Dan Snow's History Hit - Pontius Pilate

Episode Date: April 22, 2024

Pontius Pilate was the Roman Prefect of Judea during the reign of Emperor Tiberius and is most famous for condemning Jesus of Nazareth to death by crucifixion in the Four Gospels. But who really was he? And how much do we know about him?In this episode of The Ancients, Tristan speaks to Prof. Helen Bond to delve deeper into the life of Pontius Pilate and discover what else we know about this famous Roman governor.Enjoy unlimited access to award-winning original documentaries that are released weekly and AD-FREE podcasts. Get a subscription for £1 per month for 3 months with code DANSNOW sign up at https://historyhit/subscription/We'd love to hear from you- what do you want to hear an episode on? You can email the podcast at [e-mail] can take part in our listener survey here.

Hi everyone, welcome to Dan Snow's History. It's that time of the month when we hop over to listen to what our sibling podcast, The Ancients, has got going on. Tristan, the legendary Tristorian, is talking about Pontius Pilate in this episode. He was the Roman prefect of Judea during the reign of the Emperor Tiberius. He is infamous for condemning Jesus of Nazareth to death by crucifixion in the Gospels. But who was he? How much do we know about him? This was the Easter special of our sibling podcast, The Ancients, and Tristan spoke to Professor Helen Bond to delve in to what we know about this famous Roman governor.

Enjoy. Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect of Judea who, in the Bible, oversaw the trial of Jesus of Nazareth and ultimately condemned him to death by crucifixion on what we today call Good Friday. Now, what is very interesting about Pontius Pilate is that we have a lot of surviving information about this Roman official and about his rule over Judea. We can say that absolutely Pontius Pilate was a real historical figure. So in this special Easter episode, we're going to do an in-depth exploration of Pontius Pilate. What literary sources do we have for him, both biblical and non-biblical? What do they say? How do they differ? And what

does the archaeological evidence reveal about him, from coinage, architecture, a famous inscription, and more? To explain all, we have Professor Helen Bond from the University of Edinburgh returning to the show. I really do hope you enjoy, we have Professor Helen Bond from the University of Edinburgh returning to the show. I really do hope you enjoy. And here's Helen. Helen, it is a pleasure to have you back on the podcast today. Thank you. It's lovely to be here. And we're doing it for the first time ever in person, in your office at the University of Edinburgh, to talk about one of our favourite figures.

Definitely one of your favourite figures. I find this person absolutely fascinating because he's a real figure. This is Pontius Pilate. And we know a lot about him. I feel like I've lived a long time with Pontius Pilate. I wrote my PhD thesis about Pontius Pilate. So I feel I have a connection. Now, of course, we will delve more into the detail. But as a start, a bit of an overview question. Who was Pontius Pilate? Why do we know that name today? He was the Roman prefect of the province of Judea. And most importantly, he, and the reason why we know him today is that he sent Jesus of Nazareth to the cross. And is he, dare I say, a major

character in the Gospels when telling the story of Jesus? Or is that trial, that big episode, is it still quite a concise one? It's a fairly big thing. I mean, particularly in some of the Gospels, it's a bigger thing in John's Gospel than in the others. But it's sort of, it's like the climax, you know, it's like one of these films that ends in the big courtroom drama. And this is a thing that needs to be explained away for Christians, because, you know, how do you get people to join the new movement if the central figure has been crucified as a rebel against Rome? So they do have to do a little bit of maneuvering with this to show that although Jesus ends up crucified, the Roman governor didn't really want to do it. And they put all the blame onto the Jewish leaders.

And that's how they frame it. The point of part is he's kind of like, he doesn't want to do it, but he does do it. Is that the message that comes across? Broadly, they're all slightly different. In Luke's gospel, he's quite weak and he's sort of pushed into it. Mark's gospel, I think he's not a weakling, but it's clear that he would probably have just let Jesus go if he was just left on his own. And so, yes, that's very much the sort of the line that they take, that it's the chief priests who are really kind of pushing him into it. In John's gospel, actually, they even try to sort of blackmail him. They say, you're no friend of Caesar if you let this man go.

At which point Pilate says, well, OK, then I'll send him to the cross. So, yeah, you know, there's a lot of maneuvering. We're going to delve into those Bible stories a bit more as we go on. manoeuvring. We're going to delve into those Bible stories a bit more as we go on. But I mean, first off, to set the background, what do we know about the Roman administration of Judea at that time, let's say around 30 AD? We know actually quite a lot. Judea had come under direct Roman rule from around about 6 CE. Prior to that, it had been a Herodian, Herod Archelaus, who was an ethnarch. He was deposed in 6 CE for cruelty, and Augustus decided at that point that he would just put the land under direct Roman rule with a governor in

