Chapter I: The Epoch and the Localities in which Jesus exercised His Ministry
Luke iii. 1, 2.
"In the year 15 of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being Governor of Judea, and Herod Tetrarch of Galilee, Philip, his brother, ruling over Iturea and the land of Trachonitis, and Lysanias over the country about Abila, under the pontificate of Annas and Caïphas, the word of God was spoken to John, son of Zachary, in the desert." Saint Luke, in using these terms to announce the mission of John the Baptist, has not thought so much of giving us, in this summary of the times, and accurate chronology, as he desires to recall the various circumstances surrounding the appearance of the Precursor war of Jesus; nevertheless, he is not wanting in precision but that we can infer from his words the very year in which the Saviour commenced His Ministry. Indeed, the public life of Jesus was begun by His And baptism; and as this baptism followed close upon the first preaching of John the Baptist, it must have been in about the 15th year of Tiberius that the Saviour, leaving Nazareth, descended to the banks of the river Jordan.
But what are we to understand by the 15th year of Tiberius? As Augustus died the 19th of August in the year 767 of Rome (14 AD of our calendar), would it not seen, at first sight, that this year must be from 781 (28 to 29 of the Christian era), and that consequently the birth of Jesus took place, at the latest in 751, since he was "about 30 years old" at the time of his baptism? However, this date cannot be adopted; for we know from incontrovertible testimony, on the one hand, that Herod died in the month of April, 750, and on the other, that the Nativity of Jesus preceded that he event. The 15th year of Tiberius must then be computed by reckoning, not from the death of Augustus, but from the year in which Tiberius took active part in the government of the Empire. This way of calculating the reign of the Emperors was the common custom in the provinces of the East. Wieseler has demonstrated this fact by the aid of inscriptions and medals.
Adopting this hypothesis, Jesus was born toward the end of the year 749, some months before the death of Herod, and He began His Ministry about 780 (27 of the common era).
One other date, which is preserved by Saint John, supports these conclusions. Some months after His Baptism we find Jesus in Jerusalem for the Passover. Moved to wrath at the sight of hucksters in the Temple, He whipped them from their stalls with blows from a thong.
The Jews demanded at once, "What warrant have you to show us for such actions as these?"
"Overturn this Temple," a Jesus, "and in three days I will rebuild it once more!"
"What?" they replied, "this Temple was 46 years in building, and will you raise it up again in three days?"
The restoration of the Temple which is referred to here was commenced by Herod in the 18th year of his reign (734). The Passover during which these words were spoken is therefore that of 780. Now, the date of this Pasch being also that in which Jesus began His ministry, His birth, which took place 30 years earlier, must be put about 750 (four years before Christ), or, to be more exact, in the month of December, 749 (year 5 BC).
These two dates (749 and 780) settled upon, the one as fixing the nativity of Jesus, the other that of the commencement of His ministry, there remains only to be determined the period of His death, in order to arrange the chronicle of His whole life. It took place, as we shall see later, on the 40th of Nissan Friday, the seventh of April 783 AUC (the 30th year of our era). And hence there must have been four Passovers during the public life of Jesus. That of 780 marks the beginning of His preaching1 and teaching; a second (781) would seem to be the one referred to by Saint John in his fifth chapter2 as that in which Jesus cure the paralytic at the Pool of Bethesda. The Saviour did not attend the third (782); it was just about the time when He multiplied the loaves in Galilee, and to His disciples promised a New Pasch; the fourth Passover was that of His death (783).
As for the ministry of John the Baptist, he had preceded the first Pasch of 780 by some months. But the period that elapsed between the autumn of 779 and that of 780 had been observed by all Judea as the Sabbatical Year. We know what that term meant in the Mosaic legislation. Every seven years the fields were left fallow; what they brought forth of themselves was divided between the poor, the foreigners and the cattle, while overall Judea there was a full remission of all debts. Is it not most probable that John the Baptist appeared at the beginning of this year, when such a protracted period of leisure allowed of the people's listening to his Message, — a Message in which they heard him speak of expiation, mercy, and forgiveness? The Sabbatic Year commenced, like the civil year, in the month of Tishri (September); therefore the ministry of John the Baptist preceded the Baptism of Jesus by about three months. A tradition of the primitive Church locates the latter event about the 6th of January, during that same winter.
