רון ברק תשעא ב - עולם חדש מופלא: המאה היוליו-קלאודיית - דף שיחה
- 1 ירושת טיבריוס
- 2 ישוע מנצרת
- 2.1 עדות יוסף
- 2.1.1 מאמר קצר של Alice Whealey בכנס SBL 2000 שהוקדש ליוספוס.
- 2.1.3 מקורות:
- 2.1 עדות יוסף
- 3 הבשׂורה הטובה
- בקשר למשפטי ה-maeistas בעבר היה אפשר לצאת לגלות כחלופה. האם כעת רק התאבדות היא החלופה ?
- Suetonius The Life of Tiberius
- 1.1 The histories of Tiberius, Caius, Claudius, and Nero, while they were in power, were falsified through terror, and after their death were written under the irritation of a recent hatred. Hence my purpose is to relate a few facts about Augustus - more particularly his last acts, then the reign of Tiberius, and all which follows, without either bitterness or partiality, from any motives to which I am far removed.
- 1.2 He was wholly unopposed, for the boldest spirits had fallen in battle, or in the proscription, while the remaining nobles, the readier they were to be slaves, were raised the higher by wealth and promotion, so that, aggrandised by revolution, they preferred the safety of the present to the dangerous past. Nor did the provinces dislike that condition of affairs, for they distrusted the government of the Senate and the people, because of the rivalries between the leading men and the rapacity of the officials, while the protection of the laws was unavailing, as they were continually deranged by violence, intrigue, and finally by corruption.
- 1.3 Tiberius Nero and Claudius Drusus, his stepsons, he honoured with imperial tides, although his own family was as yet undiminished. For he had admitted the children of Agrippa, Caius and Lucius, into the house of the Caesars; and before they had yet laid aside the dress of boyhood he had most fervently desired, with an outward show of reluctance, that they should be entitled "princes of the youth," and be consuls-elect. When Agrippa died, and Lucius Caesar as he was on his way to our armies in Spain, and Caius while returning from Armenia, still suffering from a wound, were prematurely cut off by destiny, or by their step-mother Livia's treachery, Drusus too having long been dead, Nero remained alone of the stepsons, and in him everything tended to centre. He was adopted as a son, as a colleague in empire and a partner in the tribunitian power, and paraded through all the armies, no longer through his mother's secret intrigues, but at her open suggestion. ... And yet Augustus had appointed Germanicus, Drusus's offspring, to the command of eight legions on the Rhine, and required Tiberius to adopt him, although Tiberius had a son, now a young man, in his house; but he did it that he might have several safeguards to rest on. He had no war at the time on his hands except against the Germans, which was rather to wipe out the disgrace of the loss of Quintilius Varus and his army than out of an ambition to extend the empire, or for any adequate recompense. At home all was tranquil, and there were magistrates with the same titles; there was a younger generation, sprung up since the victory of Actium, and even many of the older men had been born during the civil wars. How few were left who had seen the republic!
- 1.4 The popular gossip of the large majority fastened itself variously on their future masters. "Agrippa was savage, and had been exasperated by insult, and neither from age nor experience in affairs was equal to so great a burden. Tiberius Nero was of mature years, and had established his fame in war, but he had the old arrogance inbred in the Claudian family, and many symptoms of a cruel temper, though they were repressed, now and then broke out. He had also from earliest infancy been reared in an imperial house; consulships and triumphs had been heaped on him in his younger days; even in the years which, on the pretext of seclusion he spent in exile at Rhodes, he had had no thoughts but of wrath, hypocrisy, and secret sensuality. There was his mother too with a woman caprice. They must, it seemed, be subject to a female and to two striplings besides, who for a while would burden, and some day rend asunder the State."
- 1.5 Tiberius as he was just entering Illyria was summoned home by an urgent letter from his mother, and it has not been thoroughly ascertained whether at the city of Nola he found Augustus still breathing or quite lifeless. For Livia had surrounded the house and its approaches with a strict watch, and favourable bulletins were published from time to time, till, provision having been made for the demands of the crisis, one and the same report told men that Augustus was dead and that Tiberius Nero was master of the State.