Caesarea on the coast. There's some discussion as to whether Judea actually became a separate province at this period or whether that was later, and that's because Josephus isn't very clear. One of his works, he seems to imply it's a separate province. In another work, he seems to imply that it's sort of under the authority of Syria at this point. But it probably doesn't make much difference because this is a tiny little province. And of course, the legate of Syria is just up to the north. And so he's keeping a watchful eye on it anyway. So by around about 30 CE, the province has only been there for 25 years or so under direct Roman rule. And these first Roman governors are all prefects. And this is a military title, because their main duty is really

just to keep law and order, to make sure that people don't riot, generally get people used to Roman rule. And so that's what Pilate is. Presumably he's got a military background himself. I was about to ask that. I mean, does that give any hint as to what we know, if we know anything about Pilate's career before he becomes prefect of Judea? If this is a newly brought into the Roman Empire, proper part of the empire. Do we think that he has this military background and he's brought in almost as this safe pair of hands to start bringing more and more stability to this area of the Roman Empire? Yeah, I think that's exactly it. And we actually know nothing about his early life. But I think it's probably fair to imagine that he's probably

come to the attention of Tiberius, perhaps also Sejanus, who is at his height at this period too. And they probably think, yes, he's a safe pair of hands. He's maybe done good work in Germany or, you know, on some of these campaigns. And they think he's a man who's ready for some kind of provincial command. I mean, it's only a small one. It's not very prestigious, but, you know, it might be a stepping stone to greater things for an ambitious man. Absolutely. And we'll kind of explore that. I know there's some later add-ons to his story, what happens after he leaves that position, but we'll get to that as we go on. But with the sources for Pilate, although we don't know anything about him before becoming prefect of Judea, for that episode, for that time, do we have quite a rich variety of sources surviving for Pilate?

Yes. I mean, it's quite amazing, actually, how much we have. If we didn't have the Gospels, we would still know quite a lot about Pilate, because Josephus tells us a lot about Pilate, and a Jewish philosopher called Philo of Alexandria, who's actually a contemporary of Pilate, so writing about 40 CE in Egypt. He also describes an incident involving Pilate. So yeah, there's a lot about him. There's even some archaeology connected to him. So yeah, Pilate is a rounded figure as far as anyone is a rounded figure in the ancient world. Well, that's very good to know, because I think that means we can have a great structure as to how we approach Pilate. And I'm thinking we go through the Gospels, first of all,

first the canonical ones, then the apocryphal ones. And then we explore these other sources, and then we can look at the archaeology. Sounds good. But let's start with the canonical Gospels, first of all. And just to make it clear, what do we mean when we say the canonical Gospels? We mean the Gospels in the canon, the New Testament canon. So the four Gospels, first of all. And just to make it clear, what do we mean when we say the canonical Gospels? We mean the Gospels in the canon, the New Testament canon. So the four Gospels that people are generally familiar with, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. And with Pontius Pilate's story, take it away, Hedon, let's go through them one by one. How do

each of these Gospels, how do they portray Pontius Pilate? Because I know sometimes they differ in their stories and how they retell the story of Jesus. Yeah, they differ quite a lot. It might only be details, but the details just sort of give a different slant on things. One thing that you need to know too is that there's a literary relationship between the Gospels. So Mark wrote first sometime in the 70s probably, and then the other G gospels used him as a source and altered him and again it's quite interesting the way that they add or take things away from Mark can can actually tell us quite a lot about their own particular interests so Mark is the first one and he kind of presents

us with two parallel trials we have the Jewish trial and then the Roman trial and part of what's happening in the Roman trial is that Jesus is going to be contrasted with someone else. So we have this figure Barabbas, an insurrectionary, he's killed some people, he's a murderer, he's killed people in the insurrection, Mark says. I mean, we don't know what insurrection he's talking about, but he's clearly sort of presenting Barabbas as this sort of rebel against Rome. And then there's a sort of a contrast going on. Mark says that there was this Passover amnesty and the people turn up and they all start to shout, release somebody for us.

And Pilate says, who do you want released? And they all say, oh, Barabbas, Barabbas. And Pilate starts saying, you know, what shall I do with the king of the Jews? And the people say, crucify him. So Mark is very much kind of putting the verdict really onto the people and sort of contrasting Jesus with this rebel. So in a way, I think the reader can see that Barabbas is the real rebel and the Jewish people are shouting for him. And this has been written just after the war, the Jewish war with Rome, when Jews really did run after rebels and did revolt against Rome with disastrous consequences because the city fell and the temple was destroyed. So in a way,

it's a sort of comment on that. The Jews in the 30s are going after this rebel, and instead, they're not going after Jesus. And in fact, the chief priests are sticking the oar in and making sure that he gets crucified. And so they're putting as much blame as possible on the chief priests, and to some extent, exonerating Pilate. So Mark ends by saying, Pilate realized that a riot is ensuing. So he just does what the people are asking him to do. And he sends Jesus to the cross. He's quite hands off in that tale, isn't he? He is.

