The Washington Post review of Mel Gibson’s Passion is basically a pan which concedes there is more than a whiff of anti-semitism about the whole thing. (Based on the visions of a 15th-century german nun who “sets out to clear Pilate’s name, describing the famously ruthless governor as a weak and unwilling pawn of Jewish blood lust”? Oh, that sounds good.) But for some reason the author backslides into the trap of “journalistic objectivity”, which quoted item differs from real journalistic objectivity in consisting merely of empty formal gestures towards balance. It can be seen most vividly in articles about Bush economic policies, in which sentences starting “critics claim…” or “some Democrats argue” are followed by incontrovertible statements of fact. See Brad DeLong’s “Why Oh Why Can’t We Have a Better Press Corps” series, parts I-MMDCLXXIII. (And while I am digressing, I would like to encourage all readers to adopt the Poor Man’s pithy formulation of the current scandal, which he terms “WhatInTheNameOfAllThatIsHolyAreYouDoingToTheEconomyGate.”) The item I object to is here:
Gibson’s use of Aramaic and Latin is similarly helpful in grounding his story, although it’s been suggested that first-century Romans would more probably have spoken Greek.
Is there anything wrong with just saying “even though the characters in the film would actually have been speaking Greek, the lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean”? (I realize that as a blanket statement about “first-century Romans” it’s false, but that’s what editing is for.) I mean, you’ve already accused Mel of a pornographic taste for violence, anti-semitism, being a hackneyed director (ooo, Judas tosses the thirty pieces of silver in slow-motion!), and trivializing the mysteries of the Christian faith. Is it necessary to bring out misleading qualifiers like “it’s been suggested” when accusing him of historical inaccuracy?
FWIW, Roger Ebert says there’s nothing anti-semitic whatsoever about the film. (I suppose it might be worth adding that Ebert is quite liberal.)
What I’ve read is that the Romans would msot likely speak Latin among themselves but speak Greek to non-Romans. I don’t know if that’s relevant.
first-century Romans would more probably have spoken Greek.
“How many Romans?”
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
The whole Jews as Christ Killers meme is leftover propaganda from the 3rd century anyways. Who gives a damn? (!)
If some anti-Vatican II mouthbreather has to shoot extra footage to actually add some “Nice Jews” at the eleventh hour while rambling about sneaky Jews stealing his scripts and lightning strikes his Jesus actor (twice) and his father talks about remote-control planes striking the towers on 9/11, well … more’s the amusement for us!
More wine! More women!
O! It’s so lonely on Olympus….
First century Roman aristocrats used Greek in preference to Latin the same way Tolstoy’s aristocrats used French in preference to Russian. The Greek koiné used in the eastern Med would not have been the same as the Attic the Roman elite cultivated. Caesar and Cicero were both thought radical for actually writing anything serious in Latin.
For a thorough exploration of Greek as a lingua franca in the eastern Mediterranean, see this post on Language Log by Bill Poser.
Is there any understanding of how Hellenistic Greek was pronounced? There just might have been difficulties in finding a consensus.
I understand there are arguments about how 1st century Latin was pronounced.
Catherine Emmerich’s dates are 1774-1824, so she is not a “fifteenth-century German nun.”
More to the point, Gibson hardly needed to rely on her for his portrayal of Pilate as a “weak and unwilling pawn of Jewish blood lust.” See Matthew 27:11-24, Mark 15:2-15, Luke 23:3-25 and John 18:29-19:22. This is not an ambiguous point.
If there is “more than a whiff of anti-semitism” here, it originates in the gospels themselves.
Sorry about the mistake on Catherine of Emmerich; I will update. As far as Pilate goes, though, we do have other historical sources besides the (often conflicting) gospels. Let me just say that to be regarded as a particularly brutal Roman provincial governor you have to do things which are pretty damn bad, and not just wander about the palace wringing your hands and having fits of conscience. If he was really conflicted about whther to crucify Jesus, it was probably the first time ever. Anyway, I haven’t seen the movie. The Post, Slate, and various Jewish leaders seem to think it’s pretty dicey, while Gene Siskel and the National Review say it’s all good. I’ll just be suspending my judgment for now, mmmkay?
