8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
1/22
Jesus and his Cast of Characters:
Constructions of Archetype
Christopher J. DeCicco
NES 321 Heretics
Prof. Haines-Eitzen
Due May 6th
, 2002
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
2/22
Heroes always emerge in a time of dying - of self, of social sanctions, of societys
forms, of standard-brand religions, governments, economics, psychologies and relationships. In
answering the call of the eternal, they discover the courage to perform the first great task of the
hero or heroine - to undergo the gestations, growth, and trauma required for a new birth. This
occurs so that they can then serve as midwife in the larger society for the continuum of births
necessary to redeem both the time and the society in which they live and bring them to a higher
level of functioning.
-Jean Huston1
Introduction: Categorization of Character
In his work The Historical Figure of Jesus, E.P. Sanders makes a short innocent
statement which speaks volumes about the human race: People like neat categories2. In its
context, this statement refers to New Testament scholars who have continuously attempted to
classify the historical Jesus as a specific kind of person, with specific kinds of beliefs, activities,
methods and philosophies. But since the information about Jesus is so diverse, and very often
contradictory, the task is a daunting one, and even the best and most thorough scholars
occasionally fall into the trappings of categorization, for the sake of simplicity and/or argument.
But the above statement is relevant outside of New Testament studies as well; in a broader
context it applies to the transmission of ideas through narratives, both ancient and modern, and
the methods by which authors (storytellers, writers, filmmakers, et cetera) convey their ideas,
and the ways audiences react. Narratives are always more easily digestible and repeatable when
the characters are clearly defined and pigeonholed, and the goals and obstacles of both
protagonists and antagonists are presented simply and concisely. Real life is never as neat or tidy
as storytelling is, but it is human nature to prefer simpler narrative structure and categorization,
and to dismiss or ignore irrelevant and extraneous data.
It is this very nature of the human psyche, and of storytelling itself, which makes the
work of New Testament scholars all the more difficult: the categorization of events and
characters in the gospels has already been applied to historical events, and unfortunately by
different people, who had different ideas, beliefs and goals when they constructed their
1Houston, The Hero and the Goddess, (New York, 1992), 73.
2Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus, (London, 1993), 153.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
3/22
2
narratives. Although there has been much progress made in the process of honing in on the
characters and events in the life of the historical Jesus, the methods by which information is
extracted is not infallible, because the reliability of data is inherently questionable.
It is this aspect of New Testament studies the reliability of data which is my prime
focus in this paper. To what extent can we trust certain information as provided in the Gospel
narratives? Where do we draw the line between historical fact and fabricated narrative? This
figurative line will be drawn in different places for different readers. Those who consider
themselves Christians might consider none or almost none of the information to be fabricated,
and all to be true. Those with a more scientific and critical approach will be more conservative
with what they label as factual. Although this is not a comprehensive study of reliability of data,
it is certainly an argument that, in certain aspects of their detective-work, some scholars are not
being conservative enoughregarding what they are willing to accept as historically accurate.
Despite the high level of scrutiny that scholars apply in their studies, some of the most respected
among them contradict themselves by admitting uncertainty in some places and then boldly
claiming certainty elsewhere3.
Regarding the dating of Jesus birth, Sanders makes a statement (in the course of his
discussion) which I find unsettling: ...We should trust this information unless we have good
reason not to do so4. This innocent until proven guilty method of logic might seem perfectly
acceptable within the context of our modern democratic sense of justice, but is too liberal and
forgiving of an approach when studying documents which already give us noticeable reason to
distrust their reliability in other portions of text. While scholars might dismiss by default certain
events in the gospels as being implausible because of scientific impossibility (e.g. healings,
exorcisms, transfiguration, resurrection), they are reluctant to dismiss other events as implausible
(e.g. meetings between famous characters, as will be discussed later) because they could be
technicallypossible. But we are dealing with narrative fabricated reality, used to construct
historical fiction a medium which thrives onpossibilitiesin order to legitimize the stories
inherent implausibilities in the real world.Therefore accepting possibility as plausibility is not
enough. In George Lucass Young Indiana Jones Chronicles television series, the protagonist
meets a different historical celebrity in each episode Sigmund Freud, Mata Hari, Theodore
3Ibid. compare p. 183 We may be confident that... to xiii Confidence... has soared, and recent scholarly literature
contains what I regard as rash and unfounded assertions...
4Ibid. 54.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
4/22
3
Roosevelt, T.E. Lawrence, Prince Feisal, Charles DeGaul, to name a few. As the viewer, we are
drawn to the stories because they are possible within the context of the story, even though we
know how historically implausible it would be for a single person to have met all of those
historical celebrities, and especially within a short amount of time. As one who has become more
intimately familiar with storytelling and the thought processes associated with creating fiction, I
am suggesting that it is safest to reverse the method of logic to guilty until proven innocent;
that is, we should assume that the gospel writers are guilty of fabricating or tailoring their
information solely for the sake of the narrative (and especiallywhen it serves the narrative), until
other historical information can corroborate. This method might leave us with fewer answers, but
having no conclusions is better than having faulty ones.
By making these statements, I am automatically playing on someone elses turf, namely
those who are far more steeped in the literature than I, and I must abide by their rules. Sanders
above statement asks for a good reason to distrust the reliability of gospels, and this paper is
about providing that very thing. Below I will argue that the Jesus narratives in the Gospels each
follow the same basic form and structure of heroic journey used by virtually all cultures
throughout human history, and that the more a text exhibits conspicuous adherence to this
structure, the more suspicious we should be that the information has been fabricated for the sake
of the narrative. This not only refers to events in Jesus life,as will be discussed first, but also to
charactersthat enter into the narrative, which will be discussed in the following two sections.
