Read below:

JBL 104/1 (1985) 57-68

JESUS BARABBAS AND THE PASCHAL PARDON

ROBERT L MERRITT 2 Bratenahl Place, Cleveland, OH 44108

At the festival season it was the Governor's custom to release one prisoner chosen by the people There was then in custody a man of some notoriety, called Jesus Bar-Abbas When they were assembled Pilate said to them, 'Which would you like me to release to you—Jesus Bar-Abbas, or Jesus called Messiah?' (Matt 27 15-17)

1

A recently published paper by Stevan L Davies supports the "remarkable theory" first proposed by Horace A Rigg, Jr and later by Η Ζ Maccoby, that Jesus of Nazareth was known to his contemporaries as Jesus bar Abba(s), that there was not a separate person named Barab- bas at the time of Jesus' trial, that the people were not granted by Pon­ tius Pilate the choice between two prisoners, but that in fact Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus Barabbas were really the same man

2 This raises

1 NEB, which notes that "Some witnesses omit Jesus" before Bar-Abbas The manu­

script evidence for the reading "Jesus Barabbas" is listed in Η A Rigg, Jr , "Barabbas," JBL 64 (1945) 428-32, R V G Tasker, The Greek New Testament Being the Text Translated m The New English Bible 1961 (London Oxford University, 1964) 413

Ρ W Schmiedel points out that some support for Matt 27 16-17 having originally read "Jesus" before "Barabbas" ("and it may be so in Mk also") "might perhaps be found in the fact that the first mention of the name Barabbas in Mk is preceded by o Acyó/xcvos The meaning would then be 'He who, for distinction's sake (though it was not his proper name) was called Barabbas'" ("Barabbas," Encyclopaedia Biblica [New York Macmillan, 1899] col 477) See also D E Nineham, Samt Mark (Philadelphia Westminster, 1977) 416 A Η M'Neile (The Gospel According to St Matthew The Greek Text with Intro­ ductions, Notes and Indices [London Macmillan, 1915, reprinted 1965] 411) and E Klos­ termann (Das Matthausevangelium [Tubingen Mohr (Siebeck), 1927] 220) also suggests that Mark 15 7 originally may have read ην oc ' Ιησού? ο λ€γόμ€νος βαραββας

2 S L Davies, "Who Is Called Bar Abbas?" NTS 27 (1981) 260-62, Rigg, "Barabbas",

Η Ζ Maccoby, "Jesus and Barabbas," NTS 16 (1969) 55-60, idem, Revolution m Judaea Jesus and the Jewish Resistance (New York Taphnger, 1980) Maccoby suggests that Barabbas was a title by which Jesus was known to his followers, Barabbas deriving either from Bar-Abba ("'Son of the Father,' ι e , Son of God"), or from Bar-Rabba(n), meaning Teacher ("Jesus and Barabbas," 58, see also Maccoby, Revolution in Judaea, 165-66, Davies, "Who is Called Bar Abbas?", S V McCasland, "'Abba, Father,'" JBL 72 [1953] 79-91) Ρ L Couchoud and R Stahl observe that, even assuming a custom of paschal grace existed which justified the crowd to free Barabbas, this does not explain the purported right of the crowd to condemn Jesus in Mark 15 13-15 ("Jesus Barabbas," HibJ

58 Journal of Biblical Literature

anew the need to reexamine the Barabbas episode as depicted in the Gospel accounts and to determine whether in fact the "crowd," given the choice, chose to have Pilate free Barabbas and crucify Jesus

According to Rigg, Jesus was brought to trial before Pilate twice, first as Jesus Barabbas (i e , Jesus, Son of the Father) and later as Jesus called χριστός (i e , the Christ [the Anointed One, the Messiah (mäsmh), or "King of Israel"—rendered "King of the Jews" in Mark 15:9 and John 18 39]), a title which in Jesus' day belonged to royalty, not divinity Jesus as Barabbas (Son of the Father) at the first trial was guilty of no crime under Roman law and was discharged, but Jesus as the Christ (the Mes- siah, the Davidic king who was to liberate Israel)3 at the second trial was quite different, for that was the political crime of treason, which was within Pilate's competence and responsibility to try 4 Thus, Rigg con- cludes, there was not involved any custom of releasing a prisoner at the Passover, but rather a case of one individual having been charged twice

Rigg's thesis is based in part on there being no evidence of the exis- tence of a custom of Privilegium paschale (the Passover or paschal pardon) in the Roman Empire or in Judea and on his failure and the failure of other scholars to find any biblical or extrabiblical precedent or parallel, direct or indirect, which suggests the likelihood of such a custom 5 However, there is