Belle, if Gene Siskel has announced the film is ok, I guess I’ll have to believe it. I didn’t know they were showing the film in the hereafter…
You can add Newsweek, Newsday, and the NYTimes and New Yorker to your list of pans - also Andy Sullivan and Hitchens, both of whom are in my opinion spot on at least occasionally.
Whoever pulled the strings to get Christ crucified it was not the poor people among whom he lived, and to whom he preached, who were Jews.
His mother was a Jew.
And there there may be some small bridge through this. Mary’s transformation from young Jewish girl to the mother of whatever it is Christ was to her at the time of his death. Son. Champion. Hero.
It’s not that she became a Christian.
Christ was executed by the state, which seems to have been both Roman and Jewish.
So the Romans and the Jews killed Jesus.
But the United States is occupying an invaded nation right now, after having invaded it militarily last year.
The Americans invaded, amd now occupy, Iraq.
But I’m an American and I reject that, I didn’t do it.
Something smaller than America did it.
The government, some men.
Some men who were threatened, and wanted to keep their power intact.
-
Making pronouncements about anyone who lived that far back in time seems close to magical thinking.
Believing that a real man lived then, who taught that love was superior to blind obedience, and was killed for teaching that, doesn’t seem unreasonable, given the treatment that same teaching receives today.
msg, that’s my favorite post of yours.
Good gravy, can’t we even kill the saviour without dragging Iraq into it?
It’s odd that Mel went through all the trouble of getting a screenplay in Latin and Aramaic, but didn’t bother to get actors of the historically correct ethnicity. I still remember the PBS show on the historical Jesus in which everyone but the historian claimed that Jesus was blue-eyed. sigh
We wouldn’t cast Denzel Washington as George Washington or Margaret Cho as Abigail Adams, would we?
Presumably, the top Romans would have spoken Latin with each other. But wouldn’t it have been Vulgar Latin, rather than the Cicero/Caesar variety?
This, from Not a Fish via Norm, cracked me up:
A Jew was walking down the street when he was attacked and beaten up by a Christian. The Jew asked why on earth he had been beaten. The man replied,
“The Jews killed Christ!”
“But that was 2000 years ago!”
“I know, but I only heard about it today!”
Belle Waring: actually, as far as the portrayal of Pilate goes, the gospels are not in serious conflict. Moreover, on this particular point, we do not have other historical sources. There is very little documentary evidence of any sort about Pilate, and none that mentions the Christian sect.
We learn that he set up standards bearing the image of Tiberius in Jerusalem, and that this caused Jewish unrest until he backed down. We also learn that he attacked a group of armed Samaritans who apparently turned out to be on a sort of treasure hunt for the sacred vessels of Moses. The jewish scholar Philo of Alexandria says he was cruel and merciless, but is not exactly an impartial observer. Thirty years after the fact, the jewish historian Josephus repeats similar things about him, but is even harder on other Roman authorities.
And that’s about it.
In short, we have no good reason to suppose that Jesus was really persecuted by the Romans for political subversion rather than by the jewish authorities for blasphemy. Rather the contrary, I would think, since, after all, he wasn’t particularly politically subversive, but was most definitely blasphemous.
AFAIK Jesus is not actually terribly blasphemous, if you stick to his words. The Talmud permits what he did on the sabbath (of course that’s later, the Sermon on the Mount insists on following the Law (i.e. Torah), which no Christian does. What gets me is his two commandments. The rest seems usual: consorting with low people, being rude, then the Temple invasion which I see as a key moment.
Eli, eli, lama sabachtani are from the Psalms of David, says a Lubavitcher rabbi I asked, since the words worry me. How can the Lord say that in accomplishing his stay here in Creation? Different if it means, I am a Jew.
Mark 14:61-64:
…the high priest asked him, and said unto him, art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?
Ye have heard the blasphemy…
I think it’s interesting that:
- A movie about Jesus is setting the new standard for violence in cinema—Ebert said it was the most violent film he had seen.
- All these Baptists/Born Agains/Etc. are going to see an ultraviolent film some Catholic guy did.
- Somehow all current events can be tied to the Bush Administration and the war in Iraq. There must be some way to prove that mathematically.
- All the controversy around this film is likely more facinating that the film itself.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review