Re: Historicity's Problems And Theudas As Our Only Candidate; 4 Genuine Historical Identifications
Posted: Sun May 01, 2022 5:40 am
Goodbye to your theory, yesmaryhelena wrote: ↑Sun May 01, 2022 4:55 amI remember that you said 'Goodbye'......................................mlinssen wrote: ↑Sun May 01, 2022 3:40 amI thought it was Aristobolus II, and now it's his son? Both don't share anything with neither Jesus nor Simon of Cyrene:maryhelena wrote: ↑Sun May 01, 2022 2:16 am (and as for anyone interested - I view the gospel Jesus as a composite figure - the crucifixion element of that composite figure reflecting the Roman execution of Antigonus, High Priest and King of the Jews.)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antigonus_II_Mattathias
Josephus states that Mark Antony beheaded Antigonus (Antiquities, XV 1:2 (8–9). Roman historian Cassius Dio says that he was crucified and records in his Roman History: "These people [the Jews] Antony entrusted to a certain Herod to govern; but Antigonus he bound to a cross and scourged, a punishment no other king had suffered at the hands of the Romans, and so slew him."[6] In his Life of Antony, Plutarch claims that Antony had Antigonus beheaded, "the first example of that punishment being inflicted on a king."[7]
That's two against one, certainly not in your favour.
What does Cassius Dio have to say then?
https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/e/ ... o/49*.html
The much quoted source, by Bill Thayer:
CASSIUS DIO ROMAN HISTORY Book 49
22 1 This, to be sure, took place at a later period; at the time under consideration Antony attacked Antiochus, shut him up in Samosata and proceeded to besiege him. But when he found he was accomplishing nothing and was spending his time in vain, and when he also suspected that the soldiers were alienated from him on account of the disgrace of Ventidius, he p387 secretly opened negotiations with the foe and made a pretended compact with him so that he might have a plausible reason for withdrawing. 2 At any rate, Antony got neither hostages (except two and these of little importance) nor the money which he had demanded, but he granted Antiochus the death of a certain Alexander, who had earlier deserted from him to the Roman side. After doing this he set out for Italy, and Gaius Sosius received from him the governorship of Syria and Cilicia. 3 This officer subdued the Aradii, who had been besieged up to this time and had been reduced to hard straits by famine and disease, and also conquered in battle Antigonus, who had put to death the Roman guards that were with him, and reduced him by siege when he took refuge in Jerusalem. 4 The Jews, indeed, had done much injury to the Romans, for the race is very bitter when aroused to anger, but they suffered far more themselves. The first of them to be captured were those who were fighting for the precinct of their god, and then the rest on the day even then called the day of Saturn.7 5 And so excessive were they in their devotion to religion that the first set of prisoners, those who had been captured along with the temple, obtained leave from Sosius, when the day of Saturn came round again, and went up into the temple and there performed all the customary rites, together with the rest of the people. 6 These people Antony entrusted to a certain Herod to govern; but Antigonus he p389 bound to a cross and flogged, — a punishment no other king had suffered at the hands of the Romans, — and afterwards slew him.
P389 Points to the Loeb page number, I guess. What does the Greek say?
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... ection%3D1
Cassius Dio Cocceianus, Historiae Romanae
Earnest Cary, Herbert Baldwin Foster, Ed.
[1] ταῦτα μὲν χρόνῳ ὕστερον ἐγένετο, τότε δὲ ὁ Ἀντώνιος προσέβαλε μὲν τῷ Ἀντιόχῳ, καὶ κατακλείσας αὐτὸν ἐς Σαμόσατα ἐπολιόρκει: ὡς δ᾽ οὐδὲν ἐπέραινεν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅ τε χρόνος ἄλλως ἀναλοῦτο καὶ τὰ τῶν στρατιωτῶν ἀλλοτρίως οἱ διὰ τὴν τοῦ Οὐεντιδίου ἀτιμίαν ἔχειν ὑπώπτευσε, [p. 386] διεκηρυκεύσατο αὐτῷ κρύφα, καὶ πλαστὰς πρὸς αὐτὸν συνθήκας, ὅπως εὐπρεπῶς ἀπαναστῇ, ἐποιήσατο.
[2] ἀμέλει αὐτὸς μὲν οὔτε ὁμήρους, πλὴν δύο καὶ τούτων οὐκ ἐπιφανῶν, οὔτε τὰ χρήματα ἃ ᾔτησεν ἔλαβε, τῷ δ᾽ Ἀντιόχῳ θάνατον Ἀλεξάνδρου τινὸς αὐτομολήσαντος παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ πρότερον πρὸς τοὺς Ῥωμαίους ἐχαρίσατο. καὶ ὁ μὲν
[3] ταῦτα πράξας ἐς τὴν Ἰταλίαν ἀφωρμήθη, 1 Γάιος δὲ δὴ Σόσσιος τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς τε Συρίας καὶ τῆς Κιλικίας παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ λαβὼν τούς τε Ἀραδίους πολιορκηθέντας τε μέχρι τότε καὶ λιμῷ καὶ νόσῳ ταλαιπωρηθέντας ἐχειρώσατο, καὶ τὸν Ἀντίγονον τοὺς φρουροὺς τοὺς παρ᾽ ἑαυτῷ τῶν Ῥωμαίων ὄντας ἀποκτείναντα μάχῃ τε ἐνίκησε, καὶ καταφυγόντα ἐς τὰ Ἱεροσόλυμα πολιορκίᾳ κατεστρέψατο.