And it's a strange picture of a Roman governor. I mean, almost everything about this is open to historical question. You know, we don't know of any such Passover amnesty. It sounds incredible that a Roman governor would allow the people to choose, you know, who would you like me to release? It's not impossible that there were occasionally Passover amnesties. Maybe sometimes he let a particular prisoner go free because he wasn't a great threat. And, you know, as a particular gesture of goodwill at the festival, maybe. But the idea that the people can just come and choose who they want to be released sounds pretty unlikely.

I mean, exactly. My mind is, I'm trying to think of a parallel to pilot at this time. And because I've recently done something on the Teutoburg Forest, this massacre of Roman soldiers, the defeat they in germany and the figure of virus who's their leader and he's appointed as you know the governor but he does have a bit of a military background too he has been in the east and one of the things that supposedly gets the guard up of the germans who really don't like him is that he's introducing like roman law and roman customs but you know he's trying to put you know a stamp of Roman authority over this newly created province and you'd have thought maybe I know it's not you know

you know giving a gesture of goodwill and Passover but you'd think that Pilate in a way could have been acting similar by saying actually no we're going to show the benefits of Roman law to you and we're going to deal with Barabbas as we, the Romans would deal with Barabbas and we would deal with the King of the Jews as we would. But in the case of Mark, I know this is all speculation, but I love talking about this stuff. It is interesting how it's a different sort of portrayal in Mark. Yeah. You know, whatever happened in the trial of Jesus, if he even had a trial, I mean, I think it's likely that Pilate sort of wanted to meet the prisoner, wanted to get a sense of how dangerous

is he? Do I just kill Jesus? Do I need to kill the disciples, the followers too? So I don't doubt that there's some level of historicity there. But the whole sort of picture as we have it in Mark, I think, is a dramatic rendering. And probably Mark himself didn't know very much about it at all. You know, he's writing for particular purposes decades later. So how different a picture do we get of Pilate in the other three canonical gospels? Well, they all sort of add different bits. So Matthew adds probably the most characteristic thing about Pilate. When you ask people, what did Pilate do? They say, oh, well, he washed his hands. But that's only in Matthew's gospel. And he washes his hands there and says, I am innocent of this man's blood. So he's not saying Jesus is innocent. He's saying,

I'm innocent. It's nothing to do with me. And again, the picture in Matthew's gospel is that it's not just the Jewish priests, actually, but the Jewish crowd as well, because Pilate washes his hands and the crowd say, his blood be on us and on our children. So, I mean, that terrible line that's been so disastrous for Jewish people throughout the decades or the centuries. But yes, so, I mean, that's only in Matthew. And then in Luke's gospel, he has a trial in front of Herod Antipas. And again, that's only in Luke. And I think what's going on there is that he has two high status men, both finding Jesus innocent. And of course, that goes a long way to sort of underscoring the fact that Jesus really is innocent. He's done nothing. He goes to his death in Luke's gospel as

a sort of innocent martyr. And then in John's gospel, he rewrites the whole thing and it's much longer and he has Jesus, well, Pilate is going in and out of the praetorium and having all these sort of deep theological discussions with Jesus. And that's where Pilate says, what is truth? And then walks off, doesn't wait for a reply. So it's much more sort of theological in John. But yes, they are different, the pictures that you have in each of the Gospels. Now, with these sources, obviously, their agendas, of course, are focused towards the story of Jesus and the trial and who is to blame for that, and so on and so forth. I'm guessing they're not the best sources then to try and piece together things like, I mean, do they have descriptions

of what Pilate looks like or how he dressed or how he walked in the praetorium as this guy? I'm guessing we'd have to look at other sources to try and figure out more about that. Yes. I mean, although a lot of sources don't tell you what people looked like or what their dress was. So Josephus and Philo don't tell us either. I mean, I think we just have to go with, you know, the general sort of Augustus Tiberius look. I mean, presumably he's got short hair. He's maybe got a beard. Maybe he's clean shaven like the emperors were. He's probably wearing a toga. You know, in all the films, the Jesus films, he sort of struts in in his full sort of military getup. But, you know, why on earth would he be ready for the battlefield?

This is Pilate at his most sort of administrative in many ways when he's trying a case. So he's probably going to be wearing a toga of some kind and, you know, looking at the archetypal Roman nobleman and i probably didn't have a friend called bigger stickers but yeah but also at that time was the capital of the roman administration you know the newly established direct roman administration on judea was that in jerusalem no it wasn't it was in caesarea on sea so Caesarea Maritima, this beautiful sort of Gentile city built by Herod the Great on the coast. And when the Romans came, that's the place that they made their headquarters in.

