Archive for the ‘Suetonius’ Category

Hippolytus and December 25th, the birthday of Christ-Christmas

Tuesday, December 8th, 2009

*Scroll down for more updates*

Roger Pearse is discussing the dates of the Winter Solstice and “Brumalia” to see if and how they correspond with December 25th.  But why do we think Jesus was born on December 25th?  I thought that I would throw my hat into the ring and give the earliest reference to December 25 as the birthday of Jesus Christ.

Hippolytus in his Commentary on Daniel 4.23.3 says:

For the first advent of our Lord in the flesh, when he was born in Bethlehem, eight days before the kalends of January [December 25th], the 4th day of the week [Wednesday], while Augustus was in his forty-second year, [2 or 3BC] but from Adam five thousand and five hundred years.  He suffered in the thirty third year, 8 days before the kalends of April [March 25th], the Day of Preparation, the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar [29 or 30 AD], while Rufus and Roubellion and Gaius Caesar, for the 4th time, and Gaius Cestius Saturninus were Consuls.

I’m not sure how to calculate the 42nd year of Augustus and the 15th of Tiberius, do we count inclusively or exclusively?  Does a partial year reign count as a full one?  Or does the year begin on the day the man became emperor (March 15th 44bc in the case of Augustus?).  Lastly, don’t we date King Herod’s death to 4BC based only off of Josephus?  As I recall the contemporary historians Tacitus and Suetonius don’t give enough information about his reign.  If so, couldn’t Josephus be a year or two off?   Finally, where is a good source on lists of Consuls?

Thoughts?

-Update-

Peter (in the comments) rightly reminded me that some believe that Hippolytus’ reference to December 25 as the birthday of Christ is a later interpolation.  Quasten says this in his Patrology. The most modern edition of Hippolytus’ commentary GCS (Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller) series number NF 7, puts the text in brackets indicating that it is a conjecture (or perhaps an interpolation), as does GCS #1 found here.  However the SC (Source Christianes) Series 13 edition (published in 1947), contains the text as I gave it above above.

Furthermore, the text that the most modern edition gives doesn’t seem to make sense.  It reads as follows:

“For the first advent of our Lord in the flesh, when he was born in Bethlehem, four days before the Nones of April, 8 days before the kalends of January, the 4th day of the week [Wednesday], while Agustus was in his forty-second year, [2 or 3BC] but from Adam five thousand and five hundred years.  He suffered in the thirty third year, 8 days before the kalends of April [March 25th], the Day of Preparation”

Now in my photocopy of the page the German footnotes are partially cut off, making it very difficult to understand what actually is going on here. The older GCS edition seems to contain the same set of footnotes and it seems that there is conflicting manuscript tradition.   Anyone with a better knowledge of German able to sort this out?  You can see the footnotes here

Do scholars label this an interpolation simply because they think that the traditional date of December was not settled on until after Hippolytus?  Or are their more reasons?

-Update-

For those outside the US the GCS #1 volume is now on my website.  Look for page 242 or 295 of the PDF.

http://www.chronicon.net/GCS1hippolytusWerke.pdf

-Update-

Hippolytus has this to say in the ancient latin translation of his Chronicon about the birth and death of Christ (No Greek fragments survive from this portion of his Chronicon).  Chronicon Section 687:

And after the transmigration into Babylon until the birth of Christ, there were 14 generations, 660 years, and from the birth of Christ until the Passion there was 30 years and from the Passion up until this year which is the 13th year of the Emperor Alexander, there is 206 years.

The 13th year of Emperor Alexander Severus was 235AD [which makes 29AD for the death of Jesus according to the Latin].  Another Latin manuscript reads that it was 207 years from the passion of Christ until the 13th year of Alexander [28 AD for the death of Jesus].  The Armenian manuscript claims Christ was 32 when he died and that there are 205 years from Christ’s death to the 12th year and 6th month of Emperor Alexander’s reign [3BC].  It  is interesting to note that in his Chronicon Hippolytus claims that Jesus died when he was 30, but in his Commentary on Daniel he says he was 33 years old.  However, if we assume that the Armenian manuscript is more accurate than the Latin (Armenian often is more accurate) in which case what Hippolytus states in his Chronicon agrees pretty well with what he says in his Commentary on Daniel.  Read Hans Dampf’s insightful comments below about Jesus being born in 3BC.

Suetonius (and Tacitus) and the New Testament #3 Quirinius

Sunday, March 15th, 2009

Quirinius is mentioned once in the New Testament in the Gospel of Luke 2:1-3:

And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This census first took place while Quirinius was governing Syria.  So all went to be registered, everyone to his own city.

Suetonius mentions Quirinius in his discussion of Emperor Tiberius.

