Episode 145: Mark 73 Good Friday?
Which Preparation day was this? The day before the Passover or the day before the Sabbath or something else entirely? We’ll explore this controversy by pulling together some information that might surprise you! What was the significance of Joseph of Arimathea claiming the body of Yeshua/Jesus?
(My affiliate links for Amazon products are included in the post. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.)
If you can’t see the podcast player, click here.
42 And when evening had come, since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath, 43 Joseph of Arimathea, a respected member of the council, who was also himself looking for the kingdom of God, took courage and went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. 44 Pilate was surprised to hear that he should have already died. And summoning the centurion, he asked him whether he was already dead. 45 And when he learned from the centurion that he was dead, he granted the corpse to Joseph. 46 And Joseph bought a linen shroud, and taking him down, wrapped him in the linen shroud and laid him in a tomb that had been cut out of the rock. And he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb. 47 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid.
So, there is a lot of confusion in some circles about the first verse—was it the day before the High Sabbath? Meaning, the date the Passover lambs were slaughtered? Or was it the day before the weekly Sabbath, aka Friday? Was it both? Was it the First day of Unleavened Bread, a High Sabbath, and the day before the weekly Sabbath? Honestly, no matter what you choose, it’s just messy and so folks like to come up with what they think are super clever workarounds (generally in meme form) but no matter what we do, the answers are never completely satisfying because of the literary license all four Gospels take with their Passover narratives. As they are all telling the same story, of how Yeshua/Jesus becomes the greater Passover and the leader of the greater Exodus, but from different angles, it was well within the literary genre rules of the time to ignore the concept of absolute accuracy that is vitally important to modern audiences. But, we have to play by their rules, not ours. This was written by them, to them, and only for us. When we get nitpicky, we miss the truth of the story that is meant to be conveyed.
Hi, I am Tyler Dawn Rosenquist and welcome to Character in Context, where I teach the historical and ancient sociological context of Scripture with an eye to developing the character of the Messiah. If you prefer written material, I have seven years’ worth of blog at theancientbridge.com as well as my six books available on amazon—including a four-volume curriculum series dedicated to teaching Scriptural context in a way that even kids can understand it, called Context for Kids (affiliate link) and I have two video channels on YouTube with free Bible teachings for both adults and kids. You can find the link for those on my website. Past broadcasts of this program can be found at characterincontext.podbean.com and transcripts can be had for most broadcasts at theancientbridge.com. If you have kids, I also have a weekly broadcast where I teach them Bible context in a way that shows them why they can trust God and how He wants to have a relationship with them through the Messiah.
All Scripture this week comes courtesy of the ESV, the English Standard Version but you can follow along with whatever Bible you want. A list of my resources can be found attached to the transcript for Part two of this series at theancientbridge.com.
There is so much to cover this week, as we will be finishing up Chapter 15 of the Gospel of Mark and then we will have two weeks left. We will be talking about Sabbath regulations and allowances, Justin Martyr, the significance of what Joseph of Arimathea did, why Pilate agreed, what the tomb was and where it probably was, and so we will be going through the Dead Sea Scrolls, the writings of the early church fathers, Philo, Josephus and all that jazz. Up to now there has been nothing except brutality but now we will see what loyalty looks like, and who showed it. And remember, the author of Mark never names any member of the Twelve again after Peter’s reaction to the crowing of the rooster in verse 73 of chapter 14. Even in the disputed verses, none are mentioned apart from one reference to “the eleven.” Instead, those who were previously unknown to the narrative become the main characters. And isn’t that exactly how the Kingdom works sometimes? The greatest become the least and the least become the greatest! In this case, a member of the Beit Din which voted to condemn Him, would rise up to claim Yeshua as though He were a family member, and the women who have been following and ministering will be commissioned as the first witnesses of the Resurrection. And the Twelve? Oh, how the mighty have fallen! Some more than others but they have all been humbled to an extent that most of us can hardly imagine.
