Herod Antipas and the shaken reed.

[Ben C. Smith]

I have been exploring of late the idea, floated on this forum by D. C. Hindley, that the extant Josephan chronology by which Pontius Pilate became governor of Judea in about AD 26 is the result of Christian textual meddling, and Pilate actually became governor in about AD 19. At the same time, my curiosity has been piqued by the curious fact that Tertullian assigns a date during the Syrian governorship of Saturninus for the census which coincided with Jesus' birth; this date, combined with Luke's insistence that Jesus was about 30 years old when his ministry began, leads naturally to a date in the early twenties for Jesus' ministry and crucifixion, a date conveniently made feasible if our suspicions about the Josephan chronology should prove correct.

Here I would like to add another indicator that may point in the same basic direction. Both Matthew and Luke have Jesus speaking well of John the baptist after his imprisonment:

Matthew 11.7: 7 And as these were going away, Jesus began to speak to the multitudes about John, "What did you go out into the wilderness to look at? A reed shaken by the wind? 8 But what did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Behold, those who wear soft clothing are in kings' palaces. 9 But why did you go out? To see a prophet? Yes, I say to you, and one who is more than a prophet."

Luke 7.24: 24 When the messengers of John had left, He began to speak to the crowds about John, "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? 25 But what did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Those who are splendidly clothed and live in luxury are found in royal palaces! 26 But what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I say to you, and one who is more than a prophet."

The "man dressed in soft clothing" seems to refer to Herod Antipas, who according to the canonical gospels imprisoned and eventually executed John. Thus the "reed shaken by the wind" would represent Antipas, as well: there was to be no shaking in the wind for the rugged prophet John!

This interpretation, as natural as it already is in context, also happens to find numismatic support:

Gerd Theissen, The Gospels in Context, page 28: The reed appears on Herod Antipas's first coins, which he had minted for the founding of his capital city, Tiberias (ca. 19 C.E.).

Note the date: in about AD 19 our soft tetrarch minted coins with reeds on them. Here is an example of such a coin:

Antipas Reed Coin.jpg (312.32 KiB) Viewed 10684 times

Herod Antipas (4 BC - 39 AD). Mint of Tiberias. AE half denomination (19.8 mm, 8.79 gm, 1h). TIBE PIAC within wreath / HPWΔΟΥ TETPAPXOY; L KΔ (year 24=20/21 AD) in fields; reed upright.

Here is another example:

Herod Antipas 4 B.C.E - 40 C.E. (Hendin 1201) Quarter denomination struck year 20 C.E. in Tiberias. 4.03 grams

These coins would have been circulating in AD 20, maybe a year before the date of the crucifixion of Jesus according to those spurious Acta Pilati to which D. C. Hindley has called our attention. The significance of this saying about John corresponding to a numismatic emblem used by Herod Antipas in the early twenties benefits further from the realization that Antipas soon thereafter changed his emblem:

Gerd Theissen, The Gospels in Context, page 29: The first (and oldest) type of coin very probably shows a reed (Canna communis) on the obverse.... It was minted only for the founding of Tiberias and later disappeared. The second type of coin is attested from the years 26-27 C.E. Unmistakably, Antipas has moved to a new vegetable emblem, probably a palm tree.... From the last year of Antipas's reign (39 C.E.) comes a third type of coin. It represents a palm branch.

By the time we reach the traditional range of dates for Jesus' crucifixion, therefore, the reed is gone, replaced by a palm tree. Obviously, somebody speaking about John in around AD 29 or 30 could be either remembering the old coins or even fingering still circulating specimens of them, but if the saying originated in around AD 20 or so there is nothing whatsoever to explain, no hurdles to overleap: it would have naturally used the reed to symbolize Antipas because that would have been the most recent emblem on record for Herod the tetrarch.

Ben.

[Secret Alias]

The word for reed in Aramaic is אגמונ and it also means 'authority figure' (= cane bearer) much like the term 'canon' developed. I wonder if the term was influenced by the similarity to hegemon because in Hebrew the term has the opposite sense - i.e. of the lowly (= Isaiah 9:13; Isaiah 19:15).

[Secret Alias]

ἡγεμών (Doric ἁγεμών and Aeolic ἁγίμων) did enter Hebrew as הֶגְמוֹן‎ and Syriac as ܗܝܓܡܘܢܐ‎

And they kept hitting him on his head with a reed (ܗܝܓܡܘܢܐ‎), and spitting ...

