Question: Is
Luke's Account of a Census Under Quirinius Credible?
Answer: For those who believe that the Gospels are
accurate historical records of Jesus’ life, one of the most difficult
problems in the New Testament is the census Luke presents in Chapter 2,
verses 1 and 2. Luke writes:
Now it came about in those days that a decree went out from
Caesar Augustus that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth.
This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governor of
Syria. And all were proceeding to register for the census, everyone
to his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city
of Nazareth to Judea, to the city of David which is called
Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, in order
to register along with Mary, who was engaged to him and was with
child.
So, Luke tells us Augustus took a census before Jesus was born and
this was the reason Joseph took Mary to Bethle-hem. However, critics say
there are five reasons why Luke’s account is historically incorrect.
First, there is no known evidence of an Empire-wide census in the
reign of Augustus. If it occurred, wouldn’t it be mentioned by one or
another of the ancient historians who recorded this period? Second,
in a Roman census, Joseph would not have been required to travel to
Bethlehem and he would not have been required to take Mary with him.
Third, a Roman census could not have been carried out in Herod’s
kingdom while Herod was still alive. Fourth, Josephus records a
lot about Herod but does not mention a Roman census in Palestine.
Fifth, Quirinius was appointed governor of Syria and Judea in A.D.
6, many years after Jesus was born. In light of these facts, did Luke
make vast historical errors in his chronology of events?
Empire-Wide Census
When Luke states that a decree from Caesar Augustus went out that all
the world should be taxed, was he talking about just one empire-wide
census? No, according to Roman historian A. N. Sherwin White. The
censuses were taken in different provinces over a period of time. But
Caesar Augustus was the first one in history to order a census or tax
assessment of the whole provincial empire. Luke uses the present tense
to indicate that Augustus ordered censuses to be taken regularly
throughout the empire rather than only one time.
Second, papyri collected in Egypt, have shown that the Romans
undertook periodic censuses throughout their empire. In Roman Egypt, for
example, from A.D. 33 until 257 A.D., 258 different censuses were taken
at 14-year intervals. This evidence has been known for a number of
years, and substantiates Luke’s reference to Augustus’ census, but it
seems to work against the Lucan account in terms of the year when Jesus
was born. Why? Because the 14-year intervals do not intersect with the
year of Jesus’ birth in 4 B.C.
But concerning that problem, the newly published Dictionary of New
Testament Background states: "Evidence indicates that
Egyptian censuses were taken at 7-year intervals during the reign of
Augustus and can be established with indirect and direct evidence for
the years of 11-10 B.C., 4-3 B.C., A.D. 4 and 5, and A.D. 11 and 12."
This information is based on documentation presented in The
Demography of Roman Egypt by Bagnell and Friar, a book
published by Cambridge University Press in 1994.
Third, there are other reasons to believe a census was taken by
Caesar Augustus in 4 or 5 B.C. Augustus knew of Herod’s paranoia. Herod
frequently changed his will and then would kill the family member he had
put in charge if he were to die. Each time he changed his will and the
one who would succeed him, he had to get permission from the Roman
emperor to do so. So, Emperor Augustus knew what was happening in
Palestine. It is reasonable to assume that Augustus, anticipating the
problems that would come about when Herod died, would want to take a
census of Herod’s territory and might well have extended the Egyptian
census of 4-3 B.C. or performed something like it in Judea.
The mentioning of the census in Luke 2:1 is the only historical
reference of this census from antiquity, yet it rests on a plausible
reconstruction of events.
Quirinius
But what about Luke’s reference to the census being taken while
Quirinius was governor? When Luke says this was the "first" census that
took place under Quirinius, the Greek word prote, usually
translated "first," can also be translated "prior." If that is Luke’s
meaning, then, he would be referring to a census taken prior to
the one taken when Quirinius was governor in 6 A.D. Is it possible that
Quirinius took a prior census?
Well, historians know that Quirinius had a government assignment in
Syria between 12 B.C. to 2 B.C. He was responsible for reducing the
number of rebellious mountaineers in the highlands of Pisidia. As such,
he was a highly placed military figure in the Near East and highly
trusted by Emperor Caesar Augustus. Augustus, knowing of the turmoil in
Herod the Great’s territory, may well have put his trusted friend
Quirinius in charge of a census enrollment in the region of Syria just
before the end of Herod’s life.
The time period from 7 to 6 B.C. also coincides with the transition
period between the rule of the two legates of Syria: Saturninus from 9
to 6 B.C. and Varus from 7 to 4 B.C. The transition of power between
these two men took place between 7 to 6 B.C., and Augustus may have
appointed his friend Quirinius to step in and conduct a census taxation
when he could not trust anyone else. Again, Luke’s statement has a
plausible foundation in history.
Herod
Next, what can be said to those who say a Roman census could not have
been carried out in Herod’s kingdom while Herod was alive? This is
simply not true. Records have now been found that show the emperor did
take censuses in vassal kingdoms like Herod’s. In fact, when Herod died,
his domain was divided among his three sons, and Augustus ordered that
taxes be reduced in the territory of one of his sons. It proves the
Roman emperor was not afraid to intervene in one of his vassal kingdoms.
Further, it is now known that in 8-7 B.C., Herod came into disfavor
with Augustus and was thereafter treated as a subject rather than a
friend. It resulted in Herod’s autonomy being taken away from him.
Third, historians have also discovered that the people of Herod’s
domain took an oath of allegiance not just to Herod, but to both
Augustus and Herod, which proves there was a greater involvement of
Augustus in Herod’s realm.
Palestine
Finally, Luke’s account points to a census taken before Herod the
Great’s death and the division of his kingdom. Why? It would have been
highly implausible to think that after Herod’s kingdom had been divided
between his three sons in 4 B.C. that people in Nazareth under Herod
Antipas would have traveled to Bethlehem, the territory belonging to
Archelaus for purposes of taxation. It makes more sense that such
traveling would have been done when all the territories were under
Herod’s rule himself and Augustus called for an overall census.
So, since it has been proved that Augustus had taken censuses in
other vassal kingdoms, and since Herod had come into the emperor’s
disfavor, and since Herod was having troubles in his own realm with his
sons, it is more than probable that Augustus would have wanted to
conduct his own census, assessing Herod’s kingdom, while Herod was still
alive. And this is exactly what Luke recorded.
Why did Joseph Take Mary?
Next, what about the criticism that in a Roman census Joseph would
not have been required to travel to Bethlehem and and he would not have
been required to bring Mary with him? Well, now historians have found
that in A.D. 104, Vivius Maximus issued an edict that states, "It is
essential for all people to return to their homes for the census." This
indicates it was plausible for Joseph and Mary to travel to Bethlehem as
Luke indicates. In fact, it is just one of the many reasons scholars
have found why Mary would have needed to go with Joseph on his trip to
Bethlehem.