- 1.6 The first crime of the new reign was the murder of Postumus Agrippa. Though he was surprised and unarmed, a centurion of the firmest resolution despatched him with difficulty. Tiberius gave no explanation of the matter to the Senate; he pretended that there were directions from his father ordering the tribune in charge of the prisoner not to delay the slaughter of Agrippa, whenever he should himself have breathed his last. Beyond a doubt, Augustus had often complained of the young man's character, and had thus succeeded in obtaining the sanction of a decree of the Senate for his banishment. But he never was hard-hearted enough to destroy any of his kinsfolk, nor was it credible that death was to be the sentence of the grandson in order that the stepson might feel secure. It was more probable that Tiberius and Livia, the one from fear, the other from a stepmother's enmity, hurried on the destruction of a youth whom they suspected and hated.
- ... As soon as Sallustius Crispus who shared the secret (he had, in fact, sent the written order to the tribune) knew this, ...nor to let Tiberius weaken the strength of imperial power by referring everything to the Senate, for "the condition," he said, "of holding empire is that an account cannot be balanced unless it be rendered to one person."
- 1.7 Sextus Pompeius and Sextus Apuleius, the consuls, were the first to swear allegiance to Tiberius Caesar, and in their presence the oath was taken by Seius Strabo and Caius Turranius, respectively the commander of the praetorian cohorts and the superintendent of the corn supplies. Then the Senate, the soldiers and the people did the same. For Tiberius would inaugurate everything with the consuls, as though the ancient constitution remained, and he hesitated about being emperor. Even the proclamation by which he summoned the senators to their chamber, he issued merely with the title of Tribune, which he had received under Augustus. The wording of the proclamation was brief, and in a very modest tone. "He would," it said, "provide for the honours due to his father, and not leave the lifeless body, and this was the only public duty he now claimed." ... He had the guard under arms, with all the other adjuncts of a court; soldiers attended him to the forum; soldiers went with him to the Senate House. ... He looked also at public opinion, wishing to have the credit of having been called and elected by the State rather than of having crept into power through the intrigues of a wife and a dotard's adoption. ...
- 1.8 On the first day of the Senate he allowed nothing to be discussed but the funeral of Augustus, whose will, which was brought in by the Vestal Virgins, named as his heirs Tiberius and Livia. ... His legacies were not beyond the scale of a private citizen, except a bequest of forty-three million five hundred thousand sesterces "to the people and populace of Rome," of one thousand to every praetorian soldier, and of three hundred to every man in the legionary cohorts composed of Roman citizens. ... Messala Valerius further proposed that the oath of allegiance to Tiberius should be yearly renewed, and when Tiberius asked him whether it was at his bidding that he had brought forward this motion, he replied that he had proposed it spontaneously, and that in whatever concerned the State he would use only his own discretion, even at the risk of offending. ... "Now," they said, "an aged sovereign, whose power had lasted long, who had provided his heirs with abundant means to coerce the State, requires forsooth the defence of soldiers that his burial may be undisturbed."
- 1.9 Some said "that dutiful feeling towards a father, and the necessities of the State in which laws had then no place, drove him into civil war, which can neither be planned nor conducted on any right principles. He had often yielded to Antonius, while he was taking vengeance on his father's murderers, often also to Lepidus. When the latter sank into feeble dotage and the former had been ruined by his profligacy, the only remedy for his distracted country was the rule of a single man. Yet the State had been organized under the name neither of a kingdom nor a dictatorship, but under that of a prince. The ocean and remote rivers were the boundaries of the empire; the legions, provinces, fleets, all things were linked together; there was law for the citizens; there was respect shown to the allies. The capital had been embellished on a grand scale; only in a few instances had he resorted to force, simply to secure general tranquillity."
