Jump to content

Census of Quirinius: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Lostcaesar (talk | contribs)
5,053 edits
attempt at adding a little more of a gloss in the lead, also remove bold and hyperlink text per style guide, add links, etc
Lostcaesar (talk | contribs)
5,053 edits
→‎Josephus: omit minor information that I think takes away from the topic and might be confusing
Line 5: Line 5:
There are two sources that mention a census under Quirinius: the [[Jewish Antiquities]] of the Jewish historian [[Josephus]], and the [[Gospel of Luke]]. Other sources which have been referred to in this discussion are the ''Gospel of Matthew'' and ''[[Acts of the Apostles]]'' from the ''[[New Testament]]'', and also the ''Annals'' of [[Tacitus]], and [[epigraphy]].
There are two sources that mention a census under Quirinius: the [[Jewish Antiquities]] of the Jewish historian [[Josephus]], and the [[Gospel of Luke]]. Other sources which have been referred to in this discussion are the ''Gospel of Matthew'' and ''[[Acts of the Apostles]]'' from the ''[[New Testament]]'', and also the ''Annals'' of [[Tacitus]], and [[epigraphy]].


Josephus records that after the exile of [[Herod Archelaus]] (successor to [[Herod the Great]] in Iudaea), Quirinius, a [[Roman Senate|Roman senator]], became governor of Syria, while an [[equestrian (Roman)|equestrian]] assistant named Coponius was assigned as the first governor of the newly-created [[Iudaea Province]]. These governors were assigned to conduct a tax census for the Emperor in Syria and Iudaea.<ref>Josephus, ''Antiquities'' 17.355 & 18.1-2; c.f. Matthew 2:22</ref> The census in Iudaea drew considerable opposition. The people were at first persuaded to cooperate by the [[Kohen Gadol|high priest]] [[Joazar]]. However, [[Judas of Galilee]] and a [[Pharisees|Pharisee]] named [[Zadok]] attempted to stir up revolutionary opposition. Josephus does not imply that they had much immediate success, but he regards their actions as the beginning of a [[Zealotry|Zealot movement]] that encouraged armed resistance to the Roman empire, culminating eventually in the [[First Jewish-Roman War]].<ref>''Antiquities'' 18.3-10. See also {{cite book |author=Emil Schürer |authorlink=Emil Schürer |others=revised and edited by [[Geza Vermes]], [[Fergus Millar]] and [[Matthew Black]] |title=The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ: Volume I |edition=revised English edition |year=1973 |publisher=T&T Clark |location=Edinburgh |isbn=0-567-02242-0 |pages=pp. 381-382 }}</ref> Thus, for Josephus, the census was a major turning point in Jewish history, although his analysis of the [[Zealotry#History|history of Zealotry]] has been challenged by some modern scholars. Josephus' census can be dated by his statements that Archelaus was exiled ten years after his reign began (A.D. 6),<ref>''Antiquities'' 17.342-4. Archelaus' exile in A.D. 6 is confirmed by [[Cassius Dio|Dio]] [http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/55*.html#27.6 55.27.6].</ref> and that Quirinius conducted a census after this, in the thirty-seventh year since the [[Battle of Actium]] (A.D. 6/7).<ref>''Antiquities'' 18.26</ref>
Josephus records that after the exile of [[Herod Archelaus]] (successor to [[Herod the Great]] in Iudaea), Quirinius, a [[Roman Senate|Roman senator]], became governor of Syria, while an [[equestrian (Roman)|equestrian]] assistant named Coponius was assigned as the first governor of the newly-created [[Iudaea Province]]. These governors were assigned to conduct a tax census for the Emperor in Syria and Iudaea.<ref>Josephus, ''Antiquities'' 17.355 & 18.1-2; c.f. Matthew 2:22</ref> The census in Iudaea drew considerable opposition, and subsequently [[Judas of Galilee]] attempted to stir up revolutionary opposition. Josephus does not imply that they had much immediate success, but he regards their actions as the beginning of a [[Zealotry|Zealot movement]] that encouraged armed resistance to the Roman empire, culminating eventually in the [[First Jewish-Roman War]].<ref>''Antiquities'' 18.3-10. See also {{cite book |author=Emil Schürer |authorlink=Emil Schürer |others=revised and edited by [[Geza Vermes]], [[Fergus Millar]] and [[Matthew Black]] |title=The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ: Volume I |edition=revised English edition |year=1973 |publisher=T&T Clark |location=Edinburgh |isbn=0-567-02242-0 |pages=pp. 381-382 }}</ref> Thus, for Josephus, the census was a major turning point in Jewish history, although his analysis of the [[Zealotry#History|history of Zealotry]] has been challenged by some modern scholars. Josephus' census can be dated by his statements that Archelaus was exiled ten years after his reign began (A.D. 6),<ref>''Antiquities'' 17.342-4. Archelaus' exile in A.D. 6 is confirmed by [[Cassius Dio|Dio]] [http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/55*.html#27.6 55.27.6].</ref> and that Quirinius conducted a census after this, in the thirty-seventh year since the [[Battle of Actium]] (A.D. 6/7).<ref>''Antiquities'' 18.26</ref>