We may conclude from these facts that the various events in the life of Jesus Christ may reasonably be connected with the following dates:
First of all, let us glance over the regions included in that field. Two of these provinces, Judaea and Galilee, are already known to us. However, it may be remarked that this latter comprised also (as belonging to the realm of Antipas) the mountains of Galaad, which the Gospel calls by the name of Perea, the " the country on the other side of Jordan."
 |
| Political situation at the birth of Christ (After Grollenberg, Atlas of the Bible (1956) |
Below this province begins the domain of Philip, containing the pasture lands of Basan. On the east, "the land of the Trachonites;" and on the north, "Iturea." This last named region, with its rich meadow country in the south, gradually grows more and more forbidding of aspect the nearer we approach to Damascus. The ground is rugged, strewn with jagged rocks and black boulders, and the flocks feed within the craters of extinct volcanoes.
Still wilder and more gloomy is the Trachonite country. It lies between Iturea, Basan, and the desert, only elevated some 30 feet above the undulating plains of Hauran, like a shoal of rocks in a sea of verdure. Any one might imagine, viewing the chaotic condition of these dreary wilds, that sometime, long ago, huge waves of basalt had been petrified all at once in the midst of a tremendous tempest. Some violent upheaval must have been the cause of these ugly chasms, dark caves, and deep defiles, which make the wastelands of Lejah object of wonderment. Such it was in the days of Jesus, and such we find it still today; for neither time nor man has changed the character of this strange country. The sixty cities of Argob — "the Heap of Rocks," as the Hebrews called them, — have still preserved intact their rugged walls and their houses with doors made of stone, all so dark and gloomy that, in the time of Solomon, they were believed to be made of bronze. Abilene, the province ruled by that Lysanias whom Saint Luke puts last in his list, is a country of a more charming complexion. It lies about the base of the Antiliban Mountains.
The traveller who leaves Damascus for Baalbek, after six hours' journey in a gorge made fertile by the waters of Barada, encounters the ruins of ancient Abila (called today Souk Ouadi Barada) the many inscriptions found in this locality leaving no doubt as to this point. This city was the capital of the principality which extended from Hermon to Libanus, and of which the origin is very doubtful. Josephus and Strabo speak of a Ptolemy, son of Meneus, who held sway over the plains of the Marsyas, in the mountainous country of Iturea, and counted among its towns Chalcis, at the foot of Libanus, and Heliopolis (Baalbek). This Ptolemy had a son, Libanus, who was put to death by Anthony, at the instigation of Cleopatra, who thus wrested from him his realm. What became of this principality thereafter? Did it pass into the hands of Herod, who, as we know, purchased from Cleopatra the parcel of her domains in Syria, and obtained the remainder from Augustus after the battle of Actium? There is room here for any number of conjectures, since after the death of Lysanias no mention of his kingdom is found anywhere until the time, about 60 years later it was, when Saint Luke mentions the same region in connection with a Lysanias, — no longer as king but tetrarch, of Abila.
The division of Palestine and the neighbouring country into Tetrarchies did not take place until the death of Herod. Probably during that epoch a prince of the lines of Ptolemy and Lysanias, and bearing the name of the latter king, received from Rome, along with the title of tetrarch,a portion of the kingdom of his fathers, and so made Abila the centre of a new state.The historian Josephus had some knowledge of this Tetrarchy, since he takes care to distinguish between the Abila of the second Lysanias and Chalcis, the capital of the first ruler of that name; and, furthermore, we possess inscriptions later than the time of Herod which in like manner make mention of a Lysanias, Tetrarch of Abilene.
