirchenlcxikon, 2 Aufl. Bd. iii. Sp. 5-7. ^1^ Tertullian, Adv. Marcion, iv, 19 : "Sed et census constat actos sub Augusto nunc in Judaea per Sentium Saturninum, apud quos genus ejus inquirere potuissent." i>" Geburtsjakr Christi, p. 189, note. Compare also : Wieseler, ChronO' logical Synopsis, p. 99, note 2. ^2° Therefore, according to Zumpt, Sentius Saturninus. 140 THE ROMAN-HEKODIAN AGE. in wliicli it is represented by Zumpt, namely, as a simple enrolment of the people without a property valuation, should have taken three or four years, whereas the much more difficult dTroTifnjcri'i of A.D. 7, which, besides, had to encounter the opposition of the people, was completed at farthest in the course of one year.-^^^ Both difiUculties might indeed be overcome were we to assume, with Gerlach ^^^ and Quandt,^^^ that Quirinius had been sent to Syria along with Quinctilius Varus (b.c. 6-4) as extra- ordinary legate, and as such had undertaken the census.^^'* In its best and most precise form this theory was represented by Sanclemente, for he assumes that Quirinius had been despatched to Syria as legatus ad census accipicndos, and indeed with a higher authority than the ordinary legate of Syria of that time, Sentius Saturninus.^^^ But this expedient is ^-^ For it was begun after the banishment of Archelaus, at the earliest in the summer of A.u.c. 759, and was, according to Josephus, Antiq. xviii, 2. 1, completed in the year 37 of the Actian era = autumn of a.u.c. 759-760. It is to be placed therefore late in autumn of a.u.c. 760, i.e. in A.D. 7. ^22 Die romischen Statthalter in Syrien und Judaa, pp. 33-35. ^^^ Zeitordmmg und Zeitbestimmungen in den Evcmgelien (also under the title : Chronologisch-geographische Beitrage zum Verstiindniss der heiligcn Schrift. i. Ghronolog. Beitrage, 1 Abthlg., Giitersloh 1872), pp. 18-25. ^21 What Gerlach says at p. 33 f. about the possibility of two governors in one province, proves only gross ignorance of the facts of the case. See against him, Wieseler, Beitrage, p. 43 f. — The case is better with Quandt, who conjectures that Varus occupied a position subordinate to Quirinius (see Zeitordnung, p. 22). But, according to Josejjhus, there can be no doubt that Varus was in possession of the supreme command in Syria. 1-^ Sanclemente, De vulgaris aerae emendatione, iv. 6, pp. 443-448. — The materials regarding the legati and procuratores ad census accipiendos may be found collected together in Marquardt, RdmischeStaatsvencaltung, Bd. ii. 1876, p. 209 (2 Aufl. von Dessen und Domaszewski besorgt, 1884, pp. 215, 216) ; and Unger, "De censibus iprovincinvum. 'Ronianorum" (Leipziger Studienzur class. Philol. Bd. x. 1887, j^p. 1-76). — It is not yet decided whether there were even in early imperial times special officers of this sort besides the ordinary governors in the provinces. linger contends against the idea by seeking to prove that in the earlier days of the empire the governors were themselves charged with the business of valuation and taxin", and that in § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 141 absolutely inadmissible from the words of the evangelist, since rjye/xovevovro'i rrjv\ov. " Now there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works — a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had cou- DIV. I. VOL. II. K 146 THE EOMAN-HEKODIAN AGE. demned liim to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appealed to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him ; and the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day." From the fourth century, when this passage was quoted by Eusebius and others (Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. i. 11 ; Demon- stratio Evangelica, iii. 3. 105—106, ed. Gaisford ; Pseudo- Hegesippus, De hello Judaico, ii. 12), through the whole of the Middle Ages, the genuineness of this paragraph was never disputed. Indeed, it contributed not a little to exalt the reputation of Josephus in the Christian Church. It was eagerly seized upon as a proof of the truth of the evangelical history. It was only in the sixteenth century that criticism first moved in the matter, and since then to the present day the controversy, pro and con, has gone on uninterruptedly. We may surely be at least unanimous as to this, that the words, as we have them now, were not written by Josephus. Whatever may be advanced in their favour does not amount to much in comparison with the unquestionable indications of spuriousness. Our manuscripts, of which the oldest, the Ambrosianus F. 128 step., do not go further back than the eleventh century (see above, vol, i. p. 103),^ without exception have this paragraph. But this proves only the great antiquity of the interpolation, which besides is vouched for by Eusebius. Over against the old citations since Eusebius stands the fact that it is extremely probable that Origen did not read this passage in his text of Josephus ; for, just where one would have expected it, he betrays no knowledge of it.^ Even then, ^ The equally ancient Patisin. 1419, which Gerlach, p. 107, designates the oldest manuscript, contains only the first ten books of the Antiquities. ^ In several passages where Origen speaks of James, the brother of Jesus Christ, he mentions it as a remarkable circumstance that Josephus Bhould have made favourable allusion to this man, although he (Josephus) § 17. THE SONS OF HEROD. 147 in respect of the external evidences, objections are not altogether wanting. But the objections on internal grounds are more decided. If reference be made to the genuinely Josephine style, we may for that only bestow upon the interpolator the praise of having very skilfully performed his task. The similarity of style is not sufficient to outweigh the non-Josephine character of the contents. As concerns the contents then, it is clear that whoever wrote the words 6 Xpc(TTo<; ovTo<; rjv was distinctly a Christian ; for that rjv is not equivalent to ivofjui^eTo and cannot be rendered : He was the Christ in the popular belief. On this point it is not necessary to say more. But it is also equally certain that Josephus was not a Christian. Urffo : the passage, to say the least of it, has interpolations in it. The point under discussion is simply this : whether there are interpolations in the passage or whether it is wholly spurious. Let us make the attempt to distinguish, and cast out what is suspicious. The words €i 'Iriaov a; ^ptara x.T.x. — It is scarcely conceivable that Origen would have so expressed himself, if he had known the famous passage. 148 TUE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. avTov elpijKOTtov. Finally, also, the concluding words want the necessary support so soon as the words o Xpiaro'; ovto<; rjv are removed from the text. If, now, we examine the passage as thus reduced we shall find that as good as nothing remains : a couple of insignificant phrases which, in the form in which they stand after our operation has been performed, could not have been written by Josephus. If one therefore continues to maintain the theory of interpolation, it cannot at any rate be in the sense of a simple insertion of Christian additions, but, with Ewald, Paret, and others, in the sense of a complete working up in a new form of the original text of Josephus. But if it is once admitted as an established fact, that of the present text scarcely a couple of words are from the hand of Josephus, is it not then more reasonable to recognise the utter spuriousness of the passage, and assume that Josephus has throughout been silent regarding Christ ? That this hypothesis is impossible cannot be maintained. It is known that Josephus wished to represent his people in the most favour- able light possible. Therefore he speaks as little as he can of the Messianic Hope, since to his cultured readers it could only have appeared as foolishness, and, besides, would have been an unwelcome subject with the favourite of the Caesars ; for in it lay the power of the opposition to Eome. Josephus might casually refer to John the Baptist without making mention of the Messianic Hope ; but this would have been no longer possible had he introduced Christ. He could neither represent Christ as a teacher of virtue, like the Baptist, nor describe the Christian community as a school of philosophy, like those of the Pharisees and Sadducees. There- fore he will be silent throughout about this phenomenon. If, for proof of the contrary, we should refer to the subsequent mention of James, the brother of Jesus Christ (Antiq. XX. 9. 1 : rcy dB€\ 40, 41-41. 153 wondered at that he eagerly desired an improvement in his circumstances ; but there seemed at that time no prospect of accomplishing it until the aged Tiberius should be succeeded on the throne by Caligula, whom he had befriended. Un- thinkingly he once expressed his wish aloud to Caligula in the presence of his coachman Eutychus. At a later period he happened to bring a charge of theft against this same Eutychus, and had him brought before the city prefect Piso.^^ Eutychus now made a declaration that he had an important secret to communicate to the emperor. Tiberius at first gave no heed to the matter.^^ But when, after some time,^^ a hearing was granted, and Tiberius came to know what Agrippa had said, he had him immediately put in fetters and cast into prison. Agrippa now continued in confinement for six months, until the death of the emperor on 16th March a.d. 37.^* With the death of Tiberius and the accession of Caligula began for Agrippa the period of his good fortune. Caligula scarcely waited till the solemnities of the funeral of Tiberius were over before he had delivered his friend from his imprisonment and conferred upon him what had been the tetrarchy of Philip, and that also of Lysanias, with the title of king. To this gift the Senate further added the honorary rank of a praetor.^'^ Instead of the iron chain which he had ^1 The Piso here referred to cannot have been the same as the one who was dead, according to Tacitus, Annals, vi. 10, in a.d. 32, as Wieseler, Beitrufje, p. 8 ff., wishes to make out ; for he is still referred to in Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 10, after tlie death of Tiberius. — Josephus in two passages designates him (pCxxi zi;; ivo'kiu!;. On other Greek designations of the fraefedus urbi, see Mommsen, liiimisches Staatsrecht, ii. 2. 981. 1^ Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 5. '^ xpovov iyyevof^.suov (Antiq. xviii. 6. 6), of which Wieseler makes four years. See the Betveis des Glauben.% 1870, p. 169. 1* Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 6-7 ; IFars of the Jews, ii. 9. 5. 1^ Philo, In Flaccum, sec. 6, ed. Mangey, ii. 523. Compare above, vol. i. p. 450. The loan was obtained, not through the emperor, but through the Senate. See Philo, I.e.: ^ctaoAa, >cxi Kxiaapo; kxi u-tto tijj 154 THE ROMAN-HERODUN AGE. worn, Caligula gave him a golden chain of equal weight." But Agrippa still continued to stay in Rome for a year and a half. It was not before autumn of a.d. 38 that he went back by way of Alexandria to Palestine, that he might set in order the afifairs of his kingdom.^^ Soon afterwards, through imperial favour, he obtained yet more important territorial additions. It has been already told (above, at p. 36) how Herod Antipas in a.d. 39, by his own fault, had lost his tetrarcliy, and now, probably not before A.D. 40, Caligula bestowed it also upon Agrippa. In the autumn of that same year we find Agrippa once more at Eome or Puteoli, where he contrived by his personal intercession to prevent Caligula, at least for a long time, from persisting in his attempt to set up his statue in the temple of Jerusalem (see above, p. 102). He then remained in the company of Caligula, and was still present in Rome when his patron, on 24th January a.d. 41, was murdered by Cliarea, and contributed not a little to secure the succession to the throne of the Caesars to the feeble Claudius.^® It may readily be supposed that he was not the man to perform such serAdces without securing some personal advantage. The new emperor was obliged, in return, not only to confirm him in the possessions which he had previously, but also to add to these Judea and Samaria ; so that Agrippa now united under his sway the whole territory of his grandfather. Besides this, he obtained consular rank. For the confirming of this grant, accordinf; to ancient custom, a solemn covenant was con- '8 Josephus, Antiq. i.v\\\. 6. 10 ; Wars of the Jeics, ii. 9. 6 ; Philo, In Flaccum, sec. 5 iiiit., ed. Mangey, ii. 520 scj. ; Dio Cassius, lix. 8. — From the insciii)tion at El-Muscliennef (in Le Bas et Waddington, Inscriptions Grecques et Latines, t. iii. n. 2211) we see tliat the territories of Agrippa extended as far as what is now the Hauran. *' Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 11 ; Philo, In Flaccum, sec. 5, ed. Maugej, il 521. Compare above, p. 37 and p. 95. *** Jo.S(,'plnis, Antiq. xix. 1-4 ; Wars of the Jeics, ii. 11. § 18. HEROD AGKlPrA I., A.D. 37, 40, 41-44. 155 eluded in the Forum, but the documentary deed of gift was engraved on brazen tablets and placed in the CapitoL'® II. The first act by which Agrippa celebrated his return to Palestine was significant of the spirit and disposition with which he was to conduct the government of his kingdom. It was an act of piety. The golden chain which Caligula had bestowed upon him on his liberation from imprisonment " he hung up within the limits of the temple, over the treasury, that it might be a memorial of the severe fate he had lain under, and a testimony of his change for the better ; and that it might be a demonstration how the greatest pro- 13 Josephus, Antiq. xix. 5. 1 ; JVars of the Jews, ii. 11. 5 ; Dio Cassiu.«, Ix. 8. Josephus expresses himself in such a manner as to imply that the tetrarchy of Lysanias was now anew conferred upon Agrippa. But seeing that he had already received that territory from Caligula, the statement can only mean that now the gift was formally confirmed. It is in the highest degree probable that Josephus found in the documents which he used the statement that Agrippa, by the favour of Claudius, held possession of the tetrarchy of Lysanias in addition to the whole territories of his grandfather. — The concluding of the covenant is represented on a coin, of which the superscription is indeed no longer perfectly legible ; on which, liowever, at any rate there is mention of a u^^^ «;>//« of King Agrippa with the Roman Senate and people {avvKKYixnc, kxi lyi,uo; ' Pufixiau). See especi- ally Reichardt in the Numismatische Zeitsrhrift of Huber and Karabacek, iii. 1871, pp. 83-88 ; Monmisen, Num. Zeitschrift, iii. pp. 449 ff.; Madden, Numismatic Chronicle, 1875, pp. 69-76 ; Madden, Coi^is of the Jews, 1881, p. 136 sq. Among the six different attempted readings enumerated by Madden, the most successful is that of Mommsen. — That Claudius was generally inclined toward such old covenants is affirmed by Suetonius, Claudius, 25 : " Cum I'egibus foedus in foro icit porca caesa ac vetere fetialium praefatione adhibita." A return home of Agrippa I. or II. (possibly the present return of Agrippa I.) is referred to in the inscription of El-Muschennef in Le Baa et Waddington, Inscriptions Grecques et Latines, t. iii. n. 2211 : t'Ttip aomnplxg x,vpiov fiotai- "Kiu; Aypi-TTTTX x.ocl stcivo^ov kx- T tVJi^K A<6f ^-«' TTCtTplOV (?) ... . Ofioi/oieti riv oikov uKohof^^rfJiv^. 156 THE KOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. sperity may have a fall, and that God sometimes raises what is fallen down." ^'^ At the same time he presented a thank- offering, " because he would not neglect any precept of the law ; " and bore the expenses of a large number of Nazarites, in order that they might discharge the obligation of their vow. With such acts the quondam adventurer began his new reign ; and he maintained the same tone throughout the three years during which he was allowed to live and govern. There were again golden days for Pharisaism ; a revival of the age of Alexandra. Hence Josephus and the Talmud are unanimous in sounding forth the praises of Agrippa. " He loved to live continually at Jerusalem, and was exactly careful in the observance of the laws of his country. He therefore kept himself entirely pure ; nor did any day pass over his head without its appointed sacrifice." Thus runs the eulogistic strain of Josephus ; ^^ and the Talmud relates how he as a simple Israelite with his own hand presented the first-fruits in the temple."^ And not only at home, but also abroad, he represented the interests and claims of Judaism. ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 6. 1. — The golden charms which, according to the Mishna, Middoth iii. 8, were hung on the curtain of the temple court, can scarcely be the same as are referred to here. See the contrary iu Derenbourg, p. 209. 2^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 6. 1. ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 7. 3 : lihs7» yovv ui/rZ Ztocirx y.ou avi/sx'^i i" '^oi; lipoao/^vfiotg ijv, x.xl roc 'Tsrccrpiec xxdxpu; Wvipu. i^icc Truan; yovv xvrou viyiu d-yusicts, oi/os ijfiipx ti; TrxpuOivsu otCru p^jj^si/ot/aot Qvatx,:. ^^ Mishna, Bikkurim iii. 4 : When the procession with the firstlings of the fruits of the fields reached the temple mount " every one, even King Agrippa himself, took his basket upon his shoulder, and went up until he came into the court," etc. — Here, as generally throughout the rabbinical traditions, it is not, indeed, quite certain whether Agrippa I. or II. is meant. — On the ceremonial ritual in connection with the presentation of the first-fruits, see, especially, Mishna, Bikkurim iii. 1-9 ; also Philo's tract, defesto cophini (Opera, ed. Eichter, v. 48-50 = Tischendorf, Philonea, pp. 69-71) ; Gratz, Monatsschrift, 1877, p. 433 ff., and generally the litera- ture referred to in Div. II. vol. i. p. 238. § 18. HEROD AGRIPPA I., A.D. 37, 40, 41-44. 157 "When on one occasion in the Phoenician city of Dora, a mob of young people erected a statue of the emperor in the Jewish synagogue, he used his influence with the governor of Syria, P. Petronius, so that not only for the future was any such outrage strictly forbidden, but also the guilty parties were called to account for their proceedings.^* And when he betrothed his daughter Drusilla to Epiphanes, son of King Antiochus of Commagene, he made him promise tliat he would submit to be circumcised.^^ By such displays of f)iety he gave abundant satisfaction to the people who were under the guidance of the Pharisees. This was shown in a very striking manner when, at the Peast of Tabernacles in a.d. 41, according to the old custom, he read the Book of Deutero- nomy,^^ and in the passage, " Thou mayest not set a stranger over thee that is not thy brother" (Deut. xvii. 15), he burst forth in tears, because he felt himself referred to in it. Then cried out the people to him, " Be not grieved, Agrippa ! Thou art our brother ! Thou art our brother ! " ^'^ 2* Joseph us, Antiq. xix. 6. 3. ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xx. 7. 1. — Epiphanes afterwards refused to fulfil his promise, and therefore the marriage was not consummated. ^^ At the close of each Sabbatical year, i.e. in the beginning of the eighth year, Deuteronomy had to be read at the Feast of Tabernacles (Deut. xxxi. 10 fF. ; Sota vii. 8). Seeing, then, that the year 68-69 was a Sabbatical year (see above, vol. i. p. 41), the year 40-41 must also have been one, and, indeed, it would be the only one occurring during the period of Agrippa's reign. Accordingly, this incident took place in a.d. 41. *^ Mishna, Sota vii. 8, The declaration of the people could also be vindicated in accordance with strictly Pharisaic ideas ; for when the Edomites (Idumeans) went over to Judaism, their descendants in the third generation became full members and citizens of the Israelitish com- monwealth (Deut. xxiii, 8, 9). — Hitzig, GescMchte des Volkes Israel, ii. 571, makes the narrative refer to Agrippa II., and Braun, Monatssclirift fur GescMchte und Wissenschaft des Judcnthumus, 1870, pp. 541-548, gives himself great trouble in order to prove that this reference is correct ; whereas the majority of scholars (see the list given by Brann at p. 541) ] ire for Agrippa I. And this latter view is right ; for a decided inclination to favour the Pharisees is far more clearly proved in the case of Agrippa I. than in that of his son. 158 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. The careful observance of Pharisaic traditions, however, does not seem to have been the only ground of his popularity. We must also allov? to him a certain natural amiability. Josephus, at least, ascribes to him an amiable disposition and unbounded benevolence.^^ That he was grateful for service that had been rendered him is proved by his appointment of Silas, a faithful companion who had shared his adventures, to the supreme command of his troops.^^ He must, indeed, have had many unpleasant experiences with this Silas, for he was frequently reminded by him in a rude, rough way of his earlier troubles, and the service which he had rendered him. In order to rid himself of this troublesome prattler, Agrippa was obliged to cast him into prison. But it was a new proof of his goodheartedness that on the next celebration of his l)irthday he caused the prisoner to be called, so that he might share in the enjoyments of the banquet. This kindly offer, however, had no effect, for Silas would take nothing as a matter of favour, and so was obliged to remain in prison.^ Agrippa on one occasion exhibited his clemency towards Simon the Pharisee,^^ who in the king's absence had excited a popular tumult in Jerusalem, and had charged the king with transgression of the law. Agrippa obtained information of these proceedings at Caesarea, summoned Simon to his pre- sence, caused him to be seated alongside of himself in the theatre, and said to him in a gentle and kindly tone : " Tell me now, what was done here contrary to the law ? " Over- ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 7. 3 : Tlpctu; 6 t^oVo;- ' Ay pur tit x, kxI Trpog iza.vru.i TO iVipyi^liCOV OflOlOV. ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 6. 3. ^° Josephus, Antiq. xix. 7. 1. ®^ Frankel, Darke-ha-Mishna, p. 58 sq., regards him as identical with Simon, the reputed son of Hillel and father of Gamaliel I. But the existence of this Simon is more than questionable (see Div. II. vol. i. p. 363). Besides, the chronology does not rightly fit in, since Gamaliel 1. was already head of the school before the time of Agrippa (Acts V. 34). § 18. HEKOD AGRIPPA I., A.D. 37, 40, 41-t4. 159 come with shame the learned scribe could give no answer, and was dismissed by the king with presents.^^ To a Pharisaic-national policy belonged also emancipation from a position of dependence upon Eome. And even in this direction Agrippa made, at least, two rather shy and timid attempts. In order to strengthen the fortifications of Jeru- salem, the capital, he began to build on the north of the city a powerful new wall, which, according to Josephus' account, would, if it had been completed, have made the city impreg- nable. But, unfortunately, before the work could be carried out, the emperor, at the instigation of Marsus, the governor of Syria, issued an injunction against the continuance of it.^^ Of yet greater significance for Eome was the conference of princes assembled by Agrippa soon after this at Tiberias. ]S'o fewer than five Koman vassal kings : Antiochus of Com- magene, Sampsigeram ^* of Einesa, Cotys of Lesser Armenia, Polemon of Pontus, and Herod of Chalcis, answered the invitation of Agrippa. But this enterprise also was broken up by Marsus. The Syrian governor himself put in an appearance at Tiberias, and ordered the other guests without delay to return home.