=== Luke ===
=== Luke ===

Revision as of 07:54, 12 March 2007

The Census of Quirinius refers to the enrolment (apographai) of the Roman Provinces of Syria and of Iudaea (which included Samaria, Judea and Idumea), for the purpose of taxation taken during the reign of the Roman Emperor Augustus while Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was governing the area. The Gospel of Luke correlates the birth of Jesus with such a census; however, possible conflicts between the account of the Gospel of Luke and the account of Josephus, as well as its relationship with the Gospel of Matthew, have given rise to academic debate. Central issues concerning this debate include the historicity of the gospels, Biblical inerrancy, and more generally the Chronology of Jesus. The classic formulation of the problem is that Luke locates Jesus' birth during a census which occurred under the reign of Herod the Great and the governing of Quirinius, whilst Josephus places Quirinius's governing and a census he conducted about a decade after Herod's death. From this, scholars have forwarded various proposals (including reworking the classic formulation) to explain the matter.

The Virgin and St. Joseph register for the census before Governor Quirinius. Byzantine mosaic c. 1315.

Sources

Josephus

There are two sources that mention a census under Quirinius: the Jewish Antiquities of the Jewish historian Josephus, and the Gospel of Luke. Other sources which have been referred to in this discussion are the Gospel of Matthew and Acts of the Apostles from the New Testament, and also the Annals of Tacitus, and epigraphy.

Josephus records that after the exile of Herod Archelaus (successor to Herod the Great in Iudaea), Quirinius, a Roman senator, became governor of Syria, while an equestrian assistant named Coponius was assigned as the first governor of the newly-created Iudaea Province. These governors were assigned to conduct a tax census for the Emperor in Syria and Iudaea.[1] The census in Iudaea drew considerable opposition, and subsequently Judas of Galilee attempted to stir up revolutionary opposition. Josephus does not imply that they had much immediate success, but he regards their actions as the beginning of a Zealot movement that encouraged armed resistance to the Roman empire, culminating eventually in the First Jewish-Roman War.[2] Thus, for Josephus, the census was a major turning point in Jewish history, although his analysis of the history of Zealotry has been challenged by some modern scholars. Josephus' census can be dated by his statements that Archelaus was exiled ten years after his reign began (A.D. 6),[3] and that Quirinius conducted a census after this, in the thirty-seventh year since the Battle of Actium (A.D. 6/7).[4]

Luke

The Gospel of Luke also mentions a census under Quirinius in his infancy narrative (concerning the birth of Jesus):

In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. All went to their own towns to be registered. Joseph also went from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to the city of David called Bethlehem, because he was descended from the house and family of David. He went to be registered with Mary, to whom he was engaged and who was expecting a child. While they were there, the time came for her to deliver her child. And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in bands of cloth, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn. (Luke 2:1–7—NRSV)

Luke records Mary's pregnancy as contemporary with that of her relative Elizabeth (Luke 1:36), whose own pregnancy had occurred "in the days of Herod, King of Judea" (Luke 1:5). This corresponds with the account of the Gospel of Matthew, which places the birth of Jesus under the reign of Herod the Great (Matthew 2:1). Historians have generally placed the end of Herod's rule and his death in 4 B.C,[5] though the date has been challenged.[6] Luke is also considered the author of the Acts of the Apostles, which mentions a census in the context of Judas the Galilean's revolutionary stirrings: "After him (Theudas) Judas the Galilean rose up at the time of the census and got people to follow him...." (Acts 5:37).