I: The Journey of the Archetypal Hero
During a time when some scholars were only studying foreign cultures in order to
understand differencesbetween peoples, enforcing an us versus them world view,
anthropologist Joseph Campbell focused on the vastsimilaritiesbetween cultures, particularly in
regard to storytelling, and the transmission of ideas through narrative. Now, decades after his
most famous work, The Hero with a Thousand Faces, many people see his conclusions as being
self-evident, forgetting the profundity of his legacy.
In the above-mentioned work, Campbell studies in detail what he refers to as the
cosmogonic cycle5or the monomyth6, upon which many (if not most) of the worlds hero
5Campbell, The Hero with a Thousand Faces, (New York, 1949) 38-39, see especially 39: ...for now it appears that
the perilous journey was a labor not of attainment but of reattainment, not discovery but rediscovery whichreinforces the idea that this is a never-ending, repeating cycle for humanity.6Ibid. 30. He borrows this term from James Joyce, Finnegans Wake, (New York, 1939), 581.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
5/22
4
narratives draw their structure. The cycle is a simple one, divided into three basic sections:
separation, initiation, return7. Separationrefers to the departure from the normal life, or from
ones roots, into the call of adventure. Initiation is the dark period, sometimes taking place in the
supernatural world or an unfamiliar setting, where the hero undergoes various tasks, or endures
trials or temptations. Returnis marked by the completion of the task(s), whereby the hero is
brought back into normal life, but now as a transformed person, able to bestow gifts to his/her
fellow humans, whether this be in the form of a boon (i.e. a material object) or abstract gifts such
as wisdom or freedom8.
This narrative form is utilized, in rather unique ways, in all four of the canonical gospels.
Before I elaborate, it is important to provide a context for this form by way of comparison to
other narratives. The scope of this work is too small to incorporate the myriad examples of this
hero cycle in the worlds cultures, so for the sake of brevity, I will be emphasizing (both here and
later) examples from three different categories. The first two categories, Pagan (Greek, Roman,
and Egyptian) narratives, and Jewish (Old Testament) narratives, are essential because they were
familiar to early Christian writers and audiences, and have a direct bearing upon how the gospels
were formulated and experienced in their earliest form. The third category is modern narratives
in film and literature, which I provide purely for the emphasis that these methods and devices of
narrative structure are still readily employed, and not unique to antiquity.
Modern fiction is self-conscious of the hero cycle (in part because of Joseph Campbell),
to such an extent that many of the how to books in the market designed to help new and
aspiring writers and filmmakers specifically call upon the cycle as the classic model to follow9.
There are countless incarnations of this in modern culture, perhaps the most famous being
Dorothy Gale from Frank Baums Wizard of Oz, Frodo Baggins from Tolkeins Lord of the
Rings and Luke Skywalker from Lucass Star Wars saga. Interestingly, the latter two of these
stories were consciously born out of research in ancient mythology.
In Mediterranean antiquity, the story of Osiris is ancient Egypts most famous example of
the hero cycle, as he is killed by his enemies, dismembered and scattered through the land, then
reborn through a tree, and his divine energy is transformed into a new existence. But this version
of the hero cycle is highly metaphorical, relates less to human frailties or goals, and one could
7Ibid. 30.
8Ibid. See diagram on 245.
9See especially Trottier, The Screenwriters Bible, (Los Angeles, 1998) 35, 79, index on 298.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
6/22
5
argue is that the real adventure is carried out by his wife Isis, who attempts to find and save her
husband, and restore his divine status. Certain Greek characters have their beginnings with
divinity - Achilles and Herakles are both born of one divine parent and one human parent10
- in
order to emphasize their uniqueness, but they still must endure challenges which are relevant to
the human realm, and their weaknesses are often human ones. In one way or another, the stories
of Jason, Aeneas and Theseus utilize the hero cycle, even if it is only as part of the heros
adventure (Jason passes the clashing rocks, sneaks past the dragon to take the Golden Fleece;
Aeneas enters the underworld, passes Cerberus to gain knowledge of the future; Theseus enters
the labyrinth, slays the minotaur and takes Ariadne as his wife)11
. All three of these narratives
depict more human main characters, while the plot is still under the influence of divine
characters. Homers Odyssey follows this pattern too, as Athena assists Odysseus through his
journeys. What makes the Odyssey interesting regarding the hero cycle is that a disproportional
bulk of the story takes place during the initiation phase, within which several miniature sub-
cycles of the monomyth are completed (e.g. visits to various islands, other tangential adventures)
before the final return is complete (even when Odysseus returns to Ithaka, he still faces the
final daunting task of regaining his wife)12
.
Utilizing multiple miniature sub-cycles is not unique to Greek tradition; in the Jewish
tradition, the Genesis story of Joseph employs this method to an even greater extreme, with each
section of the story mirroring/imitating the other sections as well as the whole story13. The story
of the prophet Jonah is perhaps the most famous of Biblical narratives to follow the cosmogonic
cycle, so much so that when Campbell elaborates on the initiation phase, one of his chapter
section titles is in the Belly of the Whale14
. Daniels lions den and Noahs ark also both
serve as the initiation phase in their respective narratives, and are a testament to the fact that a
hero is often remembered most for what is encountered in this middle phase, the trials and
tribulations that must be endured in order to rise to the status of hero. The Exodus narrative is
essential to mention here because of how it uniquely employs the hero cycle twice: first Moses
follows the journey (exile from Egypt, living among the Midianites, the burning bush, return as
10For more, see Galinsky, The Herakles Theme, (Totowa, 1972) 14.
11For more, see Campbell, The Hero with a Thousand Faces, (New York, 1949) 23-24, 30.
12For more about the structure of these sub-cycles, see Smith, The Heros Journey, (Lanham, 1997) 33.