^^ '^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 7. 4. '^^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 7. 2 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 11. 6, v. 4. 2. Com- pare also Derenbourg, p. 218 i". The original forbearance of the emperor toward the building of the wall seems to have been purchased by Agripjja through the bribing of the imperial councillors. Compare Tacitus, History, v, 12: "per avaritiara Claudianorum temporum erapto jure muniendi struxere muros in pace tamquam ad helium." 3* Aramic DIJti'DtJ' in De Vogiie, Syrie Centrale, Inscriptions, p. 54 (n. 75). —On an inscription at Emesa, of the Seleucid year 390 = a.d. 78-79, one 'S.xf.cGiyipxfio; is referred to, probably a member of the royal family (Le Bas et Waddington, Inscriptions, t. iii. n. 2567. In the Corpus Inscr. Graec. n. 4511, the date is wanting). At a later period, too, the name "Sotfitrtyspccfioi is found also in that region (Waddington, n. 2564, of the Seleucid year 494 = a.d. 182-183). ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 8. 1. — Compare in general, on the above-named vassal kings, the paragraphs referring thereto in Kuhn, Die stddtische und biirgerliche Ver/assung des romischen Reichs, Bd. ii. ; Marquardt, Rimische 160 THE ROMAN-HERODIAX AGE. rinally, it was a further consequence of liis Jewish policy that the otherwise good-natured king should become the persecutor of the young Christian community, especially of the apostles. James the elder, son of Zebedee, was put by him to a martyr's death ; and Peter escaped his hand only by the intervention of a miracle.^^ — Moreover, he was an enemy not of the Christians only. The heathen cities also within his territories hated him on account of his Jewish policy, as is proved by the unconcealed jubilation with which the news of his death was received by the Caesareans and Sebasteans.^'^ That Agrippa's Pharisaic piety was a real conviction of the heart is, in view of his earlier life, not in the least probable. He who had spent fifteen years in gaiety and debauchery is not one of whom it could be expected that in the evening of his days he should from hearty conviction assume the Pharisaic yoke. Besides this, we have the most certain proofs that the king's Jewish piety was maintained only within the limits of the Holy Land. When he went abroad he was, like his grandfather, a liberal latitudinarian patron of Greek culture. Thus, for example, Berytus had much to tell of the pagan magnificence which he there cultivated. He had erected there at his own expense a beautiful theatre, an amphitheatre, baths, and piazzas. At tlie opening of the building, games and sports of all sorts were performed, and among the rest in the amphitheatre there was a gladiatorial Staatsverwaltung, Bd. i. 2 Aufl. 1881 (p. 398 f. ; Commagene ; p. 403 f. : Emesa ; p. 369 : Lesser Armenia ; p. 359 f.: Pontus ; p. 400 f. : Chalcis) ; also Lewin, Fasti sacri, n. 1662. On the dynasty of Commagene see especially : Mommsen, " Die Dynastie von Commagene " in Mitthdlungen des deutschen arclmeologischen Institutes in Athen, Bd. i. 1876, pp. 27-29. (See vol. i. pp. 184, 185, of the present work.) On the kings of Pontus, the treatises of Sallet and Waddington named by Marquardt, Bomische Staatsverwaltung, i. 360, note 7. On Herod of Chalcis, see Appendix I. 36 Acts xii. 1-19. 3^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 9. 1. — The li^xazriuol are soldiers of Samaria (Sebaste), who lay in garrison in Caesarea. Ccjnipare above, p. 53. § 18. HEROD AGRIPPA I., A.D. 37, 40, 41-44. 161 coinljat, at which 1400 malefactors were made to slaughter one auother.^^ Also at Caesarea he caused games to be per- formed.^^ There also statues of his daughters were erected.**^ So, too, the coins which were stamped during Agrippa's reign are in thorough agreement with the description of the state of matters now given. Only those stamped in Jerusalem had on them no image, while of those that were minted in other cities some had the image of Agrippa, others that of the emperor.'*^ The ofQcial title of Agrippa is tlie same as that 3* Josephus, Antiq. xix. 7. 5.— The favour shown to Berytus is explained hy the circumstance that it was a Roman colony. Compare above, vol. i. p. 430. ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 8. 2. ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 9. 1. *^ Compare on the coins of Agrippa generally : Eckhel, Dodr. Num. iii. 491 sq. ; Mionnet, Description de medailles, v. 567-569 ; Lenormant, Tresor de Numismatique, p. 126 sq. pi. Ix. n. 3-7 ; Cavedoni, Biblische Numismatil; i. 53 f., 61-64 (ascribes all to Agrij^pa II.) ; De Saulcy, liecherches, p. 147 sq. ; Cavedoni, Biblische Numismatik, ii. 35-37 ; Levy, Geschichte der jiidischen Miinzen, p. 80 f. ; Madden, History of Jeivish Coinage, pp. 103-111 ; De Saulcy, Etude chronologique de la vie et des . monnaies des wis juifs Agrippa I. et Agrippa II. 1869 (conipare above, vol. i. p. 27) ; Reichardt in the Wiener Numismatische Zcitschrift, Bd. iii. 1871, p. 83 if. ; Mommsen, Wiener Num. Zeitschr. iii. 1871, p. 449 If. ; Madden, Numismatic Chronicle, 1875, pp. 58-80 ; Madden, Coins of the Jews, 1881, pp. 129-139 ; Stickel, Zeitschrift des deutschen Falestina- Vereins, vii. 1884, p. 213. — Those of most frequent occurrence among the coins of Agrippa are those without an image, with merely emblems (sun- shade 1 and three ears of corn), which almost all have the year-number VI. and the simple inscription BACIAGCUC APpiflA.. They were by the older numismatists ascribed to Agrippa II., but since De Saulcy have been rightly assigned to Agrippa I., in consequence of their having been minted at Jerusalem. The existence of examples with other year-numbers (V., VII., VIII., IX.) is very questionable. Compare especially De Saulcy, Numis- matic Chronicle, 1871, p. 255; " J'ai encore recueilli un tres-grand nombre de monnaies d' Agrippa an parasol, cent au moins ! Toutes sans exception sont dat(5es de I'an VI. Je persiste done plus que jamais a me mefier des autres dates qui ont ete signalees." — Besides those coins properly so called of Agrippa I., there were also stamped during his reign : (1) In Caesarea by the sea {Kxiaxpien n ■yrpo; 1i(ioi.aru> T^ifcsui), coins with the image of Agrippa and the superscription BccaiMj; /myecg Ayp/^rxac di'Kdx.tx.KTxp. (2) In Caesarea Panias, coins with the image of Caligula and the (more or less defective) name of the emperor, or without his name. (3) In DIV. I. VOL. II. L 162 THE ROMAN-IIERODIAN AGE. of the other Eoman vassal kings of that time, rrom an inscription we know that his family had been adopted into the gens Julia -j^"^ and from another that he bore the title ^aaiXev<; /xiya^ ^LXoKaia-ap €vcr6^r]<; koI ^i\op(ofiai,o.iov ^AypiVTrct fixai'hiu; dv/XTiip. — There is also evidence of other members of the Herodian family bearing the Gentile name of the Julians ; by Agrippa II., from the inscription given by Le Bas et Waddington, Inscrii^tions, t. iii. n. 2112. Agrippa I. had a son-in-law called 'lov'hio; ' A.p'x,i'KD(,og (Josephus, Antiq. xix. 9. 1 ; Against Apion, i. 9). Probabl}' also the Faioj 'lovT^iog fixai'hiu; 'AAs|«i'3ooy vio; 'AypiTrTru; rctfiiocg Kxl cci/riarpxTYjyo; rsji ' Aai'ct; (Wood, Discoveries at EphesxLS, Inscrip- tions from the Great Theatre, p. 50, note 5), referred to in an inscription at Ephesus, belonged to the Herodian family. — Compare, generally, on the frequent occurrence of the Gentile name of the Julians among the Eomaii vassal kings of the days of the empire : Renan, Mission de Phe'nicie, p. 310 ; Bohn, Qua condicione juris reges sociipopuli Romani fuerint, Berol. 1877, p. 25 sq. — It should be observed that the name Julius, as well- as the consular rank which Agrippa enjoyed, implied the possession of Roman citizenship, which had been conferred upon the Herodian family as early as in the days of Antipater, the father of Herod the Great. See iirst vol. of this work, p. 378. 43 The most complete form of the titles of Agrippa I. and Agrippa II. has been given us in the interesting inscriptions which Waddington found at Si'a, half a league from Kanawat, on the western base of the Hauran (Le Bas et Wsiddmgton, Inscriptions Grecques et Latines, t. iii. n. 2365). It runs as follows : — 'Exi fia.at'kic.); pt.s'y a.'Ko'j ' Aypt'T^'T^ot, (frhOKUtaotpo; ivailiov; x.ot,\ (pi'hopup(,u\_i-'\ ov, rci> ix. ficcffi'Aius fisyx'hov '' Aypl'Tziva, (^tt^dKuiGxpo; ivatjiovg kxi [if/-] 'hopuy.ciiov, '' Atpupiv; din'hivdipo'; xccl ^Aypi'Trvx; viog c)ividnKct.v. The titles (piKox.oi.LQUp and (pt'Kopupt.a.iog occur very frequently during that period. Numerous examples are given in the Index of the Corpus Inscr. Graec. p. 165. Compare also Bohn, Qua condicione juris reges, p. 14. — Most precisely and perfectly in accordance with the titles of the two Agrippas are those of King Sauromates of Bosporus, Corpus Inscr. .Graec. n. 2123 and 2124 : liaatT^ix iiotai'hiuv y.kyxv Tiliipiov 'lov7\iov ^.ctvp'j- § 18. IlEROD AGRIPPA I., A.D. 37, 40, 41-44. 163 Pharisaism were purely matters of policy. Upon the whole he was a careful imitator of the old Herod, "only milder in disposition and somewhat more sly." ^ Yet even the grandfather felt himself obliged to make concessions to the Pharisees. Agrippa was in this matter only consistently following out his general lines of policy, for he very well knew that the peace which he loved could be secured in no other way. The country did not long enjoy his rule. After he had reigned little more than three years, if we reckon from A.D. 41, he died at Caesarea very suddenly in a.d, 44.^^ The two accounts of his death which we have, in Acts xii. 19-23, and Josephus, Antiq. xix. 8. 2, with many variations, are yet fA,a.T-fiv 0t7^ox,x.iaxpcc k»\ (fi'Kooufieciov iiKrifiYj. Compare also, in reference to him, Wilmanns, Exempla Inscr. Lat. n. 2689. ^* Keim in Schenkel's Bibellexikon, iii. 55. *^ The date of Agrippa's death is discussed in the most complete manner by Wieseler, Chronologie des apostolischen Zeitalters, pp. 129-136. Agrippa died after he had reigned three full years over all Palestine (Josephus, Antiq. xix. 8. 2 : rpiTOv Ss 'iro; »vtu liaai'hivouTi rijg o'hyi; ^lovhotlx; -TTiTThYipuTo), consequently in a.d. 44, and indeed, soon after the feast of the Passover (Acts xii. 3 ff.), while the games were being celebrated at Caesarea in honour of the emperor (e/j tyiv KoitfTxpo; T/,a'/j», v'Trsp tvj; Uelvov ocoT/iPtdi, Josephus, Antiq. xix. 8. 2). By these games Wieseler under- stands those regular wrestling matches at Caesarea founded by Herod the Great, which were celebrated every fourth year. Upon the hypothesis, therefore, that they began on the 12th August, he places the death of Agrippa on the 6th August. But this hypothesis that the games began on 1st August is quite an arbitrary assumption. Indeed, the words of Josephus {i)7rsp TYi; iKitvov aurnpia;) jilainly show that no ix'gular games are here intended, but some extraordinary entertainments, and point to games which were celebrated at Rome in honour of Claudius' return from Britain in the spring of a.d. 44 (Dio Cassius, Is. 23), and afterward.s also in the provinces. Such also is the opinion of Anger, De tcmporum in act. ap. ratione, p. 40 ; Hausrath, Ncutestamcntliche Zcitgeschichte, 2 Auil. ii. 278 f. ; Lewin, Fasti sacri, p. 279 sq. n. 1674. The regular games of Caesarea celebrated every fourth, not every fifth year (see vol. i. of present work, p. 439), would come round, not in a.d. 44, but in a.d. 43, since, according to Josephus, Antiq. xvi. 5. 1, they were instituted in the 28t]i[ year of Herod = A.u.c. 744, and so would come round in a.u.c. 796 = A. P. 43. 164 THE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. in tliorongh and detailed agreement on the principal points.''* The Acts of the Apostles relates that in Caesarea, sitting on the judgment - seat (/SjJ/xa) dressed in his royal robes, he delivered an oration to the ambassadors representing the citizens of Tyre and Sidon, with whom, we know not why, he had been displeased. While he was speaking the people called out : It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. Im- mediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory ; and he was eaten up of worms, and gave up the ghost. According to Josephus, he was present at Caesarea while games were being celebrated there in honour of the emperor. On the second day he appeared in the theatre in a robe which was made wholly of silver. When the robe sparkled in the sun, the flatterers cried out to him declaring that he was a god {Oeov Trpoaayopevovre'i), and entreating that he would have mercy upon them. The king allowed himself to be carried away by their flattery. Soon thereafter he saw an owl sitting upon a rope, which at once he accejDted as a presage of a speedy death.^^ He then knew that his hour had come. Immediately a most severe pain arose in his bowels. He had to be carried into the house, and in five days was a corpse. — It thus appears that the principal points : Caeserea as the scene of the incident, the brilliant robe, the flattering shout, the sudden death — are common to both narratives, although the details have been somewhat diversified in the course of transmission. Agrippa left, besides his three daughters (Berenice, *^ The rendering of the story of Eusehius, Hist. eccl. ii. 10, is in all essential points in thorough agreement with that of Acts and Josephus, although he changes the owl of Josephus into an angel. Compare also Ranisch, De Lucae et Josephi in morte Herodis Agrippae consensu.. Lips. 1745. In recent times : Gerlach, Zeitschrift fur luth. Theologie, 1869, pp. 57-62. — On the changing of the owl into an angel, Heinichen, Eusebii Scripta historica, iii. 654-656. *'' Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 7. — On the owl as a bird of evil omen, see riiny, Hist, Nat. x. 12, 34-35. § 18. IIEROD AGRIPPA I., A.D. 37, 40, 41-44. 165 Mariamme, and Drusilla), only one son, then in his seven- teenth year, whose name also was Agrippa. The Emperor Claudius had been disposed to give over to him the kingdom of his father; but his advisers restrained him from carrying out his intentions. And so again the whole of Palestine, as formerly Judea and Samaria had been, was taken possession of as Eoman territory, and its administration given over to a procurator under the supervision of the governor of Syria/'* The younger Agrippa continued meanwhile to live in retirement. •*8 Josephus, Antiq. xix. 9. 1-2 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 11. 6. — Bormaiin (De Syriae provinciae Romanae jpartihus capita nonnulla, 1865, pp. 3-5) assumes that Palestine during the period a.d. 44-49 was administered by a procurator independent of the legate of Syria ; but in a.d. 49 was attached to the province of Syria, because, forsooth, Tacitus, Annals, xii. 23, begins his narrative of the events of the year 49 with the words : " Itaraei et Judaei defunctis regibus, Sohaemo atque Agrippa, provinciae Suriae additi." But it is evident that the narrative of Tacitus is very summary, and brings together things that in point of time lay quite apart from one another. Hence such a conclusion cannot be based upon his statement. Just in a.d. 44 or a.d. 45, immediately after the death of Agrippa I., the legate of Syria, Cassius Longinus, did interfere in the affairs of Judea. The independence of the procurator of Judea was there- fore no greater then than it was subsequently, and it was subsequently no less than it was then. Compare generally above, p. 47 ; and especially against Bormann, Marquardt, Eimiische Staatsvencaltung, Bd. i, 2 Aufl. 1881, p. 411, note 11, § 19. THE ROMAN PROCUEATORS, A.D. 44-66. Sources. JosEPHUS, Antiq. xx. 1 and 5-11 ; TFars of the Jews, ii. 11-14. Zonaras, Annales, vi. 12-17 (summary from Josephus). Literature. EwALD, History of Israel, vii. 412-426, 479-485. (jRatz, Geschichte der Jvden, 4 Aufl. iii. pp. 361 if., 426 ff., 724 ff. HiTZiG, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, ii. 588-594. ScHNECKENBURGER, Zeitgeschichte, pp. 215-224. Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, 2 Aufl. ii. 362 ff., iii. 331-374, 423-426. Lewin, Fasti sacri, 1865, ad. ann. 44-46. Gerlach, Die Edmischen Statthalter in Syrien und Judcia, 1865, p. 67 If. Gratz, " Chronologische Pracisirung der Reihenfolge der letzten romischen Landpfleger in Judaa," etc. {Monatsschrift fiir Geschichte und Wissen- schaft des Judenthums), 1877, pp. 401 ff., 443 ff.). Compare, Geschichte der Juden, 4 Aufl. iii. p. 724 if., where the treatise from the Monatsschrift is almost entirely reproduced. RoHDEN, De Palaestina et Arabia provinciis Romanis qiiaestiones selectae, Berol. 1885, pp. 34-36. Kellner, " Die romischen Statthalter von Syrien und Judaa zur Zeit Christi und der Apostel." Zweiter Artikel. " Die kaiserlichen Pro- curatoren von Judaa" (Zeitschrift fiir katholischen Theologie, 1888, p. 630 ff.). Menke's Bibelatlas, Bl, V. Special Map of " Judea and neighbouring countries in the time of Felix and Festus." When we glance over the history of the Eoman procurators, to whom once more the government of Palestine was en- trusted, we might readily suppose that all of them, as if by secret arrangement, so conducted themselves as most certainly to arouse the people to revolt. Even the best among them, 16(5 § 19. THE ROMAN PROCURATORS, A.D. 4-4-GG. 167 to say nothing at all of the others who trampled right and law under foot, had no appreciation of the fact that a people like the Jews required, in a permanent degree, consideration for their prejudices and peculiarities. Instead of exercising mildness and toleration, they had only applied themselves with inexorable strictness to suppress any movement of the popular life. — As compared with those who followed, the words of Josephus are true regarding the first two procurators, that, " making no alterations of the ancient laws and customs, they kept the nation in tranquillity." ^ 1. The first procurator whom Claudius sent to Palestine was Cuspius Fadus (a.d. 44 — 1)? Immediately after he had entered upon his office he had an opportunity for affirming his determination to maintain order. When he arrived in Palestine the inhabitants of Perea were in a state of open war with the city of Philadelphia.' The conflict had arisen over disputes about the boundaries of their respective territories. Inasmuch as the Pereans were the parties at fault, Fadus caused one of the three leaders of the party to be executed and the other two to be banished from the country. — But that Fadus with all his uprightness and love of justice had no appreciation of the peculiar characteristics of the Jewish people, is proved by his demand that the beautiful robe of the high priest, which in earlier times, a.d. 6-36, had laid under Eoman keeping, and had been afterwards given up by Vitellius (see above, p. 88), should again be committed to the charge of the Eomans.* Thus, without any occasion whatever, by petty annoyances, the feelings of the people, which were most sensitive in matters of this sort, were outraged. Fortunately, Fadus and the governor of Syria, Cassius Longinus, who on account of this important affair had ^ Josephus, TFars of the Jews, ii. 11. 6. ^ Josephus, Antiq. xix. 9. 2. 3 On Pluladelphia, see Div. II. vol. i. pp. 119-121. ■♦ Josephus, Antiq. xx. 1.1. 168 THE EOMAN-HEKODIAN AGE. gone up to Jerusalem, were considerate enough as to at least allow a Jewish embassy to proceed to Home, which by the mediation of the younger Agrippa obtained an order from Claudius that in the matter of the garments things should continue as they had been/ More serious than this conflict was one which occurred at a later period, and led to open war and shedding of blood. One who pretended to be a prophet, Theudas by name, gathered a large multitude of followers after him, with whom he marched down to the Jordan, giving them the assurance that he by his mere word would part the stream and lead them across on dry land. Tliis, indeed, was only to be a proof of his divine mission, and what he had mainly in view, the contest with Eome, would follow. At any rate this was how the matter was regarded by Fadus. He sent a detachment of horsemen against Theudas, which completely defeated him and slew a portion of his followers or took them prisoners ; and when Theudas himself had been apprehended, they struck off his head and carried it to Jerusalem as a sign of their victory.^ ^ Joseplius, Antiq. xx. 1. 1-2. Compare xv. 11. 4. — The rescript of Claudius to the officials of Jerusalem, in whicli this decision of the emperor is communicated to them (Joseplius, Antiq. xx. 1. 2), bears date of 28th June A.D. 45, Claud, trihunic. j)otest. V., in the consulship of Rufus and Pompeius Silvanus. On these Consules suffecii, see Klein, Fasti considares, p. 33. — Compare also : Kindlmann, " Utrum litterae, quae ad Claudium Tiberium imperatorem apud Joseph um referuntur, ad eum referendae pint necne, quaeritur. Mahrisch-Neustadt, Frogr. 1884. This treatise I have had no opportunity of examining. " Joseph us, A7itiq. xx. 5. l=Eusebius, Hist. eccl. ii. 11. — The name Theudas is met with also elsewhere {Corp. Inscr. Grace, n. 2684, 3563, 3920, 5698 ; Wetstein, Nov. Test, on Acts v. 36 ; Pape-Benseler, iFoHer- buch der griech. Eigennamen, s.v.). &ivd»; is a contraction for QeoOoaio;, Bfo'SoToc, Oiooapo;, or such like name derived from dto;. The contraction for 20 into sv is very frequent in proper names connected with tffoV and xXsof. Even in rabbinical works we find DHin (Buxtorf, Lexicon Chaldaicum, col. 2565 sq. ; Lightfoot, Opera, ii. 704 ; Schoettgen, Horae hebraicae, i. 423). But the name of the physician DIlTlj Mishna, Bechoroth iv. 4, reads according to the best manuscripts DIlTin (as in the Cambridge § 19. THE ROMAN PROCUEA.TORS, A.D. 44-6G. 169 2. The successor of Fadus was Tiberius Alexander, down to A.D. 48, descended from one of the most illustrious Jewish families of Alexandria, a son of the Alabarch Alexander, and nephew of the philosopher Philo.' He had abandoned the religion of his fathers and taken service under the Eomans. During the period of his government Palestine was visited by a sore famine.^ The one fact of any imjiortance that is manuscrii:)t and cod. de Bossi, 138). — Our rebel cliief Theudas is well known from the reference made to him in Acts v. 36, where the allusion to him occurs in a speech of Gamaliel delivered a considerable time before the actual ajipearance of Theudas. Indeed, according to the representation of the narrative of the Acts, the appearance of Theudas is placed before that of Judas of Galilee in a.d. 6. But as many are unwilling that so serious an error should be attributed to the author of the Acts of the Apostles, several theologians have assumed the existence of two different rebels of the name of Theudas. But such an assumption is not justified in consideration of the slight authority of the Acts in such matters. Compare on the pro and con of this controversy : Sonntag, " Theudas der Anfriihrer " (Studien tmd Kritilcen, 1837, p. 622 ff.) ; Zuschlaf, Theudas, Anfnhrer eines 750 R. in Paldstina erregten Aufstandes, Cassel 1849 ; Wieseler, Chronological Synopsis, p. 90 f. ; Beitrage zur richtigen Wiirdigung der Evangeliev, p. 101 ft". ; Winer, Bealwcirterbuch, ii. 609 f. ; Keim in Schenkel's Bibellexikon, v. 510-513 ; Kohler in Herzog, Beal- Encyclopaedie, 1 Aufl. xvi. 39-41 ; K. Schmidt in Herzog, Beal-Encyclo- paedie, 2 Aufl. xv. 553-557 ; Zeller, Die Apostelgeschichie, 1854, pp. 132-137 ; Lewin, Fasti sacri, n. 903, 933, 1469. The Commentaries on Acts by Kuinoel, De Wette, Meyer, Overbeck, Wendt, Nosgen, and others. The older literature is given in Wolf, Curae pihilol. in Nov. Test. on Acts V. 36. ^ Josephus, Antiq. xx. 5. 