Werke Eusebius von Caesarea (260-339) Historia Ecclesiastica

Übersetzung ausblenden
Kirchengeschichte (BKV)

9. Kap. Die Zeit des Pilatus.

Der erwähnte Geschichtschreiber berichtet1 ebenfalls über die Thronbesteigung des Archelaus nach Herodes. Er erzählt, daß Archelaus auf Grund des Testamentes seines Vaters Herodes sowie infolge einer Bestimmung des Kaisers Augustus die Herrschaft über die Juden erhalten und nach zehn Jahren wieder verloren habe,2 worauf seine Brüder Philippus, der junge Herodes und Lysanias die Tetrarchien verwalteten.3

Im achtzehnten Buche seiner „Altertümer“4 berichtet S. 47 Josephus, daß Judäa dem Pontius Pilatus übertragen worden sei im zwölften Jahre der Regierung des Tiberius, welcher, nachdem Augustus 57 Jahre regiert hatte, und die Alleinherrschaft übernommen habe; Pilatus sei volle zehn Jahre, fast bis zum Tode des Tiberius im Amte geblieben.5 Damit ist offenbar das vor kurzem erst herausgegebene Machwerk von Erinnerungen an unsern Erlöser erledigt,6 worin zunächst schon die chronologischen Angaben die Verfasser Lügen strafen. In das vierte Konsulat des Tiberius, d. i. in das siebte Jahr seiner Regierung, wird hier das verlegt, was über das Leiden des Heilandes frech erdichtet wird. Doch zu dieser Zeit war Pilatus in Judäa nachweisbar noch gar nicht am Ruder, sofern man dem Zeugnis des Josephus Glauben schenken darf, welcher in der erwähnten Schrift ausdrücklich erklärt, daß Pilatus im zwölften Jahre der Regierung des Tiberius von diesem zum Prokurator über Judäa bestellt wurde.

  1. Altert. 17, 188. 189. 195. 317—319. 342—344; Jüd. Krieg 1, 668 f.; 2, 93 f. 111. 167. ↩

  2. Im Jahre 6 n. Chr. wurde eine jüdische Abordnung in Rom gegen Archelaus vorstellig, worauf Augustus ihn nach Vienna in Gallien verbannte. ↩

  3. Vgl. Luk. 3, 1. ↩

  4. 18, 32. 33. 35. 89. ↩

  5. Vitellius, der Legat von Syrien, suspendierte ihn auf Grund der gegen ihn erhobenen Anklagen vom Amte. ↩

  6. Es wird hier an die heidnischen, zur Zeit des Maximinus entstandenen Pilatusakten erinnert (vgl. unten Kirchengesch. IX 5. 7). Von den christlichen Pilatusakten scheint Eusebius nichts zu wissen. Denn er verweist nirgends auf sie, obwohl der Stoff derselben zu ihrer Erwähnung in Kirchengesch. II 2 geradezu herausgefordert hätte. Nach Laqueur S. 122 f. hat Eusebius die Bekämpfung der Pilatusakten erst später dem ersten Buch eingefügt. ↩

Übersetzung ausblenden
The Church History of Eusebius

Chapter IX.--The Times of Pilate.

1. The historian already mentioned agrees with the evangelist in regard to the fact that Archelaus 1 succeeded to the government after Herod. He records the manner in which he received the kingdom of the Jews by the will of his father Herod and by the decree of Caesar Augustus, and how, after he had reigned ten years, he lost his kingdom, and his brothers Philip 2 and Herod the younger, 3 with Lysanias, 4 still ruled their own tetrarchies. The same writer, in the eighteenth book of his Antiquities, 5 says that about the twelfth year of the reign of Tiberius, 6 who had succeeded to the empire after Augustus had ruled fifty-seven years, 7 Pontius Pilate was entrusted with the government of Judea, and that he remained there ten full years, almost until the death of Tiberius.

2. Accordingly the forgery of those who have recently given currency to acts against our Saviour 8 is clearly proved. For the very date given in them 9 shows the falsehood of their fabricators.

3. For the things which they have dared to say concerning the passion of the Saviour are put into the fourth consulship of Tiberius, which occurred in the seventh year of his reign; at which time it is plain that Pilate was not yet ruling in Judea, if the testimony of Josephus is to be believed, who clearly shows in the above-mentioned work 10 that Pilate was made procurator of Judea by Tiberius in the twelfth year of his reign.

