Herod Agrippa I 10 B. He began a systematic persecution of Christians, including the imprisonment of St. Peter and the beheading of St. James Acts —3. His death three years later is recorded in Acts — Paul was brought before this king to defend himself against charges that he was causing social and religious unrest.
On entering Rome they meet bareheaded Augustus seated in his curule chair. Still wearing their paenulas, [travel dress] and standing with parazonia sheathed on the left they extend olive branches in their right hands for Augustus to accept.
Tiberius Beneath the field of the coin is the exergue containing letters. IMP is written and read in a synergic manner. IMP is the abbreviation for Imperator. I is also for first. Augustus was the first Imperator. Greek alphabet numbers of that era were used to date Roman coins for commerce usage in places such as Parthia. They are read in any order. The gamma is seen in the not fully formed P. I is read Imperator also.
Mu is number Gamma is number 3. For I the 1st day and 1st month of the 43rd year is also read. X is also written in the exergue. X is a stamp of Janus that happens at midnight on the first of January, that is one face looks backwards and one face looks forwards. The treaty between the Roman empire and the Parthian empire was set to start at midnight A.
Also this is seen of the symbol X. It could be read as Imperator for the tenth time placing the coins strike date to 15 BC. Reattributing the 2nd closure of the doors of Janus to the 3rd closure of the doors of Janus on January 1 in the 43rd year of the reign of Augustus Caesar.
I am in agreement as well, due to this is the time of the year all the shepherds would have been in the fields with their flocks to fatten them up for the winter, Not Dec. I should only wish to add here that the partial eclipse of March 13th 4 BCE was simply that of Purim, the full moon before Passover, As several folks have pointed out above, Josephus tells us Archaleus mourned his father Herod the Great for a week and shortly after that mourning period Passover came, on which occasion Archaelus killed about Temple worshippers.
People in 1 BCE camp have really failed to offer any hard evidence for their views, even from respectable scholars like Dr. They allege that Josephus was tampered with but never provide a scintilla of proof if its alteration from a 1 BCE original orientation.
The so called astronomical events they identify in BCE as the Star of Bethlehem could not have been seen by the Magi on their route from Babylon to Jerusalem, and we even know the road they took because it was taken by Ezra four and half centuries earlier. More than that, if the BCE celestial events super close conjunction of Venus and Jupiter, crowing of Jupiter by the star Regulus, etc. In my opinion, not enough consideration has been paid to the Purim timing in the zeal to defend a traditional church date that nearly every other scholar knows is off by at least 4 and probably 5 years.
They also seem to have forgotten that the monk who did the Christian calendar—Dionyssus Exigius—himself wrongly concluded that Octavian and Augustus were separate rulers when in fact they are one and the same man, creating an error at least of 4 years.
In my view then, there is simply not enough evidence to overturn the the excellent and well reasoned arguments of Schurer and others. Joseph was warned in a dream to take the baby and Mary to Egypt until Herod died. Jupiter has been in the stomach section of Virgo for the amount of time it takes a human to gestate, and exits about during the feast of trumpets.
Most likely it signifies the birth of the AntiChrist, because everything Jesus did, the AntiChrist also must do, in order to deceive many that he is the messiah. Knowing the astrological events that also happened around that time seem important.
What does it gain you? His birth was prophesied to humanity by His Father Gen. Why the virgin birth? Eve could drop all the eggs Seed she wants but none would produce any offspring. The Blood of Jesus in the womb of Mary was prevented from coming in contact with her blood which was from Adam by the placenta. Likeness is Homoiomati. Apply that Divine Blood by faith. I whole heartedly agree with Andrew E. I have come to the same conclusion myself, without having seen confirmation of it anywhere else prior.
It seems to be intuitively obvious, if you just look at the extant data with a mind unclouded by any preconceived notions. Then he would have been two years old, on B. I got it down to, that the B. At the maximum, it is around 6 weeks, but 4 weeks fitting even better. No one ever looks out of their house for anything at all in all of Jerusalem, in the middle of the night of to B.
With a Priesthood being present, who know all things Babylonian? That is a modern and unrealistic perspective, and expectation, for the time. Have you any idea, how many times I have looked up at the moon, throughout the many nights of my life? Several times, almost every night. And the Priesthood, via their Babylonian experience, were well aware of the predictable eclipse Saurus cycles, both lunar, and solar.
