Talk:Herodian tetrarchy

Untitled

The article should take into account other Wikipedia articles concerning the descendants of Herod the Great. Herod the Great had, at least, seven sons (excluding Boethus who either died before his father or is another name for one of the seven) who were in the line of succession. These were in order: Antipater, Alexander, Aristobulus, Philip I (aka Herod Philip I, son by Mariamne II, first husband of Herodias and father of Salome), Archileus, Antipas, and Philip II (son by Cleopatra of Jerusalem, husband of his brother's daughter Salome). At the time of his death, the last four sons survived their father. Consequently, Herod the Great's "intent" was to divide his kingdom, accordingly; hence, the four parts each standing for a single tetrarchy.

Furthermore, the four parts of the kingdom were divided in a straitforward geographic way with half the kingdom divided along the east and west sides of the Jordan River and then each of those halves divided, again, north and south. It is certain that Antipas recieved the northwestern portion that included Galilee and Nazareth and that Philip II received the northeastern portion that included Trachonitis. That would have left the southern areas to the two eldest brothers. In all likelihood, Herod Philip I, being the oldest, was probably bequeathed the southwestern portion of Judea (containing Jerusalem) while Archileus received the opposite portion on the eastern side of the Jordan river.

However, while it was Herod the Great's "intent" to divide up the kingdom that way, it had to meet with the final approval of the Romans. At some point, Herod Philip I was disenfranchised or deposed by the Romans which is why Josephus only accounts for three rulers. His tetrarchy was consolidated with the tetrarchy of Archileus, at which point, Archileus, now ruling both southern tetrarchies, became an "ethnarch". Eventually, as the article correctly states, Archileus was deposed by the Romans. For the most part, the article accurately points out that the southwestern tetrarchy of Judea was re-established with a Roman procurator or governor put in charge. But the governor is only a temporary substitute because the exiled rightful heir, Herod Philip I, was still alive and living in Rome (which ultimately leads to the conflict with John the Baptist and Antipas concerning this Philip's divorce from Herodias). However, in addition to Antipas' northwestern tetrarchy, it is a fact, that the southeastern tetrarchy was also reinstated and was given over to him but there are currently no clear historical answers as to why the Romans created a territory spanning opposite corners. Apparently, Antipas was given administration but not complete oversight of the southeastern tetrarchy which is why he is never deemed an ethnarch.

In addition, other articles accurately point out the fact that Herod Antipas and Herodias were also removed from power by the Romans and exiled into Gaul (France). This article makes the claim that Herod Agrippa (brother of Herodias) replaced him upon his "death". Actually, it is after the death of Philip II that Agrippa first receives the northeastern tetrarchy and, perhaps some of the southeastern area, as well. Later, in accordance with other Wikipedia articles which accurately assert that Caligula, the Roman Emperor, "deposed" Antipas and Herodias and replaced them with Agrippa, that it was, at this point, that the four tetrarchies were dissolved and Agrippa was made the ruler of a geographically unified Israel. Pvsalsedo 22:57, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested move (September 2014)

Requested move 1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Closed: Previous un-discussed move has been reverted. Moonraker12 (talk) 12:07, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

---

Judea (tetrarchy) → Herodian Tetrarchy – The article mostly discusses the whole arrangement of the Tetrarchy, not Herod Archelaus' lot, and the current title make it very unclear which is meant (as the undivided kingdom of Herod the Great is often called Judea too). I think it is also linked from other pages for that purpose. So we should change the title and the infobox. trespassers william (talk) 18:48, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

---

I've made a non-admin closure here. This page was moved last week, without any discussion, from "Tetrarchy (Judea)" with the explanation “the nominal name was Judea not tetrarchy". As the article is (and was originally written, it would seem) about the whole Tetrarchic arrangement in Judaea, and as there are well over a hundred links to that title, perhaps it would make more sense simply to revert that move. So I have done that. If anyone feels the original title isn't good enough, I would suggest taking it back to WP:RM and making a case for it. Moonraker12 (talk) 12:07, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 2

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. (non-admin closure) —innotata 05:56, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

---

Tetrarchy (Judea) → Herodian Tetrarchy – I can't see how the current title, that User:Moonraker12 restored, addresses the issue better than the title from yesterday, sorry. trespassers william (talk) 18:18, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

• Support 17 google book results for the proposed form. I strongly suspect that nobody off Wikipedia uses the current title. Confabulationist (talk) 13:05, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• Support: In view of what I have said below, I think this change would make things a lot clearer. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:45, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Dubious

Last time I looked (which was a couple of years ago, I admit), this article was about the Herodian Tetrarchy as a whole. Now (I notice), while most of the content is the same, it purports to be about an entity called “The Tetrarchy of Judea, one of the Herodian Tetrarchies.” This notion appeared with this, from a one edit contributor in July 2012, and seems to have skewed the article ever since.
To be clear; a tetrarchy is a system whereby the government of a political entity is divided between four rulers (like this one): The word does not refer to a terrotory (or group of territories) governed by a tetrarch (if anything, that would be a tetrarchate) and the scope of this article is not, and should not be presented as, confined to one such territory.
If there are no objections I will edit the article (revert the mistake, basically) to reflect this. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:39, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, done. Moonraker12 (talk) 17:51, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Various titles for different Herodians; leads to ugly infobox layout

The Herodians had various titles, only one was called a king, so I changed the infobox accordingly by adding the title next to each name. An ugly layout was the result. How can the infobox columns be moved closer together, so that there's more space for the text? Or its overall width expanded, for the same purpose, which could be the best method? The titles should definitely be left in place, as they are essential for lots of topics, and only as part of the infobox here are they visible at one quick glance. Arminden (talk) 07:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)