THE OF MARK'S GOSPEL

BY

W. J. BENNETT, JR. Los Angeles

As a closing summary of this collection of "controversy saying," ii i-iii 6, Mark has written the following statement. "The went out, and immediately held counsel with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him 1)". This otherwise unknown group of people called by Mark 'HpcpaLoc\lo¡ is also mentioned at xii 13; again in the context of a series of "controversy sayings." "And they sent to him some of the Pharisees and some of the Herodians to entrap him in his talk." It is then that is asked, "If it is lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?" The precise definition of this enigmatic group, 'HpwBv«voi, has long been the subject of scholary inquiry 2). Thus far the sugges- tions put forward as to nature of this group have tended to fall into two categories. A number of scholars have suggested that this group is to be understood as a fairly well-defined group which functioned within the general religio-political life of first-century Palestinian Jewish society. In this vein, it has been suggested that the title "Herodians" indicated members of Herod's family, or his court, or his domestic staff. Others have suggested that this title was an alternate name for another religious or religio- political group which is presently better known to the historian such as , , or . Over against this sort of definition there have been other sug- gestions which wish to understand the Herodians as a much more amorphous group. The suggestion, strongly argued by H. H.

1) English translations of Biblical material is taken from the Holy , Revised Standard Version (Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1953) unless otherwise noted. 2) It has been suggested that these people were members of Herod's family, his court, his domestic staff, influential aristocrats, and members of a religious sect who held Herod to be the Messiah. Cf. the fine summaries of these sug- gestions in H. H. ROWLEY, "The Herodians in the Gospels," Journal of Theological Studies, XLI (1940), pp. 14-27 and SAMUELSANDMEL, 'Herodians' Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, II (New York and Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 1962), pp. 594-595. 10

ROWLEY 3), which would identify the Herodians as a rather hetero- geneous group of influential aristocrats who were pro-Herod in sentiment has been particulary attractive. Recently, HAROLD W. HOEHNER has sought to use ROWLEY'S description of the Herodians as the basis for identifying them with another party named Boethusians 4). HOEHNER accepts ROWLEY'S general definition of the Herodians and remarks that this "would seem to square with the evidence 5). However, HOEHNER goes on to argue that it was just this sort of people who made up the group called Boethusians. Noting that in some Rabbinic literature the names Boethusians and Sadducees are interchange- able, and that had chosen high from the house of Boethus rather than from the Hasmonean family, he argues that the Boethusians were "theologically indistinguish- able from the Sadducees 6)", but politically more pro-Herodian than the Sadducees who remained generally loyal to the Hasmo- neans. Thus, HOEHNER concludes that, "It seems, therefore, that the Herodians were men of influence and standing, who in some circles were also known as the Boethusians. They were at one with the Sadducees religiously, but generally speaking, were more pro-Herodian than they" 7). This argument, like others which suggest the identification of the Herodians with other known groups, suffers somewhat from being too tightly argued. This is particularly the case when HOEHNER considers Mark xii 13. Regarding the alternation in the groups questioning Jesus (Pharisees and Herodians in xii 13 and Sadducees in xii 18) he states, "The question concerning the tribute is a political one and thus the term Herodians is natural, whereas the next question, concerning the , is a theological one where the term Sadducees is appropriate" 8). It would seem that this distinction cannot be maintained for certainly within early first-century Palestianian the question of paying tribute was, indeed, a theological issue-and that of the first order!

3) ROWLEY,op. cit. 4) HAROLDW.HOEHNER, (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, 1972), Society for Studies Monograph Series #17, Appendix 10, "The Herodians". 5) Ibid ; p. 333. 6) Ibid; p. 337. 7) Ibid; p. 339. 8) Ibid.