[Secret Alias]

It might also be an intentional play on Pilate's title or role. Pilate is often referred to not by name but by the rather vague title hegemon in Matthew.

[Secret Alias]

And Jastrow lists אגמונ as a variant of הגמונ http://cal.huc.edu/showjastrow.php?page=331 so this must explain why 'reed' was used to describe rulers generally elsewhere. A faux etymology. https://books.google.com/books?id=stxBA ... IQ6AEIKTAA

[Secret Alias]

Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me.29 What does 'they are a trouble unto me' mean? — Said R. Eleazar: The Holy One, blessed be He, saith, Not enough is it for Israel that they sin before Me, but that they trouble Me to know which evil decree I am to bring upon them. R. Isaac said: There is no single festival when troops did not come to Sepphoris.30 R. Hanina said: There is no single festival when there did not come to Tiberias a general (אגמונ) with his suite and centurions.31

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

By the time we reach the traditional range of dates for Jesus' crucifixion, therefore, the reed is gone, replaced by a palm tree. Obviously, somebody speaking about John in around AD 29 or 30 could be either remembering the old coins or even fingering still circulating specimens of them, but if the saying originated in around AD 20 or so there is nothing whatsoever to explain, no hurdles to overleap: it would have naturally used the reed to symbolize Antipas because that would have been the most recent emblem on record for Herod the tetrarch.

Although I always loved Theissen's interpretation, I rather doubted it. Regardless of this, a possible problem of your suggestion could be the wording „shaken by the wind“. If the reed would represent a man, then in my understanding clearly a man judged by God as in 3 Maccabees 2:22.

God shook him this way and that as a reed is shaken by the wind, with the result that he lay helpless on the ground.

If the reed would represent Herod Antipas, then I assume the Herod Antipas of the 40s AD, who has lost everything.

[maryhelena]

I have been exploring of late the idea, floated on this forum by D. C. Hindley, that the extant Josephan chronology by which Pontius Pilate became governor of Judea in about AD 26 is the result of Christian textual meddling, and Pilate actually became governor in about AD 19. At the same time, my curiosity has been piqued by the curious fact that Tertullian assigns a date during the Syrian governorship of Saturninus for the census which coincided with Jesus' birth; this date, combined with Luke's insistence that Jesus was about 30 years old when his ministry began, leads naturally to a date in the early twenties for Jesus' ministry and crucifixion, a date conveniently made feasible if our suspicions about the Josephan chronology should prove correct.

Here I would like to add another indicator that may point in the same basic direction. Both Matthew and Luke have Jesus speaking well of John the baptist after his imprisonment:

Matthew 11.7: 7 And as these were going away, Jesus began to speak to the multitudes about John, "What did you go out into the wilderness to look at? A reed shaken by the wind? 8 But what did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Behold, those who wear soft clothing are in kings' palaces. 9 But why did you go out? To see a prophet? Yes, I say to you, and one who is more than a prophet."

Luke 7.24: 24 When the messengers of John had left, He began to speak to the crowds about John, "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? 25 But what did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Those who are splendidly clothed and live in luxury are found in royal palaces! 26 But what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I say to you, and one who is more than a prophet."

The "man dressed in soft clothing" seems to refer to Herod Antipas, who according to the canonical gospels imprisoned and eventually executed John. Thus the "reed shaken by the wind" would represent Antipas, as well: there was to be no shaking in the wind for the rugged prophet John!

This interpretation, as natural as it already is in context, also happens to find numismatic support:

Adding more argument to a 19 c.e., re Josephus, JC crucifixion story is all very well.....however, such arguments do not remove the gLuke birth narrative set in the 6 c.e. Quirinius census and it's Jesus story set during the 15th year of Tiberius. The problem for JC historicists remains. Either the gospel Jesus figure was born under Herod the Great or this figure was born after the death of Herod the Great. Opting for a birth under Herod the Great results in denying any relevance to the story in the gospel of Luke. Indeed going backwards to 19 c.e. is important - Eusebius not withstanding. However, going backwards should be viewed as learning or appreciating where we have come from - it can never be ones whole story - life moves ever onward. Moving forward with the gospel Jesus story is learning from and accepting the relevance of gLuke.

