spin

The OLD makes it clear with the etymology [PROCVRO + -TOR] (and for procuro [PRO-+ CVRO]).


spin

ynquirer

Let’s examine the physical evidence, then. It is this one:



The stone was discovered in 1961 by an Italian archeologist, Dr. Antonio Frova, during excavations at a theatre in Caesarea Maritima, the official residence of the Roman governors of Judea Today, the stone is in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. More information here and here.

I haven’t visited the Israel Museum. Therefore, what I shall presently say is strictly based on the image everyone can see as well as I do.

Most researchers concur in these traits: 1) there are four lines, 2) all characters are Latin uncials, 3) the first line contains an isolated “S” that precedes the word “TIBERIÉVM” (with a clear acute accent on the second “E”), 4) the second line contains “NTIVS” plus “PILATVS”, 5) the third line contains “ECTVS” plus “IVDA” and an isolated “E” at the end, and 6) the fourth line contains an isolated “E.” The rest of the characters have disappeared as an effect of erosion.

A recent interpretation by Hanson and Oakman (Palestine in the Time of Jesus: Social Structures and Social Conflicts) in 1998 is as follows:


Where text in italics is supposed and dots (…) indicate words that might still be missing


There is are several problems with this reading. One of them is symmetry of the text. A proxy of the supposed outlook of it is afforded by Times New Roman font, as follows:


Of the fourth line I cannot speak, since I really don’t see the isolated “E” in it. But the whole of the first two lines does not resemble what anyone can see in the actual inscription. According to this, for instance, the “B” in TIBERIÉVM ought to be just above the ending “S” of PONTIVS; however, one can see it in the reconstruction much farther to the right, above the “A” of PILATVS. To have both lines adjusted, room is left for one or more missing words or abbreviations. For example:


Or even


In the former conjecture, the missing characters could possibly be PROC as a usual abbreviation of PROCURATOR. (Actually, PROC was used an as abbreviation for either PROCURATOR or PROCONSUL, but PROC + PRAEFECTUS might only mean PROCURATOR.)

In the latter conjecture, PROCIMP was not so unusual an abbreviation for PROCURATOR IMPERATORIS, as meaning “the emperor’s procurator.” (Click here for details.)

All in all, I don’t think that the physical evidence all too conclusive rejects Tacitus’, Philo’s, and Josephus’ testimony that Pilate was a procurator of Judea.

ynquirer

Rather than a simple dictionary, however celebrated, you should try a lexicon of ancient Latin etymologies. Good ones never forget this:

spin

A text written at the beginning of the 7th c. CE, (floruit of Isidorus Hispalensis) is not necessarily going to provide much other than the thought of the 7th c. We are trying to look at the origin of a word, not how it was understood 700 years after the fact.

I have already pointed out that the term "procurator" was already in use at the time of Plautus, when he has a character say of himself "Ego sum promus condus, procurator peni'" (Plaut. Pseud. ii.2.14). A procurator, here, is someone who manages a pantry. To render the word more clearly, look at Ovid, Ars.A. 1.587, "procurator nimium quoque multa procurat": what does a procurator do?

The term "proconsul" is derived from "(imperium) pro consule", just as "propraetor" is derived from "(imperium) pro praetore". These are transparent relations, a proconsul acts for a consul (or really with the power of a consul). The relationship between "consul" and "proconsul" is not analogous to that of "curator" and "procurator". A procurator is not acting for a curator, or with the power of a curator. A procurator manages (from "procuro"). Would you try to say the word "proscriptor" ("one who proscribes") is derived from "scriptor"?? -- or from "proscribo"? And "procreator" from "creator" or "procreo"? What about a procursator? from a cursator?? Ooops, sorry, there isn't such a thing as a cursator! I guess there's no doubt that "procursator" is derived from the verb "procurro" ("to run forward").

As I said, the noun "procurator" isn't derived from "curator": it's not a matter of a person acting for a curator, but of a person who manages.

Go with the Oxford Latin Dictionary. It's anything but simple.


spin

spin

Of course, where there's a hole, you can put whatever you like that's plausible, so your conjecture is noted.

What you need to do before you make such conjectures is to show that procurators had governorship over provinces before Claudius gave it to them. Suetonius Cl. 12.1 says that Claudius asked the senate to bestow judiciary authority on his procurators in the provinces (see also Tac. A.12.60). Procurators had no judicial power before this time, so could not make rulings in the provinces. So, we need a Latin author referring to a procurator acting as governor of a province before the time of Claudius. Got one?


spin

Malachi151

The procurator/prefect issue is meaningless. Who cares?

The existence of Pilate doesn't do anything to corroborate the Jesus myth, that's like saying that a story about Johnny Appleseed is true because it also says that Johnny Appleseed met George Washington, who REALLY was president!

Yeah, and?

Besides, the fact that Philo wrote about Pilate but never wrote about Jesus makes this fact all the more striking.

No Robots

To summarize for those having difficulty following the discussion:

• Tacitus' statement about Christians is taken as evidence of the historicity of Christ.
• Mythicists claim Tacitus' statement is an interpolation, basing their argument on Tacitus calling Pilate "procurator", which they further argue is an error.

By the same logic, the fact that Tacitus wrote about both Pilate and Christ is striking.

spin

Deep.


spin

spin

As this is my argument, please get your terminology right. I am not a mythicist. This is a matter of history, not the silly MJ/HJ crap.


spin

No Robots

Quite right. I forgot about your agnosticism. The point, though, is that your argument that the passage in Tacitus is interpolated is a critical point in "the silly MJ/HJ crap." So, you are providing aid and comfort to the enemy, a causis belli.