Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:16:08.745Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Four Notes On The Herods*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

D. Braund
D. Braund
Affiliation:
University of Exeter
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In JRS (1968), Shelagh Jameson discussed the relative chronology of the campaigns of Aelius Gallus and C. Petronius: her discussion has rightly met with broad acceptance. She argued that Petronius began his first Ethiopian campaign in or by autumn 25 B.c., while Gallus began his Arabian campaign in or by August 26 B.C. and ended it in October or November 25 B.c.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , January 1983 , pp. 239 - 242
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Jameson, S., ‘The chronology of the campaigns of Aelius Gallus and C. Petronius’, JRS 58 (1968), 71–84Google Scholar. Brunt, P. A., for one, remains unconvinced that Petronius was in office before 24 B.C.: ‘The administration of Roman Egypt’, JRS 65 (1975), 142Google Scholar. The Arabian side of Gallus' campaign is explored at some length by Wissmann, H. von, ‘Die Geschichte des Säbaerreichs und der Feldzug des Aelius Gallus’, ANRW II9, 1 (1976), 308–544Google Scholar.

2 Jameson, pp. 77–8, quoted from p. 78 and followed ia. by Smallwood, E. M., The Jews Under Roman Rule (Leiden, 1976), p. 86 n. 86Google Scholar.

3 Strabo 16 p. 780: we should not press the fact that Strabo describes them as Jews, for, being Herod's ex-bodyguards, they were evidently in a sense from Judaea. Some of them were probably Arabs: note Herod's Arab bodyguard at Jos.BJ 1. 576–7 and AJ 17. 55–7. On the early stages of Gallus' preparations, see now Lewis, N., ‘P. Oxy. 2820: Whose preparations?’, GRBS 16 (1976), 295–303Google Scholar.

4 See Smallwood, p. 89 n. 103, Schurer, E., HJP |2 321 n. 132Google Scholar, Hoehner, H. W., Herod Antipas (1972), p. 15Google Scholar, Bosworth, A. B., ‘Asinius Pollio and Augustus’, Historia 21 (1972), 446 n. 33Google Scholar, and the considerable literature they variously cite.

5 Jos. AJ 15. 3–4, 370.

6 Willrich, H., Das Haus des Herodes (1929), p. 117Google Scholar, rejected explicitly by Hoehner and ignored by the rest: locc. citt.

7 The classic statement ofthis view is Feldman, L. H.,‘Asinius Pollio and his Jewish interests’, TAPA 84 (1953), 73–80Google Scholar. It is now used as a basis for further hypothesis: see, for example, Coleman, R. (ed.), Vergil: Eclogues (1977), p. 153Google Scholar. It need hardly be said that Eel. 4 has no bearing on the present argument.

8 pace Feldman, , pp. 77–8Google Scholar. For the narrative, Jos.AJ 14. 379–89; cf.BJ 1. 281–5.

9 André, J., La Vie et L'Oeuvre d' Asinius Pollion (1949)Google Scholar, who was criticized by Feldman, p. 73 for his ‘omission’. Feldman does all one could to construct links between Pollio and those sympathetic to and`/r interested in Judaism, but with these twin pillars removed his case simply does not stand up.

10 The case is fully presented by Crouzel, H., ‘Le Lieu d'Exil d'Hérode Antipas et d'Hérodiade selon Flavius Josephe’, in Studia Patristica Vol. 10. Papers presented to the Fifth International Conference on Patristic Studies: Oxford, 1967 (ed. Cross, F. L., 1970), pp. 275–80Google Scholar. Cf. Schuüer, p. 352 n. 41, more circumspect than most.

11 So Hoehner p. 262 n.l.

12 Ravenna: Suet.Tib. 20; Ov.Ex Ponto, 2. 1. 45–8; Tac.Ann. 1. 58. 9; 2. 63. Forum Julii: Tac.Ann. 2. 63. 6. Alexandria: Tac.Ann. 2. 67. 5. Antioch: Tac.Ann. 2. 4. 4; 58. Pompeiopolis: Tac.Ann. 2. 58. 3. Vienne: see next note.

13 Jos.Bj 2. Ill; Strabo 16 p. 765.

14 Schurer, p. 352 n.41.

15 Alternatively, one might press the fact that Bj 2. 183 says, strictly, that Antipas died in Spain: it might be argued that he was at some point transferred from his first place of exile at Lyons to Spain, where he later died. If this is right, Josephus' formulation at Bj 2. 183 is most misleading

16 PIR2 i. 130.

17 Rey-Coquais, J. P., AAAS 23 (1973), 39–84, esp. 55Google Scholar.

18 , J. and , J. Ch. Balty, , Anrw. ii 8 (1978), 121Google Scholar. See also their Apamée de Syrie, 1969–71: Actes du Colloque 1972 (1972), pp. 19–21 and W. van Rengen, ibid. pp. 105–6. On, C. Iulius Agrippa I of Apamea (CIL xvi. 8)Google Scholar, compare Rey-Coquais loc. cit. with Sullivan, R. D., Anrw. 8 (1978), 345Google Scholar, who supports a Herodian connection.

19 IGLS 2759 = ILS 8957.

20 IGLS 2760 =ILS 8958. On the extent of Sohaemus' kingdom, see Barrett, A. A., AJPh 98, (1977), 153–9Google Scholar; cf. idem, CQ n.s. 29 (1979), 465–9. For Sohaemus' biography, Sullivan, R. D., Anrwii. 8 (1978), 216–18Google Scholar.