25 [1926/27] 29), see Maccoby, Revolution m Judaea> chap 1, esp p p 14, 17-18 M Goguel suggests that the Gospel story of Barabbas is very badly linked to the rest of the account of the trial of Jesus and completely turns the account off course since, for the question "Is Jesus guilty and should he be condemned?" a completely different phrase is substituted "Is it to be Jesus or is it to be Barabbas who will benefit from the paschal grace?" ("A propos du procès de Jésus," ZNW 31 [1932] 295) Goguel asserts that the Barabbas episode does not make any sense unless Jesus had already been condemned, see also M Goguel, The Life of Jesus (London Allen & Unwin, 1933) 515-16, R Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition (rev ed , Oxford Blackwell, 1972) 277 On the choice between two prisoners see Rigg, "Barabbas," 435, Maccobv, "Jesus and Barabbas," 56, 58, idem, Revolution m Judaea, chap 15 Maccoby ("Jesus and Barabbas," 60), fol- lowing Ρ Winter (On the Trial of Jesus [Berlin de Gruyter, 1961] 93-94), points out that logically there should have been a choice among many prisoners, not between only two, and that "this consideration brings out clearly the unreality of the whole story " See also H Cohn, The Trial and Death of Jesus (New York Harper & Row, 1967) 165-70

3 R E Brown, The Gospel According to John (xtit-xxt) (AB 29A, 2d ed , Garden City,

NY Doubleday, 1982) 799, Maccoby, Revolution in Judaea, chap 7, D Ν Freedman, "The Scrolls and the New Testament," JBL 78 (1959) 328-29 See E L Abel, "Jesus and the Cause of Jewish National Independence," REJ 128 (1969) 247-52

4 Rigg, "Barabbas," 444-47, 452-53 See Cohn, Trial and Death of Jesus, 171-74

Alternatively, it is possible that two different charges were made against Jesus at the same trial See A Ν Sherwm-White, Roman Society and Roman Law m the New Testament (Oxford Clarendon, 1963, reprinted from corrected sheets 1965) 35

5 Rigg, "Barabbas," 421-26, see also Maccoby, "Jesus and Barabbas," 55-56, Davies,

"Who Is Called Bar Abbas?" 260 Winter states "The Privilegium paschale is nothing but a figment of the imagination No such custom existed" (On the Trial of Jesus, 94, see also 91-94, 198-99) See also S G F Brandon, Jesus and the Zealots (New York Scnbner, 1967) 4, 258-59, G Sloyan, Jesus on Trial (Philadelphia Fortress, 1973) 67-68, Cohn,

Merritt: Jesus Barabbas 59

evidence of a custom in the ancient Near East of the king's being enjoined to release a prisoner at a particular time, a custom undoubtedly known to the Jews at that time of their Babylonian captivity. There also is evidence that prisoners were released in Greece (albeit apparently only temporarily for the period of the festival) at certain religious festivals, including festi­ vals celebrated at or near the time of the New Year or the vernal equinox (as is the Passover), and there are indications that this also was the case in Rome. This paper suggests that general awareness of these customs may have provided the Gospel writers with a vehicle for coping with a politi­ cally sensitive Roman world by facilitating the interpolation of Barabbas as the beneficiary of a paschal pardon at the trial of Jesus.

Benno Landsberger noted as long ago as 1915 that the Babylonian sign rite (a rite which involved the king's reciting a penitential psalm and which included a prisoner release ceremony on certain occasions) furnishes a par­ allel to the custom of the release of a prisoner on the occasion of a religious celebration, as is presupposed in Mark 15:6 (and later in Matt 27:15 and John 18:39).

6 Landsberger suggests that the meaning of the ceremonial

release of a prisoner in Babylonia in connection with the sign is probably founded on the idea of a symbolic reversal of societal status, an idea which

Trial and Death of Jesus, 166. According to Bultmann, "the episode of Barabbas is obvi­ ously a legendary expansion, the extent of which cannot be quite precisely determined" (History of the Synoptic Tradition, 272).

C. B. Chavel ("The Releasing of a Prisoner on the Eve of Passover in Ancient Jerusa­ lem," JBL 60 [1941] 275) finds a "distinctly defined rabbinic reference to the custom" of freeing a political prisoner in Mishna tractate Besah. 91α (The Babylonian Talmud: Seder Mo'ed II [ed. I. Epstein; London: Soncino, 1938] 485), but the pertinency of the reference to the Gospel narrative is disputed by Winter (On the Trial of Jesus, 91, 198), Rigg ("Barabbas," 422), and Cohn (Trial and Death of Jesus, 166-67). Chavel's main thesis is supported by J. Blinzler (The Trial of Jesus [Westminster: Newman, 1959] 218-21), who points out, however, that the Mishna text referred to by Chavel "fits in only with John's account, according to which the trial of Jesus and the release of Barabbas took place on the fourteenth Nisan, but not with the synoptics' account, which places the trial on the fifteenth Nisan" (p. 219). For a presentation on astronomical and calendrical grounds that the crucifixion (and hence also the trial of Jesus) occurred on 14 Nisan (Friday, 3 April A D . 33), see C. J. Humphreys and W. G. Waddington, "Dating the Crucifixion," Nature 306 (1983) 743-46.