2, xviii. 8. 1 —On the office of Alabarch, see Div. II. vol ii. pp. 280, 281. ^ Compare in regard to this famine, besides Antiq. xx. 5. 2, also Antiq. iii. 15. 3, XX. 2. 6 ; Acts xi. 28-30 ; Anger, De temporum in actis aposto- lorum ratione (1833), pp. 41-49 ; Wieseler, Chronologie des apostolischen Zeitalters, pp. 156-161 ; Karl Schmidt, Die Apostelgeschichie, Bd. i. 1882, pp. 157-164. — Josephus refers the famine to the time of Tiberius Alexander, but states that it had its beginning in the days of his predecessor: stj TOVToi; d)} KXt Toi/ /niyxu 7\i/^6v xoerat t^u 'lov^xi'xv avuifiyi ysuiaSxi. The reading t-Trl tovtoi; is confirmed by Eusebius, Hist. eccl. ii. 12. 1. In the connection in which it occurs, however, it is certainly not to be rendered propter haec (as Credner, Einleitung, p. 330, does), nor even by ad haec nor post haec (as Keim does in his Aiis dcm Urchristenthum, p. 19, note), but hy horum temporibus. On this incorrect use of h-i with the dative instead 170 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. recorded about him is that he caused James and Simon, tLe sons of Judas of Galilee, to he crucified, ostensibly because they were entertaining schemes similar to those of their father.^ of tlie genitive, see WaU, Clavis librorum V. T. apocryph. s.v. Ix/. The narrative of the Acts is in agreement with this when it refers the famine to somewhere about the time of Agrippa's death in a.d. 44. — In all the three passages Josephus names Jiidea only as the district affected by the famine (xx. 5. 2 ; tviv 'lovoxlxv; iii. 15. 3: r^v x^j/soti/ i],u,av ; xx. 2. 6 : T'^u TToXtv). The author of the Acts of the Apostles describes it as extend- ing over the whole world (xi. 28 : J|)' oM» tvid ciKovf4,ivyiu), which is a generalization quite as unhistorical as that about the census of Quirinius. Certainly the reign of Claudius had been remarked by assiduae sterilitates (Suetonius, Claudius, 18). Besides the famine that occurred in Palestine we are told of the following : (1) A famine in Rome in the beginning of his reign (Dio Cassius, Ix. 11 ; Aurel., Victor Caesar, 4 ; Coins in Eckhel, Dodr. Num. vi. 238 sq.) ; (2) Another famine in Greece in the 8th or 9th year of his reign (Eusebius, Chronicon, ed. Schoene, ii. 152 sq., in the Armenian and according to Jerome) ; and (3) yet another famine in Rome in the 11th year of his reign, according to Tacitus, Amuils, xii. 43, or according to Eusebius, Chronicon, in the 10th or 9th year ; Orosius also, vii. 6. 17, giving the 10th year as the date. But a famine that extended over the whole world is as improbable in itself as it is un- supported by the statement of any authority. ^ Josephus, Antiq. xx. 5. 2.— Tiberius Alexander served at a late period under Corbulo against the Parthians (Tacitus, Annals, xv. 28), was then made governor of Egypt (Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 15. 1, 18. 7, iv. 10. 6 ; Tacitus, History, i. 11, ii. 74, 79 ; Suetonius, Vespasian, 6), and was the most distinguished and trusted counsellor of Titus at the siege of Jerusalem (J^Fars of the Jews, v. 1. 6, vi. 4. 3). His full name is given in an edict which he issued as governor of Egypt : " Tiberius Julius Alexander" {Corpus Inscr. Grace, n. 4957). — The conjecture of Bernays, that it is to him that the pseudo-Aristotelian treatise -Tnpl x,6ai/.ou is dedicated, is highly improbable, although it has been accepted as an established fact by Mommsen, Edmische Geschichte, v. 494, 566. According to Zeller, that work is actually a production of Aristotle, and he to whom it is dedicated is Alexander the Great. See the literature given above in vol. i. p. 63. — On Tiberius Alexander compare generally : Rudorff, " Das Edict des Tiberius Julius Alexander " (Rhcin Museum, 1828, pp. 64-84, 133-190) ; Franz, Corpus Inscr. Gh-aec. n. 4957 ; Haakh in Pauly's Ueal-Encyclopacdie, vi. 2 (1852), p. 1943 f. ; Renier in the Memoires de V Academic des Inscriptions et Belles- Lettres, t. xxvi. 1 (1867), pp. 294-302 ; Lurabroso, Eecherches sur Ve'conomie politique de VEgypte sous les Lagides (Turin 1870), p. 216 sq. — The family of Tiberius Alexander continued § 19. THE KOMAN PROCURATORS, A.D. 4-1-G6. 171 Although even the days of those first procurators did not pass without troubles and upheaval, these came to be regarded as altogether insignificant in comparison with the excitement and turmoil that followed. Even under the governorship of the next procurator Cumanus popular tumults, not without faults on both sides, broke out in far more formidable proportions. 3. The first rebellion against which Ventidius Cumanus, A.D. 48-52,^° had to contend was occasioned by the coarse in- solence of a Eoman soldier. This man had the presumption at the feast of the Passover, when to maintain order and preserve the peace a detachment of soldiers was always situated in the court of the temple,^^ to insult the festive gathering by assuming an indecent posture. The enraged multitude demanded satisfaction from the procurator. As Cumanus, however, attempted first of all to hush up the also in later times in the service of the Romans. A Julius Alexander, perhaps a son or grandson of the one of whom we have been sj^eaking, served as legate under Trajan in the Parthian war (Dio Cassius, Ixviii. 30), was consul in a.d. 117, and member of the priestly College of the Arvales, A.D. 118-119. The Acts of the Arvales give his full name as Tiberius Julius Alexander Julianus (Corpus Inscr. Lat. t. vi. n. 2078, 2079 ; com- pare also, Henzen, Acta fratrum Arvalimn, Index, p. 188). One Ti/Sipios ''loi/'hio; 'A'hi^tx.uopo?, commander of cohors I Flavia and agoranomos over the second city district of Alexandria, in the 21st year of Antoninus Pius, erected a statue to the great goddess Isis {Annali delV Instituto di corrisp. archeolog. 1875, p. 15), ^" Ventidius, according to Tacitus, Annals, xii. 54 ; in Josephus called only Cumanus. — The date of Cumanus' entrance upon office may be dis- covered, though only approximately, from this, that Josephus at the same time reports the death of Herod of Chalcis in the 8th year of Claudius = A.D. 48 (Antiq. xx, 5, 2), Without sufficient ground Wieseler, Chrono- logie des apostolischen Zeitalters, pp, 68, 126 f,, fixcii the date of Cumanus' entrance upon his office as late as a.d. 50 ; whereas, on the other hand, Anger, iJe temporum in adis apostolorum ratione, p. 44 ; Gerlach, Die rumische Statthalter, p, 71 ; Ewald, History of Israel, vii. 415 ; Hitzig, Geschichte dcs Volkes Israel, ii, 589 ; Lewin, Fasti sacri, n, 1719 ; Griitz, Monaisschrift, 1877, pp, 402-408 — Geschichte tier Juden, 4 Aufl. iii. pp. 725-728 ; Rohden, De Palaestina, p, 35, assume the date a.d. 48. '^ Compare JFars of the Jetvs, v. 5. 8 ; Antiq. xx. 8. 11. 172 THE KOMAX-HEIIODIAN AGE. matter, he too was assailed with reproachful speeches, until at length he called for the intervention of the armed forces. The excited crowds were utterly routed ; and their overthrow was so complete that, according to Josephus' estimate, in the crush which took place in the streets in consequence of their flight, 20,000 (!) men lost their lives.^' The fault in this case lay with the Eomans, but in the next upheaval the occasion was given by the Jewish people themselves. An imperial official called Stephanus was attacked on a public road not far from Jerusalem, and robbed of all his belongings. As a punishment for this the villages which lay in the neighbourhood of the spot where the deed was committed were subjected to a general pillage. It was through a pure mischance that out of this pillage further mischief was very nearly occasioned ; for a soldier, before the eyes of all, amid contumelious and reproachful speeches tore up a Thorah roll which he had found. In order to obtain revenge and satisfaction for such profanity, a mass deputation visited Cumanus at Caesarea, demanding the punishment of the offender. This time the procurator saw it to be advisable to give way, and so sentenced the offender to be put to death.^^ Far more bitter and bloody was a third collision with the people under Cumanus, which though it did not indeed cost him his life, yet led to his loss of office. Certain Galilean Jews, who on their way to the feast at Jerusalem had to pass through Samaria, had been murdered in a Samaritan village. When Cumanus, who had been bribed by the Samaritans, took no steps to secure the punishment of the guilty, the Jewish people took upon themselves the duty of revenge. Under the leadership of two Zealots, Eleasar and Alexander, a great multitude of armed men made an attack upon ^2 Josephus, Antiq. xx. 5. 3 ; TVars of the Jews, ii. 12. 1. ^» Josephus, Antiq. xx. 5. 4 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 12. 2. § 19. THE ROMAN PEOCURATORS, A.D. 44-G6. 173 Samaria, hewed down old men, women, and children, and laid waste the villages. But then Cumanus with a portion of his military force fell upon the Zealots ; many were slain, others were taken prisoners. Meanwhile ambassadors from the Samaritans appeared before Ummidius Quadratus, governor of Syria, and lodged a complaint with him about the robber raid of the Jews. At the same time, however, a Jewish embassy also came to Quadratus, and accused the Samaritans and Cumanus, who had accepted bribe from them. Quadratus, therefore, went himself to Samaria and made a strict in- vestigation. All the revolutionists taken prisoners by Cumanus were crucified ; five Jews, wlio were proved to have taken a prominent part in the struggle, were beheaded ; but the ringleaders both of the Jews and of the Samaritans were sent along with Cumanus to Eome in order to answer for their conduct there. The Jews were indebted to the inter- cession of the younger Agrippa, who happened then to be in Eome, for their success in their securing their riglits. The decision of Claudius was to this effect, that the ringleaders of the Samaritans, who had been discovered by him to be the guilty parties, should be executed, while Cumanus was to be deprived of his office and sent into banishment.'* 1* Josephus, Antiq. xx. 6. 1-3 ; IVars of the Je^cs, ii. 12. 3-7. — There is a divergence in regard to essential points between this representation of Josephus and that given by Tacitus, Annals, xii. 54. According to the Roman historian, Cumanus was only procurator of Galilee, while during the same period Felix had the administration of Samaria, and indeed of Judea also (Felix . . . jam pridem Judaeae impositus . . . aemulo ad deterrima Ventidio Cumano, cui pars provinciae habebatur, ita divisae, ut huic Galilaeorum natio, Felici Samaritae parerent). Felix and Cumanus were equally to blame for the bloody conflicts that took place. But Quadratus condemned only Cumanus, and even allowed Felix to take part in the trial as judge. — It is really impossible to do away with the contradiction between Tacitus and Josephus ; for Josephus leaves no ^ 174 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. 4. At the request of the high priest Jonathan, one of the Jewish aristocracy whom Quadratus had sent to Eome/^ the Emperor Claudius transferred the administration of Palestine to one of his favourites, the brother of the influential Pallas, whose name was Felix (a.d. 52-60).^^ This man's term of office constitutes probably the turning-point in the drama which had opened with A.D. 44 and reached its close in the bloody conflicts of a.d. 70. During the days of the first two ment that the high priest Jonathan, who was in Rome at the time of the deposition of Cumanus, had besought the emperor that he shouki send Felix (see note 15). But it seems a matter scarcely to be questioned that the very detailed narrative of Josephus deserves to be preferred to the indeterminate remarks made by Tacitus. So also thinks Wurm, Tiibinger Zeitschrift fiir Theologie, 1833, 1 Heft, pp. 14-21; Anger, De temporum in adis apostolonim ratione, pp. 88-90 ; Wieseler, Ghronologie des aposto- lischen Zeitalters, p. 67 ; Winer, Eeahuorterhich, art. " Felix ; " Lewin, Fasti sacri, n. 1777. — In favour essentially of Tacitus : Nipperdey, Anmerhungen zu Tacitus Annates, xii. 54 ; Gratz, 3Ionatsschrift, 1877, p. 403 fi. = GescUcMe der Juden, Bd. iii. 4 Aufl. pp. 725-728; Rohden, Be Palaestina et Arabia, p. 35 ; Kellner, Zeitschrift fiir katholischen TJieo- logie, 1888, p. 639 f. 15 Josephus, IFars of the Jews, ii. 12. 6. Compare Antiq^. xx. 8. 5 : A.'nn- aufiivog iKilvov TTxpci roil Kxiaxpo; ■7rif4,$Sr,vcii tsjj 'lov^xixg eTri'rpoTrot/. ^^ Josephus, Antiq. xx. 7. 1 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 12. 8 ; Suetonius, Claudius, 28. — That Felix entered upon his office in a.d. 52 is probable for this reason, that Josephus immediately after making that statement mentions that Claudius after the completion of his twelfth year (t^j- dp^vn lulix.ot.rov hog sj'S*? i7ii7'hy\pux.ui), i.e. after the 24th January A.D. 53, bestowed upon Agrippa II., Batanea and Trachonitis (Antiq. xx. 7. 1). This indeed leaves the year 53 open as a possible date, which some actually adopt. But in favour of 52 is the fact that Tacitus, Annals, xii. 54, relates the deposition of Cumanus among the events of this year ; no doubt with the assumption that Felix had been already before this, contemporary with Cumanus, carrying on the government of a portion of Palestine. Although, indeed, this assumption can scarcely be regarded as correct (see note 14), yet the year 52 must be firmly adhered to as the time of the deposition of Cumanus. Compare on Felix generally : C. W. F. Walch, De Felice, Judaeae procuratore, Jenae 1747 ; Haakh in Pauly's Real-Encxjdopaedie, iii. 443 f. ; Winer, licalwiirterluch, i. 368 f. ; Paret in Herzog's lieal-Encyclopaedie, 1 Aufi. iv. 354 f. ; K. Schmidt, Herzog, 2 Aufl. iv. 518 f. ; Kellner in Wetzer and Welte's Kirchcnkxikon, 2 Aufl. iv. 1311 ff". ; Overbeck in Sclieukel's Bihellexikon, ii. 263 ft'. § 10. THE ROMAN PKOCURATOllS, A.D. 44-GO. 175 procurators things had continued relatively quiet ; under Cumanus, indeed, there were more serious uprisings of the people ; yet even then they were only isolated and called forth by particular occurrences ; under Felix rebellion became permanent. He was, like his brother Pallas, a freedman of the imperial family,^^ — a freedman probably of Antonia the mother of Claudius, and having therefore as his full name, Antonius Felix.^^ The conferring of a procuratorship with military command upon a freedman was something unheard of, and is only to be accounted for by the influence which the freedmen had at the court of Claudius.-^^ As procurator of Palestine ^^ Tacitus, History, v. 9 ; Suetonius, Claudius, 28. ^8 Antonius Felix, according to Tacitus, History, v. 9. — This name and the circumstance that Pallas, the brother of Felix, was a freedman of Antonia (Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 6. 6), favours the hypothesis that Felix also was a freedman, not of Claudius, hut of his mother Antonia (see Nipperdey on Tacitus, Annals, xi. 29 and xii. 54). — That Felix also Lore the name Claudius (so e.g. Winer, Realworterbuch, art. " Felix," and Rohden, De Palaestina et Arabia, p, 35) cannot be proved from the original documents ; for in Josephus, A7itiq. xx. 7. 1, as well as in Suidas, Lexicon, s.v. K'haCltog, instead of K'Kxvliov tiXtxx we should read KXetv- oio; ^Yi'hiKx (scil. 7r£,«s-£/, resp. iTrsfTTms'j). The reading of the manuscript in the Suidas passage is indeed K'hcc-Jdiou ; but the conjecture KAaiio/oj is rightly favoured by Bernhardy, and has been adopted by Bekker into the text. Compare in general on the name of Felix, Walch, De Felice, pp. 2-7. 1^ Suetonius, Claudius, 28, gives prominence to it as something un- usual : " Felicem, quern cohortibus et alis provinciaeque Judaeae prae- posuit." Compare in addition, Hirschfeld, Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie, 1889, p. 423. — Besides the freedman it is well known that in the latter years of the reign of Claudius, a.d. 49-54, his wife Agrippina also exercised an unwholesome influence. The Palestinian coins also of the 13th and 14th years of Claudius afford evidence of his powerful influence, since on them her name {'lovT^ix ' kypiivKivot) ap2)ears alongside of that of her husband (Eckhel, Doctr. Num. iii. 498 ; Mionnet, Descrip- tion de me'dailles, v. 554 ; Cavedoni, Biblische Numismatih, i. 66, ii. 52 ; De Saulcy, Rccherchcs sur la Numismaiique Judaique, p. 149 ; Madden, Histonj of Jewish Coinage, p. 151 sq. ; De Saulcy, Numismaiique de la Tcrre Sainte, p. 76 sq. ; Madden, Numismatic Chronicle, 1875, p. 190 sq. ; Madden, Coins of the Jeics, p. 184 sq. ; Stickel, Zcitschrift dcs dcutschen 176 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Felix proved worthy of his descent. " With all manner of cruelty and lust he exercised royal functions in the spirit of a slave ; " in these words Tacitus sums up his estimate of the 20 man. Felix was three times married. All the three wives, of whom two are known to us, belonged to royal families.^^ The one was a granddaughter of the triumvir Marc Antony and Cleopatra, and by this marriage Felix was brought into relationship with the Emperor Claudius.^^ The other was the Jewish princess Drusilla, the daughter of Agrippa I. and sister of Agrippa 11. ; and the way in whicli the marriage with her was brought about serves to confirm the estimate of Tacitus quoted above. Drusilla at the time when Felix entered upon his office was fourteen years of age.^^ Soon after this she was married by her brother Agrippa II. to Azizus, king of Emesa, after the marriage with the son of King Antiochus of Commagene, to whom she had been before betrothed, had been broken off because he refused to submit to circumcision.^* Soon after her marriage Felix saw the Palastina-Vereins, vii. 1884, p. 213). — Probably also a town on the east of the Jordan is named after her, namely, one lying between the Mount Sartaba and the Hauran : Agrippina, xrD''"iJX- This is the reading of tlie Mishna, Eosh-Hashana ii. 4, according to the Cambridge manuscript edited by Lowe. A Hamburg manuscript and the editio •princeps have Agropina ; the Jerusalem Talmud and the cod. de Bossi, 138: Gripina ; the common printed text : Groinna. The place is named only in that one passage in the Mishna. Tlie Greek form would be Ay/!/x7r<»«f, after the pattern of Tifisptu; from K^lStD- ^'^ History, v. 9 : "per omnem saevitiam ac libidinem jus regium servili ingenio exercuit." -1 Suetonius, Claudius, 28, calls him trium reginarum inaritum. 22 Tacitus, History, v. 9: "Drusilla Cleopatrae et Antonii nepte in matrimonium accepta, ut ejusdem Antonii Felix progener, Claudius nepos esset." — The name Drusilla is introduced through a confusion with the other wife of Felix. 2* As appears evidently from Antiq. xix. 9. 1, according to which Drusilla, the youngest of the daughters of Agrippa I., was six years old at the time of his death. 2* Josephus, Ayitiq. xx. 7. 1. § 19. THE KOMAN PROCURATORS, A.D. 44-66. 177 beautiful queen, became inflamed with passion, and determined to possess her. By the help of a magician of Cyprus called Simon, he prevailed on her to marry liim. In defiance of the law, which strictly forbade the marriage of a Jewess with a pagan, Drusilla gave her hand to the Eomau procurator. ^^ The public career of Felix was no better than his private life. As brother of the powerful and highly favoured Pallas, " he believed that he might commit all sorts of enormities with impunity." ^^ — It can be easily understood how under such a government as this the bitter feeling against liome grew rapidly, and the various stages of its development were plainly carried out to the utmost extent under Felix and by his fault." First of all, on account of his misgovernment the Zealots, who entertained so fanatical a hatred of the Eomans, won more and more sympathy among the ranks of the citizens. How far Josephus had grounds for styling them simply robbers may remain undetermined. In any case, as their following from among the people shows, they were not robbers of the common sort ; and their pillaging was con- fined wholly to the property of their political opponents. Felix, who was not very scrupulous about the means he used, contrived to get Eleasar, the head of the party, into his 25 Joseplius, Antiq. xx. 7. 2. Compare Acts of the Apostles xxiv. 24. Since Azizus died in the first year of Nero (Antiq. xx. 8. 4), the marriage with Felix must have taken place in the time of Claudius, in a.d. 53 or 54. Compare Wieseler, Chronologie des ajMstolischen Zeitalters, p. 80 f. — Drusilla bore a son to Felix called Agrippa, who, " together with his wife " (ai>u rri yvjociKi, it is certainly not Drusilla, but the wife of Agrippa that in meant), perished in an irruption of Vesuvius {Antiq. xx. 7. 2). — Compare on Drusilla, besides the articles in Winer, Herzog, and Scheukel, also Gerlach, Zeitschrift fiir luth. Theologie, 1869, p. 68 f. -'' Tacitus, Annals, xii. 54 : " Cuncta malefacta sibi impune ratus tanta potontia subnixo." 2' This appears most distinctly from the account given in Wars of the Jews, ii. 13. 2-6, which is much more lucid and clear than that given in the Antiq. XX. 8. 5-6. DIV. I. VOL. II. M 178 THE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE hands by means of treachery, and sent him, together with those of his adherents whom he had already in prison, to Eome. " But the number of the robbers whom he caused to be crucified was iucalcuhable, as also that of the citizens whom he arrested and punished as having been in league with them." '^ Such preposterous severity and cruelty only gave occasion to still further troubles.^^ In the place of the robbers of whom Felix had rid the country, the Sicarii made their appearance, a still more fanatical faction of the patriots, who deliberately adopted as their special task the removal of their political opponents by assassination. Armed with short daggers (sicae), from which they received their name,^° they mixed among the crowds especially during the festival seasons, and unobserved in the press stabbed their opponents (tou? Biacjiopov^, i.e. the friends of the Eomans), and feigning deep sorrow when the deed was done, succeeded in thereby draw- ing away suspicion from themselves. These political murders were so frequent that soon no one any longer felt safe in Jerusalem. Among others who fell victims to the daggers of the Sicarii was Jonathan the high priest, who, as a man of moderate sentiments, was hated by the Sicarii as well as by the procurator Felix, whom he often exhorted to act more worthily in the administration of his office, lest he (Jonathan) should be blamed by the people for having recommended the emperor to appoint him governor. Felix 'wished to have the troublesome exhorter put out of the way, and found that this could be most simply accomplished by means of assassination, to which the Sicarii, although other- wise the deadly foes of Felix, readily lent themselves.^^ 28 Wars of the Jews, ii. 13. 2 ; Antiq. xx. 8. 5. 2® Tacitus, Annals^ xii. 54 : " intenipestivis remediis delicta accen- debat." ^° Josephus, Antiq. xx. 8. 10. •^ Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 13. 3 ; Antiq. xx. 8. 5. — The Sicarii § 19. THE ROMAN PROCURATORS, A.D. 44-66. 