Few eclipses were a surprise to the Babylonians and the Jerusalem Priesthoods, after centuries of careful observation, recording, and analysis of patterns. Signs, of the days and the years, they were taken to be. They would have known, within a day, that it had occurred, nonetheless.
At least give them credit, for that knowledge. The ancients had all winter, every night, to talk and exercise their minds. To assume that they were somehow duller than the mind-numbed digital media crowd, is, to me, counterintuitive. It is only 2, years ago — 50 generations, folks. If anything, with survival of the fittest out of the picture, now? Literacy, is not the hallmark of intelligence.
Literacy, is more the mark of a society with an infrastructure that includes widespread schooling, readily-available media, and quite a bit of leisure time, where you did not have to work all of the planting, growing, and harvest season from the time that you were very young, just so that you did not starve. But they did talk, and tell stories, in the dark of winter.
And they looked up at the stars, and at the moon…. See Mat. If Herod had died in B. C 4 Jesus was just being born. Jesus was born in the fall and John the Baptist was born in the spring of the same year. We know there are 6 months between them. Also we know that Jesus began his ministry when he was 30 years old, the age when a priest would begin his ministry. This is just my logical thinking. BC 1 is a more favorable date with all the facts above. This date was figured out using the Tzu Wei Chinese astrology.
He was born the first day of Passover at about AM. Wendell, no. The Flavium Testimonium is accepted by most scholars as partially genuine, but with some Christian glosses to bring it closer to their account.
In order of primacy the records of Jesus are the writings of Paul, the Gospels, Josephus, and Tacitus. The most parsimonious explanation for the belief there was a rabbi from Nazareth in Galilee called Jesus, who was reputed to be a wonder worker and exorcist, is that there was a rabbi from Nazareth in Galilee called Jesus, who was reputed to be a wonder worker and exorcist. They all believe that a Jewish rabbi from Nazareth in Galilee was the founder of Christianity.
As for the rest of your argument. In the ancient world personal honour was a matter of concern, and one of the worst things a person could do was claim more than what they were entitled to. When the Pharisees came to John the Baptist asking if he claimed to be Elijah, they were trying to make him puff himself up in the eyes of the community, disqualifying himself in their eyes.
It was acknowledgement from others that mattered. Jeremiah died in Egypt so, by your criteria, not a prophet. Daniel died in Babylon so, not a prophet. Jesus spoke of Jerusalem itself as one who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her. There is one thing stronger than all the armies of the World, and that is an idea whose time has come.
Victor Hugo 19th Century Author. Along with my very deep appreciation to the BAR, to all readers of the BAR, and their followers and commentators, I would like to express my opinion regarding one very interesting topic. I am a passionate researcher of ancient history, kind of free researcher, and I am focused very much on all cultures before new era especially. I have been following BAR for some time already, and now, after reading mentioned article, I am motivated very much to make my own contribution to the discussion on final days of King Herod the Great and the birth of Jesus.
Both these topics are extremely interesting from the point of view of Real History, and I am pretty sure some new elements, some new clues, will be very welcome. First about the death of the King Herod. Regarding this point I need to express my very firm opinion that he did die during 4 B. The story of lunar eclipse in 4 B. Because, it seems to me, this eclipse is very important, almost as key to decipher what really had happened with King Herod the Great, and because, according to my opinion, the death of King Herod is closely connected with the birth of Jesus, then we can probably solve both problems just with proper understanding the lunar eclipse in March 4 B.
This also means something, I think. At that ancient time eclipse was much more than time marker. With our brains fully focused on technology, and with such very superficial, so called fragmented and mechanistic brains, we cannot understand cultures which embodied some deeper spiritual values and very profound understanding of natural laws.
To be even more concrete, at that time astrology was not detached from astronomy, they both were one science, one comprehensive holistic science with very profound understanding of sophisticated natural laws which govern evolution in this vast Universe which surrounds us.
So, let we try for the moment, just for the moment, to look on these things on a way they did. First of all, to go straight to the point, an eclipse was not a good omen. Astrologer who did not warn a king or an emperor on a forthcoming eclipse, this astrologer was beheaded for sure. An eclipse is a special time when, according to deeper spiritual insights, natural laws are not functioning as they use to function in any other normal situation.
