The Myth of Nazareth: The Invented Town of Jesus (26 page)

Strange’s point F is simply a bald, unsubstantiated, and irresponsible claim: “People have continued to live in Nazareth from the 3d century BC to the present.” We have rebutted this overarching conclusion in the foregoing pages, and have carried out an extensive analysis of what underlies the various “Hellenistic” claims in the Nazareth literature.

As for points A and B, we shall see that they are entirely correct—if placed in a later Roman context. There was a village of Nazareth, and it was agricultural,
in II CE and thereafter
(Chapters Four–Six). Here we see again the recurring problem of backdating later Roman evidence into periods of the Great Hiatus—to the “Herodian” period, to the “time of Christ,” to the “Hellenistic” Age,
etc
. The many cisterns and storage silos that have been found in the venerated area, the wine presses and agricultural installations, the pottery, oil lamps, and tombs—these witness to a busy village in later Roman times. The thriving village of Nazareth was a fact four centuries after the Hellenistic period and well after the time of Christ.

Cave-dwelling aside, one cannot avoid the general observation that though Strange’s Hellenistic renaissance-
cum
-heyday in Early Roman times has no relevance to Nazareth, it has every relevance to nearby Sepphoris, where the American assiduously excavated.

Sepphoris

The site of the ancient town has been identified with the present day Moshav Zippori, located on a roundish hill 285 m high (935 ft.) overlooking the Beth Netofa Valley.
^[330]
Zippori
in Hebrew means “bird,” and the town may have been so named due to it’s perched position on a hill. Sepphoris is about seven kilometers (4.3 miles) northwest of the Nazareth basin. Late Iron II remains attest to a settlement there in VII–VI BCE. Some scattered pottery shards, including a fine animal-shaped rhyton (drinking horn), date from the Persian and Hellenistic periods, but there are no structural remains before III–II BCE, unless we count a basalt grinding stone found in a nearby field. Firm confirmation of structural remains, numerous coins, and other movable finds have been found at Sepphoris dating to that era. Jewish presence there also began no later than Hasmonean times.
^[331]

In Hasmonean times Sepphoris came into its own. It was a prestigious city, “probably the administrative center of the whole of Galilee.”
^[332]
Josephus recounts that about 100 BCE the ruler of Cyprus invaded the mainland and besieged Ptolemais, captured Asochis, and made an unsuccessful bid to capture Sepphoris.
^[333]
The town at this time must have been a walled settlement of considerable strength. Indeed, Josephus writes that it had been “the strongest city in Galilee.” In the first century BCE, “For all intents and purposes, Sepphoris had already become the capital of the Galilee.”
^[334]

A considerable amount of pottery dates to the centuries between I BCE and III CE.
^[335]
In 57 BCE, the Roman proconsul of Syria chose Sepphoris as his administrative headquarters for the Galilee. The town’s prestige continued after the turn of the era. For Josephus, Sepphoris is “the ornament of all Galilee.”
^[336]
The city sided with Rome during the First Jewish Revolt and was under Jewish local government until the Second Revolt (132–135 CE). At that time it was renamed Diocaesarea. Towards the end of the second century CE Sepphoris served as the headquarters of Rabbi Judah the Prince and of the Sanhedrin, at which time and place the Mishna was redacted. This may have been its most brilliant period. Thereafter the city declined in importance, though it continued to be inhabited through Crusader times.

From the foregoing brief résumé of its history, we can appreciate that Sepphoris fulfilled many of the requirements Strange proposes for Nazareth: a “birth” (or re-birth) in III–II BCE; a “heyday” in Hasmonean times; a flourishing settlement at the turn of the era; and continued habitation from III BCE onwards.

We have already noted how the Nazareth basin is not oriented towards Sepphoris, but towards Japhia and the Jezreel Valley to the south.
^[337]
The connection between these two settlements was probably not close even when they were both in existence after Middle Roman times, for the Nazareth Ridge constitutes a significant geographical separation.

The reader of the foregoing pages is now wiser: Nazareth has not existed since the dawn of history, multiple “Hellenistic” claims are unfounded, and the scholarly Nazareth literature is replete with chronological distortion on a massive scale. The purpose is patent—to support the story as told in the canonical gospels. Yet archaeology tells a different story with clarity: there were no people living in the Nazareth basin during the seven centuries before the turn of the era. Not a single structure, tomb, coin, oil lamp, or shard speaks to the contrary.

We have now reached the end of the road leading to a pre-Christian Nazareth, explored the last footpath leading to a settlement before the time of Christ. The tradition, with its myths of continuous habitation and Hellenistic renaissance, ultimately leads one into a poisonous bog of misinformation. The conclusion derived from the material at hand is irrefutable:
no people lived in the Nazareth basin in the centuries before the birth of Jesus
. The implication is equally irrefutable:
if there was no Nazareth before his birth, then
Jesus did not come from Nazareth
.

The many citations examined in these pages, and shown to be false, demonstrate a persistent effort on the part of the tradition to obscure data and alter history. Distortion of fact and a fundamental betrayal of trust have been the price paid to protect the story related in the canonical gospels. Wearing priestly robes and affecting scholarly mien, the wolves guard a precious idea that now appears in great jeopardy: Jesus of Nazareth.

In our investigation into the history of Nazareth, the time of Christ remains to be examined. In the next chapter we shall determine whether Jesus of Nazareth was indeed a fiction, a creation of the storytellers whose writings the Christian world holds in such high esteem.