179 With these political fanatics there were associated religious fanatics "not so impure in their deeds, but still more wicked in their intentions." Advancing the claim of a divine mission, they roused the people to a wild enthusiasm, and led tlie credulous multitude in crowds out into the wilderness, in order that there they might show them " the tokens fore- shadowing freedom " {arjixela iXev6epLa<;) — that freedom which consisted in casting off the Roman yoke and setting up the kingdom of God, or, to use the language of Josephus, in innovation and revolution. Since religious fanaticism is are also referred to during the war, when tliey had in their possession the fortress of Masada. See Wars of the Jews, ii. 17. 6, iv. 7. 2, 9. 5, vii. 8. 1 ff., 10. 1, 11. 1. The author of the Acts of the Apostles was also aware of their existence as a political party (Acts xxi. 38 : toi); Tsrpoi- Ki(7-/,i>^!ov; ol'jopx; raiu a i x, a, p i o v). — In Latin sicarius is the common desig- nation for a murderer. Thus, for example, the law passed under Sulla against murderers is called " lex Cornelia de Sicariis '' (Pauly's lieal- iJncyclopaedie, iv. 969, and generally the article " Sicarius " in the same Encydopaedie, vi. 1. 1153 f ). It also occurs in the Mishna in this same general sense : Bikkurim i. 2, ii. 3 ; Gittin v. 6 ; Machsliirin i. 6. In none of these passages is the term Sicarii used to designate a political party. In the passage Machsliirin 1. 6 the story told is this, that on one occasion the inhabitants of Jerusalem hid their fig-cakes in water from fear of the D''-ip''D. In the other passages a case is supposed in which a robber-murderer has violently appropriated to himself a piece of land. It is asked what is to be done in this case with reference to the taxes {Bikkurim 1. 2, ii. 3), and whether one would be able by process of law to buy from the robber-murderer such a piece of land {Gittin v. 6). In reference to this last point it is said that since the war, which here clearly means the war of Hadrian, it had been decreed that the purchase would be valid only when the property had been first obtained from the lawful possessors and then from the robber who had taken it by force, but not when it had been bought first from the robber and then from the legal owners. Here we are to understand by the Sicarii rather non- Jewisli than Jewish robber-murderers. Compare generally : Gratzj| Geschichte der Juden, iv. 422 f , who wrongly makes the Sicarii a Jewish political party ; Derenbourg, Historic de la Palestine, pp. 280, 475 sqq. ; Levy, Ncuhebraischcs JVorterbuch, iii. 518. — The correct form D''"lp''D = sicarii, is found in Machshirin i. 6 (e.g. in the Cambridge manuscript edited by Lowe). But it is deserving of remark that in the other passages the best texts, e.g. the Cambridge manuscript, constantly have p.p''1p''D, sicaricon, and that indeed as a mas. sing. = " the murderer." 180 THE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. always the most powerful and the most persistent, Josephus is certainly right when he says tliat those fanatics and deceivers contributed no less than the " robbers " to the over- throw of the city. Felix also recognised clearly enough the dangerous tendency of the movement, and invariably broke in upon all such undertakings with the sword.^^ — The most celebrated enterprise of this sort was the exploit of that Egyptian to whom Acts xxi. 38 refers. An Egyptian Jew who gave himself out for a prophet, gathered around him in the wilderness a great crowd of people, numbering, according to Acts, 4000, according to Josephus, 30,000, with whom he wished to ascend the Mount of Olives, because he promised that at his word the walls of Jerusalem would fall down and give them free entrance into the city. Then they would get the Eoman garrison into their power and secure to them- selves the government. Felix did not give the prophet time to perform his miracle, but attacked him with his troops, slew and scattered his followers or took them prisoners. But the Egyptian himself escaped from the slaughter and dis- appeared."'^ The result of tliis unfortunate undertaking was temporary strengthening of the anti-Eoman party. The religious and the political fanatics (ot, 7077x69 kol XrjarpiKoi) united together for a common enterprise. " They persuaded the Jews to revolt, and exhorted them to assert their liberty, inflicting death on those that continued in obedience to the Eoman- government, and saying that such as willingly chose slavery ought to be forced from such their desired inclinations ; for they parted themselves into different bodies, and lay in wait ^2 Joseplius, Wars of the Jews, ii. 13. 4 ; Antiq. xx. 8. 6. *^ Joseplius, TFars of the Jews, ii. 13. 5 ; Antiq. xx. 8. 6 : Is A/yt/xr/oj- uvTo; S<9fBoa«f ex. rijj ,ucixy}i cKpetu'Ai iyivsTo. Undoubtedly the people Ijelieved in a wonderful deliverance and escape, and hoj^ed for a return, to which even Acts xxi. 38 contains a reference. — Compare also Eusebius, Jlist. eccl. ii. 21. § 19. THE ROMAN PROCURATORS, A.D. -14-06. 181 lip and down the country, and plundered the houses of the great men, and slew the men themselves, and set the villages on fire ; and this till all Judea was filled with their madness." ^* Thus did the misgovernment of Felix in the end bring about this result, that a large portion of the people from this time forth became thoroughly roused, under the constant strain of this wild reign of terror, to wage war against Rome, and rested not until at last the end was reached. Besides these wild movements of the popular agitators, internal strifes and rivalries among the priests themselves led to the increase of confusion. The high priests were at feud with the other priests, and in consequence of the illegal arrangements which prevailed in Palestine under Felix' government, they could even go the length of sending their servants to the threshing-floor, and carrying away by force the tithes which belonged to the other priests, so that many of these unfortunate priests actually died for want.^^ In the last two years of Felix occurred also the imprison- ment of the Apostle Paul at Caesarea, of wliich an account is given in Acts xxiii., xxiv. We are familiar with the story of the personal interview which the apostle had with the Eoman procurator and his wife Drusilla, at which the apostle did not fail to speak to botli of that which it was specially fit that they should hear : " of righteousness and of temperance, and of judgment to come." ^® While Paul lay a prisoner at Caesarea, a conflict arose there between the Jewish and Syrian inhabitants of the city over the question of equality in citizen rights (IcroTroXiTeia). The Jews laid claim to the possession of certain advantages and privileges, since Herod was the founder of the city. The Syrians were naturally unwilliug that any such preference s* Joseplius, JVars of the Jews, ii. 13. G; Antiq. xx. 8. G. 2^ Joseplius, Antiq. xx, 8. 8. ^'' Acts of the Apostles, xxiv. 24 f. 182 THE ROMAN-IIEKODIAN AGE. should be given to the Jews. Tor a long time both parties fought with one another in riots on the public streets. At last on one occasion, when the Jews had obtained an advant- age, Felix stepped in, reduced the Jews to order by military force, and gave up some of their houses to be plundered by the soldiers. But when, nevertheless, the disorders still continued, Felix sent the most prominent of both parties to Eome, in order that the question of law might be decided by the emperor.^'^ Before, however, the matter had been settled, Felix, probably in A.D. 60, was recalled by Nero.^^ ^^ Josepliup, Antiq. xx. 8. 7 ; JFars of the Jexos, ii. 13. 7. ^^ On the date of the recall of Felix and of Festus' entrance upon office, Bee the thoroughgoing researches of Wurm, Tiibinger Theologische Zeit- schrift, 1883, 1 Heft, pp. 8-25 ; Anger, De temporum in actis apostolorum ratione, pp. 88-106 ; Wieseler, Chronologie des apostoUschen Zeitalters, pp. 66-99 ; Wieseler in Herzog's Real-Encydopaedie, 1 Aiifl. xxi. 553-558 ; Beitrdge zur richtigen Witrdigung der Hvangelien, pp. 322-328 ; Wieseler, Zur Geschichte der neutcstamentlichen Schrift {\880), p. 93 ff. ; an anonymous paper, " St. Paul and Josephus," in the Journal of Sacred Literature, new series, vol. vi. 1854, pp. 166-183 ; Lehmann, Studieii und Kritiken, 1858, pp. 313-330 ; Lewin, Fasti sacri, p. 72 sqq. ; J. Chr. K. v. Hofmann, Die heilige Schrift neuen Testaments zusammenhangend untersucht, Thl. v. 1873, pp. 13-16; Gratz, Monatsschrift, 1877, p. 443 S. = Geschichte der Juden, 4 Aufl. iii. p. 729 ff. ; Aberle, Zur Chronologie der Gefangenschaft Pauli (Theologische Quartalschrift, 1883, pp. 553-572; Kellner, art. "Felix" in Wetzer and Welte's Kirchenlexikon, 2 Aufl. iv. 1311 ff. (1886) ; Kellner in the Katholik, 1867, 1 Halfte, pp. 146-151 ; Kellner, Zeitschrift fiir Katholisch-Theologie, 1888, pp. 640-646; Schanz, "Das Jahr der Gefan- gennahme des lieiligen Apostels Paulus " (Historisches Jahrhuch der Gorres- Gesellschaft, 1887, pp. 199-222, with supplement by Kellner, pp. 222-224 ; Wandel, Zeitschrift fiir kirchlichen Wissenschaft und kirchlichen Lehen, 1888, p. 169 ff. ; V. Weber, Kritische Gcschichte der Exegese des 9. Kapitels des Edmerbriefes, 1889, pp. 177-197. — An exact and certain determination of the year in which Felix was recalled is clearly impossible. Most of recent investigators assume A.D. 60 as the most probable date (so Wurm, Anger, Wieseler, the anonymous writer in the Journal of Sacred Literature, Lewin, Hoffmann, Aberle, Schanz, Wandel). Some go a year or two farther back (Griitz, a.d. 59 ; Lehmann, a.d. 58). Only Kellner and V. Weber, after the example of some earlier scholars (Bengel, Siiskind, Rettig, on whom see Wieseler, Chronologie des apostol. Zeitalters, p. 72), place the recall of Felix in the very beginning of Nero's reign : Kellner in November a.d. 54 j Weber in the summer of a.d. 55. The grounds for § 19. THE llOMAN PEOCUKATORS, A.D. 44-CG. 183 5. As successor of Felix, Kero sent Porcius Festus, A.D. 60- tliis last hypothesis are : (1) In the Chronicle of Eusebius, according to the Armenian text, it is said that the recall of Felix took j^lace in the last year of Claudius, a.d. 54 (Euseb. Chronicon, ed. Schoene, ii. 152) ; in the Chronicle of Jerome it is placed in the second year of Nero (Euseb. Chronicon, ed. Schoene, ii. 155). (2) When Felix after his recall was accused in Rome by the Jews, Pallas secured his acquittal (Josephus, Antiq. xx. 8. 9). Pallas had therefore at this time still great influence ; but he had clearly fallen into disfavour in the beginning of Neros reign, in A.D. 55 (Tacitus, Annals, xiii. 14). (3) The office of the procurators came to an end with the death of the emperor unless it were renewed by his succe.ssor. In answer to these statements it is to be remarked : (1) The statements in the Chronicle of Eusebius are often quite arbitrary, and 60 prove nothing. Moreover, the Armenian translation of the Clironicle can hardly contain the original text of Eusebius, since Eusebius himself in his Ecclesiastical History represents Felix as officiating under Nero (ii. 20. 1, 22. 1). (2) Josephus jiuts almost everything that he relates of the proceedings of Felix under the reign of Nero (Antiq. xx. 8. 1-9 ; TVars of the Jews, ii. 12. 8-14, 1). Felix must therefore have exercised his office for at least some years under Nero. If, therefore, Pallas was in favour with Nero at the time of Felix' deposition, he must then have been restored to favour. There is no difficulty in making such an assumption, since we also know from Tacitua that before the expiry of a.d. 55 he had been found not guilty of charges that had been brought against him (Tacitus, Annals, xiii. 23). (3) The third argument made use of by Kellner falls to the ground before the statement of Josephus, that Felix officiated as procurator for a long while under Nero, and must therefore have been confirmed by him in office. — We can only fix with any degree of certainty uj)on the terminus ad quem of Felix' recall. It occurred at any rate in the summer, since the Apostle Paul, who, not long after the departure of Felix, was sent by ship to Rome, arrived in Crete about the time of the Great Day of Atonement in October (Acts xxvii. 9). But this summer cannot well have been later than that of a.d. 60. Seeing that the second successor of Felix, Albinus, arrived in Palestine late in the Slimmer of a.d. G2, were we to assume that Felix left early in the summer of a.d. 61, we should be able to assign only one year to Festus, which in consideration of the incidents recorded as occurring in his time {Antiq. xx. 8. 9-11) is evidently too short. Very strange indeed is the argument in favour of A.D. 61 drawn from Antiq. xx. 8. 11. Because, forsooth, there in connection with an incident that occurred some time after Festus' entrance upon office, Poppea is spoken of as the wife of Nero, who was not married to her before a.d. 62 (Tacitus, Annals, xiv. 60), it has been maintained that Festus' entrance upon office cannot be placed earlier than a.d. 61. But there is nothing to prevent us from setting down that occurrence to a period more than a year after Festus' entrance upon office. Moreover, 184 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. 62/^ a man who, though disposed to act righteously, found himself utterly unable to undo the mischief wrought by the misdeeds of his predecessor. Soon after Festus' entrance upon office the dispute between the Jewish and Syrian inhabitants of Caesarea was decided in favour of the Syrians by means of an imperial rescript. The Jewish ambassadors at Eome had not been able to press their charges against Felix, because Pallas took the side of his brother. On the other hand, the two Syrian ambassadors succeeded by bribery in winning over to their interests a certain man called Beryllus, who was Nero's secretary for his Greek correspondence,^" and by this means obtained an imperial rescript, by which even that equality with the the marriaj:!e of Nero witlx Poppea did not take place till somewhere about the time of Festus' death, perhaps even somewhat later. Although that event had not occurred during Festus' lifetime, we can quite understand Josephus proleptically describing Nero's concubine as his wife. — Should we then accept the year 60 as the termintis ad quern, it is, on the other hand, not advisable to go much further back ; for two years before the departure of Felix the imprisonment of Paul begins. But at the time of Paul's apprehension Felix is described as already in possession of his office ix. TToXKuv Wuv (Acts xxiv. 10). If we place the apprehension of Paul in the year 58, Felix was then already six years in office. Much less it could not have been. Also the chronology of the life of Paul in other particulars does not require that we place the apprehension of the apostle earlier. There is at least a possibility of assuming the year 57, and so it is evidently possible to assign the removal of Felix to A.r). 59. It is most correct to say with "Wurm, at the earliest in a.d. 58, at the latest in a.d. 61, most probably in a.d. 60. 39 Josephus, Antiq. xx. 8. 9 ; Wars of the Jews, ii. 14. 1. — Compare on Festus : Winer, Eeahcmierbuch, i. 372 f. ; Klaiber in Herzog's lieal- Ji'ncyclopaedie, 1 Aufl. iv. 394 ; Overbeck in Schenkel's Bibellexicon, ii. 275 ff. ^^ Instead of the name Beryllus given by all the manuscripts of Antiq. XX. 8. 9, the editions of Josephus since those of Hudson and Havercamp read Biirrus. This conjecture, upon which some have built important chronological conclusions, is particularly foolish, for this reason, that tlie description given (Tra/oayiyyof ds ivto; ?,» rov 'Nipuvoc, tk^iv t/iv i-!:] ruu ''EXhYiuiKuv li^ioTdhuu vs7r/(Tr£f,ttsfoj) does not suit Burrus, the well-known praefeclus praetorio, with whom Josephus is quite well acquainted as such {Antig. XX. 8. 2). § 19. THE ROMAN PROCURATORS, A.D, 4-1-G6. 185 Syrians, with which before they had not been satisfied, was now taken away from the Jews, and the " Hellenes " declared to be the lords of the city. The embittered feelings excited by this decision among the Jews of Caesarea burst forth a few years later, in a.d. 66, in violent revolutionary move- ments, wliich Joseph us regards as the beginning of the great war."^ Festus, after repeated hearings, caused the Apostle Paul, whom Felix had left in prison (Acts xxiv. 27), at the apostle's own demand as a Fioman citizen to be judged before the emperor, to be sent to Eome (Acts xxv., xxvi., xxvii. 1, 2 ; compare also, in addition, pp. 59. 74 of the present work). The trouble in connection with the Sicarii continued under Festus just as great as it had been under Felix. Durino- his government also a deceive?', so at least Josephus designates him, led the people into the wilderness, promising redemption and emancipation from all evils to those who should follow him. Festus proceeded against him with the utmost severity, but was unable to secure any lasting success.^^ Details in regard to a conflict between the priests and King Agrippa II., in which Festus took the side of Agrippa, will be given under the section that treats of the history of that king. After he had held office for a period of scarcely two years, ■•i Josephus, Antiq. xx. 8. 9 ; IFars of the Jews, ii. 14. 4. — The two representations of Josephus are inconsistent with one another in certain particulars. AccordiuL; to Antiq. xx. 8. 9, the ambassadors of the Jews of Caesarea did not go to Rome to make their complaint against Felix until after the entrance of Festus upon his office. According to IFars of the Jews, ii. 13. 7 fin., however, the ambassadors of both parties had been sent by Felix himself to Eome, which is probable for this reason, that even according to Antiq. xx. 8. 9 the ambassadors of the Syrians were also in Rome. — According to Wars of the Jeivs, ii. 14. 4, it would seem as if the decision of the emperor had not been given before a.d. GG. But this is not possible, since Pallas, who died in a.d. 62 (Tacitus, Annals, xiv. Go), played an important jiart in the proceedings. *2 Josephus, Antiq. xx. 8. 10 ; IFars of the Jews, ii. 14 1. 186 THE KOMAN-HEEODIAN AGE. Festus died while administering liis procuratorsliip, and two men succeeded him, one after the other, who, like genuine successors of Felix, contributed, as far as it lay in their power, to intensify the bitterness of the conflict, and hurry on its final bloody conclusion. In the interval between the death of Festus and the arrival of his successor, in a.d. 62, utter anarchy prevailed in Jerusalem, which was turned to account by the high priest Ananus, a son of that elder Ananus or Annas who is well known in connection with the history of Christ's death, in order to secure in a tumultuous gathering the condemnation of his enemies, and to have them stoned. His arbitrary government was not indeed of long duration, for King Agrippa, even before the arrival of the new procurator, again deposed him after he had held office only for three months.^^ James, the brother of Jesus Christ (6 aSeX.(/)o7(70i5 tou >.iyo^ivnv 'Kpiazoi', lii u.vtu-j TiToKuYiuivu,. . . . Aiyit Se, on Kcil 6 'Kix.og rxvroe. si/6^i!^s (tix rou loty-ufioi ■TTi'TrovSivix.t." (2) Contra Celsum, i. 47: 'O S' ctvro; . . . ^yi-uu rviv uhiuu T'?,; Toiiv ' Ispo/TO'Avfiuu Trruaiu; kocI t^; tou uuov jcccdoiipiaiu; . . . CPri^l retvrct avufie/iYjusvini Toi; ^iovOxtoi; kxt' iK^iKnaiv ^Ixku^'jv tov 'hiK.ctiov, o; vj'j eiosXcpuf 'I*j(70y TW "hiyo^'ivdv Xo/ffro?, i'i:ithvi7s:ip (hkxic/toctou ccvzov ovrx. d'^iKTiiyxy. (3) Contra Celsum, ii. 13 fin. : Tiro: x.uSsl'hi r'/iv ' lipovau'hiif^' ug f/Av ^lmY,Tro: yoxCPi:, B/« ^IcinUjiou rov Oikxiov, rou uit'h^A/xoj Trpohrufiiuov rii; ^lovlecta; {Life, ix.). Yet this /^ixpi does not of itself mean "down to the end of Felix's term of office." The hypothesis is therefore uncertain tliat it also marks an era of Agrippa beginning in a.d. 56. We might also take as the basis for this the enlargement of territory by Nero. This is the opinion of Griitz, Monatsschrift, 1877, pp. 344-349. He assumes as the basis of this era of a.d. 61 the rebuilding of Caesarea Philippi under the name of Neronias ; which, however, is improbable, for this reason, tliat this incident might have been the beginning of a new system of chronology for the city Neronias but not for Agrippa. The era of a.d. 01 can be determined with certainty according to certain coins on which the 26th year of Agrippa is made to synchronize with the 12th consulship § 19. SUPPLEMENT. AGRIPPA IL, A.D. 50-100. 195 Of Agrippa's private life there is not much that is favour- able to report. His sister Berenice,* who, from the time of the death of Herod of Chalcis in a.d. 48, was a widow (see under Appendix L), lived from that date in the house of her brother, and soon had the weak man completely caught in the meshes of her net, so that regarding her, the mother of two children, the vilest stories became current. When the scandal became public, Berenice, in order to cut away occasion for all evil reports, resolved to marry Polemon of Cilicia, who, for this purpose, was obliged to submit to be circumcised. She did not, hov/ever, continue long with him, but came back again to her brother, and seems to have resumed her old relations with of Doraiti:in, Dom. Cos. xii. (in Madden, Coins of the Jews, p. 157 sq.), and according to another, on which the 25th year of Agrippa is also made to synchronize with the 12th consulship of Domitian (in Madden, Coins of the Jews, ]>. 157). De Saulcy believes indeed that it is not the 25th and 2Gth years of Agrippa that are there meant, but the 25th and 26th years of an era belonging to the city of Caesarea Philippi. See iltiule chronologique, 1869, and Numismatique de la Terre Sainte, p. 315. But the date is given thus : f^i (ia,. kyp. tr. ice, which can only mean, under King Agrippa in his 25th year, etc. Seeing then that the 12th consulship of Domitian belongs to a.d. 86, the 26th year of Agrippa began also in that year, and consequently the era, according to which he reckons, began in a.d. 61. — An era beginning five years earlier is witnessed to by two coins and an inscription. The two coins bear the date hov; ai rov x.a.1 &S (the figure which represents the number VI.). See Madden, Coins of the Jews, p. 146. The eleventh year of the reign of Agrippa, according to the one era, is therefore identical with the sixth year according to the other era. Both of these eras are made use of upon an inscription found at Sanamen on the Hauran : hovg x^' lov Kotl X/S' fimoiT^ias 'Ay^/Vxa {Zeitschrift des deutschen Paldstina-Vereins, vii.. 1884, p. 121 f. = Archdol.- epigr. Mittheilungen aus Oesterreich, viii. 1884, p. 189 f.). There, too, the one era begins five years before the other. Seeing then that we may there fairly assume that among the various eras of Agrippa the latest was, in later times, the one most commonly used, and seeing that, also according to the coins of a.d. 86, the era usually employed is that of A.D. 61, the one era must have begun in a d. 56 and tlie other in A.D. 61. 8 Compare on Agrippa and Berenice, Pauly's Real-Encydopaedie, i. 2, 2 Aufl. p. 2352 ; Hausrath in Schenkel's Bihellexikon, i. 396-399. 196 THE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. him. At least this somewhat later came to be the common talk of Eome.^ In the matter of public policy Agrippa was obliged to give up even the little measure of independence which his father sought to secure, and had unconditionally to subordinate him- self to the Eoman government. He provided auxiliary troops for the Parthian campaign of a.d. 54;^° and when, in a.d. 60, the new procurator Festus arrived in Palestine, he hastened, along with his sister Berenice, surrounded with great pomp {ixeTCL iroK\,rj rvjv oipx,viv M Kt^xvoiov, rivt,vi6rt OS iTTi 'biipui/o; xai tr/ i^oi.'h'Kov vtto Obta'Tr ua lotvov, n'hiVTec oi tTH Tphw Tpocioivov. 