6 B. Landsberger, Der kultische Kalendar der Babylonier und Assyrer (Leipziger Semiti­

stischen Studien, Band 6, Heft 1/2; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1915) 116-17. Luke 23:17 does not mention such a custom; see Winter, On the Trial of Jesus, 92. I. H. Marshall shows that Luke 23:17 is "probably a scribal addition" (The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978] 859); see also Goguel, Life of Jesus, 517; C. G. Montefiore, The Synoptic Gospels (2d ed.; New York: Ktav, 1968) 2. 622. Winter concludes that "the Barabbas episode was originally alien to the Fourth Gospel. . . . A reviser of the Fourth Gospel inserted the Barabbas incident into the Johannine story, making cursory and injudicious borrowings" (On the Trial of Jesus, 98). But see Brown, Gospel According to John (xiii-xxi), 870-72,854-55. Mark and Matthew describe the Privilegium paschale as the practice of Pilate or of the Roman governor, whereas John calls it a Jewish custom; see Rigg, "Barabbas," 426.

60 Journal of Biblical Literature

Landsberger states played an important role in the sar pühi rite 7 In the sign rite, in order to enhance the illusion before the god, the penitent king (who in the penitential psalms frequently represents himself as a slave or a prisoner) removes the servile or penal condition from the actual slave or prisoner, thereby freeing him while the king seemingly does penance in his behalf 8 (Landsberger suggests the possibility that the idea of the symbolic exchange may be a hidden motivating force behind the account of the setting free of Barabbas, the penitent messiah takes upon himself the pun- ishment meant for the guilty, while the latter goes free )

Surviving Assyrian tablets of the first half of the first millennium Β C (whose menologies derive from Babylonian originals)

9 reflect that the king

released a prisoner on the sixteenth 1 0

and twenty-sixth 1 1

days of Arah- samna (the eighth month, roughly November),

1 2 and also possibly on some

day (date broken away) in Tammuz (the fourth month, June-July) 1 3

7 For discussion of the sar pühi (substitute king or royal substitute) rite, see J Gray,

"Royal Substitution in the Ancient Near East," PEQ 87 (1955) 180-82,1 Engnell, Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient Near East (Oxford Blackwell, 1967) 17, 26, A L Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia Portrait of a Dead Civilization (Chicago University of Chicago Press, 1964) 100, 358, R Labat, "Le sort des substituts royaux en Assyria au temps des sargonides," RA 40 (1945) 123-42, Ρ Ρ Bourboulis, Ancient Festivals of "Saturnalia" Type (Hellënika/Parartêma, 16, Thessaloniki Hetaireias Makedonikôn Spou- dön, 1964) 30-35 But see R de Vaux, Ancient Israel (New York McGraw-Hill, 1965) 434-35

It appears that the release of a prisoner in connection with a purification rite had its Hittite analogy (where the prisoner was banished as a scapegoat after serving as a substi- tute king) and also was practiced in M a n See Engnell, Studies m Divine Kingship, 67, 77, M Vieyra, "Rites de purification hittites," RHR 119 (1939) 121-53, G Dossin, "Un rituel du culte d'Istar provenant de Man," RA 35 (1938) 1-13

8 Landsberger states that whether the setting free of the prisoner took place in actuality or only symbolically cannot be ascertained from the surviving tablets and that this is irrel- evant in terms of the essential meaning of the rite S Langdon proposes the idea that "the king, acting for the nation, released a prisoner as a form of symbolic magic to indicate that the gods were merciful to men and released them from sin" ("The Release of a Pris- oner at the Passover," ExpTim 29 [1918] 330)

9 S Langdon, Babylonian Menologies and the Semitic Calendars (London Oxford, 1935) 1, 85

1 0 E Ebehng, Keilschrifttexte aus Assur Religiösen Inhalts (Leipzig Hmnchs, 1920) (hereinafter KAR), No 178 Reverse III, line 53 (KAR 178 Rev III, 53), R Labat, Hémé- rologies et menologies d'Assur (Pans Librairie d'Amérique et d'Orient, 1939) 126-27, Landsberger, Der kultische Kalendar, 115-16, Langdon, Babylonian Menologies, 131 See also Engnell, Studies m Divine Kingship, 35-36, 44

1 1 KAR 178 Rev III, 65, Labat, Hémérologies et menologies d'Assur, 128-29, Lands- berger, Der kultische Kalendar, 116, Langdon, Babylonian Menologies, 131, CAD 8, 91

1 2 The Assyrian month approximations set forth in this paper are those given in Lang- don, Babylonian Menologies, 114, 119, 129, and 142

1 3 C Virolleaud, Babyloniaca (Paris Librairie Paul Geuthner, 1911) IV, 119, 3 (translit- erated at IV, 104, 3), Langdon, Babylonian Menologies, 123, 132, CAD 8, 91 Richard Caphce indicates that it is not certain that there is a reference to releasing a prisoner m

Merritt: Jesus Barabbas 61

Stephen Langdon asserts that the custom of releasing a prisoner also occurred on the sixteenth day of Adar (the twelfth month, March-April), a time when a Sumerian (and later a Babylonian and Assyrian) harvest festi- val was celebrated and the first sheaf of the harvest was waved (a festival related to the Hebrew Passover and the waving of the omer), but Lang- don's reading of KAR 178 Rev. 1,43 to this effect is incorrect.14