The other princes who lived in the time of Jesus were sons of Herod the Great, and had inherited his estates. It is true that their father’s will only designated two among them for the succession, Archelaus and Antipas; but in those days everything happened in Judaea according to the good pleasure of Rome, and Augustus had little respect for any dispositions made by the old King. Half of his territory, — Idumea, Samaria, and Judea, was handed over to Archelaus; the rest, divided in equal parts, formed two tetrarchies, which, following the proper acceptation of this term, comprised each a quarter of the kingdom of Herod. One such portion fell to the lot of Antipas; it was composed of Galilee and Perea. The other was reserved for Philip, — the son whom Herod had by Cleopatra of Jerusalem, and who while he was being educated at Rome had won the imperial favour. His tetrarchy extended from the Lake of Genesareth to the sources of the Jordan. It comprised Iturea and Trachonitis, as we have already seen, and beyond this country's much more fertile, Gaulanitis, Auranitis and Batania; these altogether went to make up his province. During the entire lifetime of Jesus these countries enjoyed peace and the government of a prince who was just, humane, and a patron of the arts. More than once did the Saviour pass along its pleasant parts, whether it was to seek a retreat near Mount Hermon, or to rest within its fresh blooming valleys watered by the springs of the Jordan.
Of all the regions which we have been naming over, no one listened for a longer time to the teachings of the Saviour than Galilee. Antipas, Tetrarch of this province, was an indolent and dissipated prince, entirely engrossed in the pursuit of vicious pleasures and in courting the favour of Tiberius; he was of a nature which would be apt to pay little heed to a matter which appeared so trivial, to his way of thinking, that it need not cause him any uneasiness. His only desire in the matter was to witness some of the wonders concerning which rumour had aroused his curiosity.
As for Archelaus, he could never have been seen by Jesus; for in the tenth year of the Divine Childhood this prince was deposed and exiled among the Gauls. From the outset Augustus had distrusted his weakened passionate nature, and he only vouchsafed to allow him for a time the title of ethnarch, promising him that of king if he proved himself worthy thereof. But the Emperor saw his forebodings amply and immediately justified; for the Jews were shortly stirred to revolt by the tyranny of the new ruler. Hence it became necessary to withdraw what little power had been conferred upon him.
Thus vanished even that poor shadow of independence which had still remained to Judaea Augustus made the country merely an appendage to Syria, the government of which was then in the hands of Publius Sulpicius Quirinus. Nevertheless, the importance of Judaea, as well as the necessity of restraining so uneasy a people, makes the presence of a procurator invested with almost absolute authority requisite.
A Roman night, Coponius, was the first to fill this difficult position. He was obliged to use force to bend this stubborn country beneath his yolk, and impose upon it the tax-levy which had been decreed for the whole empire. It required all the influence that the High-Priest Joazar could exert to prevent a general uprising; but he could not, by any efforts, discourage a certain few fanatics, who revolted at a signal from Judas the Gaulonite and the Pharisee Sadoc. Their attempts were at once suppressed; but the frequent executions only exalted their courage; and, ever after, similar Zealots did not cease to trouble the peace of Jerusalem, still repeating their war cry: "We have no other Master but God." These seditions, which were continually springing up, exhausted the patience of the first governors promptly enough. In less than ten years we see three Romans, each in turn endeavouring to direct the affairs of Judaea, — Coponius, Marcus Ambivius, and Annius Rufus.
With Tiberius Judaea entered upon a calmer era, and during the 23 years of his reign it received but two procurators, Valerius Gratus and Pontius Pilate. Of the former, the only factor on record which is remembered of him is the facility with which he deposed the High-Priests; for finding Annas invested with these lofty functions on his entering into office, he substituted Ismael, son of Fabi; then, after him, Eleazar, son of Annas; a little later, Simon, son of Camith; and finally, Joseph Caïphas, son in law of Annas.