35 Josejihus, Wars of the Jeics, vii. 5. 1. Josephus there tells how tliat Titus, on the march from Berytus to Antioch, came upon the so-called Sabbath-river, which flows ^ko? ' ApKxi»? t'^c 'Ayp/V^ot (ixm'Aetccg x.xi ' Fiie.(pxvct,i»;. A city therefore is intended which lay north of Berytus, and so undoubtedly the same Arcae which according to the old itiner- aries lay between Tripolis and Antaradus, 16 or 18 Eoman mihs north of Tripolis and 32 Eoman miles south of Antaradus (18 mil. pass. : Itinerarium Antonini, edd. Parthey et Binder, 1848, p. 68 ; 16 nnil. pass. : Itinerarium Burdigalense, edd. Parthey et Binder, p. 275 = Itinera Uierosolymitana, edd. Tobler et Molinier, i. 1879, p. 14; they agree in giving the distance from Antaradus at 32 mil. pass.). The name is retained to the present day in that of a village at the nortli end of the Lebanon on the spot indicated in the itineraries. In ancient times the city was very well known. The Arkites are named in the list of peoples in Gen. x. 17 CPIV)- Josephus, Antiq. i. 6. 2, calls it: 202 THE ROMAN-HEEODIAN AGE. We are tlierefore obliged to conclude that his new possessioua stretched very far to the north. The omission on the part of 'Apx-viv riiv iv ra Ai(i»voivix.n:, ii vvv ' ApKott x.ot.'Kovy.ii/n. Jerome explains Gen. x. 17 thus: "Aracaeus, qui Areas condidit, oppidum contra Tripolim in radicibus Libani situm" {Quaest. Hebr. in Genesin, Opera, ed. Vallarsi, iii. 321). In the days of the empire. Area was specially known as the birthplace of Alexander Severus (Laraprid. Alexander Severus, c. 1, 5, 13 ; Aurel. Victor, Caesar, c. 24). It was there also called Caesarea (Lamprid. Aleooander Severus, c. 13: "Apud Arcam Caesaream;" Aurel. Victor, Caesar, c. 24: "Cui duplex, Caesarea et Area, nomen est"). On coins this name occurs as early as the time of Marcus Aurelius {Kotiaotpiwj ruu tv ru Ai^ctvu or K«s/- aapstoc; Ai(ict.vov). From the time of Heliogabalus, if not even earliei^ it is ranked on the coins as a Roman colony : " Col. Caesaria Lib(ani)." An inscription, found by Renan in the neighbourhood of Botrys, refers to a dispute about a boundary between the Caesarians and the Gigartenians, Corp. Inscr. Lat. iii. n. 183 = Renan, Mission de Phenicie, p. 149 : " Fines positi inter Caesarenses ad Libanum et Gigartenos de vico Sidonior[um] jussu . . .). From this, however, it should not be concluded that their regular frontiers touched one another. See Mommsen's remarks in Corp. Inscr. Lat, and those of Renan in his work referred to. The situation of Gigarta may be determined from the order of enumeration in Pliny, Hist. Nat. V. 78: "Botrys, Gigarta, Trieris, Calamos, Tripolis." Tlie plural form ' Apx-at, used by Stephen of Byzantium, is also confirmed by the itineraries, by Jerome, Socrates {Hist. eccl. vii. 36), and Hierocles {Sjinecdemus, ed. Parthey, p. 43). — Compare generally, Belley, M^moires de VAcad/mie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, first series, vol. xxxii. 1768, pp. 685-694 ; Ritter, Erdhunde, xvii. 1. 808 ff., 842 ; Robinson, Later Researches in Palestine; Forbiger, Handbuch der alien Geographie, ii. 672 ; Pauly's Real-Encyclopaedie, i. 2, 2 Aufl. p. 1423 f. ; Kuhn, Die stadtische und bilrgerliche Verfassung des romischen Reichs, ii. 331 f. ; Gesenius, Thesaurus, p. 1073 ; Winer, Realworterbuch, i. 86 ; Baudissin, art. "Arkiter" in Herzog's Real-Encyclopaedie, 2 Aufl. i. 645 f . ; Knobel, Die Volkertafel der Genesis, 1850, p. 327 f. ; Renan, Mission de Phenicie, p. 115 sq. ; Furrer, Zeitschrift des deutschen Paldstina-Vereins, viii. 1885, p. 18 ; Neubauer, La geographic du Talmud, p. 299. — On the coins : Belley, M^moires de lAcadimie, xxxii. (1768) ; Eckhel, Doctr. Num. iii. 360 - 362 ; Mionnet, Description de me'dailles, v. 356 - 358 ; Suppl. viii. 255-257 ; De Saulcy, Annuaire de la Socide francaise de Num. et d'ArchMogie, iii, 2, 1869, pp. 270-275 ; De Saulcy, Numismatique de la Terra Sainte, pp. 117-120. § 19. SUPPLEMENT. AGPJPPA II., A.D. 50-100. 203 Joseplius in Wars of the Jews, iii. 3. 5, to refer to these northern possessions, can be accounted for only by the hypothesis that at the time of the composition of that work this extension of territory had not yet taken place. As a matter of fact, Josephiis does not refer to them there, because in that passage he does not propose to describe the whole kingdom of Agrippa, but only those districts which were inhabited more or less by Jews (compare Div. II. vol. i. p. 2). Of the southern possessions certain portions seem at a later period to have been taken away from Agrippa. At least, at the time when Josephus wrote his Antiquities, i.e. in a.d. 93—94, the Jewish colony of Bathyra in Batanea no longer belonged to the territory of Agrippa.^^ In A.D. 75 the brother and sister, Agrippa and Berenice, arrived in Eorae, and there those intimate relations begun in Palestine between Berenice and Titus were resumed, which soon became a public scandal.^ The Jewish queen lived with Titus on the Palatine, while her brother was raised to the rank of a praetor. It was generally expected that there would soon be a formal marriage, which it is said that Titus had indeed promised her. But the dissatisfaction over the matter in Eome was so great that Titus found himself under the necessity of sending his beloved one away.^** After the '8 Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 2. 2. In the Wars of the Jews, iii. 3. 5, Batanea IS reckoned as still belonging to the territory of Agrippa. ^' Even Titus' return to Palestine on receiving intelligence of Galba's death was ascribed by his defamers to his longing for the society of Berenice (Tacitus, History, ii. 2). ^* Dio Cassius, Ixvi. 15 ; Suetonius, Titus, 7 : " Insignem reginae Berenices amorem cui etiani nuptias poilicitus ferebatur."— Berenice had even already publicly assumed the name of Titus' wife (x«»t« tjIyi u; x.ai yvvvj envroii ovox ixoiii, Dio Cassius, Ixvi. 15). Any suspected of havint^ intercourse with her were rigorously punished by Titus. Aurel. Victor, Epit. 10 : " Caecinain consularem adhibitum coenae, vixdum triclinio egressum, ob suspicionem stupratae Berenices uxoris suae, jugulari jussit." — Compare also Hausrath, Neutestavientliche Zeitgeschichte, 2 Aufl. iv. 52-55. 204 THE ROMAN-IIERODIAN AGE. death of Vespasian, on 23rd June a.d. 79, she returned once more to Eoine ; but Titus liad come to see that love intrigues were not compatible with the dignity of an emperor, and so left her unnoticed.^^ When she found herself thus deceived she retui'ned again to Palestine. Of her later life, as well as of that of Agrippa, we know practically nothing. We know indeed only this, that Agrippa corresponded with Josephus about his History of the Jewish War, praised it for its accuracy and reliability, and purchased a copy of it.*" Numerous coins of Agrippa confirm the idea that his reign continued to the end of that of Domitian. The many inaccuracies which are found on these coins with reference to the imperial title have caused much trouble to numismatists. Yet, in reality, these inaccuracies are in various directions highly instructive.^^ 2^ Dio Cassius, Ivi. 18 ; Aurel. Victor, Epit. 10 : " Ut subiifc pondus regium, Berenicen nuptias suas sperantem regredi domum . . . praecepit." Suetonius, Titus, 7 : "■ Berenicen statim ab urbe dimisit, invitus invitam." — Aurelius Victor and Suetonius speak only of a dismissal of Berenice after the enthronement of Titus ; for even in Suetonius "statim" can be understood only in this sense. But Dio Cassius clearly makes a distinc- tion between the two occurrences : the involuntary dismissal before his succession to the throne, and the non-recognition of Berenice after that event. — On her travels between Palestine and Rome, Berenice seems to have gained for herself a certain position in Athens which the council and people of the Athenians have made memorable by the following inscription {Corp. Inscr. Grace, n. 361 = Corp. Tnscr. Atticarum, iii. 1, n. 556 ; on the name Julia, see above, p. 162) : — 'H fiovT^yi i] si Apsiov 'Tra.yov x.etl "Kioiv Jiipii/ii>cyiv jioiai'Ktaijxu fAiyoihviu, lov'hiov AypiTTTToi jiocat "Kiuc dv/ctripoc Kxt fiiyaAco;/ ^oeat'hiuv evepytTon rij; xo- hta? ex,yovov . . . *" Josephus, Life, Ixv. ; Against Apion, i. 9. *^ For the literature on the coins, see above, p. 192. — The real facts of the case are as follows. Besides the coins of the time of Nero (see in regard to them above, pp. 193-194) there are coins of Agrippa— (1) of the § 19. SUPPLEMENT. AGKIPPA II., A.D. 50-100. 205 According to the testimony of Justus of Tiberias,'*^ Agrippa died in the third year of Trajan, in A.D. 100 ; and there is no reason for doubting the correctness of this statement, as years of liis reign, 14, 18, 2G, 27, 29, with the inscription, h.vTox.p(x.{Topt) Ovia'xoe.(si{a.vefi) Kxiaxpi l.ificcjru ; (2) of the years of Agrippa, 14, 18, 19, 20, 26, 27, 29, with the inscription, AvTO>cp{u.r^p) T/rof Kxlaxp 2i/3«(7(roV) ; (3) of the years of Agrippa, 14, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 35, with the name of Domitian, and indeed down to the year 23 inclusive, only Ao,uiTiciv6; Kxiaoip, in the year 24 with the addition YspfcxviKog, in the year 35 : Av-ojcpoc^ropx) Ao^uiTici{i/ou) Kaiaxpot Tsc/i<,xvi(K6y). For the fullest exhibition of the evidence, see Madden, Coins of the Jews, 1881, pp. 148-159. — The agreement in the year numbers on the coins of all the three Flavians puts it beyond doubt that on all these coins the same era is employed. Hence Agrippa in his fourteenth year has had coins stampetl at the same time bearing the name of Vespasian, Titus, Domitian. But the era used can only be that of a.d. 61, which is employed on the bilingual coins of Agrippa of the 25th and 26th years of his reign (= Domitian. Cos. xii., i.e. a.d. 86). Compare what is said above at p. 194. From these data the following results may be deduced : (1) The coins of the years 26, 27, and 29 were stamped after the deaths of Vespasian and Titus ; nevertheless, in the title of both emperors the term '^diAiis" is wanting, suppressed probably on religious grounds. (2) The coins of the years 14 and 18 were stamped while Vespasian was still living ; nevertheless Titus is already called 2£/3«(ttoV. Thus, incorrect as it is, it indicates in a striking manner how Titus had already gained in the East a supreme position. He was regarded even then as practically co-regent. (3) The title given to Domitian is so far correct, since he is called on the coins of the years 14-19 only Kxtaxp, and on the coins of the year 24 (= a.d. 84) bears the title YipfMnuixo:, which, as a matter of fact, he did receive in A.D. 84. On the other hand, it was a great mistake to omit the title of "S.ilixarog, and in some instances also the title AvTOKpxrup from the coins of the years 23-25, which all belong to the period of Domitian's reign, a.d. 83-95. The coins therefore show "that in Galilee they were not altogether en rapport with, the mighty empire of this world " (Mommsen). Only the bilingual coins of the year 26 have the correct Latin title : " Imp(erator) Caes(ar) divi Vesp. f(ilius) Doraitian(us) Au(gustus) Ger(raanicus)." — Several numismatists, especially De Saulcy and Madden, partly at least in order to get rid of these result's, have, in the most extremely arbitrary manner, assumed for these coins from three to four different eras. The correct point of view has in the mo.st convincing manner been indicated by Morumsen (Wiener Numis- matische Zeitschrift, iii. 1871, pp. 451-457). *2 On Photius, Bibliotheca, cod. 33, see vol. i. of this present work, pp. 68-69. 206 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Tillemont and many modern writers have done/' Agrippa, it would appear, left no children.^ His kingdom was undoubtedly incorporated in the province of Syria. ■*^ Tillemont, Historte des empereurs, t. i. (Veni.se 1732) pp. 646-648 note xli. ; Jost, Geschichte der Israelitcn, Bd. ii., Anhang, p. 103 f. ; Brann. Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und IVissenschaft des Judenthums, 1871, pp, 26-28 ; Gi'iitz, Monatsschrift fiir Gesch. u. Wissensch. des Jud. 1877, pp. 337-352 ; Briill, Jahrbiicher fur jiidisclt. Geschichte iind Literatur, vii 1885, pp. 51-53. —The rea.son why some would reject altogether the report of Justus as given by Photius, while others would improve it by an alteration or modification of the text, is simply this, that it had been assumed that the Autobiography of Josephus was wiitten immediately after his Antiquities, in a.d. 93 or 94. In that case then Agrippa must have died before the year 93 ; for when Josephus wrote his Auto- biography, Agrippa was already dead (Life, Ixv.). But that assumption is altogether untenable, since Josephus, at the end of the Antiquities, expresses his intention of continuing the work in another way than he afterwards actually did by appending the Life. On this question see vol. i. of this work, pp. 90-92. — The coins of Agrippa of the year 35 of his reign prove that, at least in a.d. 95, he was still alive. Compare in regard to the reckoning of the date, what is said in note 41. The inscription with the date stou; X^' tov jcuI X/3' /iuai^.sus ' hypi-n-Trct, if we fix the latter date at a.d. 61 (compare above at note 7), will bring us to A.D. 92-93. ^* Whether he was married or not, we do not know. In the Talmud {hah. Succa 27a) the story is told of the steward of Agrippa putting a question to R. Elieser, which seems to imply that the questioner had two wives. Founding upon this, many assign to Agrippa two wives, assuming that the steward put the question in the name of the king. So, for instance, Derenbourg, Historie de la Palestine, pp. 252-254, and Brann, Monatsschrift, 1871, p. 13 f. There is, however, no sufficient foundation for such an assumption. See Griitz, Monatsschrift, 1881, p. 483 f. § 20. THE GREAT WAR WITH ROME, A.D. 66-73. Sources. JosEPHUS, Wars of the Jews, ii. 14-vii. ; Life, c. iv.-lxxiv. ZoNARAa, Annales, vi. 18-29 (surauiary from Joseplius). — On the so-called Hegesippus, see above, vol. i. pp. 100-102. On the non-extant works of Vespasian, Antonius Julianas, and Justus of Tiberias, see above, vol. i. pp. 63-69. Rabbinical traditions in Derenbourg, pp. 255-295. On the coins which possibly date from the period of this war, see Appendix IV. Literature. EwALD, History of Israel, vii. 486-616. MiLMAN, History of the Jews, books xiv., xv., xvi., xvii. f4RATZ, Geschichte der Juden, 4 Aufl. iii.' pp. 448-557. HiTZiG, Geschichte des Volkcs Israel, ii. 594-629. Hausrath, NexUestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, 2 Aufl. iii. 421-477. Ren AN, Antichrist. Pressens:^, The Early Years of Christianity, vol. i. pp. 399-406. London 1879. Schiller, Geschichte des romischen Kaiserreiches unter der Eegierung des Nero (1872), pp. 205-261.— Geschichte der romischen Kaiserzeit, Bd. i. 1883, pp. 381-400. Mommsen, Rdmische Geschichte, Bd. v. 1885, pp. 529-540. Lewin, The Siege of Jerusalem by Titus. With Journal of a recent Visit to the Holy City, and a general Sketch of the Topography of Jerusalem from the earliest Times down to the Siege. London 1863.— Compare Gdtt. gel. Anzeiger, 1864, p. 721 ff. — Also, Lewin, Fasti sacri, London 1865, pp. 338-362. Morrison, The Jews under the liovians. In " History of the Nations " series. London 1890. Champagny, Rome et la Jude'e au temps de la chute de Neron (ans 66-72 apres Jesus-Christ), 2 (5d. Paris 1865, t. i. pp. 195-254; t. ii. pp. 55-200. T)K Havlcy, Les derniers jours d£ Jerusalem. Paris 1886. Compare, Co^/. gel. Anzeiger, 1868, p. 899 ff. 207 208 the eoman-herodian age. 1. The Outbreak and Triumph of the Eevolution, a.d. 66. The ostensible occasion for the outbreak of the long threatened revolt was given by a deed of Florus which was not in itself any worse than many others committed by him, but to the people proved more intolerable because it was at the same time an outrage upon their religious sensibilities. Whereas before he had visited only the citizens with his plunderings, he now ventured to lay his hands upon the treasury of the temple, and to abstract from it seventeen talents. The people's patience was thus tried beyond endurance. They now rose in a great tumult ; a couple of sarcastic wits hit upon a plan for throwing contempt upon the greedy pro- curator by sending round baskets and collecting gifts for the poor and unfortunate Florus. When the governor heard of this he immediately resolved to take bloody vengeance upon those who had thus insulted him. With a detachment of soldiers he marched to Jerusalem, and in spite of the weeping entreaties of the high priests and the principal inhabitants, he gave over a portion of the city to be plundered by his soldiers. A large number of citizens, including among them even Eoman knights of Jewish descent, were seized at random, put in fetters, and then crucified. Even the humble pleadings of Queen Berenice, who happened to be present in Jerusalem at that time, had no effect in moderating the fury of the procurator and his soldiers.^ This outrage was committed on the 16th Artemisios (Ijjar, May) of the year 66.^ On the day following Florus expressed the wish that the ^ Josephus, IFars of the Jews, ii. 14. 6-9, 15. 1. 2 Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 15. 2 ; comp. ii. 14. 4; Antiq. xx. 11. 1 (in the twelfth year of Nero). Though Josephus uses the Macedonian, names of the months we are really to understand by them the Jewish months, which only approximately correspond to the months of the Julian calendar. See further details in Appendix III. § 20. THE GREAT WAE WITH EOME, A.D. C6-73. 209 citizens should go out to give a formal greeting to the two cohorts which were to enter the city from Caesarea, in order thereby to give a public proof of their submissiveness and of their penitent disposition. Although the people were not by any means inclined to do so, the high priests persuaded them to submit to this indignity lest something worse should befall them. In solemn procession the people went out to meet the two cohorts, and gave them a friendly greeting. But the soldiers, evidently guided by the instructions of Florus, refused to return their greeting. Then began the people to murmur, and to utter reproaches against Florus. The soldiers then seized their swords, and drove the people back amid incessant slaughter into the city. Then in the streets a violent conflict raged, in which the people succeeded in securing possession of the temple mount, and in cutting off the connection between it and the castle of Antonia. Florus could easily see that he was not strong enough to subdue the multitude by violence. He therefore withdrew to Caesarea, leaving behind only one cohort in Jerusalem, and announcing that he would hold the chief men of the city responsible for the quiet and order of the people.^ King Agrippa was at this time in Alexandria. When he heard of the disturbances he hastened to Jerusalem, summoned the people to an assembly on the Xystus, an open space in front of the palace of the Asmoneans, in which Agrippa resided, and from his palace addressed the people in a Ion" and impressive speech, in order to urge them to abandon the utterly hopeless, and therefore unreasonable and disastrous struggle on which they were entering.* The people declared 3 Josephus, JFars of the Jews, ii. 15. 3-6. * Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 16. 1-5 ; comp. 15. 1. — Tlie statistical details about the Roman empire which Josephus has woven into this speech of A j:;rippa, were probably borrowed from an official publication. Compare Friedlander, De fonte quo Josephus B. J. ii. 16. 4 usiis sit. Eegimonti (Index Icctionum), 1873. DIV. I. VOL. II. 210 THE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE, themselves ready to return to their allegiance to the emperor They began again to build up the galleries between the temple mount and the Antonia, which they had torn down, and they collected the outstanding taxes. But when Agrippa insisted that they should again yield obedience to Florus, this was more than the people could endure. His proposals were rejected with contempt and scorn, and he was obliged to with- draw without accomplishing his purpose in his kingdom.^ Meanwhile the rebels had succeeded in gaining possession of the fortress of Masada. At the instigation of Eleasar, son of the high priest Ananias, it was now also resolved to dis- continue the daily offering for the emperor, and no longer to admit of any offering by those who were not Jews. The refusal to offer a sacrifice for the emperor was equivalent to an open declaration of revolt against the Eomans. All attempts of the principal men, among the chief priests as well as among the Pharisees, to induce the people to recall this foolhardy resolution were in vain. They firmly adhered to the decision to which they had come.*^ When the members of the peace party, to which, as mijjht be expected, all discerning and judicious men belonged, — the high priests, the most distinguished of the Pharisees, those related to the house of Herod, — perceived that they were incapable of accomplishing any good, they resolved to have recourse to violent measures. They accordingly made appli- cation for assistance to King Agrippa. He sent a detachment of 3000 cavalry under the command of Darius and Philip, by whose help the peace party gained possession of the upper city, while the rebels continued to hold the temple mount and the lower city. A bitter strife now arose between tlie * Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 17. 1. * Josephus, Wars of the Jeics, ii. 17. 2-4. — On the fortress of Masada, see below at the end of this section. — On the daily sacrifice offered for the emperor, see the Second Division of the present work, vol. i. pp 302-304. § 20. THE GREAT WAR WITH ROMK, A.D. CG-73. 211 two parties ; but the royal troops were not strong enough to withstand the violent rage of the multitude, and were obliged to evacuate the upper city. In order to take vengeance upon their opponents, the rebels set fire to the palaces of the high priest Ananias, of King Agrippa, and Berenice.^ A few days after this, in the month Loos, that is, Ab or August, they also succeeded in storming the citadel of Antonia, and then they began to lay siege to the upper palace, that of Herod, in which the troops of the peace party had taken refuge. Here, too, it was impossible for the besieged to offer any effectual resistance. Consequently the troops of Agrippa were only too glad to submit on the con- dition of being allowed to pass out unhurt. The Eoman cohorts had betaken themselves to the three strong towers of the palace, known respectively by the names Hippicus, Phasael, and Mariamme, while all the rest of the palace was, on 6th Gorpiaios, that is, Elul or September, set on fire by the rebels.^ On the following day the high priest Ananias, who had hitherto kept himself concealed, was apprehended in his luding-place and put to death.^ The solitary feeble support which still remained to the peace party, was that of tlie Roman cohorts besieged in the three towers of the palace of Herod. These, too, were obliged at last to yield to the " Josephus, Warn of the Jews, ii. 17. 4-6. — The troops sent by Agiijipa were iIito Axpeiu f-iiv iTrTsrxpxv^ oTpxTYiycii Ss r^ 'IxkI/^ov (brhiTCTru [Wars of the Jeivs, ii. 17. 4: fin.). Philip was therefore the commander-in-chief. He was grandson of the Babylonian Zamaris, who in the time of Herod the Great had founded a Jewish colony in Batanea (Antiq. xvii. 2. 