I mean, for many reasons why that was a good choice. You know, it was on the coast, easier to get to Antioch and find the Syrian legate if you needed to, easier to sail to Rome if you needed to. And it's a Gentile city. There's a temple there to Roma and to the emperor. So it's much, much better for a Roman who can just be himself there. And I think Romans would generally have thought that Jerusalem was a slightly crazy place. It's up on a hill, it's dominated by the temple, crazy place. It's up on a hill, it's dominated by the temple, and they would know that they were not welcome in Jerusalem. So the Romans made their headquarters in Caesarea, but they didn't have a very large administration. It would just be Pilate and family, a small staff. And then they basically

left the day-to-day running of the province in the hands of the Jerusalem elite. And so those are the ones who are largely kind of running most of the things. And so would Pilate be spending most of his days at Caesarea Maritima? And actually, he wouldn't really be leaving that part. He likes having that quite close connection to Rome as well, if you're right by the Mediterranean, to going to places like Jerusalem. That's not really on his agenda much of the time, I'm guessing. I don't imagine that he looked forward to his trips to Jerusalem. I mean, he would have gone to Jerusalem for the feasts. So Jews have three big pilgrimage feasts and others like the Day of Atonement too. So he would certainly have gone there for the pilgrimage feasts. And he went with

an extra body of troops. And the idea was that the feasts were the times when there was most likely to be a riot or something like that. And so Pilate was there on hand in case there was any trouble. Though ironically, of course, the presence of the Roman governor and his troops often spurred people to riots. So it wasn't all win. And probably too, he would have had a system of assizes, something like that, because it does seem as though he has the ultimate power of capital jurisdiction.

So although there would have been Jewish courts that could have tried cases, if anybody needed to be executed, I think they would have kept them for the next time that the governor was in town. Well, there you go, bringing in Roman customs and law and so on. It's always associated with those new provinces directly under Roman rule. Well let's move on from the canonical gospels and

Helen I'd like to also ask about the apocryphal gospels because this is where things get really interesting with so many aspects of the story. First off no such thing as a silly question also what are the apocryphal gospels they're the ones that didn't make it into the canon sometimes they call the non-canonical gospels and there are lots and lots of them from the sort of the early second century onwards a lot of them are fragmentary and a lot of them are slightly different they might just be sort of sayings of Jesus, things like that. But there's a gospel called the Gospel of Peter. We've lost the first bit of it, but it starts just after Pilate has washed his hands. And in that gospel, it suggests that Herod, Herod Antipas, is the man in charge. He is the one who sentences Jesus and sends him to the cross. I mean, that

doesn't really make much sense because Herod Antipas isn't a Roman and he's not going to be sending people to the cross. So, I mean, you often get that with these gospels that they seem to get far more mixed up than the four that actually made it into the New Testament. There's also a text called the Acts of Pilate. It's not quite sure when it dates from, probably the fourth or fifth century, so it's quite late. And that supposedly is an account of the proceedings in front of Pilate, but it's clearly made up. I mean, it's very, very legendary. So Jesus goes into the courtroom, and there are soldiers around holding standards, the military standards. And as soon as Jesus comes in, they all bow down and the soldiers are sort of trying to keep them back, but the standards sort

of recognize Jesus and they bow down. And then the Jewish leaders say, oh, you know, something's going wrong here that the soldiers are doing it. And so they make Jesus go out of the room and come in again. And the same thing happens. You know, you can already tell that this is a work of Christian piety. It's very imaginative. Again, Pilate is very much on Jesus's side. He's much more the advocate for Jesus rather than the judge. Sort of a whole array of gospel characters come in to give their witness and talk about the great things that Jesus has done. It's so interesting. I mean, we will explore more of that legacy of Pilate in the Roman world and beyond. But do you think, and this is, of course, once again, a speculation, but the fact that

these people who are creating these later accounts of, let's say, the trial of Jesus and Pilate are writing in a Roman world that they want to find a way to make Pilate not responsible for this big part, because he is a senior Roman. Yes, yes, definitely. I think that's the case. I mean, I think in some of the earlier texts, and maybe some of the later ones too, there's a sort of an anti-Jewish agenda as well, because this is the time when this new faith that became known as Christianity is sort of pulling away from the synagogue. And in some places, that was quite smooth. In other places, it seems as though there was more difficulties and even persecution. And so I think there's an anti-Jewishness there too.

But certainly in something like the Acts of Pilate, I think these are people who are living in a Roman world. They're largely now Romans coming into the new faith. They're not people from a Jewish background. And they're written to sort of reassure them that, you know, OK, we worship somebody who was crucified as a rebel against Rome. But he didn't deserve it. You know, it was a travesty. You know, justice wasn't really done. That's what they're trying to say.

And noble Romans like Pilate, they could see it it they just couldn't intervene with it or something yeah yes yes and I mean there's a whole sort of cycle in the apocryphal works of letters from Pilate to the emperor and those are quite interesting because sometimes Pilate is more negative other times he sort of writes and says well I think I just killed the son of God. And the emperor is always very much sort of on on Jesus's side. You know, it's always the emperor always recognizes it. And I think that's what you're saying about, you know, the more noble the Roman is, then they instantly get it. You know, they understand straight away that Jesus is the son of

God, the Christ. And, you know, in some of these texts, the emperor is very annoyed with Pilate for having killed him. I'm Matt Lewis. And I'm Dr. Eleanor Janaga. And in Gone Medieval, we get into the greatest mysteries. The gobsmacking details and latest groundbreaking research. From the greatest millennium in human history. We're talking Vikings.