[4] πολλὰ μὲν δὴ καὶ δεινὰ καὶ οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι τοὺς Ῥωμαίους ἔδρασαν ῾τὸ γάρ τοι γένος αὐτῶν θυμωθὲν πικρότατόν ἐστἰ, πολλῷ δὲ δὴ πλείω αὐτοὶ ἔπαθον. ἑάλωσαν μὲν γὰρ πρότεροι μὲν οἱ ὑπὲρ τοῦ τεμένους τοῦ θεοῦ ἀμυνόμενοι, ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι ἐν τῇ τοῦ Κρόνου καὶ τότε ἡμέρᾳ
[5] ὠνομασμένῃ. καὶ τοσοῦτόν γε τῆς θρησκείας αὐτοῖς περιῆν ὥστε τοὺς προτέρους τοὺς μετὰ τοῦ ἱεροῦ χειρωθέντας παραιτήσασθαί τε τὸν Σόσσιον, ἐπειδὴ ἡμέρα αὖθις ἡ τοῦ Κρόνου ἐνέστη, καὶ ἀνελθόντας ἐς αὐτὸ πάντα μετὰ τῶν
[6] λοιπῶν τὰ νομιζόμενα ποιῆσαι. ἐκείνους μὲν οὖν Ἡρώδῃ τινὶ ὁ Ἀντώνιος ἄρχειν ἐπέτρεψε, τὸν δ᾽ [p. 388] Ἀντίγονον ἐμαστίγωσε σταυρῷ προσδήσας, ὃ μηδεὶς βασιλεὺς ἄλλος ὑπὸ τῶν Ῥωμαίων ἐπεπόνθει, καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἀπέσφαξεν.
Word-for-word translation by me, not precise for present and past tense:
[6] λοιπῶν τὰ νομιζόμενα ποιῆσαι. ἐκείνους μὲν οὖν Ἡρώδῃ τινὶ ὁ Ἀντώνιος ἄρχειν ἐπέτρεψε, τὸν δ᾽ [p. 388] Ἀντίγονον ἐμαστίγωσε σταυρῷ προσδήσας, ὃ μηδεὶς βασιλεὺς ἄλλος ὑπὸ τῶν Ῥωμαίων ἐπεπόνθει, καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἀπέσφαξεν.
[6] having-left the customary-things he-produced. the-persons-there on-the-one-hand then by-Herod some (the) Antony to-rule he-transferred, (the) on-the-other-hand [p. 388] Antigonus he-flogged to-a-stake being-bound(nom!), which not-even-one king other under the Romans suffered, and after this and he-cut-his-throat
A few noteworthy things:
1. ἐμαστίγωσε is the proper native Greek for flogging that only John uses as the very scene itself: both Mark and Matthew use φραγελλώσας (having flogged him), the Roman loanword
2. σταυρῷ is the exact same word as in the NT, a stake - most certainly never a cross but we know our biased Christian translations by now, don't we?
3. προσδήσας indeed is from the verb προσδέω, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/mor ... rosde%2Fw0 - to bind or, in general, attach - but that is "c. acc. only, attach" and oddly, the word here is part sg aor act masc nom, not accusative. But my Greek is rusty
4. it ends with ἀπέσφαξεν, cutting the throat: and that comes dangerously close with beheading. From the verb σφάζω, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 3Dsfa%2Fzw - which rests on top of the noun of course,
σφαγή - http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 3Dsfagh%2F
A.slaughter; the sg. is freq. in E., as Hec.571, 1037, al.; in pl., A.Eu. 187,450, S.El.37, E.Hec.522, al.; ἕστηκε . . μῆλα πρὸς σφαγὰς πυρός ready for the sacrificial fire, A.Ag.1057; πολυθύτους τεύχειν ς. to offer many sacrifices, S.Tr.756: also in Prose, “ὑπὸ σφαγῆς” Pl.R. 610b; “θανάτους τε καὶ σφαγάς” Id.Lg.682e; “σφαγὰς ποιεῖσθαι” X.HG 4.4.2; σφαγὰς τῶν γνωρίμων ποιήσαντες ib.2.2.6, cf. Isoc.8.96, D.19.260; “ἐν ταῖς πόλεσι σφαγὰς ἐμποιοῦντες” Isoc.5.107.
2. with collat. sense of a wound, αἷμα τῶν ἐμῶν ς. S.Tr.573, cf. 717; ἐκφυσιῶν . . αἵματος σφαγήν the blood gushing from the wound, A.Ag.1389; καθάρμοσον σφαγάς close the gaping wound, E.El.1228 (lyr.); “ἐσφάγη . . σφαγὴν βραχεῖαν” Ath.9.381a.
II. the throat, the spot where the victim is struck (“κοινὸν μέρος αὐχένος καὶ στήθους σφαγή” Arist. HA493b7), Antipho 5.69: pl., “ἐν σφαγαῖσι βάψασα ξίφος” A.Pr.863; “ἐς σφαγὰς ὦσαι ξίφος” E.Or.291; so in prose, “οἰστοὺς . . ἐς τὰς ς. καθιέντες” Th.4.48, cf. Sor.2.63; εἰς τὴν κεφαλὴν . . διὰ τῶν ς. Arist. HA511b35.
So the final death is by having his throat cut, whereas the entire stake construction is most peculiar:
Ἀντίγονον ἐμαστίγωσε σταυρῷ προσδήσας - did he flog Antigonus with a stake? Yes, as it is highly likely that the verb above is not the one for binding/attaching, but permitting:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... rosde%2Fw2
Herod permitted - and then we are perfectly happy with the nominative of the participium - Antigonus to be "flogged" with a stake, to be beaten with a stick. And of course, no king ever received that most lowly of punishments
I'm sorry maryhelena, but your only witness to a crucifed Jewish king appears to have been created by Christian falsification, and to be non existent
But perhaps my Greek is wrong - still, there are only 3 words here around which your entire theory is built, and the story here ends with cutting a throat / beheading, so it is highly likely that Cassius Dio attests to the exact same thing as his two fellow witnesses