Tertullian

Church father Tertullian wrote: "We read the lives of the Cæsars: At Rome Nero was the first who stained with blood the rising faith"^[17] Mary Ellen Snodgrass notes that Tertullian in this passage "used Suetonius as a source by quoting Lives of the Caesars as proof that Nero was the first Roman emperor to murder Christians", but cites not a specific passage in Suetonius' Lives as Tertullian's source.^[18] Other authors explicitly add that Tertullian's words are a reference to the passage in Suetonius' Nero 16,^[19] while others hold that they refer to the Tacitus passage,^[20] or both (Nero & Tacitus) passages.^[21]

Interpretation

In Roman usage, the word superstitio refers to any excessive religious devotion, within or outside traditional Roman religious practice. To Suetonius this particular excessive devotion was new and mischievous. This may have been the case in Suetonius' time, but Marius Heemstra thinks he was backdating the accusation to the time of Nero.^[22]

The word translated as "mischievous" above is maleficus which can also mean "magical". As a noun the word means "magician". It may be that Suetonius is here accusing Christians of using what would be called "black magic" in modern terms, as the pagan philosopher Celsus did about 177.^[23]

The passage shows the clear contempt of Suetonius for Christians - the same contempt expressed by Tacitus and Pliny the Younger in their writings.^[2] Stephen Benko states that the contempt of Suetonius is quite clear, as he reduces Christians to the lowest ranks of society and his statement echoes the sentiments of Pliny and Tacitus.^[24]

The Latin text

The Latin original version of this statement is as follows (in Ihm's edition):^[27]

Iudaeos impulsore Chresto^{[note 1]} assidue tumultuantis Roma expulit

The brief Latin statement has been described as a "notorious crux"^{[29][note 2]} and William L. Lane explains that the Latin text is ambiguous, giving two ways of interpreting it:

1. "He expelled from Rome the Jews constantly making disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus"
2. "Since the Jews constantly make disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome."

The first indicates that Claudius only expelled those Jews who were making disturbances.^[32] Boman (2012) uses the following translation, which he "consider[s] non-committal and adequately close to the original Latin": "From Rome he (Claudius) expelled the perpetually tumultuating Jews prompted by Chrestus."^[33]

Interpretation

James D.G. Dunn states that most scholars infer that "Suetonius misheard the name 'Christus' (referring to Jesus as Christ) as 'Chrestus'" and also misunderstood the report and assumed that the followers of someone called Chrestus were causing disturbances within the Jewish community based on his instigation.^[36] R.T. France says that the notion of a misspelling by Suetonius "can never be more than a guess, and the fact that Suetonius can elsewhere speak of 'Christians' as members of a new cult (without any reference to Jews) surely makes it rather unlikely that he could make such a mistake."^[37] The term Chrestus (which may have also been used by Tacitus) was common at the time, particularly for slaves, meaning good or useful.^[38] However, Cook points out that this name was only a common name among pagans. While 126 individuals named Chrestus are known from Rome alone, 59 of whom were slaves, there is only a single documented Jew named Chrestus and even this Jew practiced paganism. Therefore, Cook finds it unlikely that the Jewish agitator Chrestus could be someone other than Christ.^[39]

Louis Feldman states that most scholars assume that in the reference Jesus is meant and that the disturbances mentioned were due to the spread of Christianity in Rome.^[41] Robert E. Van Voorst states that Suetonius had a misleading source of information leading him to believe that Christ was actually present as an agitator during the reign of Claudius.^[42] Later, Van Voorst explains that in the passage Chrestus is most likely an error for Christus.^[43] E. M. Smallwood states that the only reasonable interpretation is that Suetonius was referring to Christianity.^[44] Edwin M. Yamauchi states that "A growing number of scholars, however, have accepted the argument that the "Chrestus" mentioned in Suetonius was simply a Jewish agitator with a common name, and that he had no association with Christianity."^[45] Among recent classical scholars there does not seem to be the certainty that is found among many biblical studies scholars. Barbara Levick comments, "To claim that Suetonius, writing in the second century, misunderstood a reference to Christians in his source is unconvincingly economical", concluding "The precise cause of the expulsion remains obscure."^[46] J. Mottershead in her commentary on the Claudius states that if Suetonius "had included a reference to Christ one would not have expected him to have simply used Chrestus/Christus unqualified." This points "towards the conclusion that Suetonius did not have in mind a religious dispute involving Christians."^[47]

Menahem Stern said that Suetonius was definitely referring to Jesus Christ; because he would have added "a certain" to Chrestus if he had meant an unknown agitator.^[48]

Disturbance and expulsion

Most scholars assume that the disturbances mentioned by Suetonius in the passage were due to the spread of Christianity in Rome.^[41] These disturbances were likely caused by the objections of Jewish community to the continued preachings by Hellenistic Jews in Rome and their insistence that Jesus was the Messiah, resulting in tensions with the Jews in Rome.^[36][34]

Some scholars think Suetonius was confused and assumed that Chrestus, as the leader of the agitators, was alive and lived in Rome at the time of the expulsion.^[49][34] The notion that Chrestus was instigating Jewish unrest suggests that the Chrestus reference is not a Christian interpolation, for a Christian scribe would be unlikely to think of the followers of Christ as Jews, or place him in Rome at the time of Claudius.^[50] This problem weakens the historical value of the reference as a whole.^[36] Scholars are divided on the value of the Suetonius reference; some see it as a reference to Jesus,^[5][6][51] others see it as a reference to disturbances by an unknown agitator.^{[52][note 3][55][56]}

Dating the expulsion provides some challenges because Suetonius writes in a topical rather than chronological fashion, necessitating the use of other texts to establish a time frame.^[57][58][59] The dating of the "edict of Claudius" for the expulsion of Jews relies on three separate texts beyond Suetonius' own reference, which in chronological order are: the reference to the trial of Apostle Paul by Gallio in the Acts of the Apostles (18:2), Cassius Dio's reference in History 60.6.6-7 and Paulus Orosius's fifth century mention in History 7.6.15-16 of a non-extant Josephus.^[58] Scholars generally agree that these references refer to the same event.^[59] Most scholars agree that the expulsion of some Jews mentioned by Suetonius happened around AD 49–50, but a minority of scholars suggest dates within a few years of that range.^[49][60][61]