13Genesis 37-50
14Campbell, The Hero with a Thousand Faces, (New York, 1949) 90.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
7/22
6
the new prophet), and then Moses draws the entire people of Israel into the cycle (escape from
Egypt, wandering in the desert, entering and conquering Canaan).
This double utilization of the hero cycle is critical in examining the Jesus narrative. In
this case, the gospel of Mark serves as our prime example, since it is not only considered our
earliest extant Jesus narrative (upon which two others are based), but is also the simplest and
most straight forward in its application of the hero cycle. As Sanders and co-writer Margaret
Davies point out, the bulk of the Mark text (1:21-14:50) is a three-fold discourse: evangelization,
instruction (i.e. wisdom), and apology (offense/defense of Christian philosophy and cult)15
. But
the discourse is neatly and conveniently book-ended by the two hero cycles of Jesus: the human
hero cycle (Baptism; wandering in the desert, temptation by the devil; return as an authority
figure), and then the divine one (admission of messiah status; trial, suffering & execution, later
embelished by the creeds he descended into hell; resurrection).
Why is it so important to view the Jesus narrative in the context of the archetypal hero
cycle? There are many reasons, but first and foremost is that it seems to be no accidentthat this
classic formula appears in the narrative. The writers were clearly familiar both Pagan and Jewish
stories, and recognized, either consciously or unconsciously, what made a good story - what
qualities and characteristics made a narrative appealing and attractive to the largest possible
audience. They also clearly knew how to allude to other stories - particularly Jewish narratives -
in order to support their agenda. Our most obvious example is that the author of Matthew
conspicuously modeled and sculpted his Jesus as the new Moses16
. What better way to
emphasize this similarity in character and mission than to have Jesus narrative follow the same
general path? The first hero cycle, one of personal and individual growth and a rise to special
status, is placed at the beginning of the story. Then, the second cycle at the end of the story
shows that the hero uses his special status to bring the entire group through the same set of
changes (in Moses case, delivering the Israelites into the promised land; in Jesus case,
delivering the Christians in to salvation and redemption - the promised land of paradise after
death.)17
15Sanders & Davies, Studying the Synoptic Gospels, (Philadelphia, 1989) 43.
16Matthew 2:16, also 5:1 ...up the mountain, and 8:1 ...came down from the mountain. See Ehrman, The New
Testament, (New York, 1997) 83.
17See also notes inNew Oxford Annotated Bible, (New York, 1994) NT2 name of Jesus loosely translated as
Savior.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
8/22
7
How should the archetypal hero cycle affect our pursuit of the historical Jesus? It can
serve as a great divining rod, giving us a greater indication of which elements of the Jesus
narratives could be based upon historical events and which might have been concocted in order
to give greater weight to the thrust of the narrative. Yes, it seems that Jesus was indeed a
historical figure, and through evidence from Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny18, we can gather that
Jesus was a man who attracted attention, spoke in public, and was executed because he appeared
to be in some way a threat to the status quo. But there are plenty of other details of Jesus life,
drawn solely from the gospels, which many readers and scholars still tend to accept at face value.
The problem with accepting this latter catergory as reliable evidence is that some of these details
and events fit so perfectly - so conveniently- into the phases of the hero cycle. These details
should then serve as a red flag, making us perk up and ask: are we really supposed to believe that
life imitates art with such precision? Or, to be more exact in this case, are we supposed to believe
that history precisely imitates classic narrative structure and form? In short, my answer is no.
Certain phases of the archetypal cycle are more easily dismissed as being fabricated (or
not entirely factual) because they coincide with scientific impossibility on some level. The
resurrection is a prime example: we can see that the resurrection represents the final phase of
Jesus second (divine) cycle, and is a nice way to round out the narrative, providing a sense of
purpose for, and optimism after, the physical suffering of crucifixion which was the second
phase. Even in the gospel of Mark, in which the resurrection is merely implied, or described in
more enigmatic terms than the other texts19
, this final phase is still essential, and serves as a
message of hope and the speculation of future vindication, particularly for audiences
contemporaneous to the siege of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple (which is the
approximate time this text is considered to have been written). But there are other phases of the
hero cycle that might not present supernatural challenges to us, which still deserve just as much
scrutiny as the above example.
If we examine the use of the double hero cycle utilized in the gospel of Mark, we can see
the authors mind at work when creating the first (human) cycle for Jesus. For instance, if one
knows that one is about to construct a document with narrative elements, the bulk of which is
discourse and apologetics, what better way to establish great credibility and authority in the main
18Standard References: Josephus,Antiquities of the Jews, 18.3.3; Tacitus,Annales, 15.44; Pliny,Epistola, 10.69
19The most ancient ending does not reveal the resurrected Christ; ends with Mk 16:8 and they were afraid.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
9/22
8
character than to provide a short, compact, Readers Digest version of the hero cycle at the
very beginning? This is precisely what the first chapter of Mark supplies; it is a formula which
gives a reason for the audience to trust the story, listen and pay attention to the rambling
discourse to follow.
With this in mind, we need to question the historical legitimacy of anything which occurs
in this short hero cycle that introduces the character. While, the conversations with the devil20
are
dismissed as being merely folk tradition, due to the supernatural bent of this scene (similar to the
resurrection phase discussed above), I am going out on a limb by stating that, because of the
specific role that the first cycle plays in the narrative, we should similarly entertain the
possibility that the baptism itself (the first phase of Jesus first cycle) should not necessarily be
accepted as historical fact either.
This statement opens up a rather large can of worms, as the expression goes, and requires
far more discussion and investigation in order to refute the widely-accepted belief among
scholars that the baptism was a historical event. Before I begin such an arduous task - perhaps an
uphill battle? - it is necessary first to discuss the use of famous characters in narratives. This
second section will have more obvious relevance to the above argument later in the paper.
