(avg. read time: 2–4 mins.)
Herod commands the slaughter of male children in Bethlehem two years old and under (Matt 2:7, 16)
Macrobius wrote down an apocryphal and punny saying of Caesar Augustus that has proved to be a popular description of Herod’s propensity to kill: “Better to be Herod’s pig [ὗς] than his son [υἱός]” (Sat. 2.4.11). While it is unlikely that Macrobius had an actual historical source that he consulted to find this saying, it nevertheless rings true of a man who executed three sons, a wife, an uncle, two brothers-in-law, a mother-in-law, and a father-in-law. Beyond his family, we have already noted in Part 2 how he persuaded Antony to execute Antigonus, how he executed Matthias, Judas, and their fellows, and how he planned to have many others executed on the day of his death to ensure that there would be mourning. Josephus also says Herod executed 45 principal men of Antigonus’s party after he captured Jerusalem (Ant. 15.6). He then executed the sons of Baba/Babas—who resisted the surrender of Jerusalem—and those who hid them 12 years later (15.260–266). He executed 10 men who conspired to assassinate him (15.280–289) and then he executed the people who killed his spy that thwarted the 10 (15.290). At diverse times, he executed many who he suspected of plotting against him or simply being unfaithful to him on the advice of his spies or, according to rumors Josephus reports, his own eavesdropping when walking surreptitiously among the people (15.366–369). Around the time he had his sons Alexander and Aristobulus killed for plotting against him, Josephus says he also executed 300 officers who were under suspicion (16.392–394). He executed Pharisees who predicted that the kingdom would be taken from Herod and given to Pheroras and his wife, along with some who served in his palace, and those of his family who agreed with the prediction (17.41–44).
Still, the fact remains that no other source independent of Matthew reports that the event we call the “slaughter of the innocents” happened by the order of Herod in his last years. It would certainly not be out-of-character for Herod, but whether or not one thinks that this event happened generally comes down to how one thinks about Matthew as an historical source. The question of the specific historicity of this event need not detain us here.1
The reason why it need not detain us is that even scholars who doubt the event’s historicity still see in 2:16 an indication from Matthew about how old Jesus was before Herod died. It is this datum that is typically the basis for many dating Jesus’s birth to 6 BCE, since they simply add two years to Herod’s conventional death year. But the text does not allow us to be so straightforward. First, it only says that Herod acted in accord with the time the magi told him the star first appeared (2:7, 16), which we are not told is the same as the time when Jesus was born. Second, the fact that he targets those who are two years old and under indicates that Herod is adding some leeway just to be sure he catches the infant. If this is a small town or village and this is still a small portion of that population, the murderous logistics would hardly be rendered more impractical to Herod’s mind. We are not told what the magi told Herod about when the star appeared and thus we do not know how much of a margin Herod added. Third, the term describing Jesus at this time (παιδίον; 2:8–9, 11, 13, 14, 20–21) is not necessarily informative either, as Luke uses it for John the Baptist when he is circumcised at eight days old (1:59, 66, 76), for the newborn Jesus (2:17; cf. John 16:21; Heb 11:23), and for Jesus when he was forty days old (2:27). Luke also uses the term βρέφος to refer to a baby in the womb (1:41, 44) and a baby that has just been born (2:12, 16; cf. Acts 7:19; 1 Pet 2:2), but this term is also used in 2 Tim 3:15 to refer to a young child. Therefore, the terminology in itself is not helpful for making a determination about Jesus’s age.
Summary
I have listed this reference to Herod’s command to kill those two years old and under as being of questionable relevance, because it is too imprecise. We are not told that Jesus was two years old; we simply know that he is somewhere between a newborn and two. This text also does not indicate how much longer it was until Herod died. Therefore, this particular reference is not decisive for any theory due to its imprecision.
For an extensive presentation of the case against historicity, see Brown, Birth, 226–28. For an extensive presentation of the case for historicity, see R. T. France, “Herod and the Children of Bethlehem,” NovT 21 (1979): 114–20.