  1. Archelaus was a son of Herod the Great, and own brother of the Tetrarch Herod Antipas, with whom he was educated at Rome. Immediately after the death of Antipater he was designated by his father as his successor in the kingdom, and Augustus ratified the will, but gave him only the title of ethnarch. The title of King he never really received, although he is spoken of as king in Matt. ii. 22, the word being used in a loose sense. His dominion consisted of Idumea, Judea, Samaria, and the cities on the coast, comprising a half of his father's kingdom. The other half was divided between Herod Antipas and Philip. He was very cruel, and was warmly hated by most of his subjects. In the tenth year of his reign (according to Josephus, Ant. XVII. 13. 2), or in the ninth (according to B. J. II. 7. 3), he was complained against by his brothers and subjects on the ground of cruelty, and was banished to Vienne in Gaul, where he probably died, although Jerome says that he was shown his tomb near Bethlehem. Jerome's report, however, is too late to be of any value. The exact length of his reign it is impossible to say, as Josephus is not consistent in his reports. The difference may be due to the fact that Josephus reckoned from different starting-points in the two cases. He probably ruled a little more than nine years. His condemnation took place in the consulship of M. Æmilius Lepidus and L. Arruntius (i.e. in 6 a.d.) according to Dion Cassius, LV. 27. After the deposition of Archelaus Judea was made a Roman province and attached to Syria, and Coponius was sent as the first procurator. On Archelaus, see Josephus, Ant. XVII. 8, 9, 11 sq., and B. J. I. 33. 8 sq.; II. 6 sq. ↩

  2. Philip, a son of Herod the Great by his wife Cleopatra, was Tetrarch of Batanea, Trachonitis, Aurinitis, &c., from b.c. 4 to a.d. 34. He was distinguished for his justice and moderation. He is mentioned only once in the New Testament, Luke iii. 1. On Philip, see Josephus, Ant. XVII. 8. 1; 11. 4; XVIII. 4. 6. ↩

  3. Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great by his wife Malthace, was Tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from b.c. 4 to a.d. 39. In 39 a.d. he went to Rome to sue for the title of King, which his nephew Herod Agrippa had already secured. But accusations against him were sent to the emperor by Agrippa, and he thereby lost his tetrarchy and was banished to Lugdunum (Lyons) in Gaul, and died (according to Josephus, B. J. II. 9. 6) in Spain. It was he who beheaded John the Baptist, and to him Jesus was sent by Pilate. His character is plain enough from the New Testament account. For further particulars of his life, see Josephus, Ant. XVII. 8. 1; 11. 4; XVIII. 2. 1; 5 and 7; B. J. II. 9. ↩

  4. The Lysanias referred to here is mentioned in Luke iii. 1 as Tetrarch of Abilene. Eusebius, in speaking of Lysanias here, follows the account of Luke, not that of Josephus, for the latter nowhere says that Lysanias continued to rule his tetrarchy after the exile of Archelaus. Indeed he nowhere states that Lysanias ruled a tetrarchy at this period. He only refers (Ant. XVIII. 6. 10; XIX. 5. 1; XX. 7. 1; and B. J. II. 12. 8) to "the tetrarchy of Lysanias," which he says was given to Agrippa I. and II. by Caligula and Claudius. Eusebius thus reads more into Josephus than he has any right to do, and yet we cannot assume that he is guilty of willful deception, for he may quite innocently have interpreted Josephus in the light of Luke's account, without realizing that Josephus' statement is of itself entirely indefinite. That there is no real contradiction between the statements of Josephus and Luke has been abundantly demonstrated by Davidson, Introduction to the New Testament, I. p. 215 sq. ↩

  5. Josephus, Ant. XVIII. 2. 2 and 4. 2. ↩

  6. Josephus reckons here from the death of Augustus (14 a.d.), when Tiberius became sole emperor. Pilate was appointed procurator in 26 a.d. and was recalled in 36. ↩

  7. Josephus dates the beginning of Augustus' reign at the time of the death of Julius Caesar (as Eusebius also does in chap. 5, §2), and calls him the second emperor. But Augustus did not actually become emperor until 31 b.c., after the battle of Actium. ↩

  8. Eusebius refers here, not to the acts of Pilate written by Christians, of which so many are still extant (cf. Bk. II. chap. 2, note 1), but to those forged by their enemies with the approval of the emperor Maximinus (see below, Bk. IX. chap. 5). ↩

  9. ho tes parasemeioseos chronos. "In this place paras. is the superscription or the designation of the time which was customarily prefixed to acts. For judicial acts were thus drawn up: Consulatu Tiberii Augusti Septimo, inducto in judicium Jesu, &c." (Val.) ↩

  10. Ant.XVIII. 2. 2. Compare §1, above. ↩

  Drucken   Fehler melden
Editionen dieses Werks
Ἐκκλησιαστικὴ ἱστορία vergleichen
Übersetzungen dieses Werks
Histoire ecclésiastique vergleichen
Kirchengeschichte (BKV)
The Church History of Eusebius
Kommentare zu diesem Werk
Einleitung: Kirchengeschichte des Eusebius
Introduction to Eusebius' Church History
Supplementary Notes and Tables

Inhaltsangabe