Eclipse is a very powerful mechanism of Evolution Force for not to be stacked, not to be interrupted on any way. Eclipse simply shakes everything, the things are not as usual, and along with this Evolution Force would find the way for next step to go on.
So, from the point of Evolution, eclipses are very good thing actually. But, wise and knowledgeable individuals of ancient times noticed that eclipses would have tendency to bring some negative vibrations. An eclipse was a bad omen for our ancients, and they were feared by them. And they were feared with reason, because, eclipses could be disastrous and dreadful. They could provoke terrible events to happen. At that ancient time astrologers would suggest people not to look at any eclipse regardless of the fact how fantastic this phenomena, the show on the sky, could possibly be.
They would suggest people not to eat and drink during that time also. And all that irrelative to the fact weather eclipse is visible in own geographic area or not. Even if not being visible, affliction was there. They claimed that afflicted field of life had started to be excited some six months before the eclipse already, depending of the strength of the eclipse itself, and the effect could last even six months after the very eclipse did happen.
An eclipse time for them was not an excellent time for starting anything new; no new business to be started, no new relation to be entered, no any undertaking should be done about eclipse time. That was a time for introverting, spiritual practices, not going out from the house. But, it was good to do some activities any way. For them, eclipse period was good time for cleaning the house. It is very good time for braking relationship as well. If they wanted to destruct some things, eclipse was ideal time.
Perfect time to destruct something or ruin something or someone. Because, as I already mentioned, they did understand natural laws are functioning different way during the eclipse time.
Many wars had started just about eclipse time. An Eclipse was even more important on mass level, because it influences masses very much. Very often history has shown that at that ancient time war between two kings, was actually war between two astrologers, and the king with more knowledgeable astrologer was winner, of course. Certainly, an astrologer was not developing tactic for battle field, though he could take his part in this story as well, but he was telling the king when to do what.
Good beginning, half job done! This is an old proverb, and it was used for both, construction and destruction, for good ideas … and for these not so god as well. Because, we should always have on mind that our ancients did understand very well the principle of dualistic nature of the life itself; that we actually live in dualistic world. There are good guys around who think always evolutionary way … but there are also some other guys around, who could possibly have who knows what kind of wired ideas.
These ideas of theirs were not always so evolutionary. So, that was just one small fragment how our ancients did look on these things. No doubt, every eclipse was very important, as well as role of astrologer to predict it, and to offer some remedies. That was the time when astrologer was staying very high in social structure.
Very often it happened that they were part of priesthood, because they needed a good knowledge of astronomy for their religious feasts and ceremonies. So, priests and astrologers, they both were watching on stars and moving of planets very carefully, as well as searching for good and bad omens.
I am not an expert, to be honest, but anyway, I think I have enough of knowledge to make some observations. By following BAR discussions about the death of King Herod and possible connection with some eclipse, an idea came to check something. I made many contemporary natal charts, and some very interesting ancient, but this we can maybe discuss some other time.
Now, we can forget all these spiritual aspects of astrology, because, I am sure many BAR readers would not wishing to go so far. Because, somebody would say, it is not scientific. What is scientific and what is not, and who will decide what is scientific and what is not, all that can certainly be topic for some other discussion. But now, let we for the moment forget all that, and let we use this tool, this software which, by the way, is very scientific, just as a time tool.
Let we use it just as kind of time machine, which will bring us some years back in time. My idea was to check that eclipse on 13th of March 4 B. First of all, I did find web site of NASA where all eclipses, solar and lunar, for last several thousand years are exposed, as well as all these forthcoming in next few millenniums.
They are all there on one place, and one can do research in detail. So, the year 4 B. Jagannatha Hora software uses ordinary year labeling, so 4 B. But, when I entered this date, March 13th 4 B.
Figure 1 — Jyotish Chart for 13th of March 4 B. There is no eclipse. Sun and Moon are not opposite to each other, and they are not associated with any Lunar Node. By such programs it is very easy to see lunar or solar eclipse time. For lunar eclipse Sun and Moon should be completely at the same degree but opposite to each other, in opposite signs of the zodiac, and they need to be closely connected with nodes, North or South Lunar Node.
