You are here:   Text > Herod the Terrible or Herod the Great?
 

The Christian world has inherited a wholly negative image of king Herod (74/72-4 BCE), during whose reign Jesus was born (Matthew 2:1, Luke, 1:5). Matthew's legendary account, Nativity plays and Christian imagination have turned Herod into the Ivan the Terrible of antiquity. When the three wise kings, or rather oriental magicians (magoi in the Greek Gospel), arrived at the royal palace in Jerusalem and asked about the recently born king of the Jews, Herod pretended to be helpful and directed them to Bethlehem, the traditional birthplace of the Messiah, on condition that they promised to let him know the whereabouts of the babe. He, too, wished to greet him, he lied, when in fact he planned to murder the potential rival. So when the magi failed to return, he let loose his soldiers on the infants of Bethlehem. 

The extensive secular chronicles provide a more nuanced biography, one that is almost as detailed as those of Roman emperors. Our chief informant is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (37-c.100CE), who devoted most of Book I of his Jewish War and Books XIV to XVII of Jewish Antiquities to the life and times of Herod. Josephus uses as his main source the universal history of Nicolaus of Damascus, the well-informed teacher, adviser and ambassador of Herod. The fact that Josephus often criticises the king suggests that beside the court historian's pro-Herod chronicle, he had also at his disposal another account sympathetic to the Hasmoneans, the Jewish priest-kings, who from 152 BCE ruled the Holy Land, first independently and after 63 BCE under the aegis of Rome, until Herod took their throne in 37 BCE. 

We do not know what Herod looked like. In obedience to Jewish law, he did not allow his effigy to appear on coins. Nor has any statue of his survived away from home. The nearest we come to a Herodian face is through the coins of his more liberal grandson, Agrippa I (10 BCE-44 CE) and great-grandson Agrippa II (27/28-92/93 CE). Josephus depicts Herod as a strong, attractive, and sensual man. He was outstanding as rider, hunter and soldier. Few could match the precision of his javelin or arrow. Extremely ambitious, he wished to be second to none. This eagerness probably stemmed from an inferiority complex implanted in him by two women of royal descent: his haughty wife Mariamme and mother-in-law Alexandra. One of his cheeky sons by Mariamme gossiped that standing beside his father he had to stoop as he was taller than him, and felt obliged to miss at hunting to make Herod appear the better shot. He also let it be known that to disguise his age, Herod was dying his hair black. 


Behind every great man: "Mariamme Leaves the Judgment Seat of Herod" by J. W. Waterhouse (1887) 

Gladly availing himself of the Mosaic privilege of extensive royal polygamy, Herod took altogether ten wives. Apart from Mariamme, who was both beautiful and princely, they were all chosen for their looks rather than their rank, according to Glaphyra, Herod's sharp-tongued daughter-in-law, herself daughter of the king of Cappadocia. Family prattle had it that Herod fancied Glaphyra. We learn from Josephus that Herod had at least one male lover, Karos, "a young man of unrivalled beauty", who later came to a sticky end.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Geoffrey Hudson
January 7th, 2011
11:01 AM
Geza, I missed word "legendary". Vermes wrote: “The extensive secular chronicles provide a more nuanced biography, one that is almost as detailed as those of Roman emperors. Our chief informant is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus” Vermes thus appeals to a “more nuanced” biography in the writings attributed to Josephus, a Flavian historian. Josephus (rather his Flavian editors) had a reputation for “straining the truth”. Brian W Jones, Reader in the Department of Classics and Ancient History, University of Queensland, wrote in his Suetonius, p35, “once again, the Flavian historians on whom Suetonius relied, strained the truth to and beyond its limits in disguising the slavish adulation lavished by Vespasian on the emperor of the day and exaggerated, or invented, any loss of influence the family suffered.” Flavian historians were thus not at all reliable. They wrote (exaggerated or invented) what the emperor wanted to convey to the public. Barbara Levick, Emeritus Fellow and Tutor at St Hilda’s College, Oxford, wrote on p3 of her book Vespasian, “but there is a particularly thick overlay of propaganda that obscures the truth about the Jewish War, the year of the Four Emperors, and the entire reign. Contemporary information concerning the War comes from Josephus, a disingenuous source close to the emperor”. Barbara Levick hardly ever tries throughout her book to explain what she means by “a thick overlay of propaganda”, but merrily quotes Josephus literally. So what makes Vermes believe that the writings attributed to Josephus about Herod, a history covering just a few years earlier than War, could be any more reliable, and not subject to Flavian propaganda?

Geza Vermes
January 7th, 2011
9:01 AM
May I draw Geoffrey Hudson's attention to a crucial adjective in the second sentence of the article? I qualify there Matthew's account relating to the Magi and the massacre of the innocents as LEGENDARY which means that in my view those stories are not historical.

Geoffrey Hudson
January 6th, 2011
4:01 PM
In his opening paragraph, Vermes doesn’t deny that he believes in the birth of Jesus during the reign of Herod, the three kings who asked about the birth of the king of the Jews, and the soldiers he let loose to murder the infants of Bethlehem . These were myths. The stories are based upon Herod’s cruelty to his own sons he executed. It was just that they were adults. These myths were obviously not created by Josephus, nor by Nicolaus, but were the later inventions of the Gospel writers whoever they were.

Gully Foyle
January 2nd, 2011
8:01 PM
Sue, time for your meds.

Sue
December 29th, 2010
1:12 AM
What has any of that got to do with a now instantaneously inter-connected globalized world awash with WMD's and nuclear weapons, in which one false move could trigger off World War III.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.