Page images
PDF
EPUB

covery of Pallas's influence over Nero. Though the pardon of Felix was, probably, the effect of Agrippina's power, it was, no doubt, procured by the intercession of Pallas: for Agrippina was ad Pallantis libita provoluta. Josephus, who published his history forty years after the beginning of Nero's reign*, might perhaps have mistaken the cause of his pardon; and have imputed that to Pallas's intercession with Nero, which was obtained by his influence over Agrippina. That he was sometimes mistaken in Roman transactions and characters of that day, we are sure from his calling Poppaa a religious woman, (Deoσεns yag ny) who, beside her other delinquencies, instigated Nero to the murder of his mother, and of his wife Octavia †.

*It was finished in the xiiith year of Domitian, and the fifty-sixth of his own age.

+ The language of Josephus seems to have led to a supposition, that the Empress Poppea was one of St. Paul's converts, one of "the Saints of Cæsar's household." Baronius in his Annals, and Cave in his life of St. Paul, notice the supposition, and Dr. Hales thinks it probable. (Chronol. Vol. II. p. 1252.) I wish there were sufficient evidence for it. There is no difficulty in the supposition that St. Paul's preaching had power to awaken the greatest sinner to repentance; and Poppaa's conscience was accessible through all the avenues of adultery, murder, and atrocious cruelty. But there is no ground for the supposition of her conversion, that I can find, except the ac

[ocr errors]

But Felix might have been recalled from the government of Judea before Pallas was

count, which Chrysostom gives of St. Paul's having persuaded one of Nero's concubines to renounce her connection with Nero (της ακαθαρτου συνουσίας απαλλαγηναι) and that in consequence of this conversion Nero commanded St. Paul to be put to death. The account does not say, that the Empress was converted, but one of Nero's concubines. If therefore Poppea was converted at all, it must have been when she lived in the latter character. And had she been then converted to a chaste and virtuous life, we may, I think, venture to assert, that no convert of St. Paul, under all the convictions of sin, and compunctions of repentance, which his preaching must have excited, would ever have consented to marry Nero. But the concubine Poppea was afterwards the wife of Nero, and the instigator to the murder of Octavia.

The character, which Josephus gives of Poppea has no countenance from Tacitus, who was her contemporary as well as Josephus. He says of her, Huic mulieri cuncta alia fuere præter honestum animum. She could not have been a convert before marriage, for she continued in her adulterous intercourse with Nero till her marriage in the year 62. And if we may judge from Tacitus there was nothing in her conduct after her marriage with Nero to justify the supposition that her mind had experienced any religious change; for he thus speaks of her death: Mortem Poppaa, ut palam tristem, ita recordantibus latam ob impudicitiam ejus sævitiamque. He does not say that she was ever accused or suspected of" foreign superstition," which he would have done, if there had been any report of her being a convert to Christianity. Speaking of the death of Octavia, he says, Poppaa non nisi in perniciem uxoris nupta.-Addilurque atrocior sævitia, quod

dismissed from his office by Nero; and perhaps the language of Josephus implies that

caput amputatum latumque per urbem Poppaa vidit. This was the commencement of Poppæa's imperial life. The year before her death, Gessius Florus, the most tyrannical and rapacious of all the governors of Judea, obtained the government through the interest of his wife Cleopatra, who was the friend of Poppaa. And of this friend Josephus gives a very bad character. He calls her ovde πονηρία αυτού (Φλωρου) διαφέρουσαν, as wicked as her hus band. Such a woman was not likely to be the friend of one of St. Paul's converts.

ουδεν

Josephus, however, calls Poppea JEOECns. To gratify her, Nero pardoned the Jews who had raised a building to obstruct the views of Agrippa's palace, which overlooked the Temple; and afterwards at Josephus's solicitation she obtained the release of the Jewish Priests, who had been sent prisoners to Rome by Felix. Josephus very gratefully ascribes these favours to her piety, which are more justly imputable to political caprice. Agrippina and her friends had oppressed the Jews. Poppea of course favoured and protected them. These favours were done the Jews during the most iniquitous period of her life, the latter in the first year of her marriage with Nero, and the former about four years before.

The time assigned to this conversion by Chrysostom is a decisive proof that the convert was not Poppaa. It was after St. Paul's return to Rome, and just before his death. If the Apostle suffered martyrdom in the year 65, according to Dr. Hales, Poppea was then Empress, and not one of Nero's concubines. If he died in the year 68, according to Eusebius, Jerome, Stillingfleet, and Pearson, Poppaa at that time had been dead three years, according to Tacitus. (Annal. L. XVI.)

he was: for he says, that Nero pardoned Felix, when Pallas was high in his favour, or was most in favour with him: TOTE de paλιστα δια τιμης εχων εκείνον: words, which designate a very early part of Nero's reign, rather than a late. For Pallas was dismissed from power in the second year; was tried for high treason in the third; and must have continued out of favour with Nero till the death of Agrippina in the 5th or 6th year. In the 8th year he was put to death; the same year in which Nero married Poppaa. And there was no part of the interval between Agrippina's death and his own, to which the μαλιστα δια τιμης εχων can apply. For though the death of Agrippina might have allayed Nero's hatred of Pallas, there was in the new interests nothing likely to restore his influence, or to favour his brother. If therefore Felix was recalled when Pallas was most in favour, or very high in favour, with Nero, it must have been early in the second or in the first year of Nero.

The commencement of Felix's government seems to have been another reason with the learned and excellent Bishop of Chester, for dating his recall so late as the year 60. He says in the passage before quoted, that Nero appointed Felix governor of Judæa. If Fe

lix had commenced his government of Judea under Nero, its duration would require a date as late as that assigned in the Annales. But it is clear from the Annals of Tacitus (Lib. XII.) that he was appointed governor by Claudius some years before that emperor's death *. And it is equally clear that Claudius's appointment had not been overlooked by the author of the Annales: for he says, (A. D. 53. Claud. 13.) Felix a Claudio Procurator Judææ rursus factus est. The first appointment is dated A. D. 48. Claud. 8, which was to the province of Samaria †.

There is another argument for the duration of Felix's government, in the Annales Paulini, depending on the age of Jose

*Fausto Sylla, Sylvio Othone Coss.-(A. D. 52.)Felix jampridem Judææ impositus.--Ventidio Cumano pars provinciæ habebatur, ita divisis, ut huic Galilæorum natio, Felici Samaritæ parerent.-Damnatusque flagitiorum, quæ duo deliquerant, Cumanus, et quies provinciæ reddita, (Tacitus Annal. Lib. XII.)

M. Asinio, M. Acilio Coss.-(A. D. 54.)-Claudius veneno tollitur. (Annal. Lib. XII.)

+ The two provinces of Galilee and Samaria appear to have been included under the common title of the province of Judæa: for Tacitus after speaking of Felix, as jampridem Judææ impositus, and of Cumanus, to whom pars provincia habebatur, says the province was divided between them, one having Galilee, and the other Sa

maria.

D

« EelmineJätka »