And it should be full Moon. This is because Sun and Moon are not moving on the same plane. Their paths meet-cross only in two points, and this is being called North and South Lunar Node. So, when they are properly aligned with nodes, and that means, they are on the same plane, and as they are opposite to each other, the Earth is in-between, and that means that Moon is passing through the shadow of the Earth.
In Vedic astrology the penumbral eclipse is not being considered, only total and partial lunar eclipses are considered. For lunar eclipse there is a rule that Sun or Moon should be in the range of 11 degrees and 15 minutes of arc plus … minus to the nodes.
If they are in one degree of arc plus-minus, that means, this lunar eclipse is total. So, the date March 13th 4 B. Then we can play little bit, and move the Moon by the Time Tool embedded into the program, to be completely opposite to the Sun.
That did happen on March 21st 4 B. When I checked how far the Moon from any lunar node is, I was shocked. It was only about 16 minutes of arc. It is not mistake! It is not 16 degrees of arc! Its 16 minutes of arc!
Figure 2 — Jyotish Chart for 21st of March 4 B. It is shown Total Eclipse with only 16 arc-minutes of difference in position of Moon and South Lunar Node, while Moon and Sun are opposite to each other. So, here we have difference of about 8 days. It seems that lunar eclipse did happen some 8 days after the mentioned day, and it was very strong. That was the Total Eclipse. It seems, it appeared at 8PM 20h22min20sec , what was ideal time to be observed and watched. How much was possible to be seen from Jerusalem, I do not know right now.
But that is irrelevant any way. It was strong, powerful and functional even without seeing it. Priesthood, astrologers and all scholars certainly knew about it. Ordinary people did not pay attention about such things anyway. To be honest, I was intrigued by this discovery, and that motivated me to do additional research. I checked many ancient lunar eclipses and all of them has some shift; shift of about days.
But then, when I checked first few eclipses after A. There is no shift! JH software puts eclipses right to the mentioned time. I checked several recent ones … and … no mistake, everything is fitting perfectly well. So, now it is clear! There is some problem with calendar conversion in the year A. Is this possible? How could that happen? Now we need to say little bit more about the story how JH performs its own calculations. Basically there are two options, and both can be invoked optionally along with just few clicks.
First one is based on ephemeris. It uses planetary ephemerides to calculate position of each planet for any given time. JPL is huge company with about employees, but historically and practically completely leaned on and attached to the Caltech University.
They are doing many things, and among others they have been making ephemeris for everything whatever moves in our Solar system. For every planet, for every moon satellite, and every asteroid since it was discovered, registered and introduced … they make ephemerides for absolutely everything. They measure positions of all these objects every day precisely, and register these values. Then, by knowing the path of the object, velocity and direction, they recalculate positions of that object in far past and in far future, and they make ephemeris for this also.
On such a way every planet has ephemeris from the time of about B. This is really an extraordinary work, and all Space programs are based on these ephemeris. Every flight of every spacecraft is based on these ephemeris. They are used for planetarium software also. Such files are usually big, close to 3 GB, what is not a problem for big users like NASA, but can be a big problem for astrology software developers.
This is now where this Swiss based company Astrodienst comes in. Their final product is a file of about MB. This is comfortable for practical use in astrology, and that becomes the core for planetary calculation engine for astrology software developers. So, calculation of positions of planets based on ephemerides is then oriented to find two closer ephemerides of the specified date and time, and based on velocity and direction of moving of the planet, positions of planets for any given time are interpolated and generated.
This is just very simple story about natal chart casting. In reality it is more complex to be honest. Luckily we have computers today, and such software programs, what saves us from very exhaustible calculations. We just enter personal data, and in les then second we have natal chart done. So, complete system is very precise, and JH developers declared possible error in fractions of second of arc for all dates after B. For more ancient dates, like B. But they are developing and improving this software all the time, as well as the precision of basic ephemerides is constantly being improved, so in final stage we have a situation that errors developers do declare are permanently getting smaller and smaller.
It uses completely different approach in calculation. Hence, ancient Vedic Rishis, Vedic Scholars, after observing moving of planets for very long period of time, derived very special formulas which can help finding position of any planet at any time.
