Chris Weimer

What evidence is there that Anthronges existed?

Toto

Do you mean Athronges?

Antiquities XVII

Chris Weimer

Yes, sorry...not sure how that extra N creeped in. Late at night.

But him - what evidence is there that he existed?

Nor does it appear that I am alone.

Amaleq13

That article is precisely why I didn't understand what was spelled incorrectly.

I have changed it in the thread title for anyone wondering what the hell we're talking about.

Toto

So do you really want to discuss how A[n]thronges differs from a historical Jesus?

The evidence for Athronges is a passage in a disinterested historian, writing a narrative of events, not focused on worshipping the man. It gives the expected details about him - his place in history, his distinguishing features, his actions. Nothing that is written is historically improbable - we know that upstart tall men tend to take leadership positions in revolts, and especially if he had tall brothers to back him up.

For Jesus, we have no comparable mention in contemporary narrative histories of the time of his putative existence. The passage in Josephus about Jesus is entirely different, even if you think that it has some core of authenticity. We don't know what Jesus looked like or any other mundane details about him, and most of the stories we have about him lack credibility.

Nevertheless, there is a possibility that Josephus was confused, mistaken, or writing imaginative fiction when he described Athronges. But I don't think that anyone cares enought about it one way or another to even discuss it.

gstafleu

HX-MX discussions are only relevant once an appreciable body of myth has gathered around X. Given that this has apparently not happened with A, what is the meaning of the question?

Gerard Stafleu

Toto

This is from the Google cache of Jewish Enc Online

So it sounds like some myth did arise around A.

gstafleu

Well, that then gives a place to start. First we list the antecedents, accomplishments and attributes of Cucumber Guy, and ask: for which of these do we have independent (i.e. outside the mythology in question) historical evidence. We follow this by the same for A. Then we have to decide if the equivalence Cucumber Guy=A is reasonable. If the answer is yes, we may then at least have a description of what the historical A sort of looked like. Which, I could add, would be more than we seem to have for a HJ.

Gerard Stafleu

Chris Weimer

So, does that mean that Hercules really existed?

Ben C Smith

How is Josephus disinterested here? Josephus is very interested in blaming Judeo-Roman troubles on a class of rebellious men, not on Jewry at large. The more troublemakers such as Athronges, the more plausible his thesis.

Place in history and actions I can see. But in what way are distinguishing features to be expected? Do we know what Theudas looked like? The Egyptian? Jesus of Ananus?

The plausibility argument. Good to see it in use.

You seem to be saying that Josephus is contemporary to Athronges in a way that no narrative historian is contemporary to Jesus. First, how is Josephus contemporary to Athronges? By my math Josephus was born some 40 years after the revolt that Athronges led, though we are not told (AFAIK) how much longer Athronges lived. Josephus did not actually write about Athronges until some 75-80 years after the revolt. By way of comparison, Tacitus was born some 35-40 years after the execution of Jesus and wrote about him some 80-85 years afterward.

Are we to aim at historical accuracy only when modern religious or antireligious interests are at stake? What about getting it right just for the sake of getting it right?

Let the truth be known though the heavens fall.

—Agent Fox Mulder, X-Files episode Redux (the season 5 opener); saying based on the Latin maxim, fiat iustitia, ruat caelum (let justice be done and the heavens fall).

Ben.