42 And when evening had come, since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath,
I touched briefly on the problems as we have been going through this: (1) the three days/three nights dilemma from Matthew’s account (but not Mark’s which was the earliest); (2) the problem with the date of the Last Supper/Passover seder-was it performed early, the night after Nisan 13, or was it on time, the night after Nisan 14? John and the Synoptics do not easily align on what happened here; (3) based on the answer to the second problem, which preparation day are we talking about—would it be the preparation for the Passover/weekly Sabbath (thereby a double Sabbath) or just the Preparation for the weekly Sabbath because this occurred the day after the Lambs were slaughtered for the Passover? Wasn’t that just as clear as mud? No worries, we’re going to explore all of this.
By evening, they meant after the time of the evening Tamid sacrifice. Yeshua died at the ninth hour, which during this time of year would have been around 3:45 by our time reckoning, and so even though it seems odd to us to call what is still the middle of the afternoon “evening”, that’s what we have here. It was nowhere near dark. There would be at least three hours to go but there was a lot of work to do in order to get Yeshua buried in that short a time. John says that Yeshua was slaughtered on the Passover, while the synoptics would have Him crucified the day after, unless they were celebrating early—which might explain why there was an available upper room. Presumably, a homeowner would be using that for his own gathering on the Passover. The Tosefta seems to imply that Jerusalem was so incredibly crowded that the Pesach sacrifice could be performed the day before as a shelamim (same procedures involved) and everyone would just look the other way. There were, after all, only about three available hours in the afternoon to get the sacrifices done for everyone and the crowding would have been just terrible, even with only one lamb to every ten people. The lambs also had to be eaten within the walls of Jerusalem, and there was only so much room available. Things are never as cut and dried as we believe when we know very little, and the more we know, the less sure we are!
What throws this into more of a confusion is the mistake of taking literally the “three days/three nights” of Matthew 12:40. When people talk about “plain text reading” they need to know that without a very thorough knowledge of their context, both the context of their lives and also the context of how they communicated and understood ideas, it is simply impossible. They didn’t follow our rules and so God didn’t follow our rules when talking to them. He communicated to them, where they were, and according to their world view, usually in order to critique and change it, and to be understood. So, let’s look at the three days/three nights claim within the Hebraic context with help from Chad Bird, a really great NT scholar whose wrote “Was Jesus in the Grave for Three Days and Three Nights? Avoiding Literalism by Accepting Hebrew Idiom”. And I will tell you that I posted this on social media once and it made some folks super upset so be warned! I honestly don’t see the big deal about it, even though I used to make this same mistake all the time:
“Hebrew often uses the expression tmol shilshom, literally, “yesterday, three days.” Depending on the context, it can mean “yesterday” or “previously” (cf. Exod. 4:10, where it means “in the past”). It does not mean a literal 72-hour period in the past or a time period within the last 24 hours. It just means “before today.” Likewise, in Hebrew, the expression “third day” does not necessarily mean a literal third day. For instance, in Hosea 6:2, the prophet says, “After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him.” He’s talking about a future event in which God will bring Israel home to himself, not something he will do after 48 hours have elapsed. Hosea is reflecting a common tradition in the Old Testament of significant events happening on the third day. For instance, Abraham and Isaac reached Moriah on the third day (Gen. 22:4); God descended onto Sinai on the third day (Exod. 19:11); and Jonah was in the fish “three days and three nights” (Jonah 1:17). This tradition of God doing something big on the third day, by the way, is probably what Paul was referring to when he said that Christ “was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:4). He wasn’t referring to a specific “proof text,” but to this grouping of events and the prophetic message they implied. Moreover, we see from the book of Esther that “after three days” can mean “on the third day.” As preparation for her appearance before the king, Esther asked her fellow Jews not to “eat or drink for three days, night or day” (4:16). On the surface, this would suggest that, after this three-day period, on the fourth day, Esther would go to the king. But, no, “on the third day,” Esther put on her royal robes and entered the king’s presence (5:1). Thus, “after three days” in Hebrew idiom meant “on the third day.” This same way of speaking was continued in later Jewish writings such as the Talmud, when Jewish scholars discussed days and partial days. For the rabbis, part of a day was equal to a whole day.”