They use the principle of counting elapsed time from one fixed point on the Ecliptic, and this is defined by big conjunction of planets in the midnight before February 18th B. This is very good system also, but it is proved as not so precise when we go deep in history, deep in our past time, so to say.
It is precise enough to consider contemporary natal charts, and maybe even up to hundred years plus-minus, but not very precise when considering ancient charts. My research has shown, for ascendant calculation, it generates mistake of about 1 degree of arc for every years, and if we apply it for dates around 4 B. Mistake can vary for different planets. So, it is shown that this system is definitely not practical for ancient dates.
This is true, it is not practical for serious use in astrology when ancient dates are considered, but in our case, it can be a good indicator. It can be a good control method. As I was plunging deeper and deeper into this eclipse problem research, I was just thinking … well … let see what this other system will tell about eclipse in March 4 B.
Shifting to this system within JH is very simple, just few clicks. Figure 4 — Jyotish Chart for 21st of March 4 B. One can observe shift in longitudes of all planets for few degrees. This is logical to expect, but most important clue is that it shows the same day as ephemerides based method. I checked many eclipses on this way: ancient ones, contemporary and far future forthcoming. Result is the same. By using double system checking all eclipses of present time and future time are fitting very well.
And everything is going well until behind this magic borderline … A. This calendar uses similar principle as SSS, it measures elapsed time from one fixed point on the Ecliptic, and that point is fixed to some years B. I was thinking, maybe that will show this phantom March 13th.
But it did not! I also checked many solar eclipses, and result is absolutely the same. Solar eclipse is very easy to detect with JH software as well.
Sun and Moon should be in the same zodiac sign, at the same degree, and they should be lined up with one of nodes within 18 degrees plus minus.
And it should be a New Moon. This is the Solar Eclipse. Lunar eclipses in 1 B. But, I think they are not of any importance anyway. Because, most important events we follow now, like the death of King Herod the Great and the birth of Jesus, they did happen in 4 B.
According to my opinion, our focus should be on these years. So, to conclude, interestingly, on no way I could replicate lunar eclipse on 13th of March 4 B. Two different systems of calculation, though based on the same platform, they both appoint on 21st of March 4 B. But still, in spite of all these proves, I would consider an option that JH software, though internally consistent, and showing precise positions of planets relative to each other, it can still be that this software maybe does not show proper date somehow.
I am inviting all BAR readers and truth loving scientists to continue this research if possible. I am little bit confused, to be honest. It was supposed to be very easy. As we live now in the era of Gregorian calendar, I was thinking, there is a codex, general practice, so to say, to transfer all dates of ancient time into Gregorian calendar with no losing one single second, not to mention day or year, or even years.
But, is that true? Did we maybe lose something? But anyway, we see that 21st of March is very plausible. So now, let we for the moment take this new date of eclipse, 21st of March 4 B. Does it change anything? Oo yes, it changes a lot! Then it turns to be exactly as Josephus and some other sources claimed. From commentaries in BAR I saw, that King Herod did die between lunar eclipse which could possibly be on fast day, and before the Passover.
So he died after the lunar eclipse and before the Passover of that year. According to my opinion, the fast itself should be connected with the lunar eclipse. It was there in my introduction word where I already mentioned that our ancients recommended fasting during eclipse hours, or complete day if possible.
After eclipse is finished, they took a bath and eat afterward; food which was freshly prepared after the eclipse, and not processed before or during the eclipse.
So, this fast was probably not some regular every year fast on that day. It was there due to the lunar eclipse. Jewish priesthood at that time still preserved a lot of profound understanding of natural laws functioning. This is basically one very important point inherited from Vedic Culture. On Internet I found Passover of that year was on 10th of April. So, he could possibly die some few days after lunar eclipse on 21st of March. That could be around March 4 B. This will also make this eclipse very important, because, it seems, it was strong and powerful.
This we should also read between lines in the report of Josephus. If this is the only eclipse mentioned in his entire work, then that definitely means this particular eclipse is very important one. We should always consider the fact that Josephus was not a free writer, he was not a free historian. He functioned in captivity, and he exposed, and he wrote, what he was told to. But, in his heart he was true, honest and proud Jew, and very possibly here and there, between lines, he entered some important true clues.
