Bibliography
| Title: "Pontius Pilate's Appointment to Office and the Chronology of Josephus' Antiquities, Books 18-20" Secondary Title: WUNT 60 Pages: 182-201 Type: Generic Year: 1992 Abstract: "Recorded chiefly after long Parthian digression JosA 18,35-54 in order to reflect a gap in rule after his redecessor. // Analysis of the structure of Josephus' Antiquities 18-20 reveals that, understood on its own terms, it is not at all confused in its chronology. Josephus placed first all the central material relating to the government of Judea in a specific ruler's term of office. then he brought in the peripheral material for the same period. Attention to Josephus' structural principles lends additional weight to R. Eisler's assertion that Tiberius appointed Pontius Pilate as governor of Judea in A.D. 18-19. - D.J.H. // Gratus governed until A.D. 18/19 when he was replaced by Pilatus. This dating, first suggested by Robert Eisler, The Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist (New York 19431) 13-20, can now be defended on new grounds. Two new arguments offered in its favor are that annual procuratorial appointments of high priest, as well as annual minting of procuratorial coins, both ceased aver 18. Both departures can be explained by the arrival of a new procurator. A third argument relates to the chronology of Josephus' Antiquities. - Notes // As Josephus state that Valerius Gratus, the first governor of Judaea appointed by Tiberius, held office for eleven years (AJ 18.35) and that Pilate, the other appointee, ruled for ten years which ended about the time Tiberius dies (ibid. §89), it is almost universally held that the former served from 14/15 until 26, and the latter - from 26 to 36/37. The lone exception to this consensus was Robert Eisler, who held that three factors - the brevity of the narrative regarding Gratus; Acta Pilati cited by Eusebius, according to which Pilate was governor in 21; and the fact that the expulsions from Rome in 19 are narrated in the midst of Josephus' discussion of Pilate - show that Gratus in fact governed only until 18/19, when he was replaced by< Pilate. Eisler's arguments have been largely ignored since what was considered to be s sufficient rebuttal in the course of lively polemics in the 1930's. It is here suggested, however, that his dating of Pilate is worthy of reconsideration. Two new arguments offered in its favor are that annual procuratorial appointments of high priests, as well as annual minting of procuratorial coins, both ceased, apparently, after 18; both departure could easily be explained by the arrival of a new procurator. the major new argument, however, relates to Josephus' structuring of the varied materials found in AJ XVIII-XX. It is wilde held that these books, and especially XVIII, are greatly confused chronologically; the implication in our case is that arguments such as the one which builds on the inclusion of events of 19 in the course of the chapter on Pilate would have no probative value. However, analysis of these three books - illustrated by a detailed table of all their contents - indicates that Josephus indeed followed a rational chronological scheme. His main principle was that ""central"" material was to be distinguished from ""peripheral"" material; central material related to the government of Judaea, Josephus' main concern, while all else - information about de Herodian dynasty (apart from Agrippa I, who ruled Judaea), the high priest, the Parthians, etc. - was peripheral (although not unimportant). In organising his material, consequently, Josephus brought first all the central material of a given chapter, whose chronological borders were defined by the term of the ruler of Judaea; only thereafter was peripheral material of the same period brought, even if it related to earlier parts of the period than did some of the central materials. Two further rules which guided Josephus are 1) a long story is inserted according to its chronological ""center of gravity"", which is usually defined by the story's introduction; and 2) when, due to death or suspension from office, there is a gap in the rule of Judaea (an unusual situation, for normally one governor left only after the arrival of his successor), this is reflected by the insertion of peri
pheral material before the central material of the chapter in question. In light of these principles, it seems that if Josephus deliberately inserted the long Parthian digression, which ends with Germanicus' death in 19 (AJ 19.39-54), before the first Pilate stories (§§55-64) but after noting Pilate's appointment in place of Gratus (§35), this was meant to reflect a gap in rule between Gratus and Pilate. Such a gap was engendered, it is suggested, by Gratus' suspension from office by Germanicus, whose mission to the East was partly a result of the complaints of Judaeans regarding their tax burden (Tacitus, Annales 2.42). Following the central material of Pilate (§§55-64), however, Josephus next, in accordance with his usual practice, gave the peripheral material of the same period: the Roman episodes, Pilate's clash with the Samaritans, and matters regarding the high priesthood, Parthians and Herodians (§§65-126). Thus analysis of Josephus' structuring of AJ XVIII-XX shows that, if understood on its own terms, it is not at all confused, and in the specific matter of the date of Pilate's appointment to office, it lends additional weight to the case for 18/19." Keywords: Chronology and Calendar |