King Herod the Great

According to the Gospel of Matthew, King Herod is the villain of the piece in the Christmas story. It was he who received the Magi - or Three Kings or wise men, depending on your preference - and became very upset when they told him that a new king had just been born in Bethlehem. His response was to order the slaughter of every newborn baby in the town, an event that is generally known as the Massacre of the Innocents.

But does he deserve the reputation for cruelty that he has had down the centuries?

Herod was certainly a remarkable monarch in that he was able to retain his position as King of Judea for a very long time - from 37 to 4 BC - which he could certainly not have done if he had been a weak monarch or one who was not prepared to use strong-arm tactics when it suited him.

But he also had to be a considerable diplomat, not least because the real power in the land was the Roman Empire. He had to cultivate good relations firstly with Mark Anthony (of "Anthony and Cleopatra" fame) and then with Emperor Augustus.

He was thus able to act as Rome's "puppet king" and reaped lavish rewards in terms of extra territory and Roman cash, which in turn allowed him to undertake lavish building projects such as the port of Caesarea on the Mediterranean coast. Kings who spent money on their country - even puppets of Rome - were always likely to earn a certain amount of popularity.

Herod's court was renowned for its high degree of culture and refinement, being peopled by artists, poets and philosophers. Not for nothing was he known as Herod the Great.

But that did not stop him from also being cruel and tyrannical. In later life he became paranoid and possibly mentally unhinged.

Matthew's description of the Massacre of the Innocents, despite being written around 70 years after the presumed event, may well have been inspired by a historical event that was very much in keeping with Herod's character.

Having already executed his wife Mariamne he also killed two of his sons, whom he suspected of plotting against him. These were certainly not the only victims of his tyranny, which extended to anyone whom he suspected of disloyalty. His death in 4 BC was mourned by very few.

A king who was in the pocket of the hated Romans, who welcomed philosophers to his court, and who thought nothing of slaughtering people, however young, who threatened his position, was excellent source material for the King Herod who forced the Holy Family to flee to Egypt.

Just for good measure, there is even a theory that Mariamne was actually Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Herod was his father. Make of that what you will!

© John Welford

Corinth rebuilt by the Romans

The Greek city of Corinth, on the northern shore of the Peloponnese peninsula, west of Athens, was an important trading centre long before the Romans arrived. When they did, in 146 BC, they destroyed the city and left it as a deserted shell.

The revival of Corinth came about as a result of Julius Caesar’s policy of settling retired and discharged legionary veterans in colonies distributed throughout the Empire. The first colonists arrived after Caesar’s assassination in 44 BC and they set about constructing a city very much on Roman lines.

Some Greek elements were retained in the new city, such as the Agora (forum), several stoas (covered walkways) and the Temple of Apollo, but the impression conveyed by what can be seen today is that this was a Roman city that would in time become suitable as the capital of a province, in this case Archaea.

Roman Corinth was very much a commercial centre, with a number of the buildings relating to mercantile activities.

Commerce clearly brought wealth to Corinth, as evidenced by the buildings devoted to leisure and entertainment. The original Greek theatre was converted to accommodate Roman pleasures, such as gladiatorial contests. There was also an odeum – a small theatre designed for musical performances.

Corinth was a religious city, with six temples built to revere the Roman gods during the second century AD. We know that Corinth had a small but active Christian community, from the fact that St Paul wrote two of his best-known epistles to the Corinthian Christians during the mid-first century. Paul is known to have stayed at Corinth for 18 months, during which he worked as a tentmaker and preached.

However, during the third century the fortunes of Corinth went into decline as commercial activity decreased. The Roman city was itself abandoned, with the centre of modern Corinth lying a few miles to the northeast. This has made it possible for extensive archaeological work to be done on the Roman remains, with the result that much has been learned about how a typical colonial capital operated.

A notable feature a few miles away from the Roman city is the Corinth Canal, cut through the narrowest point of the isthmus (four miles wide) to provide easier access to the port of Piraeus. Several projects to build a canal were proposed in classical times but abandoned for various reasons, including the difficulty of cutting down through up to 250 feet of solid limestone.

One attempt was made by the Emperor Nero in 67 AD, when on a visit to the region. He instructed the Praetorian Guard to begin work immediately and joined in by shovelling up a bucketful of dirt and carrying it away on his back. However, he soon lost interest in the idea, which was not revived until long after his assassination in 69 AD. The current canal, which follows the same course that Nero had in mind, was begun in 1881 and completed in 1893.

© John Welford