Normans. Kings and popes. Who were rarely the best of friends. Murder. Rebellions. And crusades. Find out who we really were by subscribing to Gone Medieval from History Hit, wherever you get your podcasts.

Well, let's move on from the apocryphal gospels and these texts and let's talk about the non-biblical sources that you hinted at earlier and you mentioned two names philo of alexandria and josephus let's start with philo of alexandria because he's more contemporary to the actual story of the historical jesus yeah so he's living in alex's living in Alexandria in Egypt, but he's a contemporary of Pilate and he has links with Judea. So presumably, you know, he has reasonable sources for this. The difficulty is that his work is hugely rhetorical. He's actually writing a book about an embassy that he goes on to the Emperor Gaius Caligula. And Gaius wants to put up a statue of himself in the Jerusalem temple. Now, this is not going to end

well. So the people protest, and then they send a delegation to Rome to ask Gaius not to do this. And Philo is part of this delegation. And I mean And it's a really interesting book and contains a description of Philo's meeting with Gaius and a description of Gaius and how he just, you know, his brain is kind of jumping around. And to clarify, Gaius is, this is Caligula, isn't it? Yes, yes. Yeah, yeah.

So anyway, in the course of this, he mentions an incident when Pilate was governor. He says that Pilate put up some shields in the praetorium in Rome. And he says there was nothing offensive about the shields. They didn't have images or anything like that. But they did have the name of the person who was dedicating them and the name of the person in whose honor they were dedicated. So that means the emperor. So they presumably had Pilate's name and the name of the emperor. So honor they were dedicated. So that means the emperor. So they presumably had Pilate's name and the name of the emperor. So you would think there was nothing to be worried

about there. But when the people hear about it, they start to get annoyed. And they get four Herodian princes who come to Pilate and put their grievances. Pilate refuses to take these shields down. And so then the Herodian rulers write to the Emperor Tiberius and tell him what Pilate's been doing. According to Philo, Tiberius is really, really annoyed and writes a really angry letter to Pilate and says, you must take down these shields, take them to the Temple of Augustus. And Philo says that's what happened. And so I think from that, you can probably tell that what these shields, the offense of these shields was that they had the full name of the emperor. They probably said Tiberius, son of the deified Augustus. And maybe they said Pontifex Maximus or something like that too. And that was what

people were objecting to. I mean, if so, though, it's a tiny, tiny offense. You know, you can imagine that there's lots of things in the Roman praetorium in Jerusalem that have the full name of the emperor on them. And presumably, Pilate has put these shields up to honor the emperor. He's not going to just take them down lightly. It's probably the safest thing to do, to wait until the emperor gives a ruling. And in this case, the emperor said, take them down lightly. It's probably the safest thing to do, to wait until the emperor gives a ruling. And in this case, the emperor said, take them down. And so Pilate did. And he doesn't get into trouble. But a lot of people have dated this to sometime after 31 CE. So after the fall of Sejanus, if Pilate did have any connection with Sejanus at all, and we don't know that for sure at all,

but if he did have a connection, then that might be why he's very keen to show his honour of the emperor. And Sejanus, just to clarify, so he was this very powerful, influential Praetorian prefect, rises to power under Tiberius and then meets a sticky end, shall we say, in the late 20s. Yes, in 31. In 31, right, yes. a sticky end shall we say in the late 20s. Yes in 31. But it's interesting once again that that story of Pilate from Philo is very much associated with military objects it seems to once again affirm that although he can never know for sure with the fact that he's marching to Jerusalem with soldiers and he's doing this action in the temple with the with the military equipment.

No it's not in the temple I mean it would be more understandable if it was in the temple, but it's in the Praetorium, which is probably Herod's former palace in the western part of the city. That's probably the place that, you know, it's the swankiest place in town. So that's going to be where Pilate and his entourage are going to put themselves.

My apologies. Shorts of memory there. But in the course of that story, Philo does give a character description of pilot and it's absolutely damning i mean it is not what you want anyone to say about you he says that he's ferocious he's greedy he's avaricious he puts people to death without trial he's savage he's cruel he'sess. I mean, it's just one list of negative adjectives, which of course you read that and you think, oh, you know, this is coming from a contemporary. It's pretty useful stuff. Pilate must have been pretty bad. The only thing is that

Philo uses exactly the same words to describe anybody he doesn't like, particularly anybody he thinks is acting against the Jewish law. So it does mean that you have to take Pilate with a pinch of salt, really. I mean, I don't think he could have said that if Pilate was generally known to be a pussycat. But on the other hand, I think, you know, you have to be a little bit careful about it. And within the rhetoric of the book as a whole, he's trying to show how the Emperor Tiberius was really worried by a tiny, tiny breach of the rules by Pilate. And what he's trying to do is to say to the Emperor, guys, Caligula, don't put up your statue. It's much bigger. Yes, exactly. Exactly.