I think, the story of Lunar Eclipse in March 4 B. Regarding the date of Passover in 4 B. But, that should be checked also, because, as we can see, I do not know if we can lean on dates exposed in History Books.
Passover is traditionally linked with 15th day of month Nisan, and some astronomer converted it into 10th of April 4 B. Time notation according to Jewish calendar is probably all right.
Nevertheless, as we have seen from eclipse case, we should be very careful with conversion to Gregorian calendar, and I suggest this to be reexamined. Well, there is much, much more to say about importance of that lunar eclipse in March 4 B. That would definitely enter us into the field of Vedic Astrology-Jyotish, which actually has something to say, to be completely honest.
But, as I mentioned before, let we stay out of the domain of astrology for this time. We just used very sophisticated astrology software as a time tool, as a time machine, to reconstruct the true image of the sky some few thousand years before our time. Just few clicks with mouse and we can see an image of sky at any time of Biblical Era, and even far beyond that.
Figure 5 — So called Columbus lunar eclipse, specified to be in March 1st A. According to legend Columbus used it to manipulate native people of Jamaica who stopped offer him a food and supply.
Is this legend based on false lunar eclipse time? Another additional lunar eclipse is the one which took place in June A. This one, same as all others after A. Figure 7 — Jyotish Chart for evening of June 4th A. This one eclipse is perfectly fitting into NASA declared timing. I inserted this eclipse just to show how precisely JH software replicates exact date and time for all eclipses after year So, that will conclude my small research on lunar eclipse in March 4 B.
Mistakes in observations are possible. Intention of this text is to expose possible problem, not to offer all solutions. More research should be done with team of different kind of experts. Just to say that I am using last version of Jagannatha Hora software, Version 7. I would like to see some competent and substantial evidence if any exists. Josephus made a reference to Christ but many scholars claim it is just spurious editing by apologists. There seem to be lots of books written these days setting forth the proposition that Jesus was not a historical personage.
Bruno Bauer reached such a conclusion way back in the 19th century and others have joined in with that assertion in our modern day. How in the world any sane person can believe that the Lord God Almighty would raise from the dead a prophet who had prophesied presumptuously is beyond me.
One could say that Jesus died early and unexpectedly and not after a long life and by natural causes. In like manner, John the Baptist must not have been a true prophet for he died young and a long ways from Jerusalem. So someone was mistaken. Tis a sight to behold. Now we cannot even determine the year when King Herod the Great died.
This controversy proves to me that that the Lord God Almighty did not authorize let alone order one gospel to be written. If he had they would have been written soon after his crucifixion or even before and not until nearly a half-century had elapsed. You folks engaged in this dispute cannot see the for the trees.
Is not this the same Herod who wanted to kill Baby Jesus? All this debate over eclipses and such is almost laughable. Was Old Herod just spiteful and mad because the Wise Men did not return and inform him when the young child Jesus was located?
This was indeed a mighty wide swath taken in this IEO. Is not it absurd for Pilate to be trying to save the same Adult Usurper King whom King Herod the Great some three decades before had reportedly killed innocent babies in order to get this same king when he was a Baby Usurper King? In truth, there was no killing of innocent babies pursuant to an order by King Herod the Great. These nativity stories are nothing but legends and YARNS, but we have highly-educated people treating them like history.
No wonder the religious impulse has caused the world today to reach the brink of destruction. Muslims believed Muhammad went to heaven on an ass whereas Christians believed Elijah ascended in a fiery chariot. Matthew does not tell us that if Jesus ascended. Luke says in his gospel it was on the evening of the resurrection Jesus went up but then in Acts says it was some forty days latter; so take your pick and also flip a coin to see if Jesus ascended from Bethany or the Mount of Olives.
AND i would also like to point out that Catholics regarded Jesus as the year death and resurrection of Osiris as if his ministry was but months baptized and killed in the saem 30AD. This is what could push a So rather than use Eusebius he commisioned Beatus of Liebana who mistakenly adds up years not Parker and Waldo H. This confirms that Herod started his regnal years in Tishri, not Nisan emphasis and bracketed comment added.
But this is circular reasoning. All this statement proves is that the Battle of Actium took place in the sixth month, Elul, just before Tishri started.
To claim that means first assuming a Tishri-based year—the very thing Filmer and Steinmann must prove—as well as factual dating. If it makes good sense as written, there is no real reason to reject it.
