*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.
It is extraordinarily important that Hippolytus identifies the crucifixion as March 25h. I will add it to my list of patristic sources. Really appreciate it.
I think “eight days before the kalends of January [December 25th], the 4th day of the week [Wednesday],” and “8 days before the kalends of April [March 25th],” are later additions. Check CCEL for the original version
Thank you for reminding me Peter, I added an update to the post.
I just checked the original Greek text (1947 Paris edition): “eight days before the Kalends of January” and “8 days before the Kalends of April” are original material. This corresponds to Tertullian, On Fasting 14, where he clearly states that the Christians celebrated Easter in the “first month” of the year, which was always March in the old calendar: “we celebrate the passover by an annual rotation in the first month”
http://www.tertullian.org/anf/anf04/anf04-21.htm#P1854_549768
Latin: http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/tertullian/tertullian.ieiunio.shtml
Greek text of Hippolytus:
Ἡ γὰρ πρώτη παρουσία τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ἡ ἔνσαρκος,
ἐν ᾗ γεγέννηται ἐν Βηθλεέμ, ἐγένετο πρὸ ὀκτὼ καλανδῶν
ἰανουαρίων, ἡμέρᾳ τετράδι, βασιλεύοντος Αὐγούστου τεσσα-
ρακοστὸν καὶ δεύτερον ἔτος, ἀπὸ δὲ Ἀδὰμ πεντακισχιλιοστῷ
καὶ πεντακοσιοστῷ ἔτει· ἔπαθεν δὲ τριακοστῷ τρίτῳ ἔτει
πρὸ ὀκτὼ καλανδῶν ἀπριλίων, ἡμέρᾳ παρασκευῇ, ὀκτωκαι-
δεκάτῳ ἔτει Τιβερίου Καίσαρος, ὑπατεύοντος Ῥούφου καὶ
Ῥουβελλίωνος.
PS: the link to the German footnotes doesn’t lead anywhere, and the book itself says “no preview available”. (??)
Another addition: Hippolytus wrote that he was born on the fourth day of the week, i.e. Wednesday. It also says “while Augustus was in his forty-second year”, with the addition “[2 or 3BC]“. Only one of those two years is correct. (1) The only Wednesday connected to a 25 December in those times was in the year 3 BC. In 2 BC it was a Thursday. The year 4 AD, which would normally have a Wednesday, 25 December, actually has the date on a Thursday, which is logical, because in February 4 AD there was an intercalary day, the b1s3xtile day. (2) The year 2 BC precisely matches the information on Augustus’ 42nd year, if we count from 43 BC, the year in which Augustus received his first imperium, defeated Antony and in which the 2nd triumvirate was founded.
It could still all be a later addition, but it is a very accurate one. And even if it is an addition, it is evidence for early Christians’ belief that the Nativity was on 25 December.
Thanks Hans, what a good source of chronology you are. The link doesn’t work? Are you outside of the US? If so you may need to use a proxy. However, I’ll throw the text of GCS #1 up on my website so you can see for yourself. The passage in question is p.242 or page 295 of the pdf. You can find it here.
http://www.chronicon.net/GCS1hippolytusWerke.pdf
My website is being slow now for some reason so it may take some time to load. Let me know what you make of those footnotes.
I’m terribly sorry, but I made a mistake about the year 43 BC. I counted wrong. So for Hippolytus’ information to add up, he must have counted from 44 BC, i.e. the year where Octavian (Augustus) accepted power and Caesar’s heirship in May. His 42nd year was therefore from May 3 BC to May 2 BC, putting Wednesday, 25 December 3 BC in the right place.
Hans, thank you again. I added a reference from Hippolytus in his Chronicon, it seems that if we follow the Armenian textual tradtion, Hippolytus also claims that Jesus was born in 3BC there. No specific date is given however.
I went through the alternative Greek passage in the PDF (p. 242/295). First of all, the words “pro tessarôn apriliôn” referring to April are in square brackets, i.e. they are interpolated. Same goes for the second interpolation “xai Gaiou Kaisaros to tetarton xai Gaiou Kestiou Satorninou”. Accordingly these are not part of the 1947 Paris edition (see above). The second interpolation is however very interesting! It covers both the birth and the death of Christ, which is also evidence that it’s an interpolation, because it is an addendum: Instead of sticking with “Rufus” and Rubellius as the consuls in the year of Christ’s death (see below), the interpolator added more consulships, whereas the one by Gaius Caesar refers to the passage about Christ’s birth, and the one by Cestius to his death. So the interpolator mixed them together, ignoring the original structure of the text. (Maybe there was no space in the original manuscript to write it down, and he had to insert it at the end of the passage.)
