Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 9.djvu/469

 LUSS 428 LULE

Quirinius et le Reoensement de S. Luc *' (Rome, 1897). Vigouroux, "Le N. T. et lea D^couvertes Modernes"

did not originAte in Egypt (they had a different s^rs- tem before 19 b. c), out most probably owed its

origin to Augustus, 8 b. c, the fourteenth year of his (Paris, 1890), has a good deal of us^ul information.

triSunUia potestas, which was a ^reat year in Rome, it has been suggested that Quirinius is a copyist's

and is called the Year I in some mscriptions. Apart error for Quintilius (Varus).

from St. Luke and Josephus, history is eqxially igno- X. Saint Luke and Jobephus. — ^The attempt to

rant of the second enrolling in Palestine, a. d. 6. So prove that St. Luke used Josephus (but inaccurately)

many discoveries about ancient times, concerning nas completely broken down. Belser successfuily

which history has been silent, have been made during refutes Ivrenkel in "Theol. Quartalschrift", 1895,

the last thirty years that it is surprising modern au- 1896. The differences can be explained only on the

thors should brush aside a statement of St. Luke's, supposition of entire independence. The resem-

a respectable first century writer, with a mere appeal blances are sufficiently accounted for by the use of the

to the silence of history on the matter. Septuagint and the common literary Greek of the

(2) The first census in Palestine, as described by time by both. See Bebb and Headlam in Hast., St. Luke, was not made according to Roman, but "Diet, of the Bible", s. vv. "Luke, Gospel of" and Jewish, metiiods. St. Luke, who travelled so much, "Acts of the Apostles", respectively. ScnQrer (Zeit. could not be ignorant of the Roman system, and his far W. Th., 1876) brushes aside the opinion that St. deecription deliberately excludes it. The Romans Luke read Josephus. When Acts is compared with did not run counter to ihe feelings of provincials more the Septuagint and Josephus, there is convincing evi- than they could help. Jews, who were proud of being dence that Josephus was not the source from which able to prove their descent, would have no objection the writer of Acts derived his knowledge of Jewish to the enrolling describea in Luke, ii. Schtirer's history. There are nimierous verbal ana other coin- aiguments are vitiated throughout by the supposition cidences with the Septuagint (Cross in " Expository that the census mentioned by St. Luke couldi^be made Times", XI, 538, against Schmiedel and the exploded only for taxation purposes. His discussion of im- author of "Sup. Religion"). St. Luke did not get penal taxation is learned but beside the mark (cf. the his names from Josephus, as contended by this last practice in Egypt). It was to the advantage of writer, thereby making the whole history a concoction. Aiiffustus to know the number of possible enemies in Wright in his "Some New Test. Problems" gives the Pakstine, in case of revolt. ^ names of fifty persons mentioned in St. Luke's Gospel.

(3) King Herod was not as independent as he is Thirty-two are common to the other two Synoptics, described for controversial purposes. A few years and therefore not taken from Josephus. Only five of before Herod's death Augustus wrote to him. Jo^ the remaining eighteen are found in him, namely.

Augustus Csesar, Tiberius, Lysanias, Quirinius, ana

Annas. As Annas is always called Ananus in Josephus, the name was evidently not taken from him. This is

B^hus, "Ant.", XVI, ix, 3, has: "Caesar [Augustus] • . . grew very angry, and wrote to Herod sharply. T^ sum of h^ epistle was this, that whereas of old he

used him as a friend, he should now use him as his corroborated by the way the Gospel speaks of Caiphas.

subject." It was after this that Herod was asked to St. Luke's employment of the otner four names

number his people. That some such enrolling took shows no connexion with the Jewish historian. The

place we gatner from a passing remark of Josephus, mention of numerous countries, cities, and islands in

"Ant.", A VII, ii, 4, " Accordingly, when all the peo- Acts shows complete independence of the latter writer.