Others

Matthew, besides placing the birth of Jesus under the reign of Herod the Great, also recorded that Herod had all the male children in Bethlehem two years old and younger executed (Matthew 2:16, see Slaughter of the Innocents), based on a prophecy relayed to him by the magi that a new King of the Jews had been born in the town. The order's instruction of "two and under", along with the inference that it took Herod time to realize that the magi were not about to deliver the child to him, implies a date of 6-4 B.C. as the latest possible dating. The Gospel of Matthew makes no reference to the census.

Tacitus, in his Annals, gives an obituary for Quirinius (Annals 3.48), but the passage is silent on the essentials of these events in question.

A final source may be the funerary inscription of Aemilius Secundus, a soldier who served under Quirinius.[7] While recounting the events of Aemilius's carrer, this inscription mentions a census "of 117 thousand citizens" in Apamea. The inscription is undated, and which census it refers to is uncertain. William Mitchell Ramsay argued for a date of around 6 to 4 B.C., consistent with his theory about the two governorships of Quirinius (see below).[8] More recently, Fergus Millar has identified the census referenced by the inscription with the Quirinius census of A.D. 6.[9]

Problems and solutions

The Gospel of Luke and the Gospel of Matthew both place Jesus' birth under the reign of Herod the Great. Luke also describes the birth as occurring during the "first census", during the "governing" ([ἡγεμονεύοντος] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup (help); root: [ἡγεμονεύω] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup (help)) of Quirinius, and implies that it took place during the reign of "King Herod". However, Josephus states that Quirinius was sent to govern Syria, and instructed to carry out a census of Judea, in AD 6, long after the death of Herod the Great (4 B.C.).

The simplest way to explain the disparity is that Luke has got his facts wrong, and many scholars accept this as the case. Others, however, have attempted to reconcile the accounts, speculating that Luke may have been referring to an earlier census, possibly during an earlier governing of Quirinius, although there is no reference to either of these in Josephus. A few have simply stated that the problem is irresolvable; in the words of H. Hendrickx: "The available evidence is insufficient to form any firm solution."[10]

Luke in error

The simplest explanation of the disparity, and one accepted by a wide variety of scholars, is that the author of the Luke Gospel has simply got his facts wrong. James Dunn remarks: “It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Luke was mistaken”.[11] Since Luke appears to be unclear as to Jesus' exact age - he tells us that "Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry" (Luke 3:23) and locates this some time after the commencement of John the Baptist's ministry in around 29 AD (Luke 3:1) - some writers have concluded that he is confused in his dating: “the Lukan attempt to supply a meaningful time-frame has led to confusion”.[12] W. D. Davies and E. P. Sanders remark: “on many points, especially about Jesus’ early life, the evangelists were ignorant … they simply did not know, and, guided by rumour, hope or supposition, did the best they could”.[13] In A Companion to the New Testament, Anthony Harvey agrees: "we should perhaps be prepared to admit that (in an epoch when such things were much more difficult to get right than they are now) he fell into error about some of the details.”[14]

Some have suggested that Luke's motive may have been to provide an account that would fit the expectation that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem: "The journey for census and tax registration is sacred fiction, a creation of Luke’s imagination in order to get Jesus’ parents to Bethlehem for his birth."[15] In a biography of Herod, Peter Richardson suggests: "Luke backdated the census of Quirinius and then used it as the reason for Joseph and Mary's trip to Bethlehem".[16]