The original information therefore is that according to Hippolytus Christ was born on Wednesday 25 December 3 BC, in the 42nd year of Augustus (obviously counting from 44 BC), and died on Friday 25 March AD 29, in the consulship of Rubellius and “Rufus”, the latter probably a transcript error from “Fufius”, who was consul with Rubellius in AD 29. (The Greek letter Phi Φ is quite similar to the Greek Rho P, so there is a possible ways the error came about: Fufius > ΦΟΥΦIΟΣ > ΡΟΥΦIΟΣ > ΡΟΥΦΟΣ.)
But the contents of the second interpolation are very interesting, because they add a lot of information, and although it doesn’t fit the original text, it allows us to look into the mind of an early Christian copyist. The interpolator obviously wanted to ignore the year 3 BC and allude to the year AD 1 as the birth of Christ, in accordance with the chronography of 354 — http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/chronography_of_354_08_fasti.htm —, which has Gaius Caesar as consul. But in AD 1 it was a Sunday on 25 December, which doesn’t fit the main text. Furthermore, he seems to have mistaken the consul Gaius Caesar (AD 1) with Gaius Iulius Caesar Augustus, maybe influenced by the mention of Augustus in Hippolytus’ original text. He writes that Gaius Caesar was consul for the fourth time, which is false, because AD 1 was his first consulship (due to his young age), and he died shortly afterwards. The only Gai Caesares who were consul for at least four times were Julius Caesar (45 BC) and Augustus (30 BC), which would give us either 45 BC or 30 BC as the year of Christ’s birth, which is both far too early for it to match the Christian tradition. But a lot of ancient writers (and also modern scholars!) have mixed up Augustus and his adopted son Gaius Caesar, also because they looked pretty much alike on statues.
Gaius Cestius was actually not called “Saturnius”, but Gallus. He was consul in AD 35. In any case the info on Gaius Cestius [Gallus] places Christ’s death and resurrection into the reign of Tiberius as well, only a little later than Hippolyte did.
It is obviously an attempt by a later copyist to shift Hippolytus’ Christ chronology, which lasted from 3 BC to AD 29 to a more “Christian” chronology starting in AD 1 and lasting to AD 35. However, I don’t know why the interpolator actually added three additional years to the life of Christ instead of just shifting the chronology en bloc.
A general comment on the footnotes: There seem to be different manuscripts, but the author says that the MSS Georg and J would be the original reading.
I can answer this myself!
It HAD to be AD 35, because the important thing was for Christ to have died on a Friday! And after AD 29 the next year which offered the interpolator a Friday 25 March was AD 35. Nice one. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_Jesus#Day_of_birth
Wikipedia has a few slight errors, e.g. they also mix up Augustus and Gaius Caesar, but they state that the Hippolytus passage “is almost certainly interpolated”, without any reference to back it up. The CCEL only has the basic information: Bethlehem, under Augustus, suffering in his 33rd year.
So it could be true what I wrote earlier, that all of the additional information is an interpolation. This would then mean that there were two traditions, which the copyists tried to insert into their manuscripts, one being 3 BC, the other AD 1. So Hippolytus might not be an early source for 25 December, but he is definitely evidence of the early Christians’ need to introduce a plausible chronology by interpolation. That itself is very important.
But how can we be sure that it’s an interpolation? My 1947 edition still has contains the complete passage. Do we know of any newer editions or philological/text-critical articles dealing with this passage?
Hans what is your email address? Write to me here
http://www.chronicon.net/about.html
I will send you something. And what does CCEL stand for?
I believe the 1947 edition, in the footnote on this passage, says that they discuss the date more in the introduction, but I couldn’t find any discussion of it (I also don’t know French so was just looking with Google Translator unfortunately.)
I have done some work on assembling ALL the references I could find. I have it in a hard copy somewhere. This is at my site. It isn’t as precise as I’d like it to be but I will fit Hippolytus in there now:
(a) those who held a March 23rd Crucifixion/March 25th Resurrection
• Alexander of Jerusalem (c. 218 CE) according to a fragment cited by Dobschutz (T u U xi 1 p 136 ff) cites March 25 as the true date of the Resurrection citing ‘apostolic documents.’ It is important to note that Alexander was connected to the Alexandrian tradition through Origen who he allowed to speak in the churches of Caesarea after he was banished from Egypt.
