Sources Sources on Pontius Pilate are limited, although modern scholars know more about him than other
Roman governors of Judaea. The most important sources are the
Embassy to Gaius (after the year 41) by contemporary Jewish writer
Philo of Alexandria, the
Jewish Wars (written , ch. 2.9) and
Antiquities of the Jews (, ch. 18.3) by the Jewish historian
Josephus, as well as the four canonical
gospels,
Mark (66–70),
Luke (80–90),
Matthew (85–90), and
John (90–110), the texts of which are anonymous, with traditional apostolic authorship debated. Pilate is also mentioned in the
Acts of the Apostles (composed between 80 and 90) and in the
First Epistle to Timothy (written in the second half of the 1st century).
Ignatius of Antioch mentions him in his epistles to the
Trallians,
Magnesians, and
Smyrnaeans (composed between 105 and 110). He is also briefly mentioned in
Annals of the Roman historian
Tacitus (early 2nd century), who simply says that he put Jesus to death. Two additional chapters of Tacitus's
Annals that might have mentioned Pilate have been lost. The written sources provide only limited information, and each has its own biases, with the gospels in particular providing a theological rather than historical perspective, resembling ancient biographies by insiders rather than objective studies or modern biographies. Besides these texts, dated coins in the name of emperor Tiberius minted during Pilate's governorship have survived, as well as a fragmentary short inscription that names Pilate, known as the
Pilate Stone, the only inscription about a Roman governor of Judaea predating the
Jewish–Roman wars to survive.
Name and early life The sources give no indication of Pilate's life prior to his becoming governor of Judaea. His
praenomen (first name) is unknown; his
cognomen Pilatus might mean "skilled with the javelin ()", but it could also refer to the or
Phrygian cap, possibly indicating that one of Pilate's ancestors was a
freedman. If it means "skilled with the javelin", it is possible that Pilate won the cognomen for himself while serving in the
Roman military; it is also possible that his father acquired the cognomen through military skill. In the Gospels of Mark and John, Pilate is only called by his cognomen, which Marie-Joseph Ollivier takes to mean that this was the name by which he was generally known in common speech. The name
Pontius suggests that an ancestor of his came from
Samnium in central, southern Italy, and he may have belonged to the family of
Gavius Pontius and
Pontius Telesinus, two leaders of the
Samnites in the third and first centuries BC, respectively, before their full incorporation to the
Roman Republic. Like all but one other governor of Judaea, Pilate was of the
equestrian order, a middle rank of the Roman nobility. As one of the attested Pontii,
Pontius Aquila (an assassin of
Julius Caesar), was a
tribune of the plebs, the family must have originally been of
plebeian origin and later became ennobled as equestrians. Pilate was likely educated, somewhat wealthy, and well-connected politically and socially. He was probably married, but the only extant reference to
his wife, in which she tells him not to interact with Jesus after she has had a disturbing dream (
Matthew 27:19), is generally dismissed as legendary. According to the
cursus honorum established by
Augustus for office holders of equestrian rank, Pilate would have had a military command before becoming prefect of Judaea; historian
Alexander Demandt speculates that this could have been with a legion stationed at the
Rhine or
Danube. Although it is therefore likely Pilate served in the military, it is nevertheless not certain.
Role as governor of Judea Pilate was the fifth governor of the Roman province of Judaea, during the reign of the emperor
Tiberius. The post of governor of Judaea was of relatively low prestige and nothing is known of how Pilate obtained the office. Josephus states that Pilate governed for ten years (
Antiquities of the Jews 18.4.2), and these are traditionally dated from 26 to 36/37, making him one of the two longest-serving governors of the province. As Tiberius had retired to the island of
Capri in 26, scholars such as E. Stauffer have argued that Pilate may have actually been appointed by the powerful
Praetorian Prefect Sejanus, who was executed for treason in 31. Other scholars have cast doubt on any link between Pilate and Sejanus.
