(09-25-2022, 04:13 PM)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:Minimalist Wrote: Jim, do you understand what the political situation was in Judaea c 30 CE?
That doesn't answer my question. undefined
So the answer is, you don't.
When Herod the Great died in 4 BC there were revolts over his plan to install his children into the various parts of his kingdoms. The Romans crushed those revolts. The one that concerns us is the installation of Archelaus in Judaea. He was apparently such a prick that by 6 AD the Sanheddrin petitioned Augustus to remove him from office and to make Judaea a Roman Prefecture. We have evidence to support Josephus' account in the form of coins issued by every named Roman Prefect from Coponius to Pilate covering the 30 year period from 6 to 36... coincidentally the time when this jesus asshole was supposed to be walking around doing his magic tricks.... but I digress.
Augustus granted the petition and the Prefect set up his command post in Caesarea not Jerusalem. Aside from the obvious creature comforts - Caesarea was a delightful seaside town built by Herod in the Roman style - it was also a much better strategic location having a significant port and being located along the main road between Syria and Egypt. The military force available to the Prefect consisted of 4-5 cohorts of auxillary infantry and a cavalry wing "Ala" in Roman usage. All told perhaps 3,000 men and these were largely drawn from the army which Archelaus had. Such a force, especially as it was scattered in various garrisons and small forts to control banditry, would have been useless in the case of any serious trouble. Luckily, there was none. The Jews had a significant measure of home rule in Jerusalem. They were granted various exemptions from certain taxes and military service by both Augustus and Tiberius. In short, in the time frame that later jesus freak assholes set their story, the Jews in Jerusalem had it pretty good.
That all changed... but not until Caligula became emperor but according to your precious gospels the whole jesus story was over by then.
Thus, purely by accident probably, these later xtian morons set their story at the one time in the first century when the fucking jews would have had little to complain about. Piss poor understanding of history if you ask me but then, they were not writing history. They were writing religious propaganda.
I don't think that's an entirely honest depiction of the political situation in Jerusalem and its surrounding in 30 AD. We know that under Pontius Pilate there were several violent incidents and tension between the Jews and Roman authority. Hell, he was removed from office in 36 AD after suppressing violently a revolt. While Palestine wasn't in chaos and turmoil during the office of Pilate, the cracks that would ultimately lead to the destruction of the city were already there.
