Roman historian and politician Tacitus referred to Jesus, his execution by Pontius Pilate, and the existence of early Christians in Rome in his final work, Annals (written c. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44.P. E. Easterling, E. J. Kenney (general editors), The Cambridge History of Latin Literature, page 892 (Cambridge University Press, 1982, reprinted 1996). The context of the passage is the six-day Great Fire of Rome that burned much of the city in AD 64 during the reign of Roman Emperor Nero.Stephen Dando-Collins (2010). The Great Fire of Rome. . pp. 1–4. The passage is one of the earliest non-Christian references to the origins of Christianity, the execution of Christ described in the canonical gospels, and the presence and persecution of Christians in 1st-century Rome.
There are two points of vocabulary in the passage. First, Tacitus may have used the word "Chrestians" () for Christians, but then speaks of "Christ" () as the origin of that name. Second, he calls Pilate a "procurator", even though other sources indicate that he had the title "prefect". Scholars have proposed various hypotheses to explain these peculiarities. The scholarly consensus is that Tacitus's reference to the execution of Jesus by Pontius Pilate is both authentic, and of historical value as an independent Roman source.Watson E. Mills, Roger Aubrey Bullard (2001). Mercer Dictionary of the Bible. . p. 343.Helen K. Bond (2004). Pontius Pilate in History and Interpretation. . p. xi. However, Tacitus does not reveal the source of his information. There are several hypotheses as to what sources he may have used.
Tacitus provides non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus. Scholars view it as establishing three separate facts about Rome around AD 60: (i) that there were a sizable number of Christians in Rome at the time, (ii) that it was possible to distinguish between Christians and Jews in Rome, and (iii) that at the time pagans made a connection between Christianity in Rome and its origin in Roman Judaea. Tacitus is one of the non-Christian writers of the time who mentioned Jesus and early Christianity along with Flavius Josephus, Pliny the Younger, and Suetonius.
The passage and its context
The Annals passage (15.44), which has been subjected to much scholarly analysis, follows a description of the six-day Great Fire of Rome that burned much of Rome in July 64 AD. The key part of the passage reads as follows (translation from Latin by A. J. Church and W. J. Brodribb, 1876):
Tacitus then describes the torture of Christians:
The exact cause of the fire remains uncertain, but much of the population of Rome suspected that Emperor Nero had started the fire himself. To divert attention from himself, Nero accused the Christians of starting the fire and persecuted them, making this the first documented confrontation between Christians and the authorities in Rome. Tacitus suggested that Nero used the Christians as scapegoats.
As with almost all ancient Greek and Latin literature,L.D. Reynolds, N.G. Wilson, Scribes and Scholars. A Guide to the Transmission of Greek and Latin Literature, Oxford 1991 no original manuscripts of the Annals exist. The surviving copies of Tacitus' major works derive from two principal manuscripts, known as the Medicean manuscripts, which are held in the Laurentian Library in Florence, Italy.Cornelii Taciti Annalium, Libri V, VI, XI, XII: With Introduction and Notes by Henry Furneaux, H. Pitman 2010 page iv The second of them (Plut. 68.2), as the only one containing books xi–xvi of the Annales, is the oldest witness to the passage describing Christians.Newton, Francis, The Scriptorium and Library at Monte Cassino, 1058–1105, Cambridge University Press, 1999. "The Date of the Medicean Tacitus (Flor. Laur. 68.2)", p. 96-97. Scholars generally agree that this codex was written in the 11th century at the Benedictine abbey of Monte Cassino and its end refers to Abbas Raynaldus cu... who was most probably one of the two abbots of that name at the abbey during that period.
Points of vocabulary
Christians and Chrestians
The passage states:
In 1902 Georg Andresen commented on the appearance of the first 'i' and subsequent gap in the earliest extant, 11th century, copy of the Annals in Florence, suggesting that the text had been altered, and an 'e' had originally been in the text, rather than this 'i'.Georg Andresen in Wochenschrift fur klassische Philologie 19, 1902, col. 780f "With ultra-violet examination of the MS the alteration was conclusively shown. It is impossible today to say who altered the letter e into an i." Since the alteration became known it has given rise to debates among scholars as to whether Tacitus deliberately used the term "Chrestians", or if a scribe made an error during the Middle Ages. It has been stated that both the terms Christians and Chrestians had at times been used by the general population in Rome to refer to early Christians.Christians at Rome in the First Two Centuries by Peter Lampe 2006 page 12 Robert E. Van Voorst states that many sources indicate that the term Chrestians was also used among the early followers of Jesus by the second century. The term Christians appears only three times in the New Testament, the first usage (Acts 11:26) giving the origin of the term. In all three cases the uncorrected Codex Sinaiticus in Greek reads Chrestianoi. In Phrygia a number of funerary stone inscriptions use the term Chrestians, with one stone inscription using both terms together, reading: "Chrestians for Christians".