Daniel R. Schwartz and Kenneth Lönnqvist both argue that the traditional dating of the beginning of Pilate's governorship is based on an error in Josephus; Schwartz argues that he was appointed instead in 19, while Lönnqvist argues for 17/18. These proposed dates have not been widely accepted by other scholars. Pilate's title of prefect implies that his duties were primarily military; however, Pilate's troops were meant more as a police than a military force, and Pilate's duties extended beyond military matters. As Roman governor, he was head of the judicial system. He had the power to inflict
capital punishment, and was responsible for collecting tributes and taxes, and for disbursing funds, including the minting of coins. Because the Romans allowed a certain degree of local control, Pilate shared a limited amount of civil and religious power with the Jewish
Sanhedrin. Pilate was subordinate to the legate of
Syria; however, for the first six years in which he held office, Syria's legate
Lucius Aelius Lamia was absent from the region, something which
Helen Bond believes may have presented difficulties to Pilate. He seems to have been free to govern the province as he wished, with intervention by the legate of Syria only coming at the end of his tenure, after the appointment of
Lucius Vitellius to the post in 35. Like other Roman governors of Judaea, Pilate made his primary residence in
Caesarea, going to
Jerusalem mainly for major feasts to maintain order. He also would have toured around the province in order to hear cases and administer justice. As governor, Pilate had the right to appoint the Jewish
High Priest and also officially controlled the vestments of the High Priest in the
Antonia Fortress. Unlike his predecessor,
Valerius Gratus, Pilate retained the same high priest,
Joseph ben Caiaphas, for his entire tenure. Caiaphas would be removed following Pilate's own removal from the governorship. This indicates that Caiaphas and the priests of the
Sadducee sect were reliable allies to Pilate. Moreover, Maier argues that Pilate could not have used the
temple treasury to construct an
aqueduct, as recorded by Josephus, without the cooperation of the priests. Similarly, Helen Bond argues that Pilate is depicted working closely with the Jewish authorities in the execution of Jesus. Jean-Pierre Lémonon argues that official cooperation with Pilate was limited to the Sadducees, noting that the
Pharisees are absent from the gospel accounts of Jesus's arrest and trial. Daniel Schwartz takes the note in the
Gospel of Luke (
Luke 23:12) that Pilate had a difficult relationship with the Galilean Jewish king
Herod Antipas as potentially historical. He also finds historical the information that their relationship mended following the execution of Jesus. Based on
John 19:12, it is possible that Pilate held the title "friend of Caesar" (, ), a title also held by the Jewish kings
Herod Agrippa I and
Herod Agrippa II and by close advisors to the emperor. Both Daniel Schwartz and Alexander Demandt do not think this especially likely.
Incidents with the Jews Various disturbances during Pilate's governorship are recorded in the sources. In some cases, it is unclear if they may be referring to the same event, and it is difficult to establish a chronology of events for Pilate's rule. Joan Taylor argues that Pilate had a policy of promoting the
imperial cult, which may have caused some of the friction with his Jewish subjects. Schwartz suggests that Pilate's entire tenure was characterized by "continued underlying tension between governor and governed, now and again breaking out in brief incidents." According to Josephus in his
The Jewish War (2.9.2) and
Antiquities of the Jews (18.3.1), Pilate offended the Jews by moving imperial standards with the image of Caesar into Jerusalem. This resulted in a crowd of Jews surrounding Pilate's house in Caesarea for five days. Pilate then summoned them to an
arena, where the Roman soldiers drew their swords. But the Jews showed so little fear of death, that Pilate relented and removed the standards. Bond argues that the fact that Josephus says that Pilate brought in the standards by night, shows that he knew that the images of the emperor would be offensive. She dates this incident to early in Pilate's tenure as governor. Daniel Schwartz and Alexander Demandt both suggest that this incident is in fact identical with "the incident with the shields" reported in Philo's
Embassy to Gaius, an identification first made by the early church historian
Eusebius. Lémonon, however, argues against this identification. According to Philo's
Embassy to Gaius (
Embassy to Gaius 38), Pilate offended against
Jewish law by bringing golden shields into Jerusalem, and placing them on
Herod's Palace. The sons of
Herod the Great petitioned him to remove the shields, but Pilate refused. Herod's sons then threatened to petition the emperor, an action which Pilate feared would expose the crimes he had committed in office. He did not prevent their petition. Tiberius received the petition and angrily reprimanded Pilate, ordering him to remove the shields. Helen Bond, Daniel Schwartz, and
Warren Carter argue that Philo's portrayal is largely stereotyped and rhetorical, portraying Pilate with the same words as other opponents of Jewish law, while portraying Tiberius as just and supportive of Jewish law. It is unclear why the shields offended against Jewish law: it is likely that they contained an inscription referring to Tiberius as (son of divine Augustus). Bond dates the incident to 31, sometime after Sejanus's death in 17 October. In another incident recorded in both the
Jewish Wars (2.9.4) and the
Antiquities of the Jews (18.3.2), Josephus relates that Pilate offended the Jews by using up the
temple treasury () to pay for a new aqueduct to Jerusalem. When a mob formed while Pilate was visiting Jerusalem, Pilate ordered his troops to beat them with clubs; many perished from the blows or from being trampled by horses, and the mob was dispersed. The dating of the incident is unknown, but Bond argues that it must have occurred between 26 and 30 or 33, based on Josephus's chronology. The Gospel of Luke mentions in passing Galileans "whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices" (
Luke 13:1). This reference has been variously interpreted as referring to one of the incidents recorded by Josephus, or to an entirely unknown incident. Bond argues that the number of Galileans killed does not seem to have been particularly high. In Bond's view, the reference to "sacrifices" likely means that this incident occurred at
Passover at some unknown date. She argues that "[i]t is not only possible but quite likely that Pilate's governorship contained many such brief outbreaks of trouble about which we know nothing. The insurrection in which
Barabbas was caught up, if historical, may well be another example."