To back that last point up, way back when I was studying Pesachim and the sacrifices, I was shocked to run across this same concept, and this was when I was really big into the crucifixion having to have happened on Wednesday so He could be in the grave for exactly three days and three nights. Yeshua was a Jew, He spoke as a Jew, He communicated with other Jews. To use precise language with them when they didn’t use it themselves, when He could instead use an idiom to communicate truth would be utterly foreign to them (truth, btw, is not the same thing as accuracy—for example, “God is love.” Is it true? Yes. Is it accurate? No. He is far more than that, we can’t even truly comprehend all that He is so how could He be defined by any single word? However, it is true). It isn’t like they all got out their stopwatches like modern skeptics, or people on social media who have nothing better to do than nitpick everyone to death!
One more factoid, and that is the oft ignored witness of Justin Martyr—and btw, Martyr was not his last name, that’s what we call him because, well, he was martyred after refusing to deny Yeshua and sacrifice to the Roman gods. He was born a Samaritan in Judea in 100 CE and he’s our primary nonbiblical reporter of how the Lambs were prepared for Passover, he’s an incredibly important witness of life during the post-Temple period (which didn’t affect the Samaritans as much as it did the Jews, of course, because their Temple had been destroyed by the Hasmoneans long since). In First Apology section 67, he says this about the early gatherings of the believers of Yeshua on Sundays (echoing the same claim made in the Didache):
“And afterward we constantly remind each other of these things (the Eucharist aka the Lord’s Supper). And the wealthy come to the aid of the poor, and we are always together. Over all that we receive we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ and through the Holy Spirit. And on the day called Sunday all who live in cities or in the country gather together in one place, and the memoirs of the Apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits. Then when the reader has finished, the Ruler in a discourse instructs and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all stand up together and offer prayers; and, as we said before, when we have finished the prayer, bread is brought and wine and water, and the Ruler likewise offers up prayers and thanksgivings to the best of his ability, and the people assent, saying the Amen; and the distribution and the partaking of the eucharistized elements is to each, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And those who prosper, and so wish, contribute what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the Ruler, who takes care of the orphans and widows, and those who, on account of sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers who are sojourners among us, and in a word [He] is the guardian of all those in need. But we all hold this common gathering on Sunday, since it is the first day, on which God transforming darkness and matter made the Universe, and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead. For they crucified Him on the day before Saturday, and on the day after Saturday, He appeared to His Apostles and disciples and taught them these things which we have passed on to you also for your consideration.”
So, according to our earliest extrabiblical witness, familiar with Judea and with the culture and privy to sources we are most certainly not, said Friday, the day before the weekly Sabbath. He evidently had no problem with the three days and nights idiom and must have taken it as such in order to make this claim. And his explanation of why they did it is just lovely and very in keeping with the Hebraic way of looking at Scripture—what was the function of gathering together on Sunday? It was an acknowledgement of the New Creation, the Kingdom of Heaven come to renew all who believe. And this was hundreds of years before Constantine assigned new meaning to it. The earliest believers have hundreds of years of priority and their witness should speak louder than anything hundreds of years later.
43 Joseph of Arimathea, a respected member of the council, who was also himself looking for the kingdom of God, took courage and went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus.