II: Celebrity Inclusion and its Implications
As scarce as the evidence might be, there areoccasional references to Jesus and other
gospel characters within some Roman records, but these rare examples are our only information
relevant to the historical Jesus which are independent from the Christian texts themselves. When
the first New Testament scholars of the modern era began their quest for the historical Jesus,
their initial reaction to these Roman records might have been one of relief: the existence of such
records might indicate that within the gospels are layers of historical truth. Because the gospels
include connections to, or interactions with, characters such as Herod the Great, John the Baptist,
Joseph Caiaphas and Pontius Pilate, and because these characters appear in non-Christian
records, this evidence might at first glance seem to support some of the gospels claims. But
there are two factors which might cast doubt upon such a first glance reaction: 1) there are plenty
of other instances in the gospels which scholars view as having been a fabrication, and 2) the
20Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13 both present much more elaborate temptation scenes than Mark.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
10/22
9
gospels are considered to post-date Jesus by forty to sixty years at least, allowing greater
possibility for traditions to stray from truth.
Again, I feel it necessary to apply the guilty until proven innocent approach when
examining the inclusion of these four characters in the gospels. Why? Because although the
Jesus movement grew to unprecedented size, its beginnings were undoubtedly far humbler. A
small fledgling movement trying to bring new people into the fold would have much to gain and
little to lose by inventing stories that include characters with which the general public is already
familiar.
For an author deciding to include a famous celebrity figure in his or her work, the
advantages are numerous. Firstly, it means that less character development is necessary for the
celebrity; the audience is already acquainted with that characters background, personality,
agenda, et cetera, and the author can devote less time in filling in such information that is
normally necessary with other characters. More time can therefore be devoted to other elements
in the story. Secondly, it relates the authors new story to a broader tapestry of otherstories,
giving the audience a greater sense that this story connects to others, the way that people relate to
other people. And thirdly and most importantly, the use of a historical celebrity grounds the
story in a specific historical setting, a familiar backdrop, providing an authenticity to the storys
place and time, and sometimes implying a greater importance to the narrative if it is connected to
figures already deemed important in other contexts.
This occurs in modern literature and film wherever there is historical fiction. Robert
Zemeckis Forrest Gump is modern films most excessive example of this. In period pieces,
royalty is a common device: Richard the Lionhearted appears in the Robin Hood stories, Queen
Elizabeth is featured in both Virginia Woolfs Orlando and in the more recent Shakespeare in
Love. Celebrity figures are often sought out for the role of villains, such as Richelieu in Dumas
Three Musketeers, or Al Capone in Brian DePalmas the Untouchables. Sometimes celebrity
villains are used to show a main characters associations, such as a brief clip of Kane with Hitler
in Welles Citizen Kane, or merely for comic effect as Hitler is used in a completely differenct
context in Spielbergs Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. Even in childrens films, whose
audience might not be familiar with history, this device is employed: FDR appears in the film
version of Annie, and Rasputin is the main villain in Anastasia.21
21An important note about which examples I chose: I did not include historical fiction where the protagonist is the
prime historical celebrity itself. The only exception is Shakespeare in Love, but Elizabeth is a reinforcing character,
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
11/22
10
The Greeks were well aware of this narrative device, although it was not used necessarily
to ground the story historically, for most of the celebrity inclusions in Greek stories were gods,
and therefore timeless. But it was nevertheless effective in conveying the importance of certain
human heroes because of their connection to, or favor bestowed by, the gods. Even in Homers
Odyssey, the hero at one point meets other famous Greek heroes and celebrities, such as King
Minos, Orion, Theseus, and Herakles22
. By having his protagonist interact with other heroes,
Homer gained much advantage, connecting his own epic with other famous legends.
Jewish storytelling is not immune to such plot device either. Nebuchadnezzars presence
in the book of Daniel serves the same purpose; Jews and non-Jews alike would have known who
Nebuchadnezzar was, and his infamous reputation fit so perfectly and conveniently into the
Daniel narrative. The names of Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes appear in the books of Ezra and
Nehemiah, marking the end of the exile, and although scholars bicker as to which Darius or
which Artaxerxes these books might specifically be referring (pick a Roman numeral...), each of
these leaders provide a celebrity presence in the narrative to both establish historical legitimacy
and bolster the perceived importance of Nehemiah as he had interacted with the Persian kings23.
The use of the term Pharaoh in Exodus takes on the same role. Although the text never
specifically points out whichpharaoh (and, again, scholars bicker about the historical specifics),
the celebrity presence of the Egyptian leader provides the same authenticity to the story, and
Jews in the earliest audience of the Exodus narrative would have had a very clear preconception
of who a pharaoh was and what his personality and character might have been.
As mentioned earlier, the author of the gospel of Matthew exerts tremendous effort to
insure that his audience recognizes direct parallels between Jesus and Moses. His first and most
effective means of doing this is in the beginning of the narrative, where Herod the Great decrees
that infant males are to be slaughtered to prevent the rise of a new leader among the Jews24
.