Adolf von Harnack argued that Chrestians was the original wording, and that Tacitus deliberately used Christus immediately after it to show his own superior knowledge compared to the population at large. Robert Renehan has stated that it was natural for a Roman to mix the two words that sounded the same, that Chrestianos was the original word in the Annals and not an error by a scribe.Robert Renehan, "Christus or Chrestus in Tacitus?", La Parola del Passato 122 (1968), pp. 368-370Transactions and proceedings of the American Philological Association, Volume 29, JSTOR (Organization), 2007. p vii Van Voorst has stated that it was unlikely for Tacitus himself to refer to Christians as Chrestianos i.e. "useful ones" given that he also referred to them as "hated for their shameful acts". Eddy and Boyd see no major impact on the authenticity of the passage or its meaning regardless of the use of either term by Tacitus.
Whatever the original wording of Tacitus, another ancient source about the Neronian persecution, by Suetonius, apparently speaks of "Christians": "In Suetonius' Nero 16.2, '', however, seems to be the original reading."
The rank of Pilate
Pilate's rank while he was governor of Judaea appeared in a Latin inscription on the Pilate Stone which called him a prefect, while this Tacitean passage calls him a procurator. Josephus refers to Pilate with the generic Greek term (), or governor. Tacitus records that Claudius was the ruler who gave procurators governing power.Tacitus, Annals 12.60: Claudius said that the judgments of his procurators had the same efficacy as those judgments he made.P. A. Brunt, Roman imperial themes, Oxford University Press, 1990, , . p.167. After Herod Agrippa's death in AD 44, when Judea reverted to direct Roman rule, Claudius gave procurators control over Judea.Tacitus, Histories 5.9.8.Paul, apostle of the heart set free by F. F. Bruce (2000) Eerdsmans page 354
Various theories have been put forward to explain why Tacitus should use the term "procurator" when the archaeological evidence indicates that Pilate was a prefect. Jerry Vardaman theorizes that Pilate's title was changed during his stay in Judea and that the Pilate Stone dates from the early years of his administration."A New Inscription Which Mentions Pilate as 'Prefect, JBL 81/1 (1962), p. 71. Baruch Lifshitz postulates that the inscription would originally have mentioned the title of "procurator" along with "prefect"."Inscriptions latines de Cesaree (Caesarea Palaestinae)" in Latomus 22 (1963), pp. 783–4. L.A. Yelnitsky argues that the use of "procurator" in Annals 15.44.3 is a Christian interpolation."The Caesarea Inscription of Pontius Pilate and Its Historical Significance" in Vestnik Drevnej Istorii 93 (1965), pp.142–6. S.G.F. Brandon suggests that there is no real difference between the two ranks."Pontius Pilate in history and legend" in History Today 18 (1968), pp. 523—530 John Dominic Crossan states that Tacitus "retrojected" the title procurator which was in use at the time of Claudius back onto Pilate who was called prefect in his own time. Bruce Chilton and Craig Evans as well as Van Voorst state that Tacitus apparently used the title procurator because it was more common at the time of his writing and that this variation in the use of the title should not be taken as evidence to doubt the correctness of the information Tacitus provides. Warren Carter states that, as the term "prefect" has a military connotation, while "procurator" is civilian, the use of either term may be appropriate for governors who have a range of military, administrative and fiscal responsibilities.Pontius Pilate: Portraits of a Roman Governor by Warren Carter (Sep 1, 2003) page 44
Louis Feldman says that Philo (who died AD 50) and Josephus also use the term "procurator" for Pilate. As both Philo and Josephus wrote in Greek, neither of them actually used the term "procurator", but the Greek word (), which is regularly translated as "procurator". Philo also uses this Greek term for the governors of Egypt (a prefect), of Asia (a proconsul) and Syria (a legate).Matthew and Empire: Initial Explorations by Warren Carter (T&T Clark: October 10, 2001) p. 215. Werner Eck, in his list of terms for governors of Judea found in the works of Josephus, shows that, while in the early work, The Jewish War, Josephus uses epitropos less consistently, the first governor to be referred to by the term in Antiquities of the Jews was Cuspius Fadus, (who was in office AD 44–46).Werner Eck, "" in , 166 (2008), p. 222. Feldman notes that Philo, Josephus and Tacitus may have anachronistically confused the timing of the titles—prefect later changing to procurator. Feldman also notes that the use of the titles may not have been rigid, for Josephus refers to Cuspius Fadus both as "prefect" and "procurator".
Authenticity
Most scholars hold the passage to be authentic and that Tacitus was the author. Classicists observe that in a recent assessment by latinists on the passage, they unanimously deemed the passage authentic and noted that no serious Tacitean scholar believes it to be an interpolation.
Suggestions that the passage may have been a complete forgery have been generally rejected by scholars. John P. Meier states that there is no historical or archaeological evidence to support the argument that a scribe may have introduced the passage into the text. Scholars such as Bruce Chilton, Craig Evans, Paul Eddy and Gregory Boyd agree with John Meier's statement that "Despite some feeble attempts to show that this text is a Christian interpolation in Tacitus, the passage is obviously genuine".
Tacitus was a patriotic Roman senator. His writings show no sympathy towards Christians, or knowledge of who their leader was. His characterization of "Christian abominations" may have been based on the rumours in Rome that during the Eucharist rituals Christians ate the body and drank the blood of their God, interpreting the ritual as cannibalism. Andreas Köstenberger states that the tone of the passage towards Christians is far too negative to have been authored by a Christian scribe. Van Voorst also states that the passage is unlikely to be a Christian forgery because of the pejorative language used to describe Christianity.