by
“His
position as the Governor (Legate) of Syria at this time is confirmed
by
the discovery of a tombstone in Beirut, known popularly as the
Q.
Aemilius Secundus inscription. In it, Quirinius is called
the
“legato Augusti Caesaris Syria”.”
Bryan Windle
Efforts to
correlate the life of Herod ‘the Great’ with the Birth of Jesus Christ, and with
the census – and there are many of them – are generally quite tortuous to read,
and they tend to arrive at rather unhelpful conclusions.
Here is a
part of one such example from the Christian Publishing House Blog:
Are the
Conflicting Dates for Herod’s Death Irreconcilable?
Exploring
the Dispute Over Herod’s Death
The timing
of Herod the Great’s death has long been a source of discussion in biblical
scholarship. Some assert that Herod died in 4 B.C.E., while others maintain that 1 B.C.E. best aligns with
the biblical and historical data. This difference greatly affects how one
understands the date of Jesus’ birth. There is confidence in the
scriptural record that Jesus was born in 01 or 02 B.C.E., an event that occurred near the end
of Herod’s reign. Many rely heavily on the writings of the Jewish
historian Josephus, while those who place greater emphasis on the biblical text
look to Luke’s Gospel and related chronological references. The question is
whether the data from Josephus, classical sources, and archaeological finds
truly conflict with the biblical chronology. A closer look reveals ways to
reconcile the debate without undermining the reliability of Scripture.
Why the
Date of Herod’s Death Matters
The sequence
of events recorded in the Gospels places the birth of Jesus before the death of
Herod the Great. Matthew 2:1 mentions that “Jesus
was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king.” Herod’s order to
slaughter male children two years of age and under (Matthew 2:16) indicates that he was
alive for a period following Jesus’ birth. If Herod died in 4 B.C.E., some would argue
that Jesus must have been born earlier. However, the biblical evidence places
Jesus’ birth in 01 or 02 B.C.E. Luke’s references to the Roman
census under Quirinius, a governor of Syria, reinforce that Jesus’ birth took place when
Caesar Augustus had ordered a registration (Luke 2:1, 2). Reconciling these
overlapping events hinges upon identifying the accurate date of Herod’s death.
The entire timeline of Jesus’ early life, including the journey of his family
to Egypt and their subsequent return, must align with the time at which Herod
was still alive.
Josephus’
Accounts and Their Complexities
Josephus is
often cited as a central figure in placing Herod’s death in 4 B.C.E. He mentions that
Herod died shortly after a lunar eclipse but before a Passover (Jewish
Antiquities, XVII, 167, 213 [vi, 4; ix, 3]). An eclipse did occur in March of 4 B.C.E. Many chronologists
seize on this partial eclipse as the one referred to by Josephus. However,
Josephus’ chronological data sometimes contain inconsistencies. For
instance, Josephus dates the capture of Jerusalem by Herod as 37 B.C.E. in one passage but
also connects it to the earlier capture of Jerusalem by Pompey in 63 B.C.E., creating a
potential one-year discrepancy (Jewish Antiquities, XIV, 487, 488 [xvi, 4]).
Josephus also employs Roman consular dating, which can be difficult to
correlate exactly with regnal year counting. There is also the question of
accession-year versus non-accession-year systems, in which one source might
begin counting a king’s reign as soon as he assumed power, whereas another source
might start counting only after the next new year. Such details can create
apparent chronological variations.
Josephus’
reliability is often considered high regarding first-century events he
personally witnessed, but the data about Herod’s death occurred decades before
Josephus was born (37 C.E.). He relied on
records, oral traditions, or earlier sources whose details might have varied.
There are
also differences in how certain Roman rulers are listed. Josephus identifies
Quintilius Varus as governor of Syria during and after Herod’s death. Some interpret
these statements as conclusive proof that Quirinius was not governor at that
time. Yet Josephus mentions scenarios where two officials in Syria served
concurrently (Jewish Antiquities, XVI, 277, 280, 344 [ix, 1; x, 8]), indicating
that Roman administrative structures could be more nuanced. ….
[End
of quote]
The trouble
is that, heretofore, we have not had the whole story.
A new
base for yielding proper estimations
According to
my revised view of the history of this time, greatly affecting early Luke, the
Infancy of Jesus Christ occurred during the Hellenistic period when the wicked
king Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ determined to impose Greek-ness upon the Jews.
It was the
desperate era of the Maccabean (Jewish) revolt).
This was one
of the worst times for the Jews (Israelites) in the entire Bible.
Antiochus
‘Epiphanes’ was the Caesar, Augustus, who attempted to unify his kingdom, and
who called for a census (Luke 2:1): “In those days Caesar Augustus issued
a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world”. Well,
that is the usual translation, but Luke himself says nothing about “Roman” in
the Greek original (Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ἐκείναις ἐξῆλθεν δόγμα παρὰ Καίσαρος Αὐγούστου ἀπογράφεσθαι πᾶσαν τὴν οἰκουμένην).