Scholars and theologians alike have been aware of this having been a plot device borrowed quite
blatantly from Exodus, where Pharaoh does the same after the birth of Moses. In the gospel of
Matthew, Herod the Great is the perfect contemporary celebrity to take on the role of the new
Pharaoh. This literary allusion works brilliantly, because it matches so consistently with
and thus fits the list of examples. I also purposefully avoided time travel fantasies such as Time Banditsand theBilland Tedfilms, because these deal with contemporary characters moving into a historical scenario.22
Homer, Book 11. See also Galinsky, The Herakles Theme, (Totowa, 1972) 12.23
See especially Nehemiah 2:1-8, where he speaks face to face with Artaxerxes.24
Matthew 2:16.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
12/22
11
Herods actual reputation in the first century BCE. As Eric M. Meyers describes, he was the
guy you love to hate.25
But despite the slaying of the infant males being somewhat consistent
with other gruesome acts that we can safely attribute to Herod the Great26
, there is no evidence
that a decree of this specific nature was historical, nor does it seem logistically plausible for such
a degree to be enforced. It is therefore safer to presume that Herod was included in Matthew
because he was a historical celebrity figure and fit well into the literary allusion incorporated into
the narrative. Although the character of Herod the Great was definitely not fictitious, his
connectionto the Jesus narrative certainly seems to be.
How does this affect our data for the reconstruction of the historical Jesus? Despite how
aware scholars are of the Matthew birth narrative being an appropriation of the Moses narrative,
some of themstillattempt to calculate the birth year of Jesus by using the death of Herod (4
BCE) as a benchmark figure27
. I find this to be absurd. To be recognizing the fictional devices of
a text and simultaneously trusting it for hard data is an incredibly unscientific approach. Are we
to believe that the author of Matthew, writing a full nine decades after the death of Herod, would
have even known or cared whether or not Jesus birth actually lined up with the last years of
Herods reign? Furthermore, Brown wastes his time compiling an eight page appendix28
on
dating the birth of Jesus by trying to reconcile the death of Herod with dates related to the reigns
of Quirinius and Augustus, mentioned in Luke 1 and 2 (these two pieces of data seem to conflict
with each other as well). But it is highly unlikely that the author of Luke would have had access
to the hard data of Roman records as we do, nor would he have been able to cross-check his
information the way current scholars can do. Again, the author of Luke was writing a full eight
to nine decades after the events he was describing, basing the rest of his document on
fragmentary oral and written traditions, passed down like a game of telephone. Are we then to
accept unquestioningly Lukes data as reliable enough to utilize in the calculation of the birth of
Jesus?
It seems more logical to view the inclusion of historical celebrities such as Herod (in
Matthews case) and Quirinius and Augustus (in Lukes case) as literary ornamentation and
allusion in order to bolster the perceived authenticity of the narrative. Perceived authenticity
for a late first century audience should not be translated into historical reliability in the twenty-
25
Mellowes, prod. From Jesus to Christ: the First Christians, (Boston, 1998) part one.26
Josephus,Antiquities of the Jews, 15.6-7.27
Sanders,Historical Figure, (London, 1993) 52-53; Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, (New York, 1977) 166.28
Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, (New York, 1977) 547-555.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
13/22
12
first century. Dismissing this data from Matthew and Luke is a frustrating but necessary action; it
leaves us without an ability to reliably date the birth of Jesus, but a lack of conclusion is better
than conclusions based on faulty evidence.
Dating the death of Jesus can be nearly as tricky a task, because the data used for this
calculation also relies on reconciling gospel passages to the more reliable Roman data of the
reigns of Pontius Pilate (as the Prefect of Judea) and Caiaphas (as the High Priest of the Temple).
Yes, the death of Jesus was far closer to the period when the gospels were written, and yes, oral
traditions from the twenties and thirties are perhaps more reliable than the birth narratives, but
we must entertain the possibility that Pilate and Caiaphas were included in the traditions
surrounding Jesus death because they - like Herod - had well-established reputations as being
ruthless characters, and were easy celebrities to include into the narrative. They were already
viewed as bad guys both during and after their periods of control29
, and their inclusion in the
passion narratives, particularly regarding their responsibility for Jesus death, seems particularly
tidy and convenient - too convenient, in fact, to accept blindly.
The reign of Caiaphas is particularly questionable here, since Luke mentions that the
events of Jesus trial occur during the times of Caiaphas and Annas30
. But as Sanders wisely
points out, there was only onehigh Priest at a time; the two of them could not have shared the
position simultaneously31
. Because of this, it is safer to conclude that the author of Luke did not
truly know who specifically was in power during the time of Jesus death, and provided this
verse, again, to allude to a period of infamy in the Temples past, as ornamentation forperceived
authenticity. Caiaphas becomes even less of an essential character for helping to calculate Jesus
death when one considers also that in the eighties and nineties when the gospels of Luke and
John were being composed, there was already pressure among Christian communities to draw
responsibility of Jesus death away from the Romans and toward the Jews. In this context,
Caiaphas becomes an easy villain to include in the narrative - he was well-known, had a
conveniently bad reputation, and even the Romans eventually removed him from position.
Therefore, his presence in the Jesus narrative seems to be contrived, for a specific response from
the audience, and consequently, historically unreliable.
29See especially Josephus,Antiquities, 18.3.1-2, 18.4.2; Wars of the Jews, 2.9.1-4)
30Luke 3:2
31Sanders,Historical Figure, (London, 1993) 52.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
14/22
13
Conversely, the general movement away from Roman responsibility of Jesus death
makes Pilates involvement more of an embarrassment to the Christian movement, requiring the
gospel writers to redraw Pilates character, depicting him as less of a villain than he was
generally perceived during and after his reign. According to scholars, then, the embarrassment of
Pilates involvement in Jesus death indicates that his involvement was based on historical fact.
But the tradition of Pilates involvement could still have been based on earlier oral transmission,
long before this political pressure to remove Roman responsibility was present within Christian
communities. Pilate could have been blamed by earlier Christians in the thirties through the
sixties, even if he was not directly involved with Jesus' execution. During this pre-Markan
period, he would have made the perfect celebrity villain, and an easy target to insert into the
narratives of oral tradition.