• Julius Africanus (c. 221 CE) another figure intimately connected with the Alexandrian tradition and who Alden Mosshammer (The Christian Era of Julius Africanus with an Excursus on Olympiad Chronology) notes dated the Incarnation to the 25th of March in the year 5501 from Adam (= 1 B.C.), and the Resurrection to March 25th, Olympiad 202.2, year 5532 from Adam (= A.D. 31).
• Bede (673-735 CE) claims that at the time of Pope Victor [i.e. late second century] the Christians of Gaul kept their Easter always on the 8th of the Calends of April (March 25th). Bede [de Ratione Temporum cap 45 It de Aequinocto Vernali t. 2 p 232] cites the authority of Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea and the synod held under him for support – “the resurrection of Jesus should be celebrated on the 25th of March on whatever day of the week it may fall, the Lord having risen on that day.” [Cent. ii Call p. 118]
• Lactantius of Cirta in Numidia (c. 240 – 320 CE) of North Africa says “in the latter days of the Emperor Tiberius, in the consulship of Ruberius Geminus and Fufius Geminus, and on the tenth of the kalends of April [i.e. March 23rd], as I find it written, Jesus Christ was crucified by the Jews. After He had risen again on the third day [i.e. March 25].” [Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died chapter 2]
• Epiphanius of Salamis (d 403 CE) claims that ‘some’ Christians of his day assign the crucifixion to March 23rd.
• Panadorus of Alexandria (c 400 CE) see Annianus below
• Annianus of Alexandria (c. 412 CE) “To summarize, then, it is AM 5534, the year that inaugurates for the first time the Lord’s day, the first Pascha of the Lord on the 25th of the Roman month of March, the 29th of the Egyptian month of Phamenoth; according to the divinely inspired scriptures of the Old and New Testament, it is 1 Nisan, the first-created day of the first-created month. On that day, the new creation begun in Christ ushered from death to life all those with a correct belief in him. [George Sycellus Chapter 391 (p.465 ff.)
• John Malalas (d. 578 CE) Monophysite Byzantine chronicler “on the 23rd of March, the third day of the moon, the fifth day of the week at the fifth hour of the night [11 pm], He was led before Caiphas…On the following day he was taken to Pilate…He was crucified on the fourteenth day of the moon…At that time the sun was bereft of its light and darkness covered the whole earth. [“Chronographia” PG xcvii, col. 351 in sequence]
• The Paschal Chronicle (c. 630 CE) the crucifixion occurred on March 23rd and the Resurrection on March 25th.
• Georgios Kedrenos (fl. 11th century CE) “The first day of the first month is the first day of Nisan which corresponds to the twenty fifth of March … On that same day our Saviour God after having finished his career, raised from the dead, which our ancient Fathers call the Pascha or Passage of the Lord. It is on this day that our old theologians fix the return or the second advent of this Saviour God.” Cedrenus represents Christ as having died in the nineteenth year of Tiberius, on the 23d of March, and to have risen again on the 25th. From this comes the custom, he says, of celebrating the Passover on the 25th of March. On this day the true light rose from the tomb. Though the festival of the resurrection is now on the Sunday after the full moon of the equinox, it was formerly on the 25th of March, as Cedrenus asserts.
• Michael Psellos (11th century CE) leading Byzantine philosopher claims that the Resurrection has to be dated ‘according to the evangelists’ to March 25, 31 CE (G Redl, “La Chronologie appliquée de Michel Psellos,” Byzantion 5 (1929 [1930]) 241 – 244).
Others who are said to fall in this camp include Theodore of Gaza, It is interesting to note that while the Alexandrians could arrive at dates of March 25th for Easter because they continued to identify March 21st as the Spring Equinox, the Roman Church eventually identified March 25th as the Spring Equinox making such a date impossible. This because the Nicene Council of 325 had ruled that Easter must be observed the first Sunday that falls after the Spring Equinox. The original date of the Resurrection had now been effectively outlawed from repeating itself.
