...If this passage is an interpolation added sometime before the end of the fourth century (when the Christian writer Sulpicius Severus cites it), it would have to be an almost unbelievably brilliant piece of deception by a true master forger who was prepared to create a negative image of his own cause in order to throw the skeptical reader off the scent.
This particular argument against forgery seems weak. For Christians of the 4th century, there was great pride in having endured the hatred and persecution of various pagan emperors. Tacitus was not someone they would have admired or wanted sympathy from. Depicting him as someone who despised their ilk would not be uncomfortable for them in the least. At any rate, the forger would have followed Tacitus’ contemptuous demeanor simply to achieve believability. The language about the Christians’ hatred of mankind matches what he says about Jews in the Histories.
When it comes to forgery, it’s important to think about the ones who could pull it off, who perfected the art, and not just about the ones we can easily detect.