1^ of ^e Jews gave assurance of their good Will to St. Luke's preface bears a much closer resemblance to

OBsar [Augustus], and to the kinf^'s [Herod's] govern- those of Greek medical writers than to that of Jose-

ment, these very men [the Pharisees] did not swear, phus. The absurdity of concluding that St. Luke

being above six thousand." The best scholars think must necessarily be wrong when not in agreement

thqr were asked to swear allegiance to Augustus. ^ witih Josephus is apparent when we remember the

(4) It is said there was no room for Quirinius, in frequent intTadietions and blunders in the latter

fyiia, before the death of Herod in 4 b. c. C. Sentius writeL^g^^^v

Gn^Ts^x^ — %llt;-r^ thi best critical commentaries, in Eng- lish, is that hyPhXQ^iaM'm Int. Cril. Com. (Edinbunsh, 1906).

8aturmnus was governor there from 9-6 B. c; and. «-rn.i • w. ^ . ry .r^^ t u .rv.^^

Aiii«i4ii;iiQ Vi^rtta frratt Ann fill itftAr fhft dpAth of li»l>, la that by FLiA^fAOOim JtU. CrU. Com. (Edmburgh, 1906).

UuintUlUS Varus, from b B. C. tUI alter the aeatn OI ^ fJnrt-rate CathoUc cofimentaiy is Schanz. Commcntar iiber

Herod. But m turbulent provinces there were some- ^^ Evangel, d. h. Luawlffobingen, 1883)— cf. also Maldona-

times two Roman officials of equal standing. In the tub, Knabenbaubr. Fiijjdn, McEvilly. Ward (London.

tbne of Caligula the administration of Africa was 18|7^j^Wiuoht. TA* (7o*pete ^►-G'nMA (Ix>ndon, i900)Mc/a 5^^

v 1 ..iy»:.w, ^.^.1.^ 1.»Ja« 8UcnasLoRNELT;jACQUiER,iV. Tew., H (Fans, 1906); Belsek;

(bb m St. Luke), while the mtemal affairs were under 2ahn, etc.; WEaroorr, The Canon of the New Test. (London!

the ordinary proconsul. The same position was held 1906); Liobtfoot. Eaeaue on Supernatural Religion (London.

by Vespasian when he conducted the war in Palestine, {^^^^882?"* ^^^^ Language of Sl Luke (Dublin and

Which belonged to the province of Sjrria— a province Sources: Synoptic Problem.— Buonaocorm, CrUica Lit-

COVemed by an officer of equal rank. Josephus speaks tenma (Bologn&, 1905); Peaks, Critical Introd. to the N. Tent.

of VolumniUS as being KaUrapos In^^^, together with (L«mdon, 10^); Webtcott. Introd. to Ih^ Study of the GoMvelB

5? T vj w«****^ €» ^.^^ ^ a7Il:« fna « J? \. «<T«k*«M» (London* 1881); Salmon, op. ett.; Idem, The Human Elenimt %n

C. Sentius SaturmnUS, m Syria (9-6 B. C.): Ihere IheChepeU (London, lOOT); Rubhbrooke, Synopticon (London

, . ,^ i. _- «_x • ^_j ir^i V „ «, • Oxford, 1909); Idem in

Wright, op. cit.

Paul the Traveller, and Galattans, Kpistle

ZZVii, 1, 2. Corbulo commanded the armies of Syria to the; Idem, Woe Chritt Bom in BethUhemf (3rd ed., London,

•gunst the ParthiiinB, while Q^tua ««d Gall™ iggf); ^^f" ^.o^TlrA^.Tei.""^'' fi'SV^r'^.f ^fo^^^^

were successively governors of Sjma. Inougn Jo- ^aHe. 1890);Knowlino. XcU in rxpo«tor'«GrwA T^ar. (Lon-

Bephus speaks of Gallus, he knows nothing of Corbulo; don, 1900). See Aero or the ApoexLEs.

but he was there nevertheless (Mommsen, "Rbm. C. Aherne.

Gesch.", V, 382i. A similar position to that of Cor- j^^^^^ ^g^^ Blessed. See William Filbt,

bulo must have been held by Quinmus for a few years gu^uu,

be twe en 7 and 4 b c

The best treatment of the subject is that by Ramsay L11I6 Indiazui.— A name which has given rise to


 * Was Christ Bom in Bethlehem?" See also the valu- considerable confusion and dispute in Ai^entine

able essays of two Catholic writers: Marucchi in "II ethnology, owing to the fact, now established, that it

BeiMarione" (Rome, 1897); Bour, "L'Insoription de was applied at differeat periods to two very different