(b) those who held a March 25th Crucifixion
• Tertullian of Carthage (early third century CE) “[it was under] Tiberius Caesar, in the consulate of Rubellius Geminus and Fufius Geminus, in the month of March, at the times of the passover, on the eighth day before the calends of April [i.e. March 25th], on the first day of unleavened bread, on which they slew the lamb at even, just as had been enjoined by Moses. [Against the Jews 8]
• Hippolytus of Rome (early third century CE) “our Lord was born on Wednesday, December 25th in the forty second of the reign of Augustus and the 5500th year from Adam. He suffered in the 33rd year on Friday March 25th in the 18th year of Tiberius.” [On Daniel Book 4]
• ibid from a table used to compute the dates of Easter at the base of a statue of Hippolytus [Henri Leclercq “Hippolyte (Statue et cimetiere de saint)” in Fernand Cabrol and Henri Leclercq Dictionaire d’archaeologie chretienne et de liturgie vol 6 part 2 (Paris: Letouzey et Ane, 1925)
• De Pascha Computus (c. 243 CE) assigns the crucifixion to March 25th [Thomas J Talley The Origins of the Liturgical Year p. 90]
• Gospel of Nicodemus or Acts of Pilate (Latin apocryphal work whose material goes back to the early third century CE) “in the fifteenth year of the government of Tiberius Caesar, emperor of the Romans, and Herod being king of Galilee, in the nineteenth year of his rule, on the eighth day before the Calends of April, which is the twenty-fifth of March, in the consulship of Rufus and Rubellio, in the fourth year of the two hundred and second Olympiad, Joseph Caiaphas being high priest of the Jews. [Part I, The Acts of Pilate] Other texts of the Gospel had an earlier dating for the crucifixion]
• Julianus Hilarianus De die Paschae xv (Gallandi, viii 748)
• Martyrologium Hieronymianum
• The Chronography (c 354 AD) (Part 13: Bishops of Rome. MGH Chronica Minora I (1892), pp.73-6) “When Tiberius Caesar was reigning our Lord Jesus Christ died the two twins being consul on the eighth day before the Kalends of April [March 25th].”
• Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 375) records that Christ was born in the Julian year 45 (1 BC on our calendar), the fourth year of the 194th Olympiad, and that the passion took place in the 18th year of Tiberius on March 25, and the Resurrection on the 27th. [De Anno Natali Christi and De Anno Passionis Christi, PG xiii, cols. 902 and 978]
• Epiphanius also says that there were Christians contemporaries of his who claimed they could accurately date the crucifixion to March 25th based on the Acts of Pilate [Panarion 50:1:5].
• ibid interestingly notes that at least some of the Quartodecimians of Cappadocia said Jesus was crucified on the 8th day of the Calends of April [i.e. March 25th] [Panarion 50:1:8]
• Orosius of Bracara (d. 418) “in the year 33, the passion took place on the 8th of the Calends of April, which is March 25th. [“History Against the Pagans,” PL xxxi, book 7, col. 1059]
• Augustine of Hippo (354 – 430 CE) “Now Christ died when the Gemini were consuls, on the eighth day before the kalends of April [March 25th]. He rose the third day, as the apostles have proved by the evidence of their own senses.” [City of God Chapter 54]
• Pseudo-Chrysostom (387 CE) [Paschal Harmony ed. Bened. viii App. p 277]
• Dionysius Exiguus “[Jesus] was born on December 25 and suffered death on March 25.” [Argumentum 15. On the day of the equinox and the solstice Cyclus Pascalis in JP Migne Patrologia Latina 67:483 - 568]
I think the evidence inevitably leads to 37 CE as the year of the Passion but it takes a bit work to demonstrate it.
Very interesting Stephen, but 37CE? Didn’t Pilate leave office in 36?
Tom,
CCEL -> ccel.org
Oh yes thank you peter, I was thinking it was a series of books.
Well let’s begin by saying that 37 CE is the only year that allows for a Sunday March 25th Resurrection according to the Jewish calculation of Passover. The question of when Pilate was dismissed has been taken up by Daniel Schwartz who accepts 37 CE as a possible date for his dismissal. The gospel says that Pilate was in Jerusalem for the Passover. Josephus says that owing to the Samaritan incident, the Samaritan senate appealed to Vitellius, Vitellius sent Pilate to Rome and by the time he got there he discovered Tiberius had already died. Vitellius oversaw the end of the Festival of Unleavened Bread.
The Samaritan messianic gathering must have coincided with a festival in the Samaritan liturgy. Passover is the most logical choice given the details described by Josephus. The Samaritan Passover likely came before the Jewish Passover. How much is depends on a number of factors The difference between the two festivals can have the Samaritan festival as early as a week before the Jewish festival.