3). Compare on him also, JVars of the Jeivs, ii. 20. 1, iv. 1. 10 ; Life, xi., XXXV., xxxvi., Ixxiv. — On an inscrijition communicated by Waddingtun mention is made of a AofiijOYi; [A]oc/))j/oj iTrxpxoi fixaiKiu; i^iycthw '' Kyoiinvce, (Le Bas et Waddington, Inscriftions, iii. n. 2135), who is pro- bably identical with our Derius. ^ Josephus, Tlars of the Jews, ii. 17. 7-8 ; comp. v. 4. 4. — The leader of Agrippa's troops, Philip, was subsequently called to account for his conduct (Josephus, Life, Ixxiv.). ^ Josephus, Wars of the Jens, ii. 17. 9. 212 THE llOMAN-HERODIAX AGE. superior power of the people. Upon laying down their arms they were allowed to walk out uninjured. But the rebels, who were now masters of the whole city, celebrated their victory by general slaughter. The Eoman soldiers were scarcely gone, leaving their weapons behind them, when they were treacherously fallen upon by the Jews, and were cut down to the last man.^" While thus the triumph of the revolution in Jerusalem was decided, bloody conflicts took place also in many other cities, where Jews and Gentiles dwelt together, especially within the borders of Palestine. Wlierever the Jews were in the majority, they cut down their Gentile fellow-townsmen ; and where the Gentiles predominated, they fell upon the Jews. The influence of the revolt in the mother country spread even as far as Alexandria." At last, after long delay and preparation, Cestius G alius, the governor of Syria, entered upon negotiations for the quieting of the disturbances in Judea. With the twelfth legion, 2000 chosen men from other legions, six cohorts, and four alac of cavalry, besides numerous auxiliary troops which the fi'iendly kings, including Agrippa, had been obliged to place at his disposal, he started from Antioch, inarched through Ptolemais, Caesarea, Antipatris, Lydda, where he arrived at the time of tlie Feast of Tabernacles in the month Tizri or October, and finally through Beth-horon to Gabao or Gibeon, 50 stadia from Jerusalem, and there pitched his camp.'^ A sally made by the Jews from Jeru- ^^ Josepluis, Trars of the Jews, ii. 17. 10. Compare Merjillafh Taanith, § 14 : " On tlie ITtli Elul the Romans withdrew from Jndea and Jerusalem " (Derenbourg, pji. 443, 445 ; Hitzig, ii. p. GOO). '^ Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 18. 1-8 ; Life, vi. ^' Josephus, IFars of the Jews, ii. 18. 9-10, 19. \.— T»(ia.u is the Gibeon often referred to in the Old Testament, identified with El-Jeb north-west of Jerusalem. See Winer, lieahcorterbuch, art. "Gibeon;" Robinson, Biblical Eesearches in Palestine, vol. li. pp. 136-138 ; Guurin, Judee, i. 385-391. I 20. THE GREAT WAR WITH ROME, A.D. 6G-73. 213 salem put the Roman army into a position of great danger, but was at last driven back.^' Cestius then advanced nearer to the city, and laid siege to the so-called Scopus, 7 stadia from Jerusalem. Four days later, on the 30th Hyperbere- taios, that is, Tizri or October, he took possession unopposed of the northern suburb Bezetha, and set it on fire.^* But when he ventured upon the bolder task of storming the temple mount his enterprise failed. He thereupon desisted from all further attempts, and began to withdraw without accomplishing his object.'" Josephus is unable to explain the causes of this procedure. Probably Cestius perceived that liis forces were insufficient for making an attack with any hope of success upon the well fortified and courageously defended city. With what determination and with what dauntless resolution the struggle was carried forward on the part of the Jews, was now to be proved to the Eoman governor on his retreat. In a ravine near Beth-horon, through which he was pursuing his journey, he found him- self surrounded on every side by the Jews, and attacked with such force, that his homeward march was turned into a flight. Only by leaving behind him a great part of his ba"u:aj];e, including much valuable war material, which sub- sequently proved of great service to the Jews, did he succeed in reaching Antioch with a fragment of his army. Amid ^3 Josephus, TFars of the Jews, ii. 19. 2. ^■* Josephus, JFars of the Jews, ii. 19. 4. — Scopus is also referred to in Wars of the Jews, ii. 19. 7, v. 2. 3, 3. 2 ; Antiq. xi. 8. 5: stg rovou nud, '^et(plv [so the best manuscripts read] Myo/mi/ow to oi oi/oftx tovto f^iToc- :ptp6fAiuov its Tvi'j ''E'h'hnvix.viv '■/'homoiv l^x-o-zov [so the best manuscripts] a/jy-xiuii. ps^ is the Aramaic form for D^DiV> as the place is called in Mishna, Pesachim iii. 8. Compare also Lif,ditfoot, Centuria Matthaeo praemissa, c. 42 (Opera, ii. 202). From this point a beautiful view of the uity was obtained (Antiq. xi. 8. 5 ; JFars of thn Jews, v. 2. 3).— The suburb Bezetha is also referred to in Wars of the Jews, ii. 15. 5, v. 4. 2, 5. 8. It is the most northerly suburb included by the so-called wall of Af^rippa (Wars of the Jews, v. 4. 2). '* Josephus, Wars of the Jeics, ii. 19. 5-7. 214 THE EOMAX-HERODIAN AGE. great rejoicings the returning conquerors entered Jerusalem on the 8 th Dios, that is, Marchesvan or Xovember.^*' In presence of the excitement caused by victory whicli now prevailed in Jerusalem all peace counsels were forcibly silenced. After such decisive successes no proposals of compromise would be listened to. Even those inclined to oppose were driven along by the course of events. Those who were inalienably attached to the Eomans left the city. All the rest were drawn into their own ranks by the rebels, partly by force, partly by persuasion (roixi fiev /Sia Tov.[s^«j/S(50f iTilxpxov rot/ 'IovOoii[kov crjoarot/]. Tiberius Julius Alexander was therefore " chief of the staff of the general." The position of this officer of equestrian rank, in an army commanded by a senatorian general, was similar to that of the praefectus praetorio in the army commanded by the emperor himself. See Mommsen, Ephemeris epi- graphica, t. v. p. 578, at n. 1344 ; Mommsen, Hermes, Bd. xix. 1884, p. 644 ff. j Pick in Sallet's Zeitschrift fur Numismatik, Bd. xiii. 1885, p. 207 f. ^'^ Joseplius, Wars of the Jews, v. 1. 6. ^^ As appears from v. 3. 1 compared with v. 13. 7. — The elder Pliny § 20. THE GREAT WAR WITH ROME, A.D. 66-73. 237 Titus had hurried ou in advance of the legions with 600 cavalry in order to obtain information about the country by spies, and had in this got so far ahead of the main body, that he exposed himself most seriously to the danger of being fallen upon by the Jews, and, indeed, owed his safety wholly to his own personal bravery.^^ The Eomans, from the moment of their arrival, had painful experience of the daring spirit of their opponents. While tire 10th legion, which had advanced from Jericho to Jerusalem, was still occupied with the strengthening of its camp on the Mount of Olives, it was attacked with such violence that it had well-nigh suffered an utter defeat. Only by the personal interference of Titus was the yielding legion brought again to a stand, and enabled to ward off the attack.^^ The conflict of parties within the city, however, was not even yet by any means abated. Even when the Eomans were lying before the gates, during the Passover festival, a carnage of one party by the other was going on within the city. The faction of Eleasar had opened the gate of the temple court for those who had gone up to attend the feast. John of Gischala took advantage of this in order to smuggle in his people with concealed weapons, and to fall on Eleasar and his followers when least expected. Those who were thus taken by surprise were not strong enough to sustain the conflict, and were obliged to admit John's adherents into the court. From this time forward there were again two parties in Jerusalem, that of John and that of Simon."*^ held a position in the army of Titus, and was indeed dvTnrirpoTrog of Tiberius Julius Alexander, according to Mommsen's skilful rendering of the inscription of Aradus, Corpus Inscript. Graec. t. iii. p. 1178, n. 4536 f- With reference to this, Pliny, in the dedication of his Natural History to Titus, says: "nobis quidein qualis in castrensi contubernio." See for further particulars, Moninisen, Hermes, Bd. xix. 1884, pp. 644-648. ^^ .Tosephus, Wars of the Jews, v. 2. 1-2. ^^ Ibid. v. 2. 4-5. *<• Joseph us, Wars of the Jews, v. 3. 1 j Tacitus, Hist. v. \2fin. 238 THK EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. lu order to understand the siege operations that followed, it is necessary to form for oneself at least a general idea of the situation of the city.^^ Jerusalem lay upon two hills, a higher one to the west and a smaller one to the east, which were separated by a deep ravine running from north to south, the so-called Tyropoeon. On the larger western hill lay the upper city, on the smaller eastern hill the lower city. The latter was also called Acra, because there in former days down to the times of the Maccabees the citadel or castle of Jerusalem had been placed."^ North of the Acra lay the site of the temple, the area of which had been considerably enlarged by Herod. Attached to the temple site on its northern side was the castle of Antonia. The temple site was surrounded on all its four sides by a strong wall, and thus even by itself alone formed a little fortress. The upper and the lower cities were surrounded by a common wall which was attached to the western wall of the temple site ; it then ran on to the west, stretched in a great curve southward over the upper and lower cities, and finally ended at the south-eastmost corner of the temple site. But, further, the upper city must have been separated from the lower city by a wall running from north to south reaching to the Tyropoeon. For Titus ^^ Compare the designation in Joseplms, Wars of the Jews, v. 4. — Of the almost incalculable literature on the topography of Jerusalem the more important works are referred to in vol. i. p. 19. The hypotheses of recent investigators about the old topography are shown in a special map in Menke's Bibclatlas, Sheet V., and still more completely by Zinmiermann, Karten und Plane zur Topograjyhie des Alien Jerusalem, Haiiel 1876. The best plans of modern .Jerusalem are those of Zimmermann-Socin and Wilson. See vol. i. p. 19. "- The situation of the Acra and the lower city is the one point most dis]iuted in the topography of Jerusalem. By a careful expression and estimation of the sources, however, it seems to me that the above state- ment may be accepted with certainty. Compare vol. i. p. 206. The history of the siege by Titus confirms this. For Titus, who pressed on from tlie north, came iiito possession of the lower city only after he had taken tlie site of the temple, and so the lower city must have lain south of this. It reached as far as Siloah {Wars of the Jews, vi. 7. 2). § 20. THE GREAT WAR WITH ROME, A.D. GG-73. 239 was obliged, after he had gained possession of the lower city, to direct an attack against the wall of the upper city. — On the west, south, and east, the walls stood upon the edge of lofty precipices ; only on the north did the ground run down tolerably low. Thus was there with a northern curve a second wall which enclosed the older suburb ; and then in a still wider curve to the north, a third wall, which had been begun by Agrippa I., but was completed only when found urgently needed during the rebellion. This third wall enclosed the so-called new city or suburb of Bezetha.'"** As the very situation of the city demanded, Titus directed his attack against the north side, hence first of all against the third wall, or to speak from the standpoint of the besiegers, the first. It was only now, when the battering-ram began tlieir work at three points, the civil war was stilled. Then the two factions, those of John of Gischala and of Simon Bar-Giora, banded together to make a common attack. In one of these onslaughts they fought with such success that the preservation of the engines of war were wholly due to the interference of Titus, who with his own hand cut down twelve of the enemy.^^ After fifteen days' work one of the most powerful of the battering-rams had made a breach in the wall, the Romans pressed in, and on the 7th Arteraisios, that is, Ijjar or May, were masters of the first wall.^-5 The attack was now directed against the second wall, rive days after the taking of the first this one also had to ^3 On. Bezetha, compare also this point, vol. ii. p. 213. — Josephus pays in Wars of (lie Jews, v. 4. 2 : Bi^sdd, o fiedipf/.Y}'Jsvrj/u,:i/ov 'EXX«8< yXmnvj x-etivii 'Ki-ytn ot,v ttoA.;?. That is impossible. For lii^idx can be nothing else but j^rT'T JT'Q, " I'lace of Olives." In the statement of Jose- phus therefore this much may be correct, that Bezetha was also called the New City. "* Josephu?, Wars of the Jews, v. 6. 2-5 ; Suetonius, Titus, 5 : "duo- decim j)ropu,i,'nat()res totidem sagittarum confecit ictibus." "• Josephus, Tl ars of the Jews, v. 7. 2. 240 THE KOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. yield before the blow of the Roman batteriDg-rams. Titus pressed in with a chosen band, but was driven back again by the Jews. Four days afterwards, however, he once more secured his position, and this time succeeded in maintaining it permanently.^^ He now raised earthworks at one and the same time against the upper city and against the Antonia, two against the one, and two against the other ; each of the four legions had to build one. Simon Bar-Giora conducted the defence of the upper city ; John of Gischala that of the Antonia. ^^ While the works were in progress, Josephus, apparently without success, was made to summon the city to surrender.^^ The want of the means of support was already beginning to be felt, and in consequence of this many of the poorer inhabitants went out of the city in search of victuals. Whenever any of them fell into the hands of the Romans, he was crucified in sight of the city, in order to strike terror into the heart of the besieged, or was sent back with his members mutilated.®^ On the 29th Artemisios, that is, Tjjar or May, the four ramparts were completed. Simon and John had only wished their completion, in order that they might direct all their energies to destroy again the works produced by incredible exertion and wearisome toil. Those over against the Antonia were destroyed by John of Gischala in this way : he dug a subterranean passage under them, supported it with pillars and then set fire to the supports, so that the ramparts fell in and were consumed in the fire. Two days later Simon Bar-Giora destroyed by fire those directed against the upper city.^«° Before Titus attempted the building of a new rampart, he »6 Josephus, Wars of the Jews, v. 7, 3-4, 8. 1-2. 8^ Ihid. V. 9. 2 ; comp. 11, 4, ^^ Ihid. v. 9. 3-4, 89 Ibid. V. 10. 2-5, 11. 1-2. "o n^i^i y. n. 4_6. § 20. THE GREAT WAR WITH ROME, A.D, 66-73. 241 made use of another device. He caused the whole city to be surrounded with a continuous stone wall (Tet^j^o?), in order to cut off all escape and to reduce the city by famine. With marvellous smartness this work was finished in three days. Numerous armed watchmen guarded it so that no one could pass it.^"^ In consequence of this the famine reached a terrible height in the city ; and if even but the half is true which the inventive imagination of Josephus has recorded, it must certainly have been horrible enough.^''^ That under such circumstances John of Gischala should have applied the sacred oil and the sacred wine to profane uses, can be regarded only by a Josephus as a reproach to him.^"^ Meanwhile Titus caused ramparts again to be built, and this time four against the Antonia. The wood used in their construction, owing to the complete devastation of all the district around, had to be carried a distance of 90 stadia ^"^ Josephus, Wars of the Jews, v. 12. 1-2 ; Luke xix. 43. Similar circumvallations are often spoken of. The most celebrated is that of Alesia by Caesar {Bell. Gall. vii. 69 : " fossanique et maceriam sex in altitudinem pedum praeduxerant ; ejus munitionis, quae ab Romanis instituebatur, circuitus XI milium passuum tenebat." Also before an attempt was made to attack it, Masada was surrounded by such a wall (Josephus, JFars of the Jews, vii. 8. 2). Large remnants of it are to be seen to this day. It was erected of unhewn stones without the use of mortar. See Survey of Western Palestine, Memoirs, iii. 421, and generally the literature mentioned in note 133. Compare also Marquardt, Eomische Staatsverwaltung, Ed. ii. 1876, p. 509. 102 Josephus, Wars of the Jeirs, v. 12. 3, 13. 7, vi 3. 3. Compare Aboth derabbi Nathan c. 6 (in Derenbourg, p. 285). Well known is the tragical history of that Mary of Beth-Esob, who was driven by hunger to devour her own child. See IVars of the Jews, vi. 3. 4 ; Eusebius, Hist. eccl. iii. 6 ; Hieronymus, ad Joelem, i. 9 ff. (Opera, ed. Vallarsi, vi. 178); and the passages from the Talmud and Midrash in Griitz, Bd. iii. 4 Aufl. p. 537 (2 Aufl. p. 401). — A mother's devouring of her own child belongs to the traditional and customary descriptions of the horrors of war, as well in threatenings : Lev. xxvi. 29, Deut. xxviii. 53, Jer. xix. 9, Ezek. V. 10, as in history : 2 Kings vi. 28, 29 ; Lam. ii. 20, iv. 10 ; Baruch ii. 3. ^"^ Josephus, IFars of the Jews, v. 13. 6. DIV. I. VOL. II. O 242 THE EOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. (four and a half days' journey).^'^ After twenty-one days' work they were completed. An attempt which John of Gischala made to destroy them on 1st Paneraos, that is, Thammuz or July, was unsuccessful, since it was not carried out with the earlier energy, while the Iiomans liad redoubled their vigil- ance.^**^ Scarcely had the Jews retired back again, when the battering-rams began to beat against the walls. At first they had no considerable success. The walls, however, were so shattered by the blows, that soon they sank of themselves at the points where the wall-breakers had been at work. But even yet the storming of the city w^as a work of difficulty, since John of Gischala liad already managed to erect a second behind it. After an encouraging speech of Titus on the 3rd Paneraos, that is, Thammuz or July, a Syrian soldier named Sabinus, with eleven comrades, made the attempt to scale the walls, but fell in the struggle with three of his companions.^"^ Two days afterwards, on the 5th Panemos, some twenty or thirty others banded together to renew the attempt. They mounted the wall secretly by night and cut down the first sentinels. Titus pressed as quickly as possible after them, and drove the Jews back as far as the temple site. Thence the Eomans were indeed beaten back again, but they held the Antonia, Nvhich was soon razed to the ground. ^"'^ In spite of war and famine the daily morning and evening sacrifices had up to this time been regularly offered. On the l7th Panemos, that is, Thammuz or July, these had to be at last discontinued ; but even then not so much on account of the famine, but rather " from the want of men." ^'^ Seeing that u renewed sumnions to surrender by Josephus proved again 10* Josephus, Wars of the Jews, v. 12. 4. "^ Ibid. vi. 1. 1-3. i"« Ibid. vi. 1. 3-6. ^^' Ibid. vi. 1. 7-8, 2. 1. ^"•^ Josephus, Wars of the Jews, vi. 2. 1 ; Mishna, Taanith iv. 6 : nynC'S "I*Dnn ^pa ntsria iby- Compare on the daily morning and evening t^K'rifices, Div. II. vol. i. pp. 273 ff. and 278 ft". § 20. THE GRP:AT WAR WITH ROME, A.D. 6 ;-73. 243 iinsuccessfnl, and an attack by night of a select detaclnnent of the army on the temple site proved a failure/"^ Titus now made preparations for a regular siege so as to take the temple by storm. The temple site formed a pretty regular square, which was completely surrounded by strong walls, along wliich on the inside ran a series of corridors. On the inside of this great space the inner court, surrounded on all sides by strong walls, formed a second position capable of being defended, which afforded to the besieged even after the loss of the outer space a place of safety. Titus was obliged first of all to make himself master of the outer wall. A'uiiu four ramparts were erected, for which he was now obliged to carry the material from a distance of 100 stadia (five hours' journey).^^" While they were working at these, a number of Iiomans met with their death on the 27th Panemos in this way: thi;y allowed themselves to be deceived by the withdrawal of the Jews from the heights of the western corridors into scaling those heights. But they had been beforehand filled by the Jews with inflammable materials. So soon then as the Eomans had reached the top the Jews set lire to the vaults, and the fire spread with such rapidity that the soldiers could not escape, but were enveloped in the fianies.'" When the ramparts were completed on the 8th Loos, that is, Ab or August, the rams were again set to work, and the siege operations began. But on the immense walls they could make no impression. In order to obtain his end Titus caused fire to be placed at the gates, and so opened up the entrance to the outer temple space.^^" On the ne.xt day, the 9th Ab, when the gates had been completely burnt down, Titus held a council of war, at which it was resolved that the temple should be spared."^ But wlien on the day following, *"* Josepluis, Wars of the Jeivs, vi. 2. 1-6. i'" Ibid. vi. 2. 7. "1 Ibid. vi. 3. 1-2. 112 j;^-^ ^.j 4 ^_2_ >>' Ibid. vi. 4. 3. 244 THE KOMAN-HEEODIAN AGK the 10th Ab, the Jews made two onslaughts rapidly one after the other from the inner court, and on the second occasion were driven back by the soldiers who were occupied with the quenching of the flames in the corridors, a soldier cast a blazing brand into one of the chambers of the temple proper."* When this was reported to Titus he hasted to the spot, followed by the generals and the legions. Titus gave orders to quench the fire ; but in the wild conflict that now raged around the spot his commands were not heard, and the fire got ever a firmer hold upon the edifice. Even yet Titus hoped to save at least the inner court of the temple, and renewed his orders to quench the flames ; but the soldiers in their excitement no longer listened to his commands. Instead of quenching the flames, they tlirew in new firebrands, and the whole noble work became a prey to the flames beyond redemption. Titus managed to inspect the inner court before the fire reached it."^ 1^* Joseplius, Wars of the Jews, vi. 4. 4-5. ^^^ Joseplius, Wars of the Jews, vi. 4. 6-7. — According to tlie account given above, the burning of tlie temple took place on the 10th Loos = Ab, as also Joseplius in Wars of the Jeivs, vi. 4. 5, expressly states. The Rabbinical tradition places the destruction of the temple on the 9th Ab (Mishna, Taanith iv. 6 : H'JtJ'ni ^Ji:^'X■l3 n)3n 2^1, 2S3 ny^'na), and indeed early on the evening before that day (6. Taanith 29a ; ^];E^'n 21J? 3S3, Derenbourg, p. 291) ; that is, in our way of reckoning, on the 8th Ab. It therefore regards as the day of destruction the day on which Titus caused fire to be laid to the gates. According to Rabbinical tradition it was Sabbath evening, T\2^ ""i^i'lD, when the temple was destroyed. See vol. i. p. 41, and Derenbourg, p. 291, According to Dio Cassius, Jerusalem was destroyed iv avryi tTi rni Kpouov ii/^ipx. According to the representation of Josephus, which we have followed, Titus had expressed a wish to spare the temple proper ( Wars of the Jews, vi. 4. 3). Divergent from this is the narrative of Sulpicius Severus, Chronicon, ii. 30 : " Fertur Titus adhibito consilio prius deliberasse, an templum tanti operis everteret. Etenim nonnuUis videbatur, aedem sacratam ultra omnia mortalia illustrem non oportere deleri, quae servata modestiae Romanae testimonium, diruta perennem crudelitatis notam praeberet. At contra alii et Titus ipse evertendum in priniis templum censebant, quo plenius Judaeorum et Christianorum religio toUeretur : § 20. THE GREAT WAR WITH ROME, A.D. 66-73. 