Trial and execution of Jesus ,
Christ before Pilate, c. 1310, from his
Maestà in Siena At the
Passover of most likely 30 or 33, Pontius Pilate condemned
Jesus of Nazareth to death by
crucifixion in Jerusalem. The main sources on the crucifixion are the four canonical Christian
Gospels, the accounts of which vary. Helen Bond argues that the evangelists' portrayals of Pilate have been shaped to a great extent by their own particular theological and apologetic concerns. [...] Legendary or theological additions have also been made to the narrative [...] Despite extensive differences, however, there is a certain agreement amongst the evangelists regarding the basic facts, an agreement which may well go beyond literary dependency and reflect actual historical events. Pilate's role in condemning Jesus to death is also attested by the Roman historian
Tacitus, who, when explaining
Nero's persecution of the Christians, explains: "Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate, and the pernicious
superstition was checked for a moment..." (Tacitus,
Annals 15.44). Josephus also
mentioned Jesus's execution by Pilate at the request of prominent Jews (
Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3); the text may have been altered by
Christian interpolation, but the reference to the execution is generally considered authentic. Discussing the paucity of extra-biblical mentions of the crucifixion, Alexander Demandt argues that the execution of Jesus was probably not seen as a particularly important event by the Romans, as many other people were crucified at the time and forgotten. In
Ignatius's epistles
to the Trallians (9.1) and
to the Smyrnaeans (1.2), the author attributes Jesus's persecution under Pilate's governorship. Ignatius further dates Jesus's birth, passion, and resurrection during Pilate's governorship in his
epistle to the Magnesians (11.1). Ignatius stresses all these events in his epistles as historical facts. Bond argues that Jesus's arrest was made with Pilate's prior knowledge and involvement, based on the presence of a 500-strong Roman cohort among the party that arrests Jesus in John 18:3. Demandt dismisses the notion that Pilate was involved. It is generally assumed, based on the unanimous testimony of the gospels, that the crime for which Jesus was brought to Pilate and executed was sedition, founded on his claim to be
king of the Jews. Pilate may have judged Jesus according to the
cognitio , a form of trial for
capital punishment used in the Roman provinces and applied to
non-Roman citizens that provided the prefect with greater flexibility in handling the case. All four gospels also mention that Pilate had the custom of releasing one captive in honor of the
Passover festival; this custom is not attested in any other source. Historians disagree on whether or not such a custom is a fictional element of the gospels, reflects historical reality, or perhaps represents a single
amnesty in the year of Jesus's crucifixion. , 1881 The Gospels' portrayal of Pilate is "widely assumed" to diverge greatly from that found in Josephus and Philo, as Pilate is portrayed as reluctant to execute Jesus and pressured to do so by the crowd and Jewish authorities.
John P. Meier notes that in Josephus, by contrast, "Pilate alone [...] is said to condemn Jesus to the cross." Some scholars believe that the Gospel accounts are completely untrustworthy:
S. G. F. Brandon argued that in reality, rather than vacillating on condemning Jesus, Pilate unhesitatingly executed him as a rebel.
Paul Winter explained the discrepancy between Pilate in other sources and Pilate in the gospels by arguing that Christians became more and more eager to portray Pontius Pilate as a witness to Jesus' innocence, as persecution of Christians by the Roman authorities increased.