And he's, you know, Tiberius is this great and good emperor that that caligula should be learning from wow depiction of tiberius is a good emperor for five yeah that's interesting in its own right for a different podcast episode in its own right before we go on to josephus i'd also like to do a quick tangent to ask about the name pontius pilate do we know that is such a unique name it feels for a Roman prefect. What do we know about it? Well, again, nothing for sure. Pilatus could be from, you know, a pilos, a spear.

So that's possible. And again, might suggest that he's from a military family. The Pontius bit has sometimes been linked with Pontus and sort of the Black Sea area. Perhaps. We don't know. We're going a few more decades on from the time of Philo. And as you've also hinted at earlier, this is a time in the story of Roman Judea when Josephus is writing, when there is more, to put it lightly, there's a lot more unrest

going on too, isn't there? Yes, yes. Yeah. I mean, certainly Josephus is writing after the war, and I think he's looking for causes. And one of the causes, as he sees it, is insensitivity amongst the Roman prefects. And so, I mean, certainly Pilate doesn't do too well on that score. In his Jewish War, he tells us a couple of stories, and he retells them in the Antiquities of the Jews, which was written around about 95 CE, and adds a few more. So the earliest story that we have,

and probably comes from early on in Pilate's time of governorship, is one story where he wants to change the guard in Jerusalem. Ordinarily, of course, that's what a military governor ought to do. But it seems as if the guard he wants to use have standards that contain images of the emperor. And because they're right in Jerusalem, right in the Antonia Fortress, which is right next to the temple, it seems as though other governors have refrained from using troops that have standards that have images of the emperor on them. And so what Pilate does is to sneakily bring them in at nighttime. And so when people wake up the next morning, they see this new guard standing there in the Antonia Fortress with these standards that have images of the emperor. And they get really, really upset by this. And the people go to Caesarea, to Pilate's headquarters, and they surround his palace there for six days and six nights. Finally, according

to Josephus, the prefect gets sick of them. So he sends in the troops, they pull out their swords, at which point the Jews who are all standing there, bare their necks and say, Jews who are all standing there, bare their necks and say, kill us, we'd rather die than transgress our ancestral customs. At which Pilate is blown away by this and says, well, okay, then I'll change the guard. You know, you have to again, sort of treat Josephus with a pinch of salt here. But it does seem as though, you know, reading between the lines, it seems as though Pilate's new governor, new province thinks, I'm not going to be dictated to by the people of this province. If I want to use troops that have images of the Roman emperor on their standards, I will do. But he very quickly realizes that actually, it's not really worth it because this is going to infringe what has been done normally in the province and it's going to be offensive to people.

And so he does back down. So, I mean, you could see that as a sign of weakness, but you could also see that as somebody who is willing to compromise and certainly doesn't want to start off his rule with a riot. No, choosing your battles, exactly. Yeah, exactly. Do you think in those two literary depictions of Pontius Pilate, the non-biblical ones where it's Philo or it's Josephus, do you think there is a contrast in the depiction of Pilate compared to those in the canonical gospels? Yeah, I think there is, but I think they're trying to do different things. So as we said,

the Gospels are very much trying to put the blame onto the Jewish leaders and to say, well, you know, Pilate wasn't really to blame here. The Jewish ones are all really not very pro. It's not so much that they're not pro-Roman. They are very pro-Roman, actually, particularly Josephus. But he does let some Romans go. And I think, you know, somebody of Pilate's sort of level, a middle-ranking Roman nobleman, provincial governors were known to be a bad lot generally. And I think he thinks it's fairly easy just to kind of to slur them and to say that they weren't the best people. You know, Judea was unfortunate. It had a series of not such good Roman governors. And I think, you know, people reading that in Rome would think, yeah, well, you know, that's the kind of person you get.

So Josephus is very pro-Roman, but it just happens that he's not pro these governors. Well, woe be to Pilate then. Well, let's talk a bit about archaeology. Now, this is very exciting. Is there any archaeological evidence for Pontius Pilate? There is actually, and it's growing. We seem to be getting more and more of it. So one thing that's very well known is the so-called Pilate stone. And this is an inscription, probably belongs to some kind of a building.

It may have been a lighthouse, even. It was found that the stone was found at Caesarea. So, I mean, it's on the coast. It may also have been some kind of a temple to the emperor or something like that. But half of the inscription is missing. But from what remains, you can tell that it's Pontius Pilatus, Praefectus Judea, and he's dedicated this building. On the left-hand side would have had his first name. And I'm really disappointed that we don't have his first name.