Even if one were to dismiss this possibility and assume that Jesus execution didoccur
during Pilates reign (making Pilates dates valid for dating Jesus death), the extent to which
Pilate is present in the Jesus narratives - even in Mark - should be questioned. The authors would
have much to gain by including a Roman figure of such infamy into the narrative, even if his
character were to be reversed, because he was a character familiar to the earliest audiences. In
fact, to have a notoriously evil Roman trying to helpJesus out of his predicament could even
serve to persuade the audience of Jesus overwhelming innocence, and the malevolence of the
Jews. There is also the possibility that Jesus was executed on account of a decree from Pilate
(i.e. enforced by Pilates underlings), but without requiring Pilate and Jesus to meet face to face
for a trial or judgement, as is suggested by all four gospel narratives. Pilates role as a literary
device, then, is still visible.
III: Literary Convenience of the Voice in the Desert
Of the four main historical celebrities discussed in this paper, the first three were easily
incorporated into the same category because they were all viewed during the first century as
villains of one kind or another. However, the fourth figure, John the Baptist, takes on a very
different role in the gospel narratives - a role that perhaps fits even more snuggly into the hero
cycle, but presents us with different - and thornier - issues than those discussed with Herod,
Pilate or Caiaphas. The implications of these issues will also require us to re-examine several
conclusions shared among New Testament scholars.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
15/22
14
In the cosmogonic cycle, there is always a catalyst provided in the narrative which places
the hero onto his/her path - an impetus to begin the cycle. Occasionally this impetus is an object
(Jacks magic beans) or an event (the end of the Trojan war, a chance for Odysseus to return
home), but more often it is another characterwho initiates the journey. This initiator character,
referred to by Campbell as the helper, protective figure, or Supernatural Aid,32comes in
many different forms, and shows up for sometimes different reasons, but this role is nevertheless
extremely significant in many narratives.
In many cases, the initiator is already established as being unique, or having unique
abilities. Whether human or divine, the initiator has previously gone through his/her own hero
journey, is often depicted as old, has had his/her own adventures, and is now passing the torch
to the next chosen figure. This transfer of energy can come in the form of a supernatural warning
(the ghost of Hamlets Father in Hamlet, the ghost of Jacob Marley in A Christmas Carol), a tool
or special object (Bilbo passes the ring to his nephew Frodo in Lord of the Rings, the Lady of the
Lake gives Excalibur to Arthur), a special ability (sentience bestowed upon Pinocchio,
knowledge of good and evil given to Adam and Eve by the serpent), or teaching and wisdom
from a specific tradition (Obi-Wan Kenobi trains young Luke in the ways of the Force in Star
Wars, Morpheus trains Neo in the Matrix). Whether or not the initiator is somehow able or
allowed to help the hero after the point where the initiation phase has been entered, it is always
clear that it is notthe initiators journey, and that this characters time for personal glory has
passed; it is time for a new hero (Odysseus meeting in the underworld with Minos, Orion and
especially Herakles, as mentioned before, also fits this model).
The Jewish scriptures are loaded with initiators passing their former glory to the next
generation of hero. Although, the story of Joseph receiving the coat of many colors from Israel
(Jacob) is our clearest, most structured example, this general pattern is used for the previous
three generations as well (the patriarchs: Abraham, to Isaac, to Jacob). It is used again to pass on
political rule after the departure from Egypt (Moses to Joshua), during the United Kingdom
(Samuel anointing David, then David to Solomon), and to a lesser extent (but with numerous
examples) during the Divided Kingdom. But in addition to patriarchy and politics, the Jewish
prophets had their own stories and their own methods of initiation as well. Perhaps the most
32Campbell, ...Thousand Faces, (New York, 1949) helper, 245; protective figure, 69; Supernatural Aid, 36.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
16/22
15
famous of these is the transfer of spirit from Elijah to Elisha, when Elijah is taken up in a fiery
chariot33
.
This example is of utmost importance here, because not only does John the Baptist
completely fit the profile of the initiator in Jesus first cycle, but the gospel authors purposefully
depict John as a prophet from the old tradition, and compare him directly to Elijah34. Although
John receives a decapitation rather than a flaming chariot for his ending, there is still an implied
transfer of divine power being implied by the gospel authors when they flesh out their respective
baptism scenes.
John the Baptist also fits our profile of a famous historical figure whose popularity and
reputation would have brought more familiarity and legitimacy to the earliest Jesus stories. Some
scholars feel that the inclusion of John the Baptist in the gospels appears as an embarrassment
to the early Christian movement (the fact that the Messiah is being anointed by someone lower
in status than himself), that this event is dissimilar enough to the thrust of the gospel ideologies
that it is probably based on an actual historical event35. I, on the other hand, suggest a very
different model for interpreting this data.
The Christian movement had already grown to large size by the time the gospel texts
were written. In conjunction with this, the Christology of Jesus (i.e. the perceived status as
unique or divine) was also growing at an alarming rate, even within the period that these texts
were written (from the human Jesus in Mark, to the divine, pre-existent Jesus of John). But, as
mentioned before, the beginnings of the early Jesus movement were far humbler than the gospel
writers would want to admit. Thus, a small fledgling movement made up of enthusiastic and
zealous proselytizers would have had much to gain by receiving - or perhaps creating- what
would be the modern equivalent of a political endorsement from an already-established,
prominent public figure such as John the Baptist. (It is all the more convenient that this de facto
political endorsement is coming from another martyr, one who is not around to disprove the
fabrication). Having Jesus be initiated into special status by someone as famous as John would
have helped to legitimize the earliest stories which circulated about Jesus. It would only be later,
after the Christology of Jesus grew to such extreme proportions, and after the movement
33 2 Kings 2:9-12
34compare Matthew 3:4 to 2 Kng 1:8.