This Caesar Augustus was,
in fact, a Seleucid Greek:
Rome
surprisingly minimal in Bible
(3) Rome
surprisingly minimal in Bible
The “decree”
of Augustus to his whole kingdom would correspond approximately (whether it be
the same document, or not) with the far-ranging and vicious edict of Antiochus
‘Epiphanes’ addressed “to his whole kingdom” (I Maccabees 1:41-53):
Then the king
wrote to his whole kingdom that all should be one people and that all
should give up their particular customs. All the nations accepted the command
of the king. Many even from Israel gladly adopted his religion; they
sacrificed to idols and profaned the Sabbath. And the king sent letters by
messengers to Jerusalem and the towns of Judah; he directed them to follow
customs strange to the land, to forbid burnt offerings and sacrifices and
drink offerings in the sanctuary, to profane Sabbaths and festivals, to
defile the sanctuary and the holy ones, to build altars and sacred
precincts and shrines for idols, to sacrifice pigs and other unclean
animals, and to leave their sons uncircumcised. They were to make
themselves abominable by everything unclean and profane so that they would
forget the Law and change all the ordinances. He added, ‘And whoever does
not obey the command of the king shall die’.
In such words he
wrote to his whole kingdom. He appointed inspectors over all the people and
commanded the towns of Judah to offer sacrifice, town by town. Many of the
people, everyone who forsook the Law, joined them, and they did evil in the
land; they drove Israel into hiding in every place of refuge they had.
Luke’s “those
days” (2:1), the time of the census, were also, as the Evangelist informed us a
bit earlier (1:5) - and as all would accept: “In the time of Herod king of
Judea”.
King Herod,
a close friend to Augustus, was, in my revised context, Philip the Phrygian,
the second only to the king himself, and the ruler of Jerusalem (2 Maccabees
5:22): “However, [king Antiochus] left governors behind to oppress the people: at
Jerusalem he left Philip, a Phrygian by birth and with a more barbarous
nature than the one who appointed him”.
And, when
the Seleucid king was dying (I Maccabees 6:14-16):
“Then he
summoned Philip, one of his Friends, and put him in charge of his whole
kingdom. He gave him his diadem, his robe, and his signet ring, so
that he might guide the king’s son Antiochus and bring him up to be
king. So King Antiochus died there in the one hundred and forty-ninth
year.
This Philip,
placed in charge of Jerusalem, was also King Herod, therefore, and he was, as
well, the second right-hand man to Caesar Augustus, Marcus Agrippa:
Herod,
the emperor’s signet right-hand man
(4) Herod, the
emperor's signet right-hand man
In the standard history, now Herod, now Marcus Agrippa, will
die before Augustus.
However, in my revised history, Augustus, as Antiochus
‘Epiphanes’, pre-deceased Herod/Marcus Agrippa – who, as said, was also the
Philip who outlived his revered king, Antiochus.
A re-setting such as this proposed one will obviously impact
considerably upon the Lucan scenario involving Caesar Augustus, King Herod, and
the Birth of Jesus Christ.
It may
perhaps even enable for a Maccabean identification of the elusive Quirinius.
And although
this revised scenario may add another layer to the cake - the Maccabean era now
collapsed into the Lucan scenario - it ought, in the long run, to provide a
more pleasingly structured dessert.
Indeed, the
parallels start rolling in.
We have just
read of the controlling edict to the kingdom issued by king Antiochus, by
Caesar Augustus.
And of a
wicked barbarian in charge of Jerusalem.
Now, further,
I would suggest, as Joseph and Mary went, according to the census edict, to
Joseph’s home town of Bethlehem (Luke 2:3-5), so, too, did the Maccabean family
of Mattathias recently move from Jerusalem to their ancestral home of Modein (cf.
I Maccabees 2:1; 13:25).
This
important town has, unfortunately, been quite wrongly located:
Must
look elsewhere for Maccabee town, Modein
(5) Must look
elsewhere for Maccabee town, Modein
That this
was no peaceful time for the kingdom of Judea is apparent from the legends
about Judas the Galilean and his revolt at the time of king Herod and his son, Archelaus.
See e.g. my article:
Religious
war raging in Judah during the Infancy of Jesus
(4) Religious war
raging in Judah during the Infancy of Jesus
P. G. Cavalcanti has
concluded somewhat similarly in his article:
Luke’s
Census Solution: Judas the Galilean and Judas ben Hezekiah as a Single
Seven-Year Revolt
(4) Luke's Census
Solution: Judas the Galilean and Judas ben Hezekiah as a Single Seven-Year
Revolt
though
without his having recognised that the revolt of Judas the Galilean (and his
colleague, Matthias) was the very same revolt as that of Judas Maccabeus (triggered
by his father, Mattathias) - that the Maccabean age occurred, partially, during
the Infancy of Jesus Christ.
Whereas the
Maccabean family found itself right in the wrong place at the wrong time, the
Holy Family had providentially escaped to Egypt for the worst of it.
They escaped
King Herod’s Slaughter of the Innocents (Matthew 2:16-18), a murderous horror
which was perfectly in keeping with the infanticidal régime of king Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’
(I Maccabees 1:59-61):
On the
twenty-fifth day of the month they offered sacrifice on the altar that was on
top of the altar of burnt offering. According to the decree, they put to
death the women who had their children circumcised and their families and
those who circumcised them, and they hung the infants from their mothers’
necks.