J. P. Meier considers "attempts to reconcile Luke 2:1 with the facts of ancient history... hopelessly contrived",[17] to which R. E. Brown concurs.[18] Roman historian A. N. Sherwin-White, though he vindicates much of Luke's account, concludes that "[t]he attempt to defend Luke" by postulating a census of Quirinius before A.D. 6 "was misconceived", and that in Luke, in bringing together John's nativity under Herod and Jesus' under Quirinius, "accepted [an] incompatible synchronism".[19] Fergus Millar says "Only Matthew and Luke take the story back to the birth of Jesus, and do so in wholly different and incompatible ways. . . Both birth narratives are constructs, one historically plausible [i.e. Matthew], the other wholly impossible [i.e. Luke], and both are designed to reach back to the infancy of Jesus, and to assert his connection to the house of David . . . and his birth in Bethlehem."[20]

Reconciling the sources

Quirinius governing twice

To reconcile Luke and Josephus, some have speculated that Quirinius was governor of Syria twice, or at least "governing" (hêgemoneuontos, a term that, besides describing a governor, could refer to other promagistri or quaestores)[21] in the area at an earlier date, and that he conducted two censuses—one in 4 B.C., referenced by Luke; and the other around A.D. 6, referenced by Josephus.

Sentius Saturninus was provincial governor in Syria from 9 to 6 B.C., followed by Publius Quinctilius Varus, who according to Josephus led a force against a revolt in Judea after Herod's death, which would mean he was an authority in Judea until at least April of 4 B.C. After Varus it is not known who was governing Syria from 4 to 1 B.C. If Quirinius did serve as governor of the province twice, it would have to have been during this time, which would be after the accepted date of death for Herod. Hence, it becomes necessary to either posit a co-governorship, or at least some form of co-rule, for Quirinius, unless one posits an alternate date for Herod's death or an unrecorded vacancy in the provincial governorship.

Theodore Mommsen was the first to argue that a damaged inscription known as the Lapis Tiburtinus[22] might provide evidence of an earlier governorship of Quirinius, which Mommsen placed after that of Varus, around 3 B.C.[23] This position was attacked by Groag in 1931, who argued that the stone does not necessarily mention two governorships of Syria (as Mommsen had argued), but simply two "legateships," not necessarily in the same province.[24] Ronald Syme, following Groag's reasoning, argued that "whether or not the man [referenced by the Tiburtine inscription] was Quirinius—and it could still perhaps be maintained that he was—there is no reason for believing that he was twice governor of Syria."[25] Syme thought L. Calpurnius Piso was the more likely candidate for the inscription, while Groag argued that it referenced M. Plautius Silvanus.[26]

The hypothesis that Quirinius was twice governor of Syria, supported by the evidence of Luke and the Tiburtine inscription, was the standard scholarly position until Syme advanced his arguments in 1934. It was thought that Quirinius conducted the Homonadensian war from Syria, and that this war took place between 3 and 2 B.C.[27] Yet Syme argued that the Homonadensian campaign may be better dated to 6 B.C., and that Quirinius conducted it as governor of Galatia, rather than as governor of Syria.[28] Today, most scholars follow Syme and hold that Quirinius was governor in Galatia from before 6 B.C. until just before A.D. 2, and that this precludes the possibility that he was governor in Syria during this period.[29] They hold this position, in part, for reasons of historical precedent. As J.G.C. Anderson observed, "A second tenure of Syria or indeed any other consular province under one and the same emperor by a senator who was not a member of the imperial house [i.e., Quirinius] is unparalleled."[30]

Alternative Translation of Luke

In 1938, F.M. Heichelheim proposed an alternate translation of Luke 2:2, suggesting that it might be rendered: This census was the first before the census taken when Quirinius was governor.[31] This translation relies on the fact that the Greek word protos, usually translated first, also means "before" or "former" when it is followed by the genitive case. Under this translation, Luke is not placing Jesus' birth during a governorship of Quirinius; rather, he is referring to a census that occurred before Quirinius's undisputed governorship in A.D. 6 (and thus before the census associated with Quirinius which sparked the uprising of Judas the Galilean), and likewise during the reign of King Herod.[32] This position has been followed by several other scholars.[33] If accepted, this translation would resolve the difficulty of locating Quirinius amongst the governors of Herod's day, though of course it does not address the plausibility of a census under Herod.

