[40] NOTE. DATE OF THE FAMINE. Orosius VII 6 puts it in the fourth year of Claudius, which began January 25, A.D. 44. But Orosius's dates at this point are put one year too early owing to a mistake in adapting to Claudius's years a series of events arranged in his authority according to a different system of chronology; this kind of mistake is known to have been frequently made by ancient chroniclers, and is proved in Orosius's case by the fact that he assigns to the tenth year of Claudius a famine at Rome which Tacitus Ann. XII 43 places in A.D. 51 We therefore take Orosius as an authority for dating the commencement of the famine in 45. Josephus mentions the famine as having occurred while Tiberius Alexander was procurator of Judea; and there is general agreement that Alexander's administration lasted from 46 to 48: though the time when it began was not absolutely certain, July 45 is the earliest admissible date, and 46 is far more probable: his predecessor Cuspius Fadus was sent by Claudius in 44, and a good deal occurred during his office. But Josephus also mentions the famine in connection with Queen Helena's arrival in 45. Helena, however, seems to have remained a considerable time, and Josephus's words are in perfect accord with our view that scarcity began with a bad harvest in 45.

In the preceding chapter, Lightfoot's view is quoted according to his edition of Gal., where he says that Barnabas and Saul had come to Jerusalem and returned to Antioch before Herod's death. Since the chapter was in type, I notice that in a posthumous essay "printed from lecture notes"he dates the famine 45; but that seems hardly consistent with his edition, and as he republished his edition without change throughout his life, it must represent his mature opinion. Perhaps he means that Paul and Barnabas brought the famine-money to Jerusalem a year or more before the famine began, which we cannot accept as a natural or a useful procedure.