And
Mattathias had lamented before his death (1 Maccabees 2:7-9):
‘Alas! Why was I
born to see this,
the ruin of my people, the ruin of the holy city?
The people sat
idle there when it was given over to the enemy,
the sanctuary given over to strangers.
Her Temple has become like a person without honor;
her glorious
vessels have been carried into exile.
Her infants have been killed in her streets,
her youths by the sword of the foe’.
All of a
sudden our seemingly over-layered cake has begun to look far more tasty.
A tyrannical
emperor, who has appointed a barbaric governor to Jerusalem,
orders a controlling edict for his entire kingdom, and people
must return to their ancestral homes for it. Babies are slaughtered,
a revolt has erupted.
Also, in the
books of Maccabees, as in the Infancy accounts of Luke and Matthew, there is
abundant angelic activity at the time, as well as signs and portents in the
heavens.
2 Maccabees 5:1-4:
About this time
Antiochus made his second invasion of Egypt. And it happened that over all
the city, for almost forty days, there appeared golden-clad horsemen charging
through the air, in companies fully armed with lances and drawn
swords— troops of horsemen drawn up, attacks and counterattacks made on
this side and on that, brandishing of shields, massing of spears, hurling of
missiles, the flash of golden trappings, and armor of all sorts. Therefore
all men prayed that the apparition might prove to have been a good omen.
Furthermore –
and this is most telling, and could be decisive – there is a revolutionary
Judas in both the Maccabean and the Lucan (Acts) layers, and he, in the latter
case, coincides with a census.
And he
coincides in time with the Governor of Syria, Quirinius.
Judas the
Galilean
Apart from
chronological factors and the Roman era location of Judas the Galilean, as
opposed to Judas Maccabeus at the time of the (“earlier”) Greek Seleucid
invasion – matters with which I have dealt above – Galilee would not be
considered to have been from where the Maccabean family had originated.
Their
ancestral home of Modein has today been fixed rather confidently - and it is quite
far from Galilee (about 135 km) - at Modiin-Maccabim-Reut:
Modiin-Maccabim-Reut -
Nefesh B'Nefesh
“Strategically
located in the center of Israel between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, Modi’in offers
access to most of Israel quickly and conveniently”.
This is demonstrably
incorrect - see my “Must look elsewhere for Maccabee town,
Modein” above. The Maccabean family could well have hailed from Galilee.
If the great Judas Maccabeus was the same as Judas the
Galilean, which I believe, then Rabbi Gamaliel does him a great disservice in
Acts 5:37: “… Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the
census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his
followers were scattered”.
That’s it!
This slight moved me to
write:
Judas
the Galilean: What was Gamaliel thinking?
(3) Judas the
Galilean: What was Gamaliel thinking?
Quirinius Governor of
Syria
We know that Luke’s
Quirinius was a genuine historical character:
Quirinius: An
Archaeological Biography – Bible Archaeology Report
“His position as the
Governor (Legate) of Syria at this time is confirmed by the discovery of a
tombstone in Beirut, known popularly as the Q. Aemilius Secundus
inscription. In it, Quirinius is called the “legato Augusti Caesaris
Syriae.” …. So we know that Quirinius was the Governor (Legate) of Syria …
and it would appear he oversaw a census in conjunction with taxing the
population. …”.
And now it
should be quite easy to find him in our ‘parallel universe’ of the Maccabees as
the Governor of Syria right at the beginning of the revolt of Judas (the
Galilean).
He is “Apollonius,
the son of Menestheus and governor of Coelesyria
and Phoenicia”.
For an early
account of the apparently malicious Apollonius, before king Antiochus had
turned fully rogue, we go firstly to 2 Maccabees 4:4-6:
Onias recognized
that the rivalry was serious and that Apollonius, the son of
Menestheus and governor of Coelesyria and Phoenicia, was intensifying the
malice of Simon. So he betook himself to the king, not accusing his fellow
citizens but having in view the welfare, both public and private, of all the
people. For he saw that without the king’s attention public affairs could
not again reach a peaceful settlement, and that Simon would not stop his folly.
Next,
to vv. 21-22:
When Apollonius
the son of Menestheus was sent to Egypt for the coronation of Philometor
as king, Antiochus learned that Philometor had become hostile to his
government, and he took measures for his own security. Therefore upon arriving
at Joppa he proceeded to Jerusalem. He was welcomed magnificently by Jason
and the city, and ushered in with a blaze of torches and with shouts. Then he
marched into Phoenicia.
But
Judas Maccabeus, early, would bring the career of this Apollonius (my
Quirinius) to a shuddering halt (I Maccabees 3:10-12):
Then Apollonius
gathered together nations and a large force from Samaria to fight against
Israel. When Judas learned of it, he went out to meet him, and he defeated
and killed him. Many were wounded and fell, and the rest fled. Then they
seized their spoils, and Judas took the sword of Apollonius and used it in
battle the rest of his life.