I'd love to know, you know, because as a Roman of his rank, he would have been called Marcus or Gaius, or he would have had three names. The Prinomen, yes. Yeah, exactly. So we've lost that. And then there's some coins that Pilate minted. He actually was very keen on coins.

He made loads and loads of them three years on the trot. On one side, they have sort of vessels from the imperial cult, wine vessels and a sort of an auger's wand. On the other side, they have things like barley and wheat. And so, yeah, I mean, there's a discussion as to whether they were offensive or not, but I think probably not. And they certainly were used for a long time. The two things that have come to light more recently, one is a monumental road, a pathway from the south of Jerusalem up to the temple. It used to be thought that that was much

later, but now archaeologists have found coins of Pontius Pilate inside the actual sort of building bits, which suggests that it was actually built during the time of Pilate. Dropped by a worker when they were making it. Yeah, exactly. Because these are tiny, tiny bronze coins anyway. I mean, they're not any great value. So yeah, so now that's being dated to the 30s. So Pilate must have overseen that to some extent. There's also aqueduct, which Josephus also mentions, and there's plenty of sort of options for that in the archaeological remains around Jerusalem. But one thing that's only fairly recently come to light is a little copper alloy ring that says Pilato on it. Now, it's really cheap and nasty. So it's not the kind of thing that you imagine that Pilate himself is going to go around wearing. It was found at Herodian,

the place where Herod the Great was buried. And what people think is that it may have belonged to some kind of administrator or, you know, somebody in Pilate's household or employee or, you know, some overseer. And it's maybe a seal. So, you know, when the overseer wants to say, yes, you know, this belongs to Pilate or this has some kind of imperial sign to it, you know, they just sort of put it in the wax and they put the image into it. So that's quite nice. Pilato probably means, you know, know off pilot or belonging to pilot something like that wow there's quite a diverse range of archaeology at the same time i know it's not a massive amount but so you've got coinage you've got remains of architecture you've got the ring and you've got this inscription yeah it's all evidence as you

say for this man whilst he is prefect of jude yes, we think of him because of that story in the Bible, which is very important to the New Testament. Actually, the figure of Pilate, he was doing a lot of different things. He may well have been quite a strict, harsh governor at the same time, but things do seem to have been done during his reign, during his governorship. Yeah. And he's doing things for the good of the people. So that monumental staircase or the pathway up to the temple and the aqueduct and yeah, you know, he's getting things moving and it's a difficult province, you know, nobody wants the Romans there and they can use the sensitivities to complain about him.

Well, let's move on because this is another interesting part of Pilate's story. Do we know what happens to him after the end of his rule as prefect of Judea? Not really. Josephus tells a story about a Samaritan messiah figure who was leading people up the mountain of Gerizim and said that, you know, great things are going to happen when you get up there. Josephus also says, though, that they had weapons with them. So not surprisingly, perhaps Pilate sends in the troops, the cavalry, they kill lots of people, they take other people prisoner. I'm Matt Lewis. And I'm Dr. Alan Orjanaga. And in Gone Medieval, we get into the greatest mysteries, the gobsmacking details and latest groundbreaking research from the greatest millennium in human history. We're talking Vikings, Normans, kings and popes who were

rarely the best of friends, murder, rebellions and crusades. Find out who we really were by subscribing to Gone Medieval from History Hit wherever you get your podcasts. you get your podcasts. And then the sequel to that story is that the Jewish rulers go to the legate of Syria and say, we are being persecuted by Pilate. So the legate sends Pilate back to Rome to answer charges. I mean, we don't know whether he thought he was guilty or not, or whether he just thought, you know, it's above my pay grade, I'll send him to the emperor. So Pilate goes to Rome only to find that Tiberius has just died and Gaius Caligula is now on the throne. So that means that he gets to Rome about March 37, or just after that. So he would have been in the province for a decade, which is a very long time. Most governors were only a couple of years. Pilate and his predecessor Gratis were there for 10 years.

And that might be because of Tiberius's foreign policy. He tended to like to leave people in provinces for longer. So we don't actually know whether Gaius thought that Pilate was guilty of anything or whether he just thought it was time for a new posting. He doesn't go back to Judea, but we don't know what happens to him. That's the end of the story there. That's as far as it goes. And this kind of leads on to the later legacy, because I'm guessing the story of Pilate becomes more colourful.