Bart Ehrman argues that the
Gospel of Mark, the earliest one, shows the Jews and Pilate to be in agreement about executing Jesus (Mark 15:15), while the later gospels progressively reduce Pilate's culpability, culminating in Pilate allowing the Jews to crucify Jesus in John (John 19:16). He connects this change to increased "anti-Judaism".
Raymond E. Brown argued that the Gospels' portrayal of Pilate cannot be considered historical, since Pilate is always described in other sources (
The Jewish War and
Antiquities of the Jews of
Josephus and
Embassy to Gaius of
Philo) as a cruel and obstinate man. Brown also rejects the historicity of Pilate washing his hands and of the
blood curse, arguing that these narratives, which only appear in the
Gospel of Matthew, reflect later contrasts between the
Jews and
Jewish Christians. Others have tried to explain Pilate's behavior in the Gospels as motivated by a change of circumstances from that shown in Josephus and Philo, usually presupposing a connection between Pilate's caution and the death of Sejanus. Yet other scholars, such as
Brian McGing and Bond, have argued that there is no real discrepancy between Pilate's behavior in Josephus and Philo and that in the Gospels.
Warren Carter argues that Pilate is portrayed as skillful, competent, and manipulative of the crowd in Mark, Matthew, and John, only finding Jesus innocent and executing him under pressure in Luke.
N. T. Wright and
Craig A. Evans argue that Pilate's hesitation was due to the fear of causing a revolt during
Passover, when large numbers of pilgrims were in
Jerusalem.
Removal and later life According to Josephus'
Antiquities of the Jews (18.4.1–2), Pilate's removal as governor occurred after Pilate slaughtered a group of armed
Samaritans at a village called Tirathana near
Mount Gerizim, where they hoped to find artifacts that had been buried there by
Moses. Alexander Demandt suggests that the leader of this movement may have been
Dositheos, a
messiah-like figure among the Samaritans who was known to have been active around this time. The Samaritans, claiming not to have been armed, complained to
Lucius Vitellius the Elder, the
governor of Syria (term 35–39), who had Pilate recalled to Rome to be judged by
Tiberius. Tiberius, however, had died before his arrival. This dates the end of Pilate's governorship to 36/37. Tiberius died in
Misenum on 16 March in 37, in his seventy-eighth year (Tacitus,
Annals VI.50,
VI.51). Following Tiberius's death, Pilate's hearing would have been handled by the new emperor
Caligula: it is unclear whether any hearing took place, as new emperors often dismissed outstanding legal matters from previous reigns. The only sure outcome of Pilate's return to Rome is that he was not reinstated as governor of Judaea, either because the hearing went badly, or because Pilate did not wish to return. J. P. Lémonon argues that the fact that Pilate was not reinstated by Caligula does not mean that his trial went badly, but may simply have been because after ten years in the position it was time for him to take a new posting. Joan Taylor, on the other hand, argues that Pilate seems to have ended his career in disgrace, using his unflattering portrayal in Philo, written only a few years after his dismissal, as proof. The church historian
Eusebius (
Church History 2.7.1), writing in the early fourth century, claims that "tradition relates that" Pilate committed suicide after he was recalled to Rome due to the disgrace he was in. Eusebius dates this to 39. Paul Maier notes that no other surviving records corroborate Pilate's suicide, which is meant to document God's wrath for Pilate's role in the crucifixion, and that Eusebius explicitly states that "tradition" is his source, "indicating that he had trouble documenting Pilate's presumed suicide". Daniel Schwartz, however, argues that Eusebius's claims "should not lightly be dismissed." More information on the potential fate of Pontius Pilate can be gleaned from other sources. The second-century pagan philosopher
Celsus polemically asked why, if Jesus was God, God had not punished Pilate, indicating that he did not believe that Pilate shamefully committed suicide. Responding to Celsus, the Christian apologist
Origen, writing , argued that nothing bad happened to Pilate, because the Jews and not Pilate were responsible for Jesus' death; he therefore also assumed that Pilate did not die a shameful death. Pilate's supposed suicide is also left unmentioned in Josephus, Philo, and Tacitus. Maier argues that "[i]n all probability, then, the fate of Pontius Pilate lay clearly in the direction of a retired government official, a pensioned Roman ex-magistrate, than in anything more disastrous." Taylor notes that Philo discusses Pilate as though he were already dead in the
Embassy to Gaius, although he is writing only a few years after Pilate's tenure as governor. ==Archaeology==