Chapter Four

The Time of
Christ

The
Great Hiatus: Part III

(63 BCE – 70 CE)

The Time of Christ

The Hasmonean period in Jewish history effectively ended in 63 BCE with the entrance of Pompey into Jerusalem and his bloody siege and conquest of the temple mount, in which the last adherents of the Hasmonean king Aristobulus II were barricaded. Though Hyrcanus II, the brother of Aristobulus, was placed on the Judean throne (with the title of
ethnarch
rather than
king
), he had to pay tribute to Rome and ruled at the latter’s wish, subject to the supervision of the Roman proconsul of Syria. In fact, the Romans preferred to deal with the Idumean royal house to the south, ruled by Antipater, who was officially dubbed “friend and ally of the Roman people” by Julius Caesar. Antipater had for a long time promoted Roman interests in Palestine. During the waning decades of Hasmonean rule, actual power was in Antipater’s hands. At first he was advisor to Hyrcanus II and governor (strathgov) of the southern province of Idumea, but then made procurator (epitropov) of Judea.

Antipater managed to get his two sons, Phasael and Herod, appointed governors of Judea and Galilee respectively. This was accomplished against the wishes of the Hasmonean-friendly Jewish aristocracy, who were successful in having Antipater poisoned in 43 BCE. Rebellion broke out across the land against the Idumean overlords, but the capable Herod was able to quell these through both military and diplomatic measures. The populace was divided, and Herod was supported principally by non-Jewish elements in the land.

Palestine was invaded by the Parthians in 40 BCE, and Herod was forced into exile. The Hasmoneans were restored to power, but in Rome Herod was immediately named King of the Jews by the Senate. He returned to Palestine and, with much Roman help, regained the throne in 37 BCE for good. One of his first acts was to execute Antigonus, the last Hasmonean monarch. Herod continued his anti-Hasmonean policies, and eventually exterminated all that blood line—including most of his own family for, in order to gain acceptance in Judean circles, he had married Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II.

During Herod’s long reign (37–4 BCE) he aggressively pursued vast building activities which ameliorated the economic situation by lowering unemployment. The Temple was greatly expanded, Caesarea Maritima (the Roman headquarters) was essentially created from the ground up, including its impressive harbor, and many other cities were refurbished.

At Herod’s death renewed rebellion broke out against Idumean hegemony. This was the beginning of a long period of brigandage, messianic movements, and general unrest which climaxed in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. In the north, Judas the Galilean
^[338]
raided the armory of Sepphoris and inspired the people to resist. Josephus credits him with founding the “fourth sect” of the Jews (in addition to Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes), namely, the Zealots or
Sicarii
(“violent revolutionaries and assassins with religious motivation”).
^[339]
Like the Maccabees, Judas’ sons and grandsons were revolutionaries, but unlike the Maccabees, they all met a violent and unsuccessful end.

In the process of reducing Judas’ rebellion, the Romans under Varus put Sepphoris to the torch and sold its inhabitants as slaves. Thereafter, the city no longer opposed Rome—in the First Jewish Revolt Sepphoris had coins minted bearing the legend
Eirenopolis
, “City of Peace.”
^[340]

 After the general pacification of the land, Herod’s kingdom was divided between his three sons. Galilee and Perea (across the Jordan) fell to Antipas; Judea, Samaria, and Idumea to Archelaus; and parts of southern Syria to Philip. Schürer describes the character of Antipas (known simply as “Herod” in Josephus and the New Testament) as “sly, ambitious, and luxurious, only not so capable as his father.”
^[341]
Antipas rebuilt Sepphoris and other cities in his realm. In an effort to protect his domains in Perea, he allied himself with Aretas, the Nabatean king, by marrying his daughter. This, however, led to much difficulty for him
vis-à-vis
Aretas, when he later divorced his wife (her name is not known) to marry a relation, Herodias. John the Baptist was preaching at this time and, according to the New Testament (Mk 6:14
ff
.) the prophet took exception to the royal liaison which resulted in John’s imprisonment and death. More probable is that the sly monarch feared the prophet’s growing influence, and slew him as a precaution (as Josephus relates).
^[342]

Aretas retaliated to the casting aside of his daughter by invading Herod’s realm and inflicting a great military defeat on him in 36 CE. The Roman emperor Tiberius, seeing his empire invaded, ordered Vitellius, his general in Syria, to take Aretas dead or alive. However, the emperor suddenly died, releasing Vitellius from his obligation.

Meanwhile, Herod Philip had died (34 CE) without issue, and after three years his tetrarchy in Southern Syria passed to Agrippa I. This Agrippa also inherited Antipas’ holdings when the latter was banished to Gaul in 39 CE (apparently a victim of Caligula’s suspicious temperament).
^[343]
Galilee remained in the hands of Agrippa I (who died in 44 CE) and then Agrippa II until the First Jewish Revolt.

Many causes have been proposed for that revolt, and like all great debacles, the causes can probably be divided between those that were endemic and longstanding, on the one hand, and immediate precipitants on the other. We have mentioned the unsettled nature of the times, the activity of zealots in the land, the hegemony of the half-foreign Herodians, not to mention of the fully-foreign Romans. Certainly, one immediate precipitant was the looting of the Temple in 66 CE by Gessius Florus, the Roman procurator. Josephus paints this Florus in the most vile terms, as one who—enlisting the aid of common rogues—was accustomed to plunder cities and communities at will and without reason.
^[344]
It would appear that this man was insensitive to the explosive possibilities of the times, and helped precipitate the ultimate catastrophe.

A tumult arose among the inhabitants of Jerusalem at the despoiling of the Temple. Florus marched on the city (his headquarters was Caesarea) and gave orders to his soldiers to plunder one quarter. A large number of citizens were crucified on May 16, 66. Revolutionaries seized the fortress of Masada. The High Priest refused to make the daily offering to the emperor—“equivalent to an open declaration of revolt against the Romans” (Schürer). The die was cast.