You've already kind of hinted at the acts of Pilate I mean becomes more colourful as you've already kind of hinted at with like the acts of Pilate and so on yeah but does the later story of Pilate you know kind of is more colour added to it because I've read in my notes and I've got in my notes that the name well the horrible word suicide comes into the story of Pilate later on he seems to sort of spark two different responses. Some people read the gospel accounts and Tertullian said Pilate was already a Christian in his heart. So, you know, people can read the gospel accounts and think, yes, Pilate is already a convert. He wants to follow Jesus. And so you get some accounts, particularly in the East, where Pilate is very positively disposed. You have the story of his wife, who makes an appearance in Matthew's Gospel, arguing on behalf of Jesus. And so in the Coptic

and Ethiopic churches, Pilate and his wife are saints. So they have a saint's day, June the 15th. So Pilate sort of is, you know, more and more positive in those strands of tradition. On the other hand, you get people who read the account in those strands of tradition. On the other hand, you get people who read the account and don't see beyond the fact that Pilate sent Jesus to the cross. And so some of these letters that I mentioned earlier, Pilate writes to the emperor and the emperor is really cross with him. And in one of these, Pilate does kill himself. And then there's all the story about what you do with the body of Pilate. Apparently, all these evil spirits are lurking above his body. And they try to bury him in

various places, but these evil spirits keep following. Finally, they go to Lake Lucerne in Switzerland, and they plonk him in the lake. And there are still these sort of spirits, but nobody cares because it's, you know, in a lake in Switzerland. And that's where Mons Pilatus is in Switzerland. That's how it gets its name. So yeah, there's all different opinions on Pilate and whether he was a good guy or a bad guy. So Pilate has this very diverse, shall we say, legacy, depending on where in the world you are in those centuries following the historical pilot. And I want to bring it down all the way to present day. And I mentioned it earlier, Biggus Dickus and Pontius Pilate's portrayal in Monty Python's Life of Brian.

That's the one we sometimes, well, almost always think of straight away. But as Pontius Pilate, has he been portrayed quite regularly in TV and film? And how is he usually portrayed? I mean, one of the interesting things about the Monty Python one is it's one of the few ones to actually put him in a toga. Nearly always, he's portrayed as, you know, the military man with looking like a legionary. He's always got some red on him and sort of, you know, the battle, the battle gear. So he's very much presented as the military man. Lots of presentations, even David Bowie and James Nesbitt. And yeah, some really good portrayals of Pilate, I think.

And one other part of Pontius Pilate's legacy that I know you've done a lot of work around from the 20th century, and it's this quite Stalinist piece of literature. Now, what is this? the 20th century, and it's this quite Stalinist piece of literature. Now, what is this? Yeah, I think every age, in a way, sort of imagines Pilate in their own sort of colours, their own garb. So, you know, early 20th century, he was very much the British Empire sort of governor, you know, the natives and that kind of thing. But one of the things that I find really interesting is the use of Pilate in Stalinist literature, or during the Stalinist terrors. Suddenly, I think the idea of this man who washes his hands and doesn't have the backbone, doesn't stand up for what's right,

that clearly made quite an impression on people in the 30s in Russia. And I mean, one of the best depictions of that, and one of my favorite novels actually, is Mikhail Bulgakov's Master and Margarita. It's this mad story about the devil goes to Moscow and sort of wreaks havoc. But in amongst that, you keep going back to the story of Pilate and the trial of Jesus in the 30s in Jerusalem. And it's a very different story to the one that we have in the Gospels. But you can tell that, I mean, it's the same basic sort of story. But it's very much from Pilate's point of view, Pilate's getting into Pilate's head. And Pilate afterwards is wracked with guilt because he didn't do what was right. He didn't stand up for Jesus, even though he knew he should have done. And this is written by an

atheist. I mean, Bulgakov used to be a Christian, but renounced it all. But still, it's that idea that Pilate symbolizes the weak-willed person who can't stand up for what's right. And I think, you know, that's a really powerful, I mean, who knows, probably it's not historical, but it's a very powerful picture of a Roman governor. Very powerful picture and a nice way to end this on another part of Pilate's very complicated legacy. Helen, this has been an absolutely extraordinary chat. Last but certainly not least, you have your own podcast, which focuses focuses I'm sure probably partly also on pilots but all these figures of the bible historical or people we don't yet have the evidence for shall we say yes yes thank you for the opportunity for to plug it um biblical time machine uh with my co-host Dave Roos we look

at everything to do with biblical history from the Hebrew Bible through to the New Testament and everything in between. Characters, ideas, what people look like, what people smelled like, how many lice they had. Yeah, those are the things we like. Ponty P had lice, do we think? He might not have done. Because the thing is, if you had more than one change of clothes, I think you were okay. It's if you only had one change of clothes, you probably had life. Yeah, he was probably fine.

Helen, it just goes to me to say thank you so much for taking the time to come back on the podcast. Thank you. Lovely to talk. Well, there you go. There was Professor Helen Bond talking all things Pontius Pilate, this Roman prefect of Judea, Ponti P. I hope you enjoyed today's episode. Last things from me, wherever you listen to The Ancients, whether it be on Apple Podcasts, on Spotify or elsewhere, make sure that you are subscribed, that you are following The Ancients, so that you don't miss out when we release new episodes twice every week.

the ancient so that you don't miss out when we release new episodes twice every week. But that's enough from me. I wish you a fantastic Easter, and I will see you in the next episode. you