Heichelheim's proposed translation was rejected by Horst Braunert, who interpreted Acts 5:37, which speaks of "the census", to exclude the possibility that Luke 2:2 mentions a different census. Braunert also noted that ancient sources, namely the Suda and John Chrysostom, while paraphrasing the passage of Luke in question, speak unambiguously of "the first census." In other words, the standard translation of Luke 2:2 reflects an ancient understanding of the text.[34] A. N. Sherwin-White has also considered the alternative translation implausible, and argued that it could not be accepted without a parallel usage elsewhere in Luke's writings.[35] However, B. W. R. Pearson observed the difficulty in establishing a "regular" usage of any particular writer given so small a sample, and argued that, in the greater context of the Hellenistic Greek in which Luke wrote, such usage "is well attested, and we do not even have to go outside the New Testament itself to find it (cp. John 5:36 and 1Corinthians 1:25)."[36]

Census under Herod

Augustus had an interest in the collection of census data on his empire. He is known to have taken a census of Roman citizens at least three times, in 28 B.C., 8 B.C., and A.D. 14.[37] Orosius mentioned another census in 3 B.C.[38] There is also evidence that censuses were taken at regular intervals during his reign, at least in the provinces of Egypt and Sicily, important because of their wealthy estates and supply of grain.[39]

There is also the census in Judea mentioned by Josephus in A.D. 6 (see above), which occurred after Judaea was annexed to the province of Syria. According to Josephus, the taxation associated with this census prompted a revolt. Schürer argued that an earlier enrolment would have evoked the same response, and that this would have been noted by Josephus.[40] An earlier enrollment, if ordered and administered by an imperial official, would also be unprecedented. Client kingdoms paid tribute to Rome, and often taxed their own subjects for the paying of this tribute, but their residents were not directly taxed by the empire.

Archelaos, King of the Clitae in Cilicia Tracheia, is known to have attempted a Roman-style census in service of his own taxation; L.R. Taylor supposes that Herod may have acted similarly.[41] Palestine had been subject to many Roman military campaigns and tribute payment, beginning with Pompey in 48 B.C.,[42] and Herod, who had been established as king by Marc Anthony and the Roman Senate,[43] was (like other client kings) often beholden to Anthony and Augustus, and has been called a "model of what those dependent rulers ought to be."[44] Herod was likewise required to pay tribute to Rome,[45] and he raised the money for this tribute through taxation of his subjects.[46] While it is not credible to accept that a Roman styled census conducted by Roman officials occurred in Herod's kingdom, according to Ramsay: "Luke does not speak of any such application," in that he does not claim the census was conducted by a Roman official.[47] B. W. R. Pearson speculated that Herod very possibly employed Roman administrative techniques in taxing his own people and that Luke is referring to this.[48]

Jesus born in A.D. 6

Some authors propose that Luke intended to date Jesus' birth to A.D. 6. According to this interpretation, Luke 2:2 and Josephus refer to the same census, which occurred during the first governorship of Quirinius, in A.D. 6. This interpretation brings Luke into conflict with Matthew, wherein it is clear that Jesus was born some time before the death of Herod the Great (see above). J. Duncan M. Derrett argued that the Herod referred to in Luke 1:36 may well be Herod Archelaus, and not Herod the Great; he characterized the debate surrounding Luke and the census as having suffered from a "pre-critical" tendency to harmonize the Gospels, and held that Luke has his own internal chronology, differing from Matthew's.[49] Mark Smith has recently advanced a similar argument, contending that Matthew placed the death of Jesus too early and that Luke is a more reliable source in this regard.[50] However, one difficulty with this solution is Luke's statement that Jesus was "about thirty years of age" when his ministry began (Luke 3:23). Luke places the baptism of Jesus (and hence his ministry) after John the Baptist began his preaching, which Luke dates to "the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar" (Luke 3:1), i.e. c. A.D. 27 — hence from this it appears Luke is placing Jesus' birth around 3 B. C. (in accord with Matthew).[51]

