Multiple sources

History in Ascension of Isaiah ‒ Part 3: Vespasian and Titus are responsible for Jesus' crucifixion in 9: 14

History in Ascension of Isaiah ‒ Part 3: Vespasian and Titus are responsible for Jesus

Introduction

In the third part of this Ascension of Isaiah series I briefly discuss one single verse, 9:14, which mentions Jesus’ crucifixion. This verse has survived in Latin and in Ethiopian, not in Greek. In Latin it goes as follows1:

  • In manuscript L2 (‘Latin 2’):
    Et princeps mundi illius extendet manum suam in filium ⎾dei⏋, [et occidet illum] et suspendet illum in ligno et occidet nesciens, qui sit.
  • In manuscript S (‘Latin translation of the Slavonic version’):
    Et princeps mundi illius propter filium ejus extendet manus suas in eum et suspendent illum in ligno, et occidet eum nesciens qui sit.

I cannot show the Ethiopian version nor would I be able to translate it. I only give M.A. Knibb’s comment on the verse under consideration2: ‘Eth “by the hand of his son” ’ This note makes clear that the Ethiopian version has an equivalent of ‘propter filium ejus’ in the Latin S-manuscript. Therefore I base my translation below on ‘S’.
It also seems clear that the mundus in ‘mundi illius’ (‘of that world’) is the Latin equivalent of the Greek κόσμος, which is a frequently used code word for the Roman empire in the New Testament and in other early Christian writings.

Translations

  • M.A. Knibb, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha volume 2, p. 170, based on a collation of five Ethiopian manuscripts:
    And the god of that world will stretch out [his hand against the Son], and they will lay their hands upon him and hang him upon a tree, not knowing who he is.
  • My translation, based on ‘S’:
    And the emperor of that world, by the hand of his son, stretches out his hands against him, and they hang him on the wood, and he kills him not knowing who he is.

Discussion

The ‘princeps mundi illius’ seems to be a quite recognizable description of the Roman emperor, and the most obvious father-son relationship in that context is the relation between Vespasian and his son Titus. As the Roman emperors were divinized Knibb’s ‘god of that world’ and my ‘emperor of that world’ are one and the same. By emphasizing Vespasian’s primary role in Jesus’ execution, the Roman emperor and Jesus are opposed in their imperial claims. It is by the hands of his son Titus that Vespasian, who had returned to Rome to become emperor prior to the siege and capture of Jerusalem, arrested Jesus and had him crucified.
The Ethiopian manuscripts do not mention Jesus’ death by the hands of the Romans, the Slavonic manuscript does. Interestingly another fragment of Ascension (11:20-21) also mentions Jesus’ crucifixion, and this time he is not killed by the Flavians but a different outcome is described: (20) In Jerusalem, I saw how they crucified him on a tree, (21) and likewise (how) after the third day he rose and remained (many) days.

The Flavians crucified Jesus not knowing that he was the messiah. They could not know, because at that moment Jesus wasn’t the messiah yet, he was one of the rebellion leaders in besieged Jerusalem. Jesus only became the messiah because he was victorious over the Romans by surviving his execution at the hands of his enemies.
The meaning of this verse, naming the protagonists and applying he translation emphases suggested above, may be as follows:
And Vespasian, the emperor of the Roman empire, by the hand of his son Titus, stretches out his hands against Jesus, and they hang him on the wood, not knowing who he is.

(1) R.H. Charles, The Ascension of Isaiah, 1900, p. 121.

(2) in J.H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha volume 2, p. 170.