245 While the Romans slaughtered indiscriminately all that fell into their hands, children and old men, priests and people, and intentionally fanned the terrible conflagration, so that nothing escaped the flames, John of Gischala succeeded, along with his Zealot following, to escape into the upper city. Even before the temple had been burnt down, the legions planted their standards in the temple court, and greeted their general as Imperator."® quippe lias religiones, licet contrarias sibi, isdem tamen ab auctoribus profectas ; Christianos ex Judaeis extitisse : radice sublata stirpem facile perituram." Orosius, vii. 9. 5-6, from a somewhat different point of view, ascribes the destruction to Titus. Seeing that Sulpicius Severus, as Bernays has proved, elsewhere bases his statements on Tacitus, Bernays has concluded that on this point also his statement rests on the history of Tacitus, which for this period is no longer extant, and served as model for Josephus, who wishes to free Titus from the nota crudelitatis (Bernays, Ueber die Chrmiik des Sidpicius Severus, 1861, pp. 48-61, in his Gemmmelfe Werke, ii. 159-181). The following also agree with Bernays : Stange, De Titi imperatoris vita, P. 1, 1870, pp. 39-43 ; Schiller, Geschichte der rom. Kaiserzeit, i. 399 ; Thiaucourt, Revue des etudes juives, t. xix. 1889, p. 65 sqq. The following vacillate : Renan, Der Antichrist, pp. 405-410 ; and Mommsen, Romisclie Geschichte, v. 538 f. Against Bernays : Gratz, Geschichte der Juden, 4 Aufl. iii. p. 538 f., and Hausi-ath, Zeitgeschichte, 2 Aufl. iii. 474. Only general assertion without reference to original sources is given by Illhardt, Titus und der jiidische Tevipel (Philologus, Bd. xl. 1881, pp. 189-196). Titus, he says, had intended to preserve the temple for a time until he had seen it and plundered it, and then to destroy. — It is in fact probable that Sulpicius Severus drew upon Tacitus ; but that does not prove that it was the model according to which Jose- phus constructed his account. This remains a mere possibility. Even the former supposition is rendered suspicious Ijy its being based upon an alleged resolution impossible in the mouth of Titus. ^"' Josephus, Wars of the Jews, vi. 5. 1-2. The greeting of Titus as Imperator : Wars of the Jews, vi. 6. 1 ; Suetonius, Titus, 5 ; Dio Cassius, Ixvi. 7 ; Orosius, vii. 9. 6. On the significance of this procedure, see especially Suetonius, I.e. Titus was suspected of having fallen away from Vespasian, and of having wished to set up as an independent ruler of the East. — Further details by Teuffel in Pauly's Beal-Encyclopaedie, vi. 2. 2490 ; Mommsen, Irnperatnrtitel des Titus {Wiener Numismat. Zeitschrift, Bd. iii. 1871, pp. 458-478) ; F. J. Hoffmann, Quomodn quando Titus imperator f actus sit, Bonnae 1883 ; Chambalu, Der Verfassungsstreit zu^ischen Titus und Vespasian (Philologns, Bd. xliv. 1885, pp. 123-131) ; 246 THE EOMAX-HERODIAN AGE. The work of the conqueror, however, was by no means completed with the overthrow of the temple. The upper city, the last refuge of the besieged, had yet to be taken. Titus once again called upon Simon and John to surrender. But the besieged wished to stipulate for liberty to go forth un- touched, which would not be granted them."^ By order of Titus the parts of the city now in the possession of the Eomans — the Ophla, the depository of the archives, the council house, the lower city down to Siloah — were set on fire, while at the same time the tyrants in the upper city continued their work of murder and plunder."^ Seeing then that there was no hope of securing the voluntary surrender of the besieged, it was necessary once more to resort to the erection of ramparts. They were con- structed partly at the north-western corner of the upper city near the palace of Herod, partly at the north-eastern corner, in the neighbourhood of the so-called Xystus. On the 20th Loos (Ab, August) the buildings were begun; on the 7th Gorpiaeus (Elul, September) they were finished. The battering-rams soon made a breach in the walls, through which the soldiers with little difficulty forced their way, because the besieged in their despondent condition could no longer offer a vigorous and determined opposition."* One portion of them made the attempt to break away through the besiegers' lines and to force through the cordon which sur- rounded them at Siloah; but they were driven back, and rushed again into their subterranean hiding-places. Meanwhile the whole of the upper city was taken possession of by the Romans. The military standards were planted and the song of victory Pick, " Der Iraperatortitel des Titus," in Sallet's ZeitschriftfitrNumismatik, Bd. xiii. 1885, pp. 109-238. Add to these : Schiller in Bursian's Jahres- hericht, Bd. lii. pp. 17-25; Mommsen, "Zu den Miinzen des Titus," in Sallet's Zeitschrift fiir Numismatik, Bd. xiv. 1887, pp. 31-35. '"^ Josephus, Wars of the Jetcs, vi. 6. 2-3. i>* Itdd. vi. 6. 3, 7. 2-3. ^^'^ Ibid. vi. 8. 1-5. § 2(1. THE GliKAT WAU WITH KOMR, A.D. 6G-73. 247 vas sun" The soldiers passed tlirou'ih the citv murderin(""^'''h'^'-' i'^oirjaxTo t/iv f'!rihnfitxv. 126 Josephus, Wars of the Jews, vii. 5. 1-3. 12'' The arrival of Titus in Rome is set down "somewhere about the middle of June a.d. 71'"' by Chambalu, Philologus, xliv. 1885, pp. 507-517. 128 Josephus, JVars of the Jews, vii. 5. 3-7 ; Dio Cassius, Ixvi. 7. The Jewish spoils which were borne along in the triumphal procession are to be seen to the present day on the relief work on the Arch of Titus. Compare Reland, De spoliis templi Hierosolymitani in arcu Titiano Romae ronspicuis, Ultraj. 1716. New edition by Schulze 1775. Also in Ugolini, 'Thesaurus, t. ix. An engraving and a description of the Arch of Titus, which was not erected divo Tito until after the death of Titus, is given by many ; among others, by Reber, Die Ruinen Roms und der Campagna, 1863, pp. 397-400. On the relief, see Philippi, " Ueber die romischeu Triuraphalreliefe und ihre Stellung in der Kunstgeschichte " {Ahhandiuiigen der philol.-hist. Classe der sachs. Gesellsch. der Wissensch. Bd. vi. 1874, pp. 245- 306 ; with illustrations : Tafel ii.-iii.). — In the inscription on the Arch of Titus (Corpus Inscriptionum Latinoram, t. vi. n. 945) no mention is made of the Jewish war. But another Arch of Titus, destroyed in the fourteenth or fifteenth century, which had stood in the Circus Maximus, bore the following pompous and, so far as it deals with the earlier history of Jerusalem, untrue inscription, bearing date a.d. 81, preserved in a manu- 250 THE ROMAN-IIERODIAN AGE. the rebel leader, was in accordance with an old custom carried away from the festal procession to prison and executed there.'^' The conquest of the capital had certainly given to Titus the right to the celebration of the triumph. The whole of Palestine, however, was not yet by any means subdued. The strongholds of Herodium, Macharus, and Masada were still in the hands of the rebels. The reduction of these fortresses was the work of the governor of Palestine at that time, Lucilius Bassiis. In regard to the Herodium, this seems to have been accomplished by him without difficulty.'^" The siege of Macharus occupied a longer time.^^' Yet even this strong- script at Einsiedeln : " Senatiis populusque Romanus imp. Tito Cae.'^ari divi Vespasiani f. Vespasiano Augusto . . . quod praeceptis patri(is) coii- siliisque et auspiciis gentem Judaeorum doiDuit et urbem Hierusolyniaiu oiunibus ante se ducibus regibus gentibus aut frustra petitam ant oiunino iuteinptataiii delevit" (Piper, Jahrbb. fiir deutsche Theol. 1876, pp. 52-54 ; Corp. hiscr. Lat. t. vi. n. 944 ; Dannesteter, Revue des etudes juives, t. i. 1880, 1?. 35 sq. ; on its genuineness : Mornnisen, Berichte der sacks, (j'esellsch. der Wissensch. philol.-hist. CI. 1850, p. 303). — The coins of Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian with the superscription : lovlutx; io.'Kux.vta.;, Judaea evida, Judaea capta, and such like, are given most fully in Madden, Coins of the Jeivs, 1881, pp. 207-229. Compare also De Saulcy, Kecherches sur la N umismatiqiie Judmque, p. 155 sq. ; Numi.'i- matique de la Terre Sainte, p. 79 sq. ; Gladden, Nitmismaiic Chronicle, 1876, pp. 45-55 ; History of Jewish Coinage, pp. 183-197. 1-^ Joseph us. Wars of the Jews, vii. 5. 6 ; Dio Cassius, Ixvi. 7. — Simon was dragged to the place over against the Forum {Wars of the Jews, vii. 5. 6 : ilg Tov i'ttI rii; ecyopci: icFvpero tottoj/). Upon this statement Haver- camp correctly remarks: "scil. carcerem, quern Livius dicit Foro im- minere." The career Mamertinus lay near the Forum. There, and indeed in its lower part, the Tullianum, were, e.g., Jugurtha and the Catilinian conspirators put to death. It was the common practice to put prisoners of war to death there by strangling. Trebellius PoUio, Tyranni triginta, c. 22 (in : " Scriptores Historiae Augustae, ed. Peter) : " strangulatus in carcere captivorum veterum more." On the Career, see also Pauly's Real-Enc\jclopaedie, art. "Tullianum," and Gsell-Fels, Rom. (1 Aufl.) ii. 200 if. '*" Josephus, Wars of the Jews, vii. 6. 1. — On the situation of the Herodium, see vol. i. of this work, p. 435. ^^^ Macharus in Greek : M»x'^'P'>'^s (^o Josephus, Strabo, xvi. 2. 40, p. § 20. THE GREAT WAR WITH KOME, A.D. 6C-73. 251 b *ld, before it was taken by storm, yielded by a voluntary surrender. The decision to surrender was finally taken in consequence of the apprehension of a youth called Eleasar, who had particularly distinguished himself in the defence. Bassus threatened to crucify him in view of the city, and in order to prevent this the Jews gave over the fortress.^^" In the meantime Lucilius Bassus died. To his successor, Flavins Silva, fell the task of taking Masada."' In that fortress the Sicarii, under 763 ; Stephanus Byzant. s.v.) is in the Semitic languages Mechawar, miao or K33D- In the Mishna, Tamid in. 8, the editio princeps, the Cambridge Manuscript, and cod. de Rossi, 138, liave "iliDD ; Aruch has "1330- Both forms also occur elsewhere, but "ilIDD is more common. The pointing of the word "illDO, Mechawar, as in cod. de Rossi, 138, is confirmed by the reading "illSSDj which a Munich Manuscript, Joma 39a, has. See Levy, Neuhebrdisch.es TVorterhuch, in. Ill f. Also generally : Lightfoot, Opera, ii. 582. Besides this Semitic form, we have the following : Msi.'/,a./iipu; (Parthey, Hieroclis Synecdemus et Notitiae graecae episcopatuum, 18G6, p. 93) and Machaveron, as an accusative form, Tobler and Molinier, Itinera Hierosolyniitana, 1879, p. 328. — According to Wars of the Jews, vii. 6. 2, Machiirus had been fortified as early as in the days of Alexander Janniius. Gabinius demolished the fortress (Antiq. xiv. 5. 4 ; IVars of the Jeios, i. 8. 5). Herod the Great fortified it anew {Wars of the Jews, vii. 6. 2). On its importance, see Pliny, Hist. Nat. v. 16. 72 : " Machaerus secunda quondam arx Judaeae ab Hierosolymis." — It lay on the southern border of Peraea {Wars of the Jeivs, iii. 3. 3), and in the time of Herod Antipas is said to have belonged to the king of Arabia {Antiq. xviii. 5. 1). Undoubtedly it is the modern Mkaur, east of the Dead Se.i. See Seetzen, Reiscn durch Syrien, ii. 330 ft'., iv. 378 ft". ; Ritter, Erdkunde, XV. 1. 577 f. ; Raumer, Raliistina, p. 264 ; Keim, Jesus of Nazara, ii. 335 ff. ; Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, 2 Aufl. i. 329 f. ; Parent, Machaerous, Paris 1868 ; Tristram, The Land of Moab, 2nd ed. 1874, p. 253 sqq. ; Due de Luynes, Voyage d' Exploration a la mer morte, a Petra et sur la rive gauche du Jourdain, Paris, s. a. [1874], Atlas, Sheets 36-39 ; Baedeker-Socin, Palastina, p. 317. '^^ Josephus, Wars of the Jews, vii. 6. 1, 4. ^^^ On Masada, i.e. m\*D, mountain stronghold, in Strabo, xvi. 2. 44, p. 764, corrupted into Moatijosoa, see especially the comprehensive mono- graph of Tuch, Masada, die herodianische Felsenfeste, nach Fl. Josephus und neueren Beohachtungen, Leipzig 1863, p. 4. — It had indeed been fortified even by the high priest Jonathan ( Wars of the Jews, vii. 8. 3), and was spoken of as an important stronghold as far back as the time of Hyrcanus II. about B.C. 42 {Antiq. xiv. 1 1. 7 ; Wars of the Jews, i. 12. 1), and during 252 THE KOMAN-HERODIAN AGK the leadership of Eleasar, the son of Jairi, and a descendant of Judas of Galilee/^* had established themselves at the com- mencement of the war, and had continued to maintain their position. The siege proved a very difficult business, since the rock upon which the fortress was built rose on all sides so high and steep that it was almost impossible to bring the engines of destruction near. Only at one point, and even there only by means of difficult and ingenious preparatory operations, was it possible to secure a place for a battering- ram. But by the time that this machine had made a breach in the wall, the besieged had already erected behind that wall another bulwark of wood and earth, which, owing to its elasticity, could not be destroyed by the battering-ram. The enemy, however, by the use of fire succeeded in setting this obstacle also aside. When Eleasar saw that there was no longer any hope of resisting the attack, he held a council the invasion of Palestine by the Parthians served as a safe retreat for the members of the family of Herod (Antiq. xiv. 13. 8 f., 14. 6, 15. 1 f. ; Wars of the Jews, i. 13. 7 f., 15. 1, 15. 3 f.). Herod the Great fortified it anew ( Wars of the Jeivs, vii. 8. 3). — According to Wars of the Jews, vii. 8. 3, it lay near to the ■western bank of the Dead Sea ; according to Wars of the Jews, iv. 7. 2, it was not far from Engedi. So, too, Pliny, Hist. Nat. v. 1 7. 73 : " Inde {scil. ' from Engedi ') Masada castelhuu in rupe et ipsum haut prociil Asphaltite." According to this, and according to the description which Josephus, Wars of the Jews, vii. 8. 3, gives of the locality, there can be no doubt that it is to be identified with the modern Sebbeh on the western bank of the Dead Sea south of Engedi, as Smith and Robinson Avere the first to recognise. The siege works of the Romans of A.D. 73 are .still to be distinctly seen in that place. See generally : Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, iii. 241 ff. ; Wolcott and Tip})ing in the Bibliothcca sacra, New York 1843 ; Ritter, Erdkunde, xv. 1, p. 655 IF. ; De Saulcj-, Voyage autour de la mer morte, Paris 1853, Bd. i. p. 199 fF., with atlas, pi. xi.-xiii. ; Rey, Voyage dans le Haouran et aux bards de la mer morte execute pendant les anuses, 1857 et 1858, Paris ; atlas, ph xxv.-xxvi. ; Tuch, Masada; Sepp, Jerusalem und das heilige Land, 2 Aufl. Bd. i. 1873, p. 821 ff., with plans and illustrations ; Baedeker-Socin, Paldstina, pp. 298-300, with plan ; The Survey of Western Palestine, Memoirs by Conder and Kitchoner, iii. 418-421, with two plans and an illustration ; and there- with Sheet xxvi. of the large English Map. ^^* Josephus, Wars of the Jews, ii. 17. 9, vii. 8. 1 § 20. THE GREAT WAR WITH ROME, A.D. 6C-73. 253 with the garrison, in which he urged that they should first of all slay the members of their own families, and then put one another to death. This, therefore, was done. When the Komans entered, they beheld with horror that no more work was left for them to do. Thus was the very last stronghold of the rebellion conquered in April a.d. 73.^^^ After the fall of Masada disturbances were made by tlie Jews in Alexandria and in Cyrene, which in the former place resulted in the closing of the temple of Onias at Leontopolis.^"^ But these after -vibrations of the great revolution in the mother country are scarcely worthy of being mentioned along- side of the original movement, The fate of Palestine was sealed by the overthrow of Masada. Vespasian retained the country as a private possession, and the taxes levied went into his own purse.'^^ Only to 800 veterans did be distribute grants of land at Emmaus near Jerusalem.^^*^ The former 135 Joaephus, JFars of the Jeivs, vii. 8. 1-7, 9. 1-2. — According to vii. 9. 1, tlie self-slaughter of the garrison of Masada took place on the 15th Xanthicus (Nisan, April). The year is not mentioned. But since in an earlier passage, vii. 7. 1, the fourth year of Vespasian is mentioned, which began on 1st July a.d. 72 (comp. Tacitus, Hist. ii. 79), the conquest of Masada must have occurred in the spring of a.d. 73. Compare Ewald, History of Israel, vii. 614. 12^ Josephus, }Fars of tlie Jews, vii. 10-11 ; Life, Ixxvi. 13^ Josephus, TFars of the Jens, vii. 6. 6 : KiXiiiuv nzu.na.]) viji' d-oooadixi root/ lovoaiuv' ov yocp y.XTUiciaev iKU izoKiv, lotccv uvru t/jv y^opotu (Jiv'Ka.rrotv. Mommsen, Eomische Geschichte, v. 539 f. note, discovers in tlio.se words a contradiction. But such there would be only if we were to take dTrohoadxt in the sense of "to sell." It means, however, also "to farm out." The country immediately surrounding Jerusalem had been given over to the tenth legion (Joseplius, Life, Ixxvi.). 1^^ Josephus, l-Fars of the Jews, vii. 6. 6 : CKTXKoaiot; oi fio'joi; oItto rii; OTpeirioi; oicc(Diijit.itioig )(,uptO'j thuKtv it; KxrotKriGtv, o x.oc'hfnui /xiv ' A/ny^ocov;, u.-!rix,ii OS ruv lipoao'hvfiuu aruhiov; Tptx-KovTU. Tlie reading here vacillates between Tpiot,Kovr» and e^jj^oj/Tse. Since the two best manuscripts have rptocicovTu, and since i^vjy.ouTot, is evidently an emendation in accordance with Luke xxiv. 13, the former is to be regarded as the correct reading. Accordingly our Emmaus cannot be the same as that Emmaus otherwise known, situated somewhere about 20 or 21 miles from Jerusalem, which, from the time of Julius Africanus, in the beginning of the third century 254 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. temple -tax of two drachmas was henceforth exacted of all after Christ, was called Nicopolis. On it see Div. II. vol. i. p. 159 ; Henderson, Handbook on Palestine, pp. 165-167 ; Gelzer, /wZiws Africanus, i. 5-7. Sozomen distinctly declares that the latter : fUTci rviv a-'Kuntv ' Ispoao'hvftuv xxl r^v Konoi tZiv ' \ovioitav v/x/ij*, had the name of Nicopolis {Hist. eccl. V. 21) ; and the coins of Em maus- Nicopolis are supposed to have an era from about a.d. 70. See, with reference to this point, Belley in the Memoires de I' Acad, des inscr. et belles-lettres, alte serie, Bd. xxx. 1764, pp. 294-306 ; Eckhel, Doctr. Num. iii. 454 ; Mionnet, Description de nie'dailles ant. v. 550 sq., Swppl. viii. 376 ; De Saulcy, Numismatique de la Terre /Samfe,pp. 172-175,406,pl.vi.3-5 : De Saulcy in Annuaire de la Societe francaise de Num. et d'Arche'ol. t. iii. 2, 1869, pp. 275-278 ; De Saulcy in Melanges de Numismatique, t. ii. 1877, p. 147 sq. For this reason, in spite of the indication of distance in Josephus, the military colony of Vespasian is by many identified with Emmaus-Nieopolis. So e.g. Kuhn, Die Stddt. und biirgerl. Verfassung des rom. lieichs, ii. 356 f. ; Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung, Bd. i. 2 Aufl. 1881, p. 428 ; Gelzer, Julius Africanus, i. 5-7 ; with hesitation : Grotefend in Pauly's Real- Encyclopaedia, iii. 115. But the assertion of Sozomen, who only casually throws out this suggestion, and probably hastily draws this conclusion only from the name Nicopolis, is confronted by the definite and positive statement of Kusebius and other chroniclers, according to which Nicopolis had not been founded earlier than the time of Julius Africanus, and only then received this name. According to Eusebius, Ghronicon. ad ami. Abr. 2237, ed. Schoene, ii. 1 78 sq. = 67t7-o?m-o« PascJiale, ed. Dindorf, i. 499, in the time of Helesgabalus ; according to Syncellus, ed. Dindorf, i. 676, in the time of Alexander Severus. Compare also generally : Jerome, De viris illustriis, c. QZ = Opera, ed. Vallarsi, ii. 903, and an anonymous writing, probably from the Church history of Philip of Side, dating about a.d. 430, which De Boor has edited according to a Codex Barocxianus [Te.cte und Untersuchungen ::ur (reschichte dsr altchristlichen Literatur, edited by Gebhardt and Harnack, v. 2, 1888, pp. 169, 174 f.]. Yet another is given in Reland, Palaestina, p. 759. The chief pas.sage in Eusebius, Ghronicon, ed. Schoene, ii. 178 sq., runs as follows in the Armenian : " In Palestina antiqua Emmaus restaurata est Nicopolisque vocata cura [praefectura] et interpellatione Julii Africaui chronographi ad regem ;" according to Jerome : " In Palaestina Nicopolis quae prius Emmaus vocabatur urbs condita est, legationis industriam pro ea suscipiente Julio Africano scribtore temporum;" according to the Ghronicon Paschale : Jlct.'KutarivT,; 'Nix.6'7ro>j: ij vporspov 'Kfi/itxov: iKTiadti TTohii, "irpiaiiivovros VTsp ccvriii Kut'i vpiiaruf^ivov 'Iov'Klou i\(pptx,ocvov tov rcH XpovtKu. avyypoL-^^ctf^.iuov. That this is correct, and that the statement of Sozomen is false, is further proved by this, that writers before Heliogabulus are acquainted only with the name Emmaus. So Pliny, Hist. Nat. v. 14. 70 ; Ptolemy, v. 16. 7. In the Itinerarium Antoyiini it is not met with at all. Also Josephus, Avho frequently mentions tliis Emmaus, never makes 5 20.. THE GREAT WAR WITH ROME, A.D. 66-73. 255 Jews for tlie temple, Jupiter Capitolinus.^^'"* The inhabitants of Palestine became impoverished, and by the seven years' war their numbers had been terribly reduced. A Jewish magis- tracy, of the kind formerly possessed, no longer existed. The one gathering point which still remained for the people was the remark lliat it is now called Nico})olis, whereas elsewhere he docs not omit such notices. The existence of coins of the Palestinian Nicopolis before Heliogabulus, and with an era from about a.d. 70, is, however, very questionable indeed. See the critical remarks by De Saulcy in Numismatique de la Terre Sainte, pp. 172-175, and Monimsen, Ephemeriii epigraphica, t. v. 1884, p. 619. The coin described by De Saulcy in IIk; Appendix, p. 406, is very uncertain as to reading. In the Melanges de N umiwiatiqiie, ii. 147 sq., De Saulcy reports that he had received from Jerusalem a copy of the coin described by Belley of the year 72 aer. Nicop., which was minted after the death of Faustina, who died A.D. 141. But the place of its discovery being Jerusalem, does not prove that the coin belonged to the Palestinian Nicopolis. It may, e.g., have belonged to the Egyptian city of that name. It may even be matter of question whether we should not read P() = 170, instead of BO =72, according to the era of Augustus. We have therefore no dependable testimony of the founding of an Enimaus-Nicopolis about a.d. 70. Against the identification of the military colony of Vespasian with this Enimaus-Nicopolis, it may be alleged, besides Josephus' account of its distance, that the military colony of Vespasian is not called Nicopolis by Jo.sephus, and that, on the other hand, every characteristic feature of a colony is wanting in Emmaus-Nico- j)olis. Our Emmaus ( JFars of the Jews, vii. 6. 