35Sanders,Historical Figure, (London, 1993) 94, 119; see also the Criterion of Dissimilarity Ehrman, The New
Testament, (New York, 1997) 193-95.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
17/22
16
expanded, that the presence of John the Baptist would have been an embarrassment to the
Christian movement(s) during the times that the four gospels were committed to writing.
Evidence that further supports this interpretation can be found in the Antiquities of the
Jews by Flavius Josephus. Although the extant version of Josephus which describes Jesus is
substantial, (approximately 125-130 words in English)36, most scholars feel that this version is
highly Christianized - more biased towards Christian ideology than Josephus ever exhibits in the
rest of his works. The passages which are believed to be genuine (i.e. not tampered with by
Christian monks) add up to a far shorter length (approximately 90 words in English37
, or if one
considered the Josephan passage as transmitted by 10thCentury Agapius, approximately 100
words in English38). But the amount of text that Josephus dedicates to John the Baptist (his
teachings and the plot surrounding his death), is far more extensive than the Jesus passage (about
225 words in English39
). This is a significant discrepancy, and cannot be overlooked. Although it
might seem petty to equate word count with popularity, at the very least this could imply that
John the Baptist was a more significant and prominent public figure during the early first century
than Jesus was, and possibly had a greater impact on the psyche of the general public than Jesus
did - even as viewed from the nineties (when Josephus was writing), after the Christian
movement was already on firmer ground. Furthermore, Sanders shrewdly points out that if, as
Josephus describes, the people viewed Antipass military defeat as punishment for executing
John, the public indeed must have held John in great esteem.40. Neither Jesus nor his execution
garnered the kind of immediate public outcry that was associated with John. This further
supports the argument that John the Baptist achieved far greater celebrity during his time than
Jesus did, despite the fact that the latter had inspired more written text and general popularity
decades and centuries later. Thus, at the beginning of the Jesus movement, a fabricated
connection to a Jewish celebrity such as John the Baptist would have been a great benefit to the
earliest transmitters of the Jesus narrative.
What are the implications of suggesting that Jesus connection to John the Baptist was
fabricated for the narrative? This alleged connection has been used by some New Testament
36Josephus,Antiquities, 18.3.3. Whiston translation (Philadelphia, 1957) 535.
37Meier,A Marginal Jew, (New York, 1991) 61.
38Maier,Josephus: the Essential Writings, (Grand Rapids, 1988) 264-5, see note on 265.
39Josephus,Antiquities, 18.5.2; Whiston translation (Philadelphia, 1957) 540.
40Sanders,Historical Figure, (New York, 1993) 92.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
18/22
17
scholars to establish that the historical Jesus presented an apocalyptic message to the public. In
short, the line of logic follows that since John the Baptist spoke apocalyptically (the beginnings
of Jesus ministry), Paul wrote apocalyptically (our first writings after Jesus, approximately 50-
60 CE), and the author of Mark wrote apocalyptically (our first extant narrative, ca. 70 CE), we
should conclude that Jesus - in the middle of all this - did the same41. I find this argument
unconvincing for several reasons. First, if we are to understand the gospel of Mark as having
been written some time during or after the Roman siege of Jerusalem in 70 CE, then that is
clearly a time when apocalyptic ideas and philosophies were raging high among the Jewish
people, and the specifically apocalyptic language within Mark could very well be anachronistic,
and inserted into the text for the sake of contemporaneous relevance. (Also, the apocalyptic
language in Mark is inconsistently placed through the text, indicating that those specifically
apocalyptic passages, especially chapter 13, were based on previous written text, similar to the
literary seams within the gospel of John.) Second, Paul was clearly proselytizing his own
agenda throughout his ministries, inserting his own world views (and placing Jesus within them).
He seems to have had little knowledge of the actual life of Jesus, and did not explicitly allude to
certain Jesus events familiar to us42
even when they could have supported his argument. In
addition, the book of Galatians describes his ministry as separate from the earliest Christian
movement and then later in oppositionto Peter and his movement43
, making Pauls connection to
the early Jesus movement a tenuous one. And thirdly, we do not have any clear evidence outside
of the gospels themselves that John the Baptist spoke in an explicitly apocalyptic manner.
Josephus claims only that John spoke of virtue, righteousness, piety and purification44
. His text
does not mention John speaking of divine intervention or the coming of a new age, as would be
expected from apocalyptic discourse.
When discussing the historical Jesus, Sanders accuses modern scholarship of seiz[ing]
on one point to say that it is determinative, and then beat[ing] the other pieces of evidence into
necessary shape45
. But when arguing that Jesus had an eschatological message, Sanders does
the same thing: he implies that we should trust Marks eschatological depiction of Jesus because
it is consistent with John the Baptists message as attested by Josephus, and then claims that
41Ehrman, The New Testament, (New York, 1997) 218-19.
42Ibid. 312. Ehrman points out the similarities between Rom 13:7 & Mk 12:17, and Gal 5:14 &Mt 22:39-40.
43Gal 1:16-17, 2:11-14.
44Josephus,Antiquities, 18.5.2
45Sanders,Historical Figure,(London, 1993) 55.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
19/22
18
Josephus depiction of John is insufficient, and we should look to Mark for the details of Johns
ideologies (But for the contents of the Baptists message we must rely on the gospels, since
Josephus summary tells us nothing...46
). This is circular reasoning! It is neither effective in
persuading that Jesus message was eschatological, nor that Johns was. This is not to say that
their messages were noteschatological, but that the evidence is insufficient to conclude one way
or the other, because our primary sources are too biased to be reliable. The only conclusion that
I feel this data truly indicates is that the writer of what we now know as the gospel of Mark had
apocalypticism on his/her mind; any eschatological message ascribed to Jesus and John is very
likely to be the writer displacing his/her own opinions, problems, and world views into a
constructed past, to create a text that was more relevant to his/her present.