[Tacitus: Annals Book 1.10 http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/tac/a01010.htm]
- 1.10 It was said, on the other hand, "that filial duty and State necessity were merely assumed as a mask. It was really from a lust of sovereignty that he had excited the veterans by bribery, had, when a young man and a subject, raised an army, tampered with the Consul's legions, ... No doubt, there was peace after all this, but it was a peace stained with blood; there were the disasters of Lollius and Varus, the murders at Rome of the Varros, Egnatii, and Juli." ... He had not even adopted Tiberius as his successor out of affection or any regard to the State, but, having thoroughly seen his arrogant and savage temper, he had sought glory for himself by a contrast of extreme wickedness." For, in fact, Augustus, a few years before, when he was a second time asking from the Senate the tribunitian power for Tiberius, though his speech was complimentary, had thrown out certain hints as to his manners, style, and habits of life, which he meant as reproaches, while he seemed to excuse.
- 1.11 After this all prayers were addressed to Tiberius. He, on his part, urged various considerations, the greatness of the empire, his distrust of himself. "Only," he said, "the intellect of the Divine Augustus was equal to such a burden. Called as he had been by him to share his anxieties, he had learnt by experience how exposed to fortune's caprices was the task of universal rule. Consequently, in a state which had the support of so many great men, they should not put everything on one man, as many, by uniting their efforts would more easily discharge public functions." There was more grand sentiment than good faith in such words. ... All these details Augustus had written with his own hand, and had added a counsel, that the empire should be confined to its present limits, either from fear or out of jealousy.
- 1.12 Thereupon Asinius Gallus said, "I ask you, Caesar, what part of the State you wish to have intrusted to you?"
- 1.13 For Augustus, when in his last conversations he was discussing who would refuse the highest place, though sufficiently capable, who would aspire to it without being equal to it, and who would unite both the ability and ambition, had described Marcus Lepidus as able but contemptuously indifferent, Gallus Asinius as ambitious and incapable, Lucius Arruntius as not unworthy of it, and, should the chance be given him, sure to make the venture. About the two first there is a general agreement, but instead of Arruntius some have mentioned Cneius Piso, and all these men, except Lepidus, were soon afterwards destroyed by various charges through the contrivance of Tiberius.
- 1.14 But for Germanicus Caesar he asked pro-consular powers, and envoys were despatched to confer them on him, and also to express sympathy with his grief at the death of Augustus. The same request was not made for Drusus, because he was consul elect and present at Rome.
- 1.15 It was then for the first time that the elections were transferred from the Campus Martius to the Senate. For up to that day, though the most important rested with the emperor's choice, some were settled by the partialities of the tribes. Nor did the people complain of having the right taken from them, except in mere idle talk, and the Senate, being now released from the necessity of bribery and of degrading solicitations, gladly upheld the change,
ליום ה: שם, שם 4.1-7 (דגש על פרק 6); 6.51/57 (הפרק האחרון של ספר 6).
מאמר קצר של Alice Whealey בכנס SBL 2000 שהוקדש ליוספוס.
In modern times a brief passage about Jesus Christ known as the Testimonium Flavianum found in Book 18 of Josephus’ Jewish Antiquities has been considered to be the only extra-biblical witness to his historicity. In ancient and medieval times it was the most frequently quoted passage from Josephus' works,1 and it played no small role in making Josephus the most widely read Greek-language historian of the pre-modern Western world.2 In the sixteenth century the text was for the first time pronounced a forgery by some scholars, creating an intellectual controversy that has not been resolved even today. As a result of its great popularity from antiquity to modern times and the controversy over its authenticity since early modern times, the text may very well be the most discussed non-Biblical passage in all ancient literature.3
although the passage about Maria (War 6, 201-213), the Jewish woman who ate her own child during the siege of Jerusalem, was almost as popular during this period as the Testimonium Flavianum.4
This is indicated by the existence of a medieval Syriac version of the Testimonium reading, like Jerome’s text, “he was believed to be the Christ” rather than “he was the Christ.”8
The 5 first scholar to point to such textual evidence was the Reformed theologian Louis Cappel (1585-1658) who noted that the passage does not fit into its surrounding context very smoothly.12
מאמר ארוך בהרבה הסוקר את המחקר בנושׂא: Carleton Paget, James. 2001. "Some Observations on Josephus and Christianity", Journal of Theological Studies 52/2: 52.2 (2001) pp. 539–624.