We know that the Jewish calendar came under Babylonian influence during the first two centuries after the captivity of the Jews and their exile to Babylonia about 597 B.C.15 Although there is no evidence that the Jews borrowed a Babylonian custom of releasing a prisoner in con- nection with a festival,16 we do know that one recipient of a Babylonian reprieve was Jehoiachin, King of Judah, who was freed by Amel-Marduk

Tammuz, for "the only thing preserved of the supposed injunction is [ . . . ] BAR-ir. BAR can represent the verb ussuru, to release, but the writing indicates a form ending in -ir, hence not the usual future umassar, though the precative limassir 'let him release' is pos- sible. The probability of a reading [(sarru) kasâ] limassir or so depends on the parallelism of the whole line with lines containing the phrase in other texts, which I am not again checking [and which should be checked before accepting Langdon's reading]" (personal communication, 28 April 1981).

1 4 Labat, Hémérologies et menologies dAssur, 142-43; Mitchell Dahood and Richard Caplice, personal communications, 26 March 1981. See Langdon, Babylonian Menologies, 142-43. Langdon (Babylonian Menologies, 114) also states that a prisoner was released on the fifteenth day of Ayar (second month, April-May), citing R. C. Thompson, The Reports of the Magicians and Astrologers of Nineveh and Babylon in the British Museum (London: Luzac, 1900) I, No. 215 (Plate 62). This misreads the cuneiform inscriptions, which may be translated (William W. Hallo, personal communication, 14 April 1981) "if on the fifteenth of the month of Aiaru he li[bat]es to the god Ea (and) releases the guard (sa massarti) all that is his will be established for praises." See also Thompson, Reports II, p. lxxi.

1 5 S. Gandz, "The Calendar of Ancient Israel," in Homenaje a Millás-Vallierosa (Barce- lona: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1954) 1. 633; Langdon, Babylonian Menologies, 85; E. R. Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings: A Recon- struction of the Chronology of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah (rev. ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965) 169.

1 6 See J. B. Segal, The Hebrew Passover from the Earliest Times to A.D. 70 (London: Oxford, 1963) 242; see also 119-20, 153. For a speculative interpretation of the crucifixion and of the prisoner release custom depicted in the Gospels see J. G. Frazer, The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion (3d ed.; London: Macmillan, 1913), Part 6 (The Scapegoat), 412-23 and 360-68; idem, The Golden Bough (1 vol. abridged ed.; New York: Macmillan, 1922), Preface. Frazer speculates that they derive from the mock king sacrificial rite at the Sacaea festival of Babylonia, which festival he sees as bearing a close resemblance to the oldest form of the Roman Saturnalia and which he suggests the Jews brought back from their captivity as the feast of Purim. For a critical commentary on Frazer's interpretation, see A. Lang, "Mr. Frazer's Theory of the Crucifixion," Fortnightly Review 75 (1901) 650-62. See also Rigg, "Barabbas," 423. For other speculations, see H. Zimmern, Zum babylonischen Neujahrsfest (Leipzig: Teubner, 1918), esp. p. 12, sum- marized and criticized in G. R. Tabouis, Nebuchadnezzar (New York: Whittlesey House, 1931) 358-60; J. Morgenstern, Some Significant Antecedents of Christianity (Leiden: Brill, 1966) chap. 4, esp. pp. 49-51 (see also pp. 93, 100-102).

62 Journal of Biblical Literature

(Evil-Merodach) in 561 Β C on the occasion of Amel-MardmVs ascension to the throne after the death of Nebuchadnezzar.

1 7 Here Babylonian

custom intersects with Jewish recorded history with an event of sufficient impact to assure its remembrance as reflected in 2 Kings and Jeremiah.

Not only was there a custom of releasing a prisoner at particular times in Babylonia and Assyria, but more immediate to the time of Jesus a custom of prisoner release existed in Greece in connection with certain religious festivals Prisoners were released at the Athenian festival of Dionysus known as the Greater Dionysia (or the Great or City Dionysia), a festival of joy at the departure of winter and the promise of summer which was celebrated for six days from the ninth to the fourteenth of the month of Elaphebolion (about 28 March-2 April).

1 8 The festival encom­

passed a religious procession in honor of the god Dionysus Eleuthereus (one of whose manifestations was that of a dying and resurrected god) and culminated with the production of comedies, tragedies and satyr plays in the great theater of Dionysus The festival was also made the occasion for the proclamation of honors conferred upon citizens and others for conspicuous service to Athens and was a time for visits of ambassadors from other Greek states for matters requiring public affir­ mations such as oaths of alliance.