Historicity of Luke's details

Some sources questioned the historicity of other parts of Luke's account. He describes a decree of Augustus requiring registration of the whole [οἰκουμένη] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup (help). This word literally means the "inhabited [world]", but was frequently used to indicate the Roman Empire.[52] No simultaneous census of the entire Empire in Augustus' time is attested to outside of Luke,[53] though Luke's account does not necessarily mean that the whole empire was enrolled at once.[54] J. Thorley argued that Luke's wording only means that Augustus decreed that the registration practices that had been employed in Italy for centuries and in the provinces for some time should be extended throughout the Roman world, including client kingdoms.[55] Sherwin-White, who does not support the speculation that Quirinius conducted a census before A.D. 6, suggests that Luke intends to refer only to a policy of universal registration promulgated by Augustus, and that this was first implemented in Judaea under Quirinius.[56]

Luke's statement that Joseph and Mary had to travel to Bethlehem 'because he was descended from the house and family of David' has also been called into question; J. Dunn wrote: "the idea of a census requiring individuals to move to the native town of long dead ancestors is hard to credit".[57] However K. F. Doig observed that for some forms of taxation and enrolment would be conducted where the tribal records were kept.[58] There is evidence that the Roman Empire did retain certain local tax enrolment customs for non-citizens at times, for example in Egypt.[59] Additionally, taxes had to be paid in the principal towns of taxation districts.[60] Lastly, it is known that some censuses did require subjects to return to their administrative districts.[61]