Andrew E. This is surely a common sense observation, but it must unfortunately be specifically pointed out, lest the complex arguments put forth by Filmer and Steinmann obscure it. Actually, what is disturbing is this misrepresentation, for no conflict with Josephus can be found.
Herod died shortly before a Passover Antiq. Since Josephus says that he reigned thirty-seven years from the date of his appointment, thirty-four years from his conquest of Jerusalem Antiq.
But we know that Josephus elsewhere counts a year too much, according to our reckoning…The reason of this is that he counts portions of a year as a year [i. If this be so, the thirty-fourth year of Herod would begin on the 1st Nisan of the year B. That this is indeed the correct reckoning is confirmed by astronomical date, and by the chronology of the successors of Herod bracketed comment added.
His reasoning is actually predicated around accepting them as written. The only contradiction is not with Josephus, but with the ultimately unsupported insistence of Filmer and Steinmann on using non-inclusive rather than inclusive reckoning, and that from Tishri rather than Nisan.
Third, he states that early Christian sources place the birth of Christ after 4 BC, generally in late 3 or early 2 BC. It should be pointed out, however, that those sources are not unanimous about a specific year, which indicates they reflect not accurate records but tradition i. To take these reports as authoritative is to depend on unproven tradition rather than a single well-attested year. He begins by presenting three incontestable points from Antiquities Steinmann first admits p.
In the post-exilic era several Jewish months, including the third, were routinely designated by their order in the calendar rather than their Jewish names.
The parenthetical explanation in Esther also demonstrates the standardized inclusive counting the Filmer camp denies, for Tammuz, not Sivan, would have been specified as the third month if the Jews had used actual, non-inclusive reckoning. There is no reason to suppose that Josephus, a Romanized Jew whom we already know—from his own words, no less—viewed Nisan as the first month of the year, would refer to a Greek month out of the blue, particularly without also naming it for his readers unfamiliar with Greek conventions recall how he explained Xanthicus earlier.
It also makes little sense that Josephus would flip-flop with his calendars, giving the month in Greek terms, but the day in Jewish terms. The odds are overwhelmingly against it. A straightforward understanding of the passage indicates the Jewish month of Sivan, the third month of the ecclesiastical calendar, was meant.
Steinmann then p. Two problems exist here: first, he again assumes without supporting evidence that it was the Day of Atonement in Tishri, and second, he makes the further undemonstrated assumption that non-inclusive, actual dating was used. But as discussed in the previous article of this series, this overlooks the detail that Antiochus IV Epiphanes died in BC, vacating the Syrian kingship over the Jews and defaulting to leaving the Hasmoneans in power.
By recognizing this we can say that the Hasmonean dynasty endured for years. Indeed, it not only could, but it does. What are these considerations?
The first he owes directly to Filmer p. We will discuss this matter in detail below. The second consideration arises from a conflict Steinmann, again following Filmer p.
Thus, Sossius would not have helped Herod—a man favored by Antony—capture Jerusalem in Rather than teaching that Sosius was entirely passive during 37 BC, the Dio passage merely tells us, and quite specifically, that the Romans accomplished nothing of note in Syria. The sense is that, lest personal successes in Syria might inadvertently offend the uninvolved Antony which had happened earlier with Ventidius, costing him the Syrian governorship, Dio That is exactly what the text says in Antiquities Consistent with this, in Wars 1.
For after the taking of Samosata [in 38 BC], and when Antony had set Sosius over the affairs of Syria, and had given him orders to assist Herod against Antigonus , he [Antony] departed into Egypt; but Sosius sent two legions before him into Judea, to assist Herod, and followed himself soon after with the rest of his army emphasis and brackets added. The third consideration adduced by Steinmann against a 37 BC fall of Jerusalem is tied to the Jewish sabbatical years.