1 9 Strangers in considerable numbers

were present in Athens at the time of the festival and even took part in the festival

2 0 Thus, knowledge of the practice of releasing prisoners at

the time of the festival would have been widely disseminated The Greater Dionysia became important in Athens in the sixth century BC and continued until at least the first century A D

2 1

Prisoners were also released at Greek festivals and rites primarily concerned with phenomena of nature and the renewal of vegetation, such as at the Thesmophoria,

2 2 a women's festival in honor of Demeter

1 7 See 2 Kgs 25 27-30, Jer 52 31-34

1 8 "Dionysia," in Encyclopaedia Britannica (11th ed , Cambridge and New York Cam­

bridge University Press, 1910) 8 283, A Pickard-Cambndge, The Dramatic Festivals of Athens (2d e d , Oxford Clarendon, 1968), chap 2, W Smith, W Wayte, and G E Marindm, eds , A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (3d ed , London John Murray, 1890) 1 640 (hereinafter SmitKs Dictionary), Η Τ Peck, ed , Harper s Dictio­ nary of Classical Literature and Antiquities (New York American, 1923) 521

1 9 Pickard-Cambndge, Dramatic Festivals of Athens, 59

2 0 Smith's Dictionary 1 640, Pickard-Cambndge, Dramatic Festivals of Athens, 58

2 1 Pickard-Cambndge, Dramatic Festivals of Athens, 58, 83

2 2 J G Frazer, "Thesmophoria," m Encyclopaedia Britannica 26 838-40, esp ρ 839

η 16, citing "Marcelhnus on Hermogenes, in Rhetores Graeci, ed Walz, ìv 462, Sopater, ibid , vin 67" for the statement that "Prisoners were released at the festival " See C Walz, ed , Rhetores Graeci (Stuttgart and Tubingen J G Cottae) 4 462 2-3 (1833) and 8 67 1 2 - 13 (1835) See also H W Parke (Festivals of the Athenians [Ithaca, NY Cornell Univer- sity Press, 1977]) and J E Harrison (Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion [2d ed , Cambridge University Press, 1908] chap 4) for a discussion of the nature and time of observance of the Thesmophoria and other festivals

Mer ritt: Jesus Barabbas 63

celebrated in Athens on the eleventh to the thirteenth day of the month of Pyanepsion (October), and at the P a n a t h e n a e a

2 3 (a festival apparently

superimposed upon the older Kronia), 2 4

one of the oldest and most important of the Athenian festivals, the great day of which was the twenty-eighth of Hecatombaeon (about mid-August).

2 5

The criteria for choosing the particular prisoners to be released at a Greek festival and the circumstances of their release are only sparsely indicated by the surviving accounts. It appears that those who could lawfully participate in offerings and libations were eligible for release and not the impure, those under a curse and those who were excluded from being sprinkled with holy water (and who thus, presumably, could not participate in religious ceremonies).

2 6 This is consistent with a scholium by

Ulpian on Demosthenes indicating that the release was merely a parole for the duration of the festival and not an amnesty, with bond required to be furnished on behalf of a released prisoner. A temporary release of prisoners also is consistent with feasting slaves, with masters themselves undertaking the role of servants during the days of the Kronia and similar festivals, after which the slaves revert to their usual status. According to Ulpian, prisoners were released at the Greater Dionysia and Panathenaea in order that piety toward the divine might be preserved (by the paroled prisoners being allowed to attend the festivals.)

27 Lewis Richard Farnell speculates that the

2 3 Ulpian Schol. Demosthenes 22.68; Sopater, in Rhetores Graeci 8.71.27-28 (1835);

L. R. Farnell, The Cults of the Greek States (Oxford: Clarendon, 1907) 3. 96-97 (see also p. 328 η. 75n, and 5. 322 n. 127m [1909]).

2 4 J. E. Harrison, Themis: A Study of the Social Origins of Greek Religion (2d ed.;

Cambridge: University Press, 1927) 253; Parke, Festivals of the Athenians, 30. Segal (Hebrew Passover, 120), apparently relying upon Harrison, states that at the older Kronia, on the twelfth day of the month following the summer solstice (the Athenian New Year's month), "masters waited upon slaves and prisoners were released." Harrison (Themis, 253) also states that prisoners were released "at the spring festival of Dionysus, the Anthesteria" (celebrated from the eleventh to the thirteenth of the month of Anthesterion [February- March]), but she apparently confuses this with the Greater Dionysia, which was a differ­ ent Dionysian festival.

2 5 "Panathenaea," in Encyclopaedia Britannica, 20. 672-73; A. Mommsen, Feste der

Stadt Athen im Altertum (Leipzig: Teubner, 1898) 41-159. 2 6

Sopater, in Rhetores Graeci 8.72.7-9 (1835): . . . etra «fáyeír 0€σμωτηρίον διδωσιν, ους μ€Τ€\€ίν Up ω ν κα\ σττονοων evayes, ου τους ακάθαρτους και cvaycîs και των ττςρφραντηρίων α-π^λαννομΑνονς. W. Κ. C. Guthrie states that "a murderer was consid­ ered by all the laws of religion at Athens to be incurably impure and accursed" (Orpheus and Greek Religion: A Study of the Orphic Movement [2d rev. ed.; London: Methuen, 1952] 200). Cohn points out the unlikelihood that any alleged custom of Privilegium paschale would permit Pilate to pardon someone guilty of murder or treason (Trial and Death of Jesus, 165-68).