Pontius Pilate, who succeeded him, has attained a sad but renown. In the twelfthth year of Tiberius, being charged with the government of Judaea, he showed himself, at the outset, such as he was to the last moment, a man with a predisposition to justice, but rendered unreliable by a combination of ambition and cowardice. One of his first acts was to send a Roman garrison, with their standards, to Jerusalem. His predecessor, more politic than he, had been careful not to intrude within their Temple walls with those Roman ensigns, emblazoned with the idolatrous legends and insignia; they even forbore to interfere with the troops of Zealots. But at the command of Pilate legionaries broke down the gates in the night time, and at dawn the populists saw with horror those impure images contaminating the Citadel of God. A suppliant throng was dispatched to Cesarea, and during five days kept beseeching Pilate with their clamorous petitions. The Governor, wearying of their persistency, ordered the soldiers to surround the crowd and disperse them by force of arms. At their approach the Jews cast themselves flat upon the ground, preferring to die rather than to endure any violation of the Law. Pilate was compelled to yield to their stubborn resolution, and withdrew his standards.
At another time, a little later than this, he was even less successful in a similar enterprise. He suspended, along the walls of his palace in Jerusalem, golden shields with the names of pagan divinities graven upon their glittering services. Again the people rose up in revolt, and Tiberius himself ordained the removal of those emblems, which were so abhorred by his new subjects.
It was not merely this vacillation between rashness and timidity which militated against Pilate’s authority; even his favours were treated with disdain. Jerusalem lacked a sufficiency of water; he decided to bring the needed supply from a distance of about three leagues, introducing it into the city through one of those majestic aqueducts, such as remain to this day a grand memorial of ancient Rome. But the people, upon learning that the revenues of the Temple were to be devoted to this project, laid hold upon the work men and put a stop to all labour upon it. Much blood was spilt before the rebels were suppressed.
This persistent hostility put Pilate’s capricious nature out of all patience, and he decided to follow the example of his predecessors. He retired to Cesarea upon the borders of the sea, administered the government while keeping aloof from the people, and contented himself with levying taxes and putting a check upon unruly spirits. It was only during the feasts of the Pasch that he would condescend to occupy the fortress Antonia with a detachment of his troops; for from the seat he could dominate the Temple with its throngs, while he held his forces in readiness to crash out any insurrection.
Of all the members of the Sanhedrin, those who conceived the bitterest animosity against Jesus were the princes of the Priesthood. And so, because they had such a preponderating influence in that Council, Saint Luke mentions this fact at the outset of his Gospel, that Annas and Caïaphas were the two leaders of the great Sacerdotal Body during the public life of the Saviour. Annas, it would seem held the first place there. Although deposed from his office by Valerius Gratus, the predecessor of Pilate, he not only retained enough influence to procure the elevation of his five sons, together with this same as son in law Caïaphas, to the pontificate, but even managed to maintain a rigorous authority in all the councils of the high-priests who succeeded him. Undoubtedly the Jews, who held the more tenaciously by their theocratic institutions in proportion as the Romans infringed upon them more insolently, in this instance would regard the continual changes imposed upon their royal priesthood as illegal and without force. Exasperated by such sacrileges, they would, to all outward appearance indeed, submit to the pontiff put over them by the will of Rome; but all the same they would look upon one man alone as their legitimate head. This man was Annas, whom, as we shall see, they loaded with attention and honours.
Such was the government of Judaea in the time of Jesus Christ, such the circumstances amid which He appeared, and to which Saint Luke has been careful to call our attention. As he was addressing readers who were familiar with the period and places of which he speaks, a few words sufficed for his purpose; today we need to know much more of detail in order to give the words of the Evangelist their original clearness and importance.
Totus tuus ego sum
Et omnia mea tua sunt;
Tecum semper tutus sum:
Ad Jesum per Mariam
Ad Jesum per Mariam
No comments:
Post a Comment