Describing the siege undertaken by Sosius and Herod, Josephus records:. Now the Jews that were inclosed within the walls of the city, fought against Herod with great alacrity and zeal And this they did while a mighty army lay round about them; and while they were distressed by famine, and the want of necessaries: for this happened to be a sabbatick year Nor was there any end of the miseries he [Herod] brought upon them [the defeated Jews]: and this distress was in part occasioned by the covetousness of the prince regnant [Herod was confiscating silver and gold wherever he could find them]; who was still in want of more; and in part by the sabbatick year, which was still going on , and forced the countrey to lie still uncultivated: since we are forbidden to sow our land in that year These details give us a way to determine the year that Herod took Jerusalem, but only if we can identify with confidence at least one other post-exilic sabbatical year to synchronize with it.
Finally, it should be noted that Herod besieged Jerusalem at the end of a Sabbatical year when food supplies were running low.
This was the same situation in mid BCE near the end of a sabbatical year. Thus, Tishri —Elul was a Sabbatical year. Instead, Jerusalem fell at the beginning of the following year Tishri 36 , with the siege taking place during the summer of the Sabbatical year summer of 36 BCE. None of the references I looked at that accept a 37 BC de facto start for the reign of Herod place the taking of Jerusalem in Tishri, but in early summer, generally the month of Sivan June of 37 BC, cf.
So, which is more accurate for the post-exilic period, the sabbatical year determination of Wacholder, or the one by Zuckermann? It also draws on the work of ABR's Dr. Douglas Petrovich. Without a solid, objective basis for translating its problem passages bearing on the sabbatical years, the Seder Olam provides no conclusive help in choosing between the approaches of Zuckermann and Wacholder.
We must look elsewhere for a basis to make the choice. I believe we find this basis in the detailed analysis of sabbatical year evidences of Wacholder and Zuckermann presented by Bob Pickle. Here we merely summarize some of their key points. Wacholder had presented ten lines of evidence for his sabbatical year determinations, and Pickle bases his study on them. They are:. For each of these topics Pickle examines the data, contrasts how the Zuckermann and Wacholder approaches deal with it, and draws conclusions about which does a better job at explaining the data.
First of all, why does it matter? It matters because this question is pertinent to a study of the 70 weeks of Daniel 9. The reason the Jews were sentenced to a captivity of 70 years is because they had not kept that many sabbatical years and had to catch up Lev.
So Daniel 9 begins with a reference to the missed sabbatical years of 70 sabbatical cycles, and ends with a discussion of another 70 sabbatical cycles bracketed comment added. It therefore follows that if a particular interpretation of the 70 weeks coincides with known sabbatical years, then that interpretation has additional merit. This approach requires the positive identification of at least one sabbatical year sometime in history. What follows is a discussion dealing with each of these lines of evidence as they appear in his paper.
It is outside the scope of this study to detail all the various points Pickle covers. As Pickle puts it:. Agrippa and Gallus were consuls in 37 BC. Thus Jerusalem was besieged by Herod in the spring and summer of 37 BC. I should mention here my own approach to the challenge of determining a solid basis for post-exile sabbatical year calculation. I first tried to identify the most likely first sabbatical year after the return of the Jews from the Babylonian captivity.
When the Jews returned to the land and commenced agriculture once again, this initiated a new sabbatical cycle from Tishri. I later discovered that Zuckermann had made the same deduction.
On that basis, after considerable study of Ezra and Nehemiah, I determined a likely first post-exilic sabbatical year. This gave me a considerable measure of confidence than my determination was correct, despite the fact that it disagreed with Wacholder. This meant, since Josephus tells us that Herod took Jerusalem during a sabbatical year, the siege must have ended during the summer of 37 BC. Josephus said in Antiquities We will close this sabbatical year discussion by noting that the highly-respected Jack Finegan pointed out on page of his Handbook of Biblical Chronology revised edition :.
Andrews, Scotland, ], , emphasis added. However, a closer examination of Antiquities When Herod conquered Jerusalem he appointed Ananel to be high priest. Counting high priests beginning with Ananel and ending with Pannias, the last high priest before Titus conquered Jerusalem, there were twenty-seven high priests. This means that Josephus was including Antigonus in his reckoning of twenty-eight high priests during the reign of Herod.
To confirm this, note that above it was demonstrated that Antigonus reigned in Jerusalem as high priest from Tishri 39 to Tishri Again, from the conquest of Herod down to that by Titus he [Josephus] counts years Antiq. Given the convention of using inclusive dating from Nisan for the reigns of Jewish kings, years is exactly right for the time spanning 37 BC to AD
0コメント