2 7 Ulpian Schol. Demosthenes 22.68, as it appears in Oratores Attici: Fragmenta

Oratorum Atticorum (ed. Κ. Müller; Paris: Didot et Sociis, 1888) 2. 706: 'E0os ην παρά τοις ^Αθηναίοις €V τοις Α.ιοννσίοις και €V τοίς ΥΙαναθηναίοις τους Ο€σμώτας αφίζσθαι τον 0€σμον €V €Κ€ΐι>αι? rais ήμίραις παρασχόντας ίγγνητας προς το μη φυγείν, Ita και το

64 Journal of Biblical Literature

original idea which suggested the practice of releasing prisoners may have been that "law and order could be suspended during a short period of licence which was especially common at ceremonies connected with the crops " 2 8

I suggest that the custom of releasing prisoners at the Greater Dionysia (and other Greek) festivals may have had its origin in the leg- end of Pentheus, who succeeded his grandfather Cadmus as king of Thebes As related by Ovid, after Dionysus returned from Asia and founded Eleutherai he came to his birthplace, Thebes, claiming to be a god Pentheus denied Dionysus's divinity and ordered him and his fol- lowers seized When Pentheus imprisoned Acetes, a companion of Dionysus, and the cruel instruments of Acetes' death were being pre- pared, the prison doors burst open of their own accord and his chains fell off 2 9 Euripides tells a similar story with respect to the freeing of the maenads or Bacchae, the women worshipers of Dionysus, who had come with him from Asia Moreover, when Dionysus continued to try to per- suade Pentheus to accept him as a god and Pentheus ordered Dionysus bound and imprisoned, an earthquake collapsed the palace, freeing Dionysus unbound 3 0

It is important to point out in the light of the foregoing discussion that there were actually few prisoners in the Athenian world, for Athenian courts levied sentences of exile, execution, fines, confiscation of property, or diminution of personal status, but rarely or only occasionally was a prison term itself the penalty 3 1 The state prison seems to have had only eight cells32 and was used to confine persons awaiting execution, to confine

€νσ*β€ς γένηται προς το θέϊον και ασφαλές νπάρχη τοις χρ€ωστονμ€νοις μη φίνγόντων των οζσμωτων, άλλα μ€τα τας ημίρας της ίορτής πάλιν ϊνβαλλομένων eis το οξσμωτηριον Aeyci ονν o n kv CKCIWIÇ ταίς ήμζραις ο πατήρ τον ^Ανοροτίωνος ως αδ«αζ> €χων €κ τον 0€σμον απ€Ορα ("It was a custom among the Athenians at the Dionysia and Panathenaea for prisoners to be released from prison on those days when they had pro­ duced guarantors of their not escaping, in order that piety towards the divine might be preserved and there might be surety for moneys owed, with the prisoners not running away but being remanded to prison")

2 8 Farnell, Cults of the Greek States 3 96-97

2 9 Ovid Metamorphoses 3 878-83

3 0 The Bacchae, 444-49, 585-634 Acts 16 25-26 recites a similar account of an earth­

quake freeing Paul and Silas from imprisonment See also Acts 12 6-10, where Peter is freed from prison chains by an angel

3 1 A R W Harrison, The Law of Athens Procedure (Oxford Clarendon, 1971) 2 168-

85 (chap 2, §9, Penalties) William Stearns Davis, A Day in Old Athens A Picture of Athenian Life (Boston Allyn and Bacon, 1952) 144-45 E Vanderpool, "The prison of Socrates," The Illustrated London News 264 (June 1976) 88 But see Harrison (Law of Athens, 2 177), who refers to statements in the orators and elsewhere "which definitely imply that imprisonment was recognized as a normal penalty "

3 2 Vanderpool, "The prison of Socrates," 87-88, R E Wycherley, The Stones of Athens

(Princeton Princeton University Press, 1978) 46-47, M Crosby, "The Poros Building," Hesperia 20 (1951) 168-87 Generally, a cell was occupied by more than one prisoner,

Mer ritt: Jesus Barabbas 65

accused persons whom it was not possible to release on bail before trial or sentence, and to confine those who failed to pay a public debt or a fine (until payment was made). 3 3 In the case of unpaid public debts or fines the debtor was apparently not imprisoned immediately after the verdict was rendered but could by providing sureties secure freedom from imprisonment until the ninth prytany, and if he had not paid by then he was imprisoned and the property of the sureties was distrained upon.3 4 If the charge was one of treason or conspiracy to overthrow the democracy no sureties were allowed and the accused had to be held in custody.35

The Greek festival of Kronia had its counterpart in Roman Saturnalia festivals (December 17-23),3 6 at which, according to Jane Ellen Harrison, there was also a custom "of releasing prisoners and slaves—the mock subjects of the mock king of the feast, himself a prisoner or a slave."37

Although no authority for this statement is given,38 the possible adoption in Rome in connection with Saturnalia festivals of the Athenian practice of releasing prisoners may be indicated by an allusion to Cronus's "kindness to slaves and prisoners" in Lucían Saturnalia 8,39 and by the statement of Athenaeus (14.44, 45, citing and quoting from Baton of Sinope) that "the Roman Saturnalia are originally a very Greek festival" which among the Thessalians "is called Peloria," at which festival "they serve up tables admirably furnished, and hold a very cordial and friendly assembly, so as to receive every foreigner at the banquet, and to set free all the prisoners, and to make their servants sit down and feast with every sort of liberty and licence, while their masters wait on them."4 0

Livy (5.13.5-8) reports that when the eight-day celebration of the lectisternium or Draping of Couches, a propitiatory ceremony (thought to be of Greek origin) at which a sacrificial meal was offered to gods and

Socrates' friends seem to have arranged for him to have a cell to himself (Vanderpool, "The prison of Socrates," 88).