Even so, the above arguments presented by Sanders (and Ehrman) still hinge on the
presumption that Jesus connection to John the Baptist was historically accurate. Because Johns
presence in the text (and presumably in the earlier oral traditions) comes in the form of a
standard plot device (the initiator) in a standard archetypal hero cycle, how can we legitimately
trust these sources for historical truth? In my opinion, we cannot rely on these texts for anything
more than what they are: narrative constructions. Paula Fredriksen warns that modern
scholarship might lead us to project what is meaningful to us back onto and into our subject of
inquiry.47
But the New Testament writers received no such warning, nor would they have
heeded it. Their very purpose was to thrust their own ideologies into a construction of the past.
Jesus was the ultimate blank slate upon which this ideological appropriation of the past could
occur.
Conclusion: the Man and the Metaphor
In the introduction to Joseph Campbells posthumously-released The Heros Journey,
Phil Cousineau described the well-known anthropologist as ...the ecstatic scholar, a breed of
thinker thought long extinct since the age of scientific rationalism.48
In an academic world
where other scholars were dismissing the myths and narratives of other cultures as childs play,
Campbell turned his own personal and spiritual pursuits towards revealing to the world the vast
similarities that all story-telling exhibits throughout human existence. Now that these similarities
46Ibid. 93, 183.
47Fredriksen,Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews, (New York, 1999) 39.
48Campbell, The Heros Journey, (New York, 1990) xiii.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
20/22
19
are apparent, and indeed transparent to us, they can no longer be ignored when we examine
either the past or the present.
Campbell was known to occasionally be critical of modern Christianity for not
recognizing the metaphors within its own storytelling: Every religion is true in one way or
another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck to its own metaphors,
interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble.49
Although he spoke in terms of Christian
theology, this statement applies to a certain extent to modern New Testament academics as well.
Modern scholarship may recognizethe metaphors in the texts, the literary allusions, the parallels,
the origins, perhaps with a more critical eye than those with a theological approach. But to
recognize such features, and then simultaneously trustthe metaphor for reliable historical data
seems nothing less than sheer folly.
In many ways this guilty until proven innocent approach that I have implemented here
can be a very unsettling one, because it leaves us with fewer answers, and fewer solid
conclusions. As Sanders wrote, People like neat categories, and none of us are exceptions to
this. The lack of nice, neat, perfect answers is always an uncomfortable experience, for historians
or anyone else. But coming up with answers for the sake of havinganswers (and basing such
answers on shaky evidence) only leaves me unconvinced of some of the most widely-accepted
conclusions among New Testament scholars.
I realize that I have attempted here to challenge the works and ideas of men and women
who are far more learned in the subject matter than myself. It is worth noting that I
simultaneously hold great admiration for this group of men and women; their works and ideas
are a continual source of inspiration and invigoration. This has also not been an attempt to
systematically negate their conclusions; some of the most popular arguments in the field I find to
be incredibly persuasive. But as a person who has also become steeped in the processes of
creating fiction, I cannot help but to recognize familiar and conspicuous storytelling devices in
the gospels. In refusing, or ignoring the opportunity, to examine these texts through a
storytellers eyes, one might proverbially miss the forest for the trees.
I also realize that a paper as short as this cannot possibly include all the details and
intricacies which would be necessary for a full study of the reliability of texts utilizing this
method of criticism. I am acutely aware that I have glossed over some issues with a mere
49Campbell, The Power of Myth, (New York, 1988) 56.
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
21/22
8/14/2019 2002 - Christopher J. DeCicco - Jesus and his Cast of Characters. Constructions of Archetype
22/22
21
Works Cited
Brown, Raymond E. The Birth of the Messiah. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc.,1977.
Campbell, Joseph. The Heros Journey: Joseph Campbell on his Life and Work. Boston: Element
Books, 1999. Original Publication New York: Harper & Row, 1990.
Campbell, Joseph. The Hero with a Thousand Faces. New York: Bollingen Foundation Inc.,1949.
Campbell, Joseph, with Bill Moyers. The Power of Myth. New York: Doubleday, 1988.
Ehrman, Bart D. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings.New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Fredriksen, Paula. Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1999.
Galinsky, G. Karl. The Herakles Theme. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield, 1972.
Houston, Jean. The Hero and the Goddess. New York: Ballantine Books, 1992.
Josephus, Flavius. The Life and Works of Flavius Josephus. Trans, William Whiston.Philadelphia: The John C. Winston Company, 1957.
Maier, Paul L. Josephus: The Essential Writings. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, Inc., 1988.
Meier, John. A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. New York: Doubleday, 1991.
Mellowes, Marylin, Producer. From Jesus to Christ: the First Christians. Boston: WGBH
Educational Foundation, 1998.
Metzger, Bruce M. and Roland E. Murphy, Eds. The New Oxford Annotated Bible: NewRevised Standard Version. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.
Sanders, E.P. The Historical Figure of Jesus. London: Penguine Press, 1993.
Sanders, E.P. and Margaret Davies. Studying the Synoptic Gospels. Philadelphia: Trinity PressInternational, 1989.
Smith, Evans Lansing. The Hero Journey in Literature. Lanham, MD: University Press ofAmerica, 1997.
Thundy, Zacharias P. Buddha and Christ: Nativity Stories and Indian Traditions. New York: E.J.Brill, 1993.
Trottier, David. The Screenwriters Bible. Los Angeles: Silman-James Press, 1998.
Vardaman, Jerry and Edwin M. Yamauchi, Eds. Chronos, Kairos, Christos. Winona Lake:Eisenbrauns, 1989.