The ignorance of most scholars regarding the difference between the Samaritan and Jewish services has led them to suppose that the disturbance which led to Pilate’s dismissal was the Feast of the Tabernacles. I have always wondered how these people imagine Pilate could have traveled from Palestine (October 36 AD) to Rome and arrive only after Tiberius’ death (mid March 37 AD). He must have been travelling by donkey through Asia Minor!
To this end, I think it is perfectly reasonable to suppose that the Samaritan incident happened BEFORE the Jewish Passover – perhaps a week before, Pilate continued to oversee the events described in the gospel all the while the Samaritan senate made its appeal to Vitellius. Some time after the crucifixion but before the seventh day of Passover Pilate was sent to Rome and Vitellius came to Jerusalem to oversee the close of the holiday.
My reconstruction supposes that the Testimonium Flavianum was added to the text. I believe that the Passion was a real historical event but that a later Christian editor added the existing reference to make Josephus’ witness accord with traditional dating of the event.
The critical passage from Antiquities is:
… and others of them [the Samaritans] they put to flight, and took a great many alive, the principal of which, and also the most potent of those that fled away, Pilate ordered to be slain.
But when this tumult was appeased, the Samaritan senate sent an embassy to Vitellius, a man that had been consul, and who was now president of Syria, and accused Pilate of the murder of those that were killed; for that they did not go to Tirathaba in order to revolt from the Romans, but to escape the violence of Pilate. So Vitellius sent Marcellus, a friend of his, to take care of the affairs of Judea, and ordered Pilate to go to Rome, to answer before the emperor to the accusations of the Jews. So Pilate, when he had tarried ten years in Judea, made haste to Rome, and this in obedience to the orders of Vitellius, which he durst not contradict; but before he could get to Rome Tiberius was dead.
But Vitellius came into Judea, and went up to Jerusalem; it was at the time of that festival which is called the Passover. Vitellius was there magnificently received … [Ant. xviii.1-3]
I should also mention that ANY good book on the Samaritan Passover practices will tell you that Samaritans actually arrive on Mount Gerizim two weeks before Passover. Josephus does not say that the Samaritans were celebrating Passover only that they were on the mountain. This gives us a much better window for allowing (a) someone to announce that vessels had been rediscovered (b) Pilate to attack the Samaritans on the mountain some time during the month of Nisan BEFORE the 14th according to the Samaritan calendar (c) that in the period of time between the beginning of Nisan according to the Samaritan calendar and the Jewish Passover celebration – now a gap of up to three weeks – those things just described in Josephus occurred.
Part of the problem with chronology is that most every reign can be fudged a year or two in a certain direction, which makes it very hard to determine which is correct! I’ll have to think about what you said here Stephan.
The simplest way to solve the problem in my mind is to calculate the Passover for all years that could possibly have been the year of Jesus’ Passion. I used Jack Finegan’s Handbook and here’s what I got:
Here are the list of dates for the sunset starting the 15th of the first month of Nissan from Jack Finegan’s Handbook of reveal that only two dates from the period support this Wednesday date for the Passover and a corresponding Easter Sunday:
30 A.D. Wednesday 5th April (Easter Sunday 9th April).
31 A.D. Monday 26th March.
32 A.D. Monday 15th April.
33 A.D. Friday 3rd April.
34 A.D. Monday 23rd March
35 A.D. Monday 11th April.
36 A.D. Friday, 30th March.
37 A.D. Wednesday 21st March (Easter Sunday 25th March).
38 A.D. Monday 7th April.
39 A.D. Friday 28th March.
40 A.D. Friday 16th April.
Jewish days begin at night and continue through to the next one of our days. A day that begins at sunset on Wednesday carries through to Thursday in a Roman calendar. So it is that the gospel narrative really began on Wednesday and thus we are left with only two real possibilities to choose between for the correct dating of the Passion. It is either Wednesday the 6th of April, 30 CE (the Montanists and other late sources) or Wednesday the 22nd of March, 37 CE (the date supported – in some form – by everyone else).
Tom, the email in my posts is a working address.
Hans, 35 AD doesn’t fit with the calculation of Jewish Passovers. That’s the one piece of data that can’t be screwed with. The lunar cycle is beyond the power of editors to change.
The only reason Hippolytus has a Wednesday December 25 and 42nd year of Augustus is because he originally thought he was 30. If he thought right away he was 33 then he would have had December 25 a Saturday 6bc and 39th year of Augustus. It is also the 15th day of the new moon. There is another insciption found later which states that it was december 25th a Friday the 14th or 15th day of the new moon. Why would they count the days after the new moon? Could they even do it? It had to be passed down to them somehow.