The idea that Pilate;s actions were an attack on the temple may go back to Origen's commentary on Matthew see https://archive.org/stream/patrologiae_ ... 3/mode/2upKen Olson wrote:In this long-dormant thread I had previously posted:
I closed with a leading question about whether Pseudo-Hegesippus had another source here, which I think he does. Three things that are not in Josephus' accounts in Ant. 18.55-59//BJ 2.169-174: (1) that Pilate brought the images into the temple itself, (2) that the incident went badly for the Jews, and (3) that this incident was the beginning of the ruin of Judea and the Jewish people could all be derived easily from the works of Eusebius of Caesarea.Consider the following passage from Pseudo-Hegesippus::
And because it has been proposed by us to reveal the causes, by which the people of the Jews defected from the Roman empire and hastened destruction for themselves, the event indicates that Pilatus the governor of the province gave the beginning of its ruin, seeing that first of all he did [not] hesitate to bring into the Jerusalem temples the images of Caesar. When the people disturbed by this resisted and he decreed the images had to be received, he forced many into death. (Excidio 2.3).
In Josephus’ account (Ant. 18.55-59//BJ 2.169-174), Pilate brings the images into Jerusalem, but not into the temple. And when the Jews show their willingness to be killed rather than allow this transgression of the law, Pilate relents and removes the images from the city and no one is killed. It seems that Pseudo-Hegesippus is a very tendentious interpreter of Josephus, not an honest one. Or does he have a source other than Josephus here?
In Demonstratio Evangelica 8.2, Eusebius writes:
And in Ecclesiastical History 2.6.3-8, Eusebius gives Josephus' account of Pilate and the images, cutting off the ending containing the peaceful resolution, and follows it with his account of Pilate's use of money from the sacred treasury incident, in which many Jews *were* killed, and comments:And the same writer [Josephus] writes elsewhere: Pilate the governor (meaning the same Pilate of our Saviour's time) brought the images of Caesar into the temple by night, which was unlawful, and caused a great outburst of tumult and disorder among the Jews. (Ferrar trans. 2.138)
Now it seems to me that the most reasonable interpretation of this evidence is that Pseudo-Hegesippus is guided in his reading of Josephus by knowledge of Eusebius' works. Globally, Pseudo-Hegesippus' decision to write a Christian history using Josephus as a source to prove the thesis that the disasters that befell the Jews in the war were God's punishment for what they had done to Christ and his disciples already shows the influence of Eusebius who had done this 45 years earlier in the Ecclesiastical History (see now Richard Pollard, "The De Excidio of 'Hegesippus' and the Reception of Josephus," Viator 46.2 (2015) 65-100 at 76-77 also available on his Academia.edu page https://uqam.academia.edu/RichardPollard ).The same writer shows that besides this innumerable of other revolts were started in Jerusalem itself, affirming that from that time risings and war and mutual contrivance of evil never ceased in the city and throughout Judea until the time when the siege under Vespasian came upon them as the last scene of all. Thus the penalty of God pursued the Jews for their crimes against Christ. [HE 2.6.8]
Andrew Criddle