3 3 Davis, Day in Old Athens, 145; Vanderpool, "The prison of Socrates," 88; Harrison, Law of Athens, 2. 242.

3 4 Harrison, Law of Athens, 2. 242-44. For a requirement that a defendant be incar- cerated unless he furnished three sureties from his own census class, see p. 221.

3 5 Harrison, Law of Athens, 2. 56, 87; see also pp. 62, 170-72, 178, 230, for other instan- ces where the furnishing of sureties may not have been permitted.

3 6 Conjectured by J. G. Frazer to have originally been a celebration of the winter solstice ("Saturn," in Encyclopaedia Britannica, 24. 231). During the festival the woolen fetters were taken from the feet of the cult statue of Saturn (identified in later times with Cronus); see Harrison, Themis, 223, 253; Macrobius, Saturnalia 1.8.5.

3 7 Harrison, Themis, 224. 3 8 Macrobius, Saturnalia 1.10.1 does not speak of prisoner release and states only that to

punish a criminal during the days of the Saturnalia festival called for an act of atonement. 3 9 Translated by H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler, The Works of Lucían of Samosata

(Oxford: Clarendon, 1905, reprinted 1949) 4. 111. 4 0 The Deipnosophists or Banquet of the Learned of Athenaeus, translated by C. D.

Yonge (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1854) 3.1021-23. See also Harrison, Themis, 251.

66 Journal of Biblical Literature

goddesses, was held for the first time in Rome in 399 Β C, prisoners were released on condition that they return to prison at the end of the festival We have no record which indicates that such temporary releases of pris­ oners also took place during later (infrequent) celebrations of the lec- tisternium Nevertheless, the temporary release of prisoners reported by Livy enhances the probability that such a practice also was observed at Saturnalia festivals as suggested in the preceding paragraph

I propose the possibility that the Babylonian, Assyrian, and Greek (and seemingly also Roman and perhaps other) customs of releasing a prisoner or prisoners at the time of certain religious and other festivals and occasions were known m the world of the Gospel writers and provided a setting that paved the way for reciting the details of the trial of Jesus at the time of the Passover in a manner that fulfilled their apologetic need to exculpate the Romans and put responsibility for the crucifixion on the J e w s

4 1 As

observed by D E Nineham in his commentary on Mark,

The experience of the Church, especially after AD 70, was that while the Jews increasingly refused to accept Christ's claims, the Romans were sometimes surprisingly friendly and Gentiles in general seemed much more inclined to believe It was, therefore, natural to lay blame for the crucifixion exclusively on the Jews and to exonerate the Romans completely, and a steadily increas­ ing tendency can be observed in the New Testament and later Christian literature to transfer all guilt in this matter to Jewish shoulders, this tendency had already begun to operate before St Mark's time and has had its effect upon his account

4 2

Consistent with the foregoing, S G F Brandon, H Ζ Maccoby, and others maintain that Mark deliberately inserted a spurious prisoner-release custom into the trial of Jesus for apologetic purposes

4 3 Brandon and

4 1 See Nineham, Saint Mark, 368, 413 For factors that may have influenced the evan­

gelists in their Gospel accounts on conscious and unconscious levels, see the Introduction to Nineham, Saint Mark, esp pp 24-25, 30-33, and 48-52, and the discussion of the passion of Christ at pp 365-69 Compare W S Vorster ("Kerygma/History and the Gos­ pel Genre," NTS 29 [1983] 87-95), who states "After the rise of Redaktionsgeschichte and especially as a result of the latest literary critical studies of the gospels, it has been proved beyond doubt that the gospels are narratives, made-up stones where theology and proclamation, history and interpretation form part of the functions of the text as a process of communication A narrative such as a gospel involves a narrator's choice Even if it reports actual events it involves the narrator's point of view Mark tells his story from an omniscient and intrusive point of view He knows everything about his characters, what they see, hear, feel and even what they think He even knows the mind of Jesus (2 8, 3 5, 5 30, 8 12) He does not only report but comments and evaluates in order to create sympathy or dislike in his characters (cf 1 22, 14 1 or his portrayal of the Jewish leaders and disciples) so as to convince the receiver(s) of his story " (p 91)

4 2 Nineham, Saint Mark, 367-68

4 3 Brandon, Jesus and the Zealots, chap 5, esp pp 258-65, and chap 6, esp ρ 283, see

also idem, The Trial of Jesus of Nazareth (New York Stein and Day, 1968), Maccoby,

