Herod’s adultery and murder in Mark 6:17-29

Herod Antipas’s affair with his sister-in-law Herodias, whom he had by this time married, was widely known.  Indeed, the affair had led him to plan to divorce his first wife, whose father, a king, later went to war with Herod because of this insult and defeated him.  John’s denunciation of the affair as unlawful (Lev. 20:21) challenged Herod’s sexual immorality, but Herod Antipas could have perceived it as a political threat, given the political ramifications that later led to a major military defeat.  (The ancient Jewish historian Josephus claims that many viewed Herod’s humiliation in the war as divine judgment for him executing John the Baptist.)

Celebrating birthdays was at this time a Greek and Roman but not a Jewish custom, but Jewish aristocrats had absorbed a large amount of Greek culture by this period.  Other sources confirm that the Herodian court indulged in the sort of immoral behavior described here.  After taking his brother’s wife (Lev. 20:21), Antipas lusts after his wife’s daughter Salome (cf. Lev. 20:14).  He then utters the sort of oath one might give while drunk, but which especially recalls that of the Persian king stirred by Queen Esther’s beauty (Esther 5:3, 6, 7:2), though this girl’s request will be far less noble.  But as a Roman vassal Herod had no authority to give any of his kingdom away anyway.

Salome had to go “out” to ask her mother Herodias because women and men normally dined separately at banquets.  Excavations at Antipas’s fortress Machaerus suggest two dining halls, one for women and one for men; Herodias thus was probably not present to watch Herod’s reaction to the dance.  Josephus characterizes Herodias the same way Mark does: a jealous, ambitious schemer.

Although Romans and their agents usually executed lower class persons and slaves by crucifixion or other means, the preferred form of execution for respectable people was beheading.  By asking for John’s head on a platter, however, Salome wanted it served up as part of the dinner menu–a ghastly touch of ridicule.  Although Antipas’s oath was not legally binding and Jewish sages could release him from it, it would have proved embarrassing to break an oath before dinner guests; even the emperor would not lightly do that.  Most people were revolted by leaders who had heads brought to them, but many accounts confirm that powerful tyrants like Antipas had such things done.

If a man had sons, normally the eldest son was responsible for his father’s burial; here, John’s disciples must fulfill this role for him.  Since he had been executed, the disciples performed a dangerous task unless they had Herod’s permission to take the body.  Their courage underlines by way of contrast the abandonment of Jesus’ male disciples during his burial!

Total
0
Shares
1 comment

Comments are closed.

Previous Post

Enemy soldiers torture and mock Jesus in Matthew 27:27-34

Next Post

Historical information about the birth of Jesus — Luke 2:1-14

Related Posts