* Compare the defence of the governor's action in Sir James Stephen's Libert 11, Erjualitif, Fraternity, p. 88 f. It is not a bench on which historical criticism will be content to rest for long. See Zinunermann's Hist<ir. M'ert der iiltesten Ueberl. (l!)0.=i) p. 184 f.
t Besides the account of Judas (273ff-; cf. vol. i. 911) ; on these fragments of Palestinian Jewish tradition see W. C. Allen's 'St. Matthew' (ICC), p. 31.5. 'When truth is in danger,' said Dr. John Ker, 'the conduct of many is to wash their hands in Pilate's basin of weak neutrality ; but they only soil the water, and do not cleanse their hands.'
J Note the intentional repetition of iu.{i? i-i^tc-Oi from 2"-*.
5 The opposition of the people to Pilate's suggestion may have been due in part to his own unpopularity. The Jews would readily take any opportunity of thwarting a proposal from one who had so repeatedly defied their prejudices and religious tastes.
756
TRIAL OF JESUS
TRIAL OF JESUS
stigated by the sacerdotal authorities, Avho were afraid of Pilate's appeal, and jealous* of the pos- sible popularity which Jesus might win among the crowd. Accordingly they worked — how, we are not told — upon the jiassions of the mob, religious and political. The result was a wild outcry for the release of Barabbas, which at once showed Pilate that Jesus was not a favourite of the people, but mei"ely a discredited provincial.
The general outline of the closing scene, despite variations in detail, is fairly distinct. Pilate allows himself to be overborne by the pojiular clamour. Finding that his attempts to expostulate with the mob are fruitless, he at last lets them have their own way, pronouncing the fatal words i^eXeva-y et's (TTavpov {ibis ad crucem).
Before ordering the prisoner oft' to the death which, in Roman law, must immediately follow the capital sentence, he bids the lictor, /, lictor, conliga manus,flagellis verbcretur ; Jesus is then subjected to the scourging which preceded, in Roman usage, f the last act of the death punishment. Such at least, according to one tradition (Mk 15'^ = Mt27^®), was the significance of the scourging ; it was a mere accessory to the crucifixion. In Luke, it occupies an earlier and a different position, as we have seen, whilst J in the Fourth Gospel (19^'-) it forms part of the mockery, and issues in Pilate's presentation of Jesus to the people in order to excite a pity or a contem])t wliich might allay their malice. This is probably correct. In closely associating the scourging with tlie mockery, though not in j^lacing them prior to the formal condemnation, the Fourth Evangelist is following the Markan tradition. He rightly brings out the third and last appeal of Pilate, before the final sentence is pronounced. But for the details of this bloody punishment we must look outside the Gospels. All four eschew any harrowing pictures of the scene. The simple and sober mention of the fact is all that the tradition has preserved.
(c) The mocJcing of Jesus (see GROWN OF THORNS, Mockery, Reed, Thorns).— That Jesus was in- sulted and ill-treated during the course of His trial is a fixed part of the Evangelic tradition, § but it is uncertain when and where the cruel sport took place. According to one tradition (Mk 14^^ = Mt 26'j'- ^^) it followed the condemnation by the Sanhedrin ; either the bystanders || or the servants
* This ill-will (Mk 1510 =Mt 2718) towards one who had chal- lenged their vested interests and ecclesiastical authority was patent to Pilate (cf. vol. i. 521 f., and Lidgett's Spiritual Prin- ciple of the Atonement, p. 11 f.). As we know from the record of his previous conflict with the Jews, he took an insolent delight in humiliating them, which had thrice led to an even more humiliating surrender upon his own part. The trial of Jesus gave him another chance of thwarting the authorities. But he had learned prudence by this time. He would use Jesus as far as possible to exasperate the Jews, but he would have little hesitation in sacrificing his prisoner to safeguard his own credit and popularity, particularly when he found that the Galilaean was unpopular Himself.
t Thus the Jews caught outside Jerusalem during the siege by Titus ' were first scourged, then tormented with all kinds of torture before they died, and were crucified opposite the walls of the city ' (Jos. BJ v. xi. 1).
J Perhaps founding on the hint of Lk 2322, where it is part of Pilate's suggested compromise. The ijosition of the scourg- ing, with the subsequent Ecce Homo incident (Jn 191-S. 4f.), tg rightly assigned by the Fourth Evangelist.
S How far the tradition has been affected by the natural desire (cf. Ac 1327. 28) to conform the sufferings of Jesus to such OT prophecies as Is 506f- (cf. Mic 5i), it is impossible to deter- mnie. Even Matthew, with his predilection for discovering fulfilment of prophecy, does not refer to such passages. The likelihood is, as Strauss admits (§ 128), that while Jesus was actually maltreated as the Evangelists record, ' their descrip- tions are modelled on prophecies which, when once Jesus appeared as a sufferer and maltreated person, were applied to Him.
11 Apparently including even some of the councillors them- selves—a trait of Oriental passion which, in view of Jos. BJ yi. V. 3, IS not to be taken as a touch of the Evangelic tradition inconsistent with the dignity of the authorities. Wellhausen thinks Mt.'s version ( = high priests) is original.