6) is mo.st probably rather to be identified with the New Testament Emmaus, Luke xxiv. 13, although tlie distance in the two cases, respectively 30 and 60 furlongs, are only approximately correct. It has been shrewdly conjectured that our Emmaus, in which Vespasian founded a Roman colony, is identical with the modern Culonie near Jerusalem. So Sepj), Jerusalem, 2 Autl. i. 54-73; E wald, ifisiory of Israel, vii. 553, 612 ; Hitzig, Geschichte, ii. 623 ; Caspari, Chronological and Geographical Introduction to the Life of Christ, p. 242 ; Keim, Jesus of Nazara, vi. 306 ; Furrer in Schenkel's Bihellexicon, ii. 107 ff. ; Fr. W. Schultz in Herzog, Ktnl-Encyclopnedie, 2 Aufl. xi. 771. In an inscription found at Enimaus-Nicopolis mention indeed is made of a mil{es) [leg. V.] Mac, Ephemeris epigraphica, t. v. p. 620, n. 1446. Hut the designation as miles, instead of as veteranus, is against the conjecture that it can refer to one of the veterans settled by Vespasian. In a.d. 68 a fortilied camp of the fifth legion was placed at Emiir,ius, and remained a long time, probably until A.D. 70 {Wars of the Jews, iv. 8. 1, v. 1. 6.). 1"'' Josephus, JVars of the Jevs, vii. 6. 6 ; Dio Cassius, iv. 8. 1. Compare Div. IT. vol. i. ].. 251. 256 THE KOMAN-HEBODIAN AGE. the law. Around this they gathered now with anxious and scrupulous faithfulness, and with the indomitable hope that some day, under an established civil government, and even among the nations of the world, it would come again to have a recognised place and practical authority. § 21. FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM TO THE OVERTHROW OF BAR-COCHBA. 1. The State of Affairs in Palestine from Vespasian to Hadrian. The separation of Judea from the province of Syria, which had been resolved upon at the time when Vespasian was sent thither (see above, vol. i. p. 369), continued in force also after the conclusion of the war. Judea — and indeed under that very name — formed from this time forth an independent province.^ Since it had as a garrison only one legion, the Icgio X. Frdensis (see above, p. 248), alongside of which were only auxiliary troops (see above, p. 56), the commander of that legion was at the same time governor of the province. It appears that, as a rule, the position was held by men of praetorian rank. It was only at a later period that the province came to be administered by men of consular rank, probably after the time of Hadrian, since even then the Icgio ^ The name .Judaea occurs, e.g., on the military diploma of a.d. 86 (Corpus Inscr. Lat. t. iii. p. 857, Dipl. xiv.), on the inscription of Julius Severus {Corpus Inscr. Lat. t. iii. n. 2830), on the coin which celebrates Hadrian's visit to Judea {adventui Aug. Judaeae, in Madden, Coins of the Jews, 1881, p. 231), on the inscription of an other- wise unknown " proc(urator) Auf5(usti) provincia(e) Jud(aeae) v(ices) a(gens) l(egati)" in Corpus Inscr. Lat. iii. n. 5776, and elsewhere. At a later date, somewhere after Hadrian, the prevailing designation is Syria Palaestina, which occurs even as early as in Herodotus (see Division II. vol. ii. p. 193. Yet even then the name Judea had not altogether passed out of use. The geographer Ptolemy sets both alongside of each other (Ptolemy, v. 16. 1). Compare Marquardt, Bomische Staatsvenualtung, Bd. i. 2 Aufl. 1881, p. 421, note 2 ; P. von Rohden, Be Palaestina et Arabia orovinciis Romanis quaestiones selectae, 1885, pp. 1-3. DIV. I. VOL. IL fi 258 THE ROMAN-HERODIiN AGE. VI. Ferrata was stationed in Judea, and the governor was not of an order superior to the commander of a legion.^ From the series of governors only certain names are now known to us.^ The first of these who exercised their functions during the war of a.d. 70-73 have already been briefly referred to : — 1. Sex. Vettulenus Cerialis, who at the siege of Jerusalem commanded the fifth legion (see above, p. 236). He remained after the departure of Titus as commander of the garrison troops, that is, of the tenth legion and of the detachments joined with it, and gave them over to Lucilius Bassus (Wars of the Jews, vii. 6. 1). His full name is given in an inscription (Corpus Inscriptionum Latinorum, t. x. n. 4862). 2. Lucilius Bassus, who took the strongholds of Herodium and Macharus (Josephus, Wars of the Jeivs, vii. 6. 1—6). He died as governor (Wars of the Jews, vii. 8. 1). The procurator serving under him, L. Laberius (not Ai^epoL<;) Maximus (Wars of the Jews, vii. 6. 6), is also mentioned in the Acts of the Arval priesthood : Corpus Inscriptionuvi Latinorum, t. vi. * Proofs of what is said above are given by von Roliden, De Palaestina et Arabia provinciis Eomanis, p. 30 sq. On an inscription found recently in Jerusalem, dating from the time of Caracalla, one M. Junius Maximus "leg(atus) Augg. (i.e. duorum Augustorum) leg(ionis) X. Fr(etensis)" is mentioned. Seeing that he is designated as leg. Augg., Zangemeister had assumed on his first examination of the inscription (Zeitschrift des deutschen Palastina-Vereins, x. 1887, pp. 49-53) that this commander of the legion was also governor. But he has himself rightly, in his appendix to that article (Zeitschrift, xi. 138), correctly observed that in that case the designation pro praetore would not have been wanting. The person referred to was therefore only commander of the legion. 3 Compare the collection of passages in : Kuhn, Die stadtische und biirgerliche Verfassung des Rom. Reichs, ii. 184 f.; Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung, Bd. i. 2 Aufl. p. 419 f. ; von Rohden, De Palaestina et Arabia provinciis Romanis, 1885, pp. 36-42 ; Liebenam, Forschungen zur Verwaltungsgeschichte des rom. Kaiserreichs, Bd. i. 1888, pp. 239-244. — Gratz, " Die roraischen Legaten in Judaa unter Domitian und Trajan und ihre Beziehung zu Juden und Christen" (Monatsschr. fur Gesch. mid fVissensch. des Judenth. 1885, pp. 17-34), gives only rabbinical legends. § 21. (l) PALESTINE FROM VESPASIAN TO IIADIilAN. 259 n. 2059, and in the military diploma of a.d. 83 {EplicmerU epigraphica, v. p. 612 sq.). According to the latter authority, he was the governor of Egypt. 3. L. Flavins Silva, the conqueror of Masada (Josephus, Wars of the Jews, vii, 8-9). He was consul in a.d. 81. His full name is given as L. Flavins Silva Nonius Bassus in the Acta Arvalium, Corpus Inscriptionum Latinorum, t. vi. n. 2059. Compare Henzen, Acta Arvalium Index, p. 186. 4. M. Salvidenus, about a.d. 80, is witnessed to l)y a Palestinian coin of Titus, with the superscription ETII M. SAAOTIAHN{OT), Madden, Coins of the Jews, p. 218. He is certainly identical with the M. Salvidenus, who, according to a coin of Domitian, was proconsul of Bithynia (Mionnet, Supplement, v. p. 2). 5. Cn. Pompeius Longinus, a.d. 86. In a military diploma of Domitian of a.d. 8 6 the veterans of two alae and four cohorts are referred to " qui . . . sunt in Judaea sub Cn. Pompeio Longino " (Corpus Inscriptionum Latinorum, iii. p. 857, Dipl. xiv.). We have no other information with reference to these governors of Judea. — From some statements of the diploma Henzen thought himself justified in drawing the conclusion, that at that time warlike operations were being carried on in Judea. The premises, however, do not by any means sustain such a conclusion.'* * Henzen, Jahrhiicher des Vcrcins von AKeriliumsfrcunden im HJicmlande, xiii. 1848, pp. 34-37. He is followed by : Darmesteter, licvue des etudes jaives, i. 1880, pp. 37-41; Schiller, Geschichte der romischen Kaiserzeit, i. 532. Aj^'ainst this view : Rohden, De Palaestina et Arabia, p. 38 (in accordance with a coninmnication from Mommsen). — Henzen's rea.sons are : (1) The cohors I. Avyustana Lusitanorum, mentioned on the diploma, was shortly before stationed in Pannonia. It must therefore have been sent for from thence in order to strengthen the garrison of Judea. (2) Tlie veterans, accoiding to the diploma, leceived indeed the i-ank of citizens, but not a full discharge {hoiiesia missio). It was therefore thought that they might still be needed. Tlie latter argument is not decisive, and the cohors I. A uijinita Lusitanorum mentioned on the inscription, is demonstrably diliercnt from the cohors I, Lnsitanorum settled in Pannonia in a.d. 85. 2 GO THE ROMAN-IIEEODIAN AGE. 6. Atticus, about a.d. 107. In two fragments of Hege- sippus, which are quoted by Eusebius, it is reported thut Simeon, said to be the second bishop of the Church of Jerusalem, died a martyr's death " under the Emperor Trajan and the governor Atticus" (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. iii. 32. 3: eVt Tpalavov Kai(Tapo<; Koi viraTiKov Attikov', iii. 32. 6: eVt 'Attikov tov vrraTtKov). In the Chronicle of Eusebius this event is placed in the tenth year of Trajan, a.d. 107 (Eusebius, Chronicon, ed. Schoene, ii. p. 162 sq.) ; in the Chronicon Pascliale, ed. Dindorf, i. 471, in the consulship of Candidus and Quadratus, a.d. 105. Neither of these state- ments, indeed, has the value of traditional testimonies, least of all the statement in the Chronicon Paschale, which has only the authority of Eusebius. Our Atticus is supposed to be identical with the similarly named father of Herod Atticus. The designation of viruTiKo^ is remarkable, since other gover- nors of Judea had held this office before their consulship. — Compare generally : Waddington, Fastes dcs 'provinces asiatiques, p. 192 sq. ; Dittenberger, Hermes, xiii. 1878, pp. 67—89. 7. Pompeius Falco, about a.d. 107 and onwards. The inscription in Corpus Inscriptiomcm Latinorum, t. x. n. 6321, gives the cursus Iwnorum of this man, who is known from the letters of the younger Pliny. According to this document he was also " leg(atus) Aug(usti) pr(o) pr(aetore) provinc(iae) [Judaeae] et ]eg(ionis) X. Eret(ensis)." The supplied word Judaeae is warranted here by the fact that the command of the tenth legion was attached to the governorship. According to Pliny, Epist. vii. 22, this governorship dates probably from a.d. 107 to A.D. 110, for in the letter written about that time Pliny commends a friend to Falco for the place of a tribune. But this, according to the other date of the cursus honorum, could only have happened during the period of his governorship of Judea. — The epistles addressed by Pliny to Pompeius Ealco are Pliny, Fpist. i. 23, iv. 27, vii. 22, § 21. (l) PALESTINE FROM VESPASIAN TO HADRIAN. 261 ix. 15. Compare generally: Mommsen, Hermes, iii, 1869, p. 51 ; Pliny, Epist. ed. Keil, p. 422 (Index by Mommsen); Waddington, Pastes des provinces asiatiques, pp. 202-204; Kohden, p. 39; Liebenam, Forschungen, i. 94 ff. ; Petersen and Luschau, Beisen in Lykien (1889), p. 123. 8. Tiberianiis, about a.d. 114. — In Joannes Malalas, ed. Dindorf, p. 273, the express language of a writing is quoted, which Tiberianus, the governor of Palaestina prima, addressed to Trajan during his stay in Antioch, a.d. 114 (eV tcS Ze BLarpilSeiv tov avrov Tpalavhv ^arriXea iv ^Avrioj^eLO, 7i]<; ^vp[a<; ^ovXevofievou to, irepl tov iroXifiov efirpvaev avrcv Ti,^epiavov e6vov<;, TavTO). In it Tiberianus calls the attention of the emperor to the fact that the Christians in a foolish manner deliver themselves up to martyrdom, and desires directions as to how he should proceed. In reply Trajan commanded him and all other magistrates throughout the whole empire to suspend the persecutions. This same story is told in a somewhat different way by John of Antioch (in Mliller, Fragmcnta hist, graec. iv. 580, n. 111). The statement of the latter is literally reproduced by Suidas in his Lexicon, s.v. Tpalav6<{ 7re/x06'e/cr7;9. Compare Clironicon ad. ann. Ahr. 2148). 11. Julius Severus, a.d. 135. — The suppression of the Jewish revolution was thoroughly completed only by Julius Severus, who was sent to Judea from Britain, where he had been up to that time governor (Dio Cassius, Ixix. 13). The cursus honoru?n of this man is given in the inscription, Corpus Inscriptionum Zatiriorum, t. iii. n. 2830, where the higher offices are enumerated in the following order : " leg(ato) pr(o) pr(aetore) imp(eratoris) Traiani Hadriani Aug(usti) proviuciae 264 THE ROMAN-HERODIAN AGE. Daciae, cos. leg. pr. pr. provinciae Moesiae inferioris, leg. pr. pr. provinciae Brittaniae, leg. pr. pr. provinciae Judeae, leg. pr. pr. provinciae Suriae." This therefore confirms the state- ment of Dio Cassius that he came from Britain to Judea. On the other hand, the statement of Dio Cassius, or rather that of his unskilful epitomizer Xiphilinus, that after the conclusion of the Jewish revolt he was made governor of Bithynia (Dio Cassius, Ixix. 14), is the result of a confusion between him and another Severus. Our Julius Severus, who was consul in a.d. 127, was called Sextus Julius Severus {Corpus Inscript. Lat. iii. p. 874, Dipl. xxxi.), but the governor of Bithynia was Tl. Xeovrjpo.;i/ Kd'hovyAyrrj, Ma,l2op6ix, Is VTTO ruv i-^rixojpicav. — Pliny, Hist. Nat. v. 13. 69: Neapolis quod antea Mamortha dicebatur. — Eusebius, Onomasticon, ed. Lagarde, p. 290 : '2v)(,sf<, i] x,cci 'S.tKi^ux »j Kctt S^A^j^* TrclA/j 'loCKUii viiu ipvifAo;' OiiKuvrxt Si ToVo? 11/ "Trpoxarstoi^ Nissf xo'Asojj. Ibid. p. 274, s.v. Aovl^cc' "Trxpot- y^sifiiVYi 'S.vxsfi dTTo 3 ayif^.iiov Nex; xo'Xswj ; instead of which Jerome gives in his text more correctly : in tertio lapide Neapoleos; Epiphanius, Haer. 72. 23 : iu liKifioi; rovreanu h rri NixvoT^si. So, too, Haer. 80. 1. — Jerome, " Peregr. Paulae," in Tobler, Palaestinae descriptiones, p. 23 ( = Jerome, Opf. ed. Vallarsi, i. 703) : " Sichem, non ut plerique errantes legunt Sichar, quae nunc Neapolis appellatur." — Compare generally : Eeland, Palaestina, pp. 1004-1010; Eoljinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, iii. 95-136 ; Williams in Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, ii. 411, 412 ; Ritter, Erdkunde, xvi. 637-658 ; Kuhn, Die stiidtische und biirger- liche Verfassung des rom. Reichs, ii. 56, 355, 356, 364 ; Sepp, Jerusalem, 2 Aufl. ii. 37-66 ; Guerin, Samarie, i. 390-42 1 ; Baedeker - Socin, Palastina, p. 342 ff. ; The Survey of Western Palestine, Memoirs b\^ Conder and Kitchener, ii. 203-210, and Sheet xi. of the large English Map. — The articles on Shechem in the Bible dictionaries of Smith, Kitto, and Fairbairn ; and "Sichem" in those of Winer, Schenkel, and Riehm. 12 By Septimius Severus it was deprived oi the jus civitatis {Spartia7i. vita Severi, c. 9), but the same emperor at a later period again restored to it that privilege (Spartian. vita Severi, c. 14 : " Palaestinis poenam remisit quam ob causam Nigri meruerant "). Under Philip the Arabian, accord- ing to the evidence of the coins, it was mads into a Roman colony. Ainmianus MarcelliuTis designates it as one of the greatest of the cities of Palestine {Ammiav. xiv. 8. 11). § 21. (l) PALESTINE FROM YESrASIAN TO HADRIAN. 267 few of these coins, later than the time of Hadrian, Gerizini is represented, and on its top a temple which was dedicated, according to Damascius, to Zev^; vylriaTo<;P'^ The festive games of Neapolis during the second century, and certainly even at a later date, were regarded as amongst the most important in Palestine.-^"^ — The founding of Capitolias in Decapolis belongs to the time of Nerva or Trajan ; its era begins in a.d. 97 or 98.'^ Hadrian founded Aelia on tlie >2a On the iiumerons extant coins, from Domitian down to the middle of tlie third century, we meet with Serapis, Apollo, the Ephesian Diana, and other deities. In regard to the temple on Gerizim, see " DamasciuH ' in Photius, Bibliotheca, cod. 242, ed. Bekker, p. 3456 ; iu Z A;oV vT^iarw AytUTctrov hpov. Renan, L'e'glise chre'tienne, p. 222. On the earlier and later history of the worship on Gerizim, see Eckhel, Doer. Num. iii. 434.-- The flourishing condition of Hellenistic culture and religion in Neapolis is also proved by a marble basis of a tripod recently found there. On the relief of this marble are represented the battles of the gods and the heroes, especially of Theseus and Hercules. According to an inscription dis- covered there, the tripod, probably also the marble basis, had been brought by the founder from Athens. See Zeitschrift des dcutschen Paliistina- Vereins, vi. 230 f., vii. 136 f. 1"'' See the inscription of the time of Marcus Aurelius in Le Bas and Waddington, Liscriptionx, t. iii. 2, n. 16206, communicated literally and in full in Div. II. vol. i. p. 24. 1^ Eckhel, Doer. Num. iii. 328 sq. — For the literature on Capitolias, which possibly may be identical with Raphana, see Div. II. vol. i. p. 106. — Capitolias is mentioned in Ptolemy, v. 15. 22 ; Itinerarium Anionini, ed. Wesseling, pp. 196 sq., 198 ; Tabula Peuting. Hierodis Synccdcm. ed. Wesseling, p. 720 ; Geogr. Savennas, ed. Pinder et Parthey, p. 84 ; Acts of Councils in Le Quien, Oriens christianus, iii. 715 sq. ; Orelli, Jnscr. Lat. n. QA\ = Cor;pus Inscr. Lat. t. vi. n. 210; ibid. t. x. n. 532 ; Ejphemeris epigraphica, t. iv. p. 331 {D II.), t. v. pp. 211-398 ; coins from Marcus Aurelius down to Macrinus. — Many (e.g. Kuhn, Die stadtische und bilrgcr- liche Verfassung, ii. 372) erroneously refer to our Capitolias the notice of the jurist Paulus in Digest. 1. 15. 8. 7 : similes his Capitulenscs esse videntur, i.e. like Caesarea, which, as a colony, had not the full jus Italieum, Capitolias was, according to the coins, ccvrouof^oi, and therefore not a Roman colony. Paulus means Aelia Capitulina, that is, Jerusalem, as the parallel passage in Ulpian (Digest, 1. 15. 1. 6) i)roves : " In Palestina duae fuerunt coloniae, Caesariensis et Aelia Capitolina, eed neutra jus Italieum habet." The correct view is given in Noris, Annus et epochae Syrom,acedonum, iii. 9. 4, ed. Lips. 326 ; Deyling, Obyervatloncs 2C8 THE KOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. site of Jerusalem, the history of which is given below in the account of the war. Other new foundings of Palestinian cities belong to a period later than that of which we treat, such as that of Diocaesarea = Sepphoris (known under its new name from the time of Antonius Pius, see Div. II. vol. i. p. 136), Diospolis = Lydda, Eleutheropolis (both under Septimius SeverusV* Nicopolis = Emmaus (under Helio- gabulus). The destruction of Jerusalem brought about a violent revolution in the inner life of the Jewish people. No longer a Sanhedrim and no longer a sacrificial service, — the loss of those two great institutions was of itself sufficient to produce a profound change in the conditions of Jewish life. But it has first of all to be established that the sacrificial service actually did cease." Not only the Epistle to the Hebrews, tlie date of the composition of which is uncertain, but also Clement of Eome and the author of the Epistle to Diognetus, who undoubtedly wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem, speak as if in their time the Jewish sacrificial worship was still maintained.^* And Josephus also expresses liimself quite to the same effect. Not only where he describes the Jewish sacrificial worship in accordance with the Old Testament,^^ but also where he apparently speaks of the customs and practices of his own time, he employs the present nacrae, v. 475 ; but Deyling erroneously names Noris as maintaining the contrary opinion. ^* Stark, Gaza und die philistciische Kiiste, p. 553. ^^ Compare the careful demonstration in Fried mann and Gratz, "Die angebliche Fortdauer des jiidischen Opfercultus nach der Zerstorung des zweiten Tempels" {Theol. Jahrbiicher, 1848, pp. 338-371). — Against them : Friedenthal in Fiirst's Literal urblatt des Orients, 1849, col. 328-322. — Against him again : Friedraann in Liter aturhlatt, 401, 433, 465, 534, 548. — In reply : Friedenthal, Literaturblatt, 492, 524, 573, 702. — Derenbourg, Historie de la Palestine, pp. 480-483. '''• Clemens Ronianus, c. 41 ; Epist. ad Diognetum, c. 3. ^' Josephus, Antiq. iii. 9-10. § 21. (l) PALESTINE FROM VESPASIAN TO HADRIAN. 269 tense.^^ It is indeed the fact that when speaking of the sacrifices for the Eoman people and for the Eoman emperor he makes use of this mode of expression, although this was purely a later custom, and was not a prescription of the Old Testament.^^ Besides this, we have also scattered allusions in the rabbinical literature, which seem to indicate the continuance of the sacrificial service after a.d. 70.^" It is not to be wondered at that many on the basis of such material should have maintained the continuance of the sacrificial worship. In itself this was quite a possible thing. In an interesting passage in the Mishna,^^ E. Joshua testifies : " I have heard that one ought to present sacrifice even if there be no temple ; that one should eat that which is sanctified [on this see Division II. vol. i. p. 236], even though there be no wall around the court ; that one may eat what is holy in a lower degree [see on this Division II. vol. i. p. 240] and the second tithe, even if there should be no wall around Jerusalem ; for the first consecration has sanctified, not only for its own time, but for all future time." It was not there- fore in utter opposition to the views of the Eabbis that men should continue after the destruction of the temple to offer sacrifices in holy places. But as a matter of fact this was not done. In the enumeration of the unfortunate days of Israel it is distinctly said that on 17th Thammuz the daily '* Joseph UP, Treatise atjainst Apion, ii. 23. ^^ Josephus, Treatise against Apion, ii. 6, 5. fin. : " facimus autem pro eis continua sacrificia ; et non solum quotidianis diebus ex impensa communi omnium Judaeorum talia celebramus, verum .... solia imperatoribus hunc honorem praecipuum paiiter exhibemus.'' ^^ The most deserving of attention is Pesachim vii. 2, where tlie ques- tion is discussed whether one should roast the paschal lamb on a gridiron. " R. Zadok said : Once Eabban Gamaliel spoke to his slave Tabi : Go and roast us the paschal lamb on the gridiron." Since a slave Tabi is elsewhere named as servant of Gamaliel tlie second, about A.D. 90-110 {Berachoth ii. 7; Succa ii. 1), it would seem that this later Gamaliel is the one intended in this place. ^^ Edujoth viii. C. 270 THE KOMAN-HERODIAN AGE. sacrifice was abolished ("'"P^jiO -'^?),^^ while there is nowhere any reference made to its restoration. In the description of the Passover in the Mishna, the enumeration of the dishes that had to be set upon the table is concluded with the remark : " During the time that the temple was standing the Passover offering also was served.^'' This implies that after the destruction of the temple it was no longer offered. In speak- ing of the legal enactments for determining the new moon it is said: " So long as the temple remained standing those who had seen the new moon were allowed to violate the Sabbath by going to Jerusalem, in order to testify thereto, for the sake of the observance of the sacrifice on the festival of the new moon." ^* The harmonious testimony of those passages of the Mishna is confirmed by others in the Babylonian Talmud of a character yet more direct, if that were possible, which assume even in regard to the times of Eabban Jochanan ben Saccai, Kabban Gamaliel II. and R Ishmael, i.e. the first decade after the destruction of the temple, that the whole sacrificial worship had ceased."^ Finally, Justin also appears as a witness on behalf of this view. He says to his opponent Trypho : " God never appointed the Passover to be offered except in the place where His name was to be called upon, knowing that after the passion of Christ the days would come, when even Jerusalem would be given over to our enemies, and all sacrifices should cease." ^^ And in another passage Trypho himself says in answer to Justin's question as to whether it was not then still possible to observe all the commands of Moses : " By no means, for we know well that it "* Taanith iv. G. Coini>are wiiat is said above, p. 242. -3 Pesachim x. 3. "* i^osh hashana i. 4. ^* Rosh hashana 31^ Pesachim 72*', Sebachim 60'', in Fricdmanu and Griitz, Theol. Jahrbiicher, 1848, p. 349 ff. -'' Justin, Dialogus cum Trypho, c. 40 : tihu; on i'htvrfovTxi iifiipxt /itiToe TO TTOiSilv TOP XoiOTOV, OTl X,xl 6 TOTTOi TSJJ ' lipOVOX'h'/i//, TOi; i^dpol; U/XU» voip*hodi!7iTot.t Kxi vetwoi/TXi ecTrxaxt xtt'Ku; '7irpoo? /xTjSev Biacjyepecv l3aaikevovTO