Footnotes

  1. ^ Josephus, Antiquities 17.355 & 18.1-2; c.f. Matthew 2:22
  2. ^ Antiquities 18.3-10. See also Emil Schürer (1973). The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ: Volume I. revised and edited by Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar and Matthew Black (revised English edition ed.). Edinburgh: T&T Clark. pp. pp. 381-382. ISBN 0-567-02242-0. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help); |pages= has extra text (help)
  3. ^ Antiquities 17.342-4. Archelaus' exile in A.D. 6 is confirmed by Dio 55.27.6.
  4. ^ Antiquities 18.26
  5. ^ e.g., Schürer, pp. 326-328. This is based upon the chronology of Josephus (see Antiquites 17 chapter 8 footnote 11) and on the regnal dates of Herod's successors
  6. ^ W. E. Filmer, Journal of Theological Studies 17 (1966) pp. 283-98; O. Edwards, "Herodian Chronology", in Palestine Exposition Quarterly 114 (1982) pp. 29-42; E. L. Martin, The Birth of Christ Recalculated (Pasadena and Newcastle upon Tyne, 1978); J. Thorley, "When was Jesus Born", Greece & Rome (1981)
  7. ^ ILS 2683 = Ehrenberg & Jones, no. 231. Translated in Braund, no. 446, and in Robert K. Sherk (1988). Translated Documents of Greece and Rome, volume 6: The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. no. 22. ISBN 0-521-33887-5.
  8. ^ William Mitchell Ramsay, Was Christ born in Bethlehem? 1891, chapter 8; see also chapters 9 & 11.
  9. ^ Fergus Millar. The Roman Near East: 31 B.C. - A.D. 337. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. pp. pp. 48, 250. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
  10. ^ Herman Hendrickx, Study in the Synoptic Gospels: the infancy narratives (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1984). See also G. Ogg's article in the Expository Times 79 (1968), where he surveys the problem and reaches the same conclusion as Hendrickx.
  11. ^ James Douglas Grant Dunn, Jesus Remembered, (Eerdmans, 2003) p344. Similarly, Erich S. Gruen, 'The expansion of the empire under Augustus', in The Cambridge ancient history Volume 10, p157
  12. ^ S. R. Llewelyn in New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity: A Review of the Greek Inscriptions and Papyri, S. R. Llewelyn et al, (Eerdmans, 1992) page 41.
  13. ^ W.D Davies and E. P. Sanders, 'Jesus from the Jewish point of view', in The Cambridge History of Judaism ed William Horbury, vol 3: the Early Roman Period, 1984.
  14. ^ Anthony Harvey, A Companion to the New Testament (Cambridge University Press 2004), p221.
  15. ^ Richard G. Watts and John Dominic Crossan, Who is Jesus?: Answers to Your Questions about the Historical Jesus (Westminster John Knox Press 1999), page 18
  16. ^ Peter Richardson, Herod: King of the Jews and Friend of the Romans, (Univ of South Carolina Press 1966), page 31; Jerome Murphy-O'Connor makes a similar point in Paul: a critical life (Oxford University Press 1998), page 15.
  17. ^ Meier, John P., A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. Doubleday, 1991, v. 1, p. 213.
  18. ^ Brown, Raymond E. The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke. London: G. Chapman, 1977, p. 554: "When all is evaluated, the weight of the evidence is strongly against the possibility of reconciling the information in Luke 1 and Luke 2... Luke seems to be inaccurate in associating that birth with the one and only census of Judea (not of Galilee) conducted in A.D. 6-7 under Quirinius".
  19. ^ Sherwin-White, pp. 166, 167
  20. ^ Millar, Fergus (1990). "Reflections on the trials of Jesus". A Tribute to Geza Vermes: Essays on Jewish and Christian Literature and History (JSOT Suppl. 100) [eds. P.R. Davies and R.T. White]. Sheffield: JSOT Press. pp. 355–81. {{cite conference}}: Unknown parameter |booktitle= ignored (|book-title= suggested) (help) repr. in Millar, Fergus (2006). "The Greek World, the Jews, and the East". Rome, the Greek World and the East. 3. University of North Carolina Press: 139–163.
  21. ^ McGarvey, J.W. and Philip Y. Pendleton, The Fourfold Gospel (Cincinnati: The Standard Publishing Foundation) p. 28
  22. ^ The inscription reads in part: "… PRO·CONSVL·ASIAM·PROVINCIAM·OPT… DIVI·AVGUSTI·ITERVM·SYRIAM·ET·PHO…" (missing text represented above by "…"). Translated it reads: "… proconsul obt[ained] Asia Province … of the divine Augustus again Syria and Pho…" Text available here. Published as ILS 918 = Victor Ehrenberg (1976). Documents Illustrating the Reigns of Augustus and Tiberius (2nd edition, reprinted with addenda ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. no. 199). ISBN 0-19-814819-4. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) Translated in David C. Braund (1985). Augustus to Nero: A Sourcebook on Roman History: 31 BC-AD 68. Totowa, New Jersey: Barnes and Noble. pp. no. 362. ISBN 0-389-20536-2.
  23. ^ T. Mommsen, introductory remarks to his edition of Res Gestae (Berlin, 1883, second edition), pp. 161-78.
  24. ^ Groag, "Prosopographische Beiträge," Jahreshefte des österreichischen archäologischen Instituts in Wien 21-22 (1924), pp. 448ff; this position is summarized in A. N. Sherwin-White (1963). Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. pp. 163-164. ISBN 0-19-825153-X. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