Mer ritt: Jesus Barabbas 67

Maccoby make reasonable cases that after the commencement of the Jewish War against Rome in A D 66 and the siege and capture of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70, Mark deliberately interpolated a custom of Privilegium paschale and the Barabbas episode into his Gospel account in order to deflect the blame for Jesus' death from the Romans to the Jews and to detach and dissociate the Christians (originally an integrally Jewish sect) from the Jews in their hour of defeat 4 4 Maccoby agrees with Rigg that in fact "Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus Barabbas were the same man," 4 5 but goes further than Rigg by concluding that in the process of the Gospel writers' seeking to exonerate the Romans "a duplication of names was transformed into a duplication of persons,"46 with the Jews and not Pilate depicted as calling for the crucifixion of Jesus

If there was no custom of Privilegium paschale in the Roman Empire or in Judea, why did Mark introduce that particular custom in furtherance of his apologetic purpose? I suggest that the answer to this question is the same whether there was one person depicted as two, or whether Jesus and Barabbas were in fact separate persons 4 7 I propose

Revolution in Judaea, chaps 16 and 17, idem, "Jesus and Barabbas " See also, for ex- ample, Goguel, Life of Jesus, 520 "The Barabbas incident can only have been intro- duced into the Passion narrative at a time when this narrative had already been affected by the desire of the Christian community to keep on good terms with Rome", M Grant, Jesus An Historian s View of the Gospels (London Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1977) 165 "The evangelists, notably Matthew are still manifestly concerned to put all the blame on the Jews—a theme which this story of Barabbas may well have been specifically invented to drive home " F W Beare (The Gospel according to Matthew [San Francisco Harper & Row, 1981] 528-31) interprets Matt 27 15-26 as steps "in the Christian programme of laying the whole guilt [for the Crucifixión] on the Jews, and absolving the Romans, so far as that could be done The cry of verse 25, whereby the Jews of the time invoke upon themselves and upon their children the whole guilt for the death of Jesus, is of course nothing but hostile invention No such cry was ever uttered It is appalling for a Christian to think of how much suffering has been inflicted upon Jews throughout the ages, partly as a result of this completely fictitious scene" (p 531) See also Cohn (Trial and Death of Jesus, chap 10), who shows that not only did the Jews not speak the words that Matthew imputes to them but also that the episode of Pilate's wash- ing his hands could never really have taken place, see also Bultmann, History of the Syn- optic Tradition, 272, 282

4 4 Cf Acts 3 13-15 See M Grant, The Jews m the Roman World (New York Scribner, 1973) 218-19 4 5 Maccoby, Revolution in Judaea, 164, idem, "Jesus and Barabbas," 56 4 6 Maccoby, Revolution m Judaea, 165, idem, "Jesus and Barabbas," 60 4 7 Brandon suggests that, if the Barabbas story has a historical basis, then it would hinge

on Jesus' having become associated in some way with an insurgent leader during his last fateful days in Jerusalem and that "this association gave rise to some tradition that Jesus had been crucified by the Romans instead of this leader Barabbas" (Jesus and the Zealots, 263) For summaries of other explanations by A E J Rawhnson (The Gospel According to St Mark [London Methuen, 1925] 227-28) and Ρ Winter (On the Trial of Jesus, 9 1 - 99) involving confusion in Pilate's mind because there were two prisoners, each with the first name Jesus, see Maccoby, Revolution in Judaea, 162 Goguel suggests that "the story

68 Journal of Biblical Literature

that Mark's use of a custom of reprieve of a prisoner at the Passover echoed the known customs of prisoner releases at festivals in the ancient world and thus lent an aura of authenticity to the episode wherein Barabbas is depicted as the beneficiary of such a reprieve The choice of prisoner given to the crowd in furtherance of Mark's effort to deflect blame from Rome not only built upon familiarity with the existence of other customs of prisoner release but also was reinforced by widespread knowledge of the choice given to the crowd at Roman gladiatorial games, the choice to determine whether a wounded gladiator would be killed or allowed to live

4 8 The choice between two prisoners further

made possible the portrayal of the penitent messiah as taking upon him­ self the punishment meant for the guilty, an allusion to the fulfillment of the OT prophecy of Deutero-Isaiah The Barabbas episode thus was both expedient and effective in meeting multiple needs of the synoptics and of John for rounding out their Gospel accounts

of Barabbas is a fragment of a tradition which was originally independent of the story of Jesus" (Life of Jesus, 516, see also 519-20, Bultmann, History of the Synoptic Tradition, 272 η 2)

4 8 Gladiatorial games, introduced in Rome in 264 Β c , were held throughout the Roman

Empire Those compelled to fight gladiatorial duels included prisoners of war (including Titus's captives from the Jewish War), criminals condemned to death or forced labor, and numerous Christians It should be noted that some gladiatorial games were held at or near the time of Saturnalia festivals See "Gladiators," in Encyclopaedia Britannica, 12 63-65, M Grant, Gladiators (New York Delacorte, 1968) 28-29, 74-75

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.