יוספוס, ענתיקות 18.63-64
יוספוס, ענתיקות 20.197-203
הערותיו של לואיס פלדמן במהדורת Loeb של ענתיקות היהודים (ספר 18).
- The phrase "receive the truth with pleasure" is characteristically Josephan.
- In particular, Thackeray, the prince of Josephan scholars, who went so far in his study of Josephus' language as to compose a lexicon to Josephus for his own use so as to see how precisely each word is used in Josephus and whether there is evidence of shifts of style in various parts of his works due to his "assistants" or to other reasons, noted that the phrase 'such people as accept the truth gladly' is characteristic of the scribe in this part of the Antiquities, since the phrase appears eight times in books 17-19 (supposedly the work of the Thucydidean assistant) and nowhere else in Josephus. (Louis H. Feldman, "The Testimonium Flavianum, The State of the Question," Christological Perspectives, Eds. Robert F. Berkley and Sarah Edwards, page 188).
- As with Ambrose, Jerome's manuscript was different than the one used by Eusebius in that it lacked the definitive statement "he was the Christ." As Alice Whealey notes, "the fact that the passage is quoted by Jerome in a slightly variant form in this period, which reads, 'he was believed to be the Christ' rather than the textus receptus' 'he was the Christ' is not proof of Jerome's own doubts about its authenticity, as is occasionally alleged. Rather, it is evidence that in addition to the textus receptus a variant version of the Testimonium in Greek was still in circulation in late antiquity." (The Testimonium Flavianum Controversy from Antiquity to the Present, 2000 SBL Josephus Seminar). Louis Feldman agrees: An examination of the citation shows that though he is clearly quoting, Jerome says that Jesus credebatur esse Christus. Hence his text said not that Jesus was the Messiah, but that he was believed to be a Messiah. This would fit the statement, noted above of Origen, to whom Jerome was so indebted, that Josephus did not admit Jesus to be the Christ.
- Kirby cites to Louis H. Feldman's comment:
The fact that an ancient table of contents, already referred to in the Latin version of the fifth or sixth century, omits mention of the Testimonium (though, admittedly, it is selective, one must find it hard to believe that such a remarkable passage would be omitted by anyone, let alone by a Christian, summarizing the work) is further indication that there was no such notice . . . .
(Feldman, Judaism and Christianity, page 57).
- חפשׂו בספריה וברחבי הרשת מידע כללי העונה על השאלה: מתי נכתבו כתבי הבשׂורה ומעשׂי השליחים, ועל-ידי מי? בתשובה לשאלה זו נכרתו יערות שלמים והתיבשו אגמי דיו. נסו להגיע לתמונה כללית של המחקר.
- הולדת ישוע (ויוחנן): מתי א א- ב כג; לוקס א א – ב נב, ג כג-לח; יוחנן א א-יח
- הולדת מלכיצדק: חנוך ב (הסלאבי) כב – כג
- הטבילה והמבחן: מתי ג א – ד יא, יא א-יד; מרקוס א א-יג; לוקס ג א-כב, ד א-טו, ז יח-לה; יוחנן א יט-לד
- הדרשה על ההר: מתי ה
- שעה קלה על כלכלה: מתי י א-טו, יט טז-ל; מרקוס ו ז-יג, י יז-לא; לוקס ט א-ו, יח יח-ל. מעשׂי השליחים, ד לב – ה יא.
- שׂהידיות: מתי כו-כח; מרקוס יד-טז; לוקס כב-כד; יוחנן יח-כ