Daniel R Schwartz on gLuke, Josephus and Quirinius

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=474&hilit

Daniel R Schwartz: Reading the First Century: On Reading Josephus and Studying Jewish History of the First Century

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Reading-Centur ... r+schwartz

[maryhelena]

By the time we reach the traditional range of dates for Jesus' crucifixion, therefore, the reed is gone, replaced by a palm tree. Obviously, somebody speaking about John in around AD 29 or 30 could be either remembering the old coins or even fingering still circulating specimens of them, but if the saying originated in around AD 20 or so there is nothing whatsoever to explain, no hurdles to overleap: it would have naturally used the reed to symbolize Antipas because that would have been the most recent emblem on record for Herod the tetrarch.

Although I always loved Theissen's interpretation, I rather doubted it. Regardless of this, a possible problem of your suggestion could be the wording „shaken by the wind“. If the reed would represent a man, then in my understanding clearly a man judged by God as in 3 Maccabees 2:22.

God shook him this way and that as a reed is shaken by the wind, with the result that he lay helpless on the ground.

If the reed would represent Herod Antipas, then I assume the Herod Antipas of the 40s AD, who has lost everything.

Good point re the reed shaken and Antipas - who lost his kingdom long after 19 c.e. Perhaps another Herodian might be more appropriate to this interpretation of the gospel story - Archelaus who lost his kingdom in 6 c.e. Slavonic Josephus placing the baptizer in the time of Archelaus.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/gno/gjb/gjb-3.htm

3. He came to the Jews and summoned them to freedom, saying: "God hath sent me, that I may show you the way of the Law, wherein ye may free yourselves from many holders of power.
4. And there will be no mortal ruling over you, only the Highest who hath sent me." 5. And when the people had heard this, they were joyful. And there went after him all Judæa, that lies in the region round Jerusalem.

Seems to me that what the crowds wanted to see in the wilderness was the Herodian reed blown away in the wind.....

However, Archelaus aside, that Roman/Herodian reed still stood tall and bedecked with soft clothes in palaces....

[Ben C. Smith]

By the time we reach the traditional range of dates for Jesus' crucifixion, therefore, the reed is gone, replaced by a palm tree. Obviously, somebody speaking about John in around AD 29 or 30 could be either remembering the old coins or even fingering still circulating specimens of them, but if the saying originated in around AD 20 or so there is nothing whatsoever to explain, no hurdles to overleap: it would have naturally used the reed to symbolize Antipas because that would have been the most recent emblem on record for Herod the tetrarch.

Although I always loved Theissen's interpretation, I rather doubted it. Regardless of this, a possible problem of your suggestion could be the wording „shaken by the wind“. If the reed would represent a man, then in my understanding clearly a man judged by God as in 3 Maccabees 2:22.

God shook him this way and that as a reed is shaken by the wind, with the result that he lay helpless on the ground.

If the reed would represent Herod Antipas, then I assume the Herod Antipas of the 40s AD, who has lost everything.

Good point. Theissen does discuss that verse and others on that score. On the other hand, Theissen also writes about the reed representing a person of no conviction, who bends this way and that, as in Lucian.

If your interpretation is correct, then the saying would be looking back on the respective careers of John and Antipas, sometime after the horrific death of the latter, and contrasting the prophet with the tetrarch judged by God. This retrospective viewpoint appeals to me on some level, since the past tense can be interpreted as John's career being over: "What did you go out into the wilderness to behold?" What makes me hesitate is that the whole point of the saying is to contrast John with Antipas, and John's execution (at latest in the late thirties, to judge from Josephus) does not make a very good contrast against a judgment by God (indeed, it could be interpreted precisely as a judgment by God, if one were not predisposed to appreciate hellfire prophets). In other words, if the intention is to say, "Look at this fellow: he lost everything, surely a judgment by God," the all too easy retort is: "Well, John lost everything, too."

If, on the other hand, the shaken reed is taken in the sense intended by Lucian, then that image corresponds well with the spineless lifestyle of a collaborator with Rome, and the contrast is clear. But then the pleasing retrospective viewpoint is lost. And the sense intended by Lucian may be a bit more obscure, in this cultural context, than the sense intended by the Hebrew prophets and in 3 Maccabees 2.22.