Tiberius 49:

In the course of a very short time, he [Tiberius] turned his mind to sheer robbery. It is certain that Cneius Lentulus, the augur, a man of vast estate, was so terrified and worried by his threats and importunities, that he was obliged to make him his heir; and that Lepida, a lady of a very noble family, was condemned by him, in order to gratify Quirinus, a man of consular rank, extremely rich, and childless, who had divorced her twenty years before, and now charged her with an old design to poison him.

In my reading of Tacitus I missed references to Quirinius.  Here they are:

Annals 2.30

As an ancient statute of the Senate forbade such inquiry in a case affecting a master’s life, Tiberius, with his cleverness in devising new law, ordered Libo’s slaves to be sold singly to the State-agent, so that, forsooth, without an infringement of the Senate’s decree, Libo might be tried on their evidence. As a consequence, the defendant asked an adjournment till next day, and having gone home he charged his kinsman, Publius Quirinus, with his last prayer to the emperor.

Annals 3.22-23

At Rome meanwhile Lepida, who beside the glory of being one of the Æmilii was the great-granddaughter of Lucius Sulla and Cneius Pompeius, was accused of pretending to be a mother by Publius Quirinus, a rich and childless man. Then, too, there were charges of adulteries, of poisonings, and of inquiries made through astrologers concerning the imperial house. The accused was defended by her brother Manius Lepidus. Quirinus by his relentless enmity even after his divorce, had procured for her some sympathy, infamous and guilty as she was. One could not easily perceive the emperor’s feelings at her trial; so effectually did he interchange and blend the outward signs of resentment and compassion. He first begged the Senate not to deal with the charges of treason, and subsequently induced Marcus Servilius, an ex-consul, to divulge what he had seemingly wished to suppress. He also handed over to the consuls Lepida’s slaves, who were in military custody, but would not allow them to be examined by torture on matters referring to his own family. Drusus too, the consul-elect, he released from the necessity of having to speak first to the question. Some thought this a gracious act, done to save the rest of the Senators from a compulsory assent, while others ascribed it to malignity, on the ground that he would have yielded only where there was a necessity of condemning.

On the days of the games which interrupted the trial, Lepida went into the theatre with some ladies of rank, and as she appealed with piteous wailings to her ancestors and to that very Pompey, the public buildings and statues of whom stood there before their eyes, she roused such sympathy that people burst into tears and shouted, without ceasing, savage curses on Quirinus, “to whose childless old-age and miserably obscure family, one once destined to be the wife of Lucius Cæsar and the daughter-in-law of the Divine Augustus was being sacrificed.” Then, by the torture of the slaves, her infamies were brought to light, and a motion of Rubellius Blandus was carried which outlawed her. Drusus supported him, though others had proposed a milder sentence. Subsequently, Scaurus, who had had a daughter by her, obtained as a concession that her property should not be confiscated. Then at last Tiberius declared that he had himself too ascertained from the slaves of Publius Quirinus that Lepida had attempted their master’s life by poison.

Annals 3.48

About the same time he requested the Senate to let the death of Sulpicius Quirinus be celebrated with a public funeral. With the old patrician family of the Sulpicii this Quirinus, who was born in the town of Lanuvium, was quite unconnected. An indefatigable soldier, he had by his zealous services won the consulship under the Divine Augustus, and subsequently the honours of a triumph for having stormed some fortresses of the Homonadenses in Cilicia. He was also appointed adviser to Caius Cæsar in the government of Armenia, and had likewise paid court to Tiberius, who was then at Rhodes. The emperor now made all this known to the Senate, and extolled the good offices of Quirinus to himself, while he censured Marcus Lollius, whom he charged with encouraging Caius Cæsar in his perverse and quarrelsome behaviour. But people generally had no pleasure in the memory of Quirinus, because of the perils he had brought, as I have related, on Lepida, and the meanness and dangerous power of his last years.

Next week I will post Josephus’ references to Quirinius as well as Strabo’s.

Suetonius and the New Testament #2 Expulsion of Jews

Thursday, February 19th, 2009

My previous entry was the last of the series involving Tacitus, but the first of a shorter series about Suetonius and the New Testament.  In the book of Acts 18:1-3 it is recorded that the Jews were expelled during the reign of Claudius.

After this, Paul left Athens and went to Corinth. There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome. Paul went to see them, and because he was a tentmaker as they were, he stayed and worked with them.

A similar event is noted by Suetonius when he is listing a series of actions taken by Claudius at various points in his reign.

Claudius 25:

He banished from Rome all the Jews, who were continually making disturbances at the instigation of one Chrestus.

Whom this Chrestus is has been debated back and forth for a long time.  Obviously some identify him as Christ, others say it is some unknown person.  In either case Suetonius was aware of Christians as he mentions them when he talks about Nero.

Nero 16:

He likewise inflicted punishments on the Christians, a sort of people who held a new and impious superstition.