Nikos Kokkinos: The Herodian Dynasty. (page 272-276)
The question of how long Agrippa I stayed in Rome is significant for an understanding of the early part of his career, and it needs to be addressed properly here. Josephus clearly tells us that Agrippa left Rome only after he was reduced to poverty, as a result of recklessly spending the fortune left to him by his mother on her death. Hence our primary question must be the year in which Berenice I died....................
....most scholars automatically assumed that he left Rome in CE 23, in the year Drusus died. This is a serious uncritical assumption, the date provides only a terminus post quem.
.....Now, since his arrival at Palestine Agrippa withdrew to Idumaea, since all subsequent events relating to him belong to the early 30s, Smallwood could not find the means to explain why, had he returned in CE 23, Agrippa’s life stood still for almost a decade. Would he have locked himself up in the tower of Malatha, contemplating suicide for some 10 years? In its effort to a void this artificial vacuum the new Schurer admitted that Wieseler was ‘more or less correct’ to place the journey of Agrippa from Rome to Palestine in CE 29 or CE 30. An even later date is surely called for.
Schurer continued by pointing out that the return of Agrippa could not have occurred before the marriage of Antipas to Herodias, as an event dated here to CE 34. Although a short period (perhaps a year) elapsing between Agrippa’s withdrawal to Idumaea and his wife’s appeal to Herodias in 34, is not excluded by Ant. 18,147-48, the implication nevertheless is that he would not have returned before 32/33. Such a date can illuminate many points raised here for the first time.
a. C. Herennius Capito, who had been commissioned to recover from Agrippa some considerable debts incurred to the imperial treasury in Rome, began dunning him for the repayment only in late CE 35. Clearly this debt, which baffled Smallwood, is not likely to have been owing since before CE 23, the year when Agrippa left Rome according to the majority opinion.
b. Consider what Josephus says about Tiberius Gemellus, the son of Drusus and grandson of the Emperior Tiberius. Agrippa ‘had helped bring him up’. But Gemellus was born only in CE 19, he was still regarded as ‘a mere child’ in 33, and had yet to enter puberty early in 37 – in fact he became princeps iuventutis only later in that year. Certainty Agrippa did not help bring Gemellus up before CE 23!
===============
.....b. Berenice had been honoured by Augustus himself, and her mother’s property had been left to Livia...One would have expected Bernice to follow her mother’s example, or at least share her property between both great imperial ladies. Livia and Antonia Minor. Yet among the beneficiaries of her will, we hear only of Antonia. Whatever the circumstances, this would make perfect sense after the death of Livia at the beginning of CE 29.
.....c. One of the daughters of Agrippa I, the notorious Berenice II, was born in CE 28/29 .....and, as her name betrays, she would have been called after her grandmother - possibly immediately after the latter’s death. It may well be the case that a few months after the death of Livia in January(?) CE 29, Berenice I died, to be followed shortly by the birth of her granddaughter. Berenice I would have been around 60 at that time.
The question of how long Agrippa I stayed in Rome is significant for an understanding of the early part of his career, and it needs to be addressed properly here. Josephus clearly tells us that Agrippa left Rome only after he was reduced to poverty, as a result of recklessly spending the fortune left to him by his mother on her death. Hence our primary question must be the year in which Berenice I died....................
....most scholars automatically assumed that he left Rome in CE 23, in the year Drusus died. This is a serious uncritical assumption, the date provides only a terminus post quem.
.....Now, since his arrival at Palestine Agrippa withdrew to Idumaea, since all subsequent events relating to him belong to the early 30s, Smallwood could not find the means to explain why, had he returned in CE 23, Agrippa’s life stood still for almost a decade. Would he have locked himself up in the tower of Malatha, contemplating suicide for some 10 years? In its effort to a void this artificial vacuum the new Schurer admitted that Wieseler was ‘more or less correct’ to place the journey of Agrippa from Rome to Palestine in CE 29 or CE 30. An even later date is surely called for.
Schurer continued by pointing out that the return of Agrippa could not have occurred before the marriage of Antipas to Herodias, as an event dated here to CE 34. Although a short period (perhaps a year) elapsing between Agrippa’s withdrawal to Idumaea and his wife’s appeal to Herodias in 34, is not excluded by Ant. 18,147-48, the implication nevertheless is that he would not have returned before 32/33. Such a date can illuminate many points raised here for the first time.
a. C. Herennius Capito, who had been commissioned to recover from Agrippa some considerable debts incurred to the imperial treasury in Rome, began dunning him for the repayment only in late CE 35. Clearly this debt, which baffled Smallwood, is not likely to have been owing since before CE 23, the year when Agrippa left Rome according to the majority opinion.
b. Consider what Josephus says about Tiberius Gemellus, the son of Drusus and grandson of the Emperior Tiberius. Agrippa ‘had helped bring him up’. But Gemellus was born only in CE 19, he was still regarded as ‘a mere child’ in 33, and had yet to enter puberty early in 37 – in fact he became princeps iuventutis only later in that year. Certainty Agrippa did not help bring Gemellus up before CE 23!
===============
.....b. Berenice had been honoured by Augustus himself, and her mother’s property had been left to Livia...One would have expected Bernice to follow her mother’s example, or at least share her property between both great imperial ladies. Livia and Antonia Minor. Yet among the beneficiaries of her will, we hear only of Antonia. Whatever the circumstances, this would make perfect sense after the death of Livia at the beginning of CE 29.
.....c. One of the daughters of Agrippa I, the notorious Berenice II, was born in CE 28/29 .....and, as her name betrays, she would have been called after her grandmother - possibly immediately after the latter’s death. It may well be the case that a few months after the death of Livia in January(?) CE 29, Berenice I died, to be followed shortly by the birth of her granddaughter. Berenice I would have been around 60 at that time.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Herodian-Dynas ... s+kokkinos