  25. ^ R. Syme, "Galatia and Pamphylia under Augustus," Klio: Beiträge zur alten Geschichte 9 (1934), p. 133.
  26. ^ Ronald Syme (1952) [1939]. The Roman Revolution (corrected ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. pp. 398-399. ISBN 0-19-881001-6. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
  27. ^ J.G.C. Anderson, "The Position Held by Quirinius for the Homanadensian War" in The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. X: The Augustan Empire (44 B.C. - A.D. 70), ed. S.A. Cook, F.E. Adcock, M.P. Charlesworth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1934, repr. with corrections 1989), pp. 877-8
  28. ^ R. Syme, "Galatia and Pamphylia under Augustus: The Governorship of Piso, Quirinius and Silvanus," Klio: Beitraege zur Alten Geschichte, 27 (1934), pp. 122ff)
  29. ^ Cf. B. Levick, "Greece and Asia Minor from 43 B.C. to A.D. 69," in The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. 10, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1996), p. 650; idem, Roman Colonies in Southern Asia Minor (Oxford, 1967), pp. 203-14; R. Syme, "The Titulus Tiburtinus," repr. in Roman Papers, ed. A. Birley (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979-), vol. 3, pp. 869-884; and Anderson, "The Position Held by Quirinius," as cited above
  30. ^ J.G.C. Anderson, "The Position Held by Quirinius for the Homanadensian War' in The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. X: The Augustan Empire (44 B.C. - A.D. 70), ed. S.A. Cook, F.E. Adcock, M.P. Charlesworth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1934, repr. with corrections 1989), pp. 877-8.
  31. ^ F.M. Heichelheim, "Roman Syria," in An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome ed. T. Frank (Baltimore, 1938), pp. 161ff
  32. ^ F. F. Bruce, Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans) p. 192
  33. ^ Nigel Turner, Grammatical Insights into the New Testament, pages 23-24; H. W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1977), p. 21; L. H. Feldman in W. Brindle, "The Census and Quirinius: Luke 2:2" in JETS 27 (1984), pp. 48-49; John Thorley, The Nativity Census: What does Luke Actually Say? Greece & Rome (1979) pp. 82-83
  34. ^ H. Braunert, "Der römische Provinzialzensus und der Schätzungsbericht des Lukas-Evangeliums," Historia: Zeitschrift für alte Geschichte 6 (1957), p.212
  35. ^ Sherwin-White, p. 171, n. 1
  36. ^ Brook W. R. Pearson, "The Lucan censuses, revisited" in Catholic Biblical Quarterly (April 1999)
  37. ^ Res Gestae 8
  38. ^ Orosius, Historiarum Adversum Paganos 6.22, 7.2
  39. ^ For provincial censuses under Augustus, cf. H. Braunert, "Der römische Provinzialzensus," cited above, pp. 192ff
  40. ^ Schürer, pp. 418-419
  41. ^ Lily Ross Taylor, "Quirinius and the Census of Judaea", American Journal of Philology 54 (1933), 120-133, p. 131. Our source for the taxation of the Clitae is Tacitus, Annales 6.41
  42. ^ Emil Schürer, A History of the Jewish People in the time of Jesus Christ (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890) vol 1, ii. p. 122
  43. ^ Josephus, Jewish War 1.14.14
  44. ^ Michael Grant, Herod the Great (London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1971) p. 11, cf. p. 14, 50-52, 225-226
  45. ^ Michael Grant, Herod the Great (London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1971) p. 171; cf. Josephus, Jewish War 1.14.14
  46. ^ Michael Grant, Herod the Great (London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1971) p. 171
  47. ^ William Mitchell Ramsay, Was Christ born in Bethlehem? 1891, chapter 5
  48. ^ Brook W. R. Pearson, "The Lucan censuses, revisited" in Catholic Biblical Quarterly (April 1999)
  49. ^ J. Duncan M. Derrett, "Further Light on the Narratives of the Nativity," Novum Testamentum 17.2 (April, 1975), pp. 81-108
  50. ^ Mark Smith, "Of Jesus and Quirinius", Catholic Biblical Quarterly 62 (2000), pp. 278-293
  51. ^ John Thorley, "The Nativity Census: What Does Luke Actually Say?" Greece & Rome vol. 26 no. 1 (April 1979) p. 81 and n. 1
  52. ^ Henry George Liddell (1940). A Greek-English Lexicon. revised by Henry Stuart Jones and Roderick McKenzie. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. s.v. οἰκουμένη. ISBN 0-19-864226-1. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  53. ^ Schürer, pp. 407-411
  54. ^ Ben, III Witherington, New Testament History: A Narrative Account p. 65
  55. ^ John Thorley, "The Nativity Census: What Does Luke Actually Say?" Greece & Rome vol. 26 no. 1 (April 1979) p. 82
  56. ^ Sherwin-White, pp. 168-169
  57. ^ James Douglas Grant Dunn, Jesus Remembered, p. 344
  58. ^ Kenneh F. Doig, New Testament Chronology, (Lewiston, N.Y.: Mellen, 1991) chapter 5
  59. ^ Ramsay, Was Christ Born in Bethlehem? chapter 7
  60. ^ Emil Schürer, A History of the Jewish People in the time of Jesus Christ (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890) vol 1, ii. p. 111; cf. Ulpian, Digest L 15.4, 2
  61. ^ P. Lond. 904; Decree of C. Vibius Maximus

See also

External links

Skeptics:

Apologists:

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Census_of_Quirinius&oldid=114493477"