The word for council here is not Sanhedrin, meaning that he was not at the private hearing held in the home of the High Priest. The word is bouleutes, the word better translated as Beit Din, the formal council (aka the Great Sanhedrin) which met in the Chamber of Hewn Stone on the Temple Mount. The informal Sanhedrin was convened in order to find charges they could make stick, which wasn’t generally how things were done but were in this case, and the Beit Din of up to seventy-one members (depending on the charges involved and what happened during the voting) were the ones who could formally charge someone and hand them over to Rome if the death penalty was warranted. In Luke 23:51, we are told that Joseph had not voted to condemn, but since all that was needed was a two-vote majority, this was not problematic. The verdict did not need to be unanimous. This says that Joseph was looking for the Kingdom of God—as were all Jews—a return to the Golden Age under a messianic Davidic king. But the Davidic king wasn’t only to bring salvation from their oppressors, but also righteousness and justice. At the trial, Joseph had refused to convict, probably for a great many reasons but as he was respected and was actively looking for the inbreaking of the Kingdom, as a first-century Jew he would be painfully aware that it was injustice and infighting that had brought on their latest occupation. John had called the people to repentance for the unrighteousness and injustice of the nation and especially the leadership, and I imagine Joseph was among the baptized who had heard John announcing that the Kingdom was incoming.
The author of Mark says that he “took courage” and took the initiative to go to Pilate to ask for the body. And this really was a dangerous enterprise. Pilate was a brutal and fickle man, and a brilliant politician. And we are meant to remember another dangerous enterprise—John the Baptist’s disciples retrieving John’s body from Machaerus (Ant 18.119) which we are told about in Mark 6:29. Of course, they were probably only able to retrieve his body as Herodias had his head. But this was considered the duty of a disciple, to refuse to allow the body of their master to come to shame or dishonor, as there were few fears more terrible than not being properly buried. And they would do this at any cost, even risking death. That the eleven remaining disciples of Yeshua are nowhere to be seen, it is clear that they are willing to allow His body to be thrown into a mass grave with the other victims. The shame suffered by someone guilty of sedition was to be complete, in life and in death. In coming for Yeshua’s body, when Yeshua was crucified for sedition (rebellion against Rome), such an important man was taking a huge chance that he would also be marked as a sympathizer with whatever claims Yeshua was making and whatever crimes He was convicted of. He could easily be targeted himself. Rome had the ultimate power to decide how the body was to be disposed of, but they usually honored requests from family members who requested the body except in cases of treason against the state. So, was Pilate going to grant this request or was Joseph to come under suspicion?
44 Pilate was surprised to hear that he should have already died. And summoning the centurion, he asked him whether he was already dead.
Pilate was shocked. How could Yeshua be dead already? It had been just over six hours. Of course, it wasn’t unknown for the soldiers to beat someone so badly that they bled out quickly or never even made it to the cross but it was not the norm because they preferred to make an example. And the example was for someone to linger in public agony for days. But Pilate summons the centurion, and the definite article is there so we are to understand that it isn’t just any centurion standing by but the one in charge who, just a few verses earlier, declared that Yeshua was indeed the Son of God and we talked about the importance of that phrase to a Roman last time. Pilate verified that Yeshua was indeed dead. The word for surprised here, thaumazo, is the same word used to describe Pilate’s reaction to Yeshua’s silence in the face of the accusations against Him. This echoes Isaiah 52:13-15 “Behold, my servant shall act wisely; he shall be high and lifted up, and shall be exalted. As many were astonished at you— his appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance, and his form beyond that of the children of mankind— so shall he sprinkle many nations. Kings shall shut their mouths because of him, for that which has not been told them they see, and that which they have not heard they understand.” That would for sprinkle in “sprinkle many nations”, the translators of the LXX translated a word usually used for the sprinkling or splattering of blood for purification purposes. Now, I am not suggesting that Pilate was purified, far from it, it is just interesting how the translators wanted to translate that Hebrew word, which means to purify or consecrate with blood, with the word for surprise. Perhaps they didn’t like the idea of gentiles being purified like a priest or altar, during the time that the Hebrew text was translated into Greek, they were being occupied by the Greeks but the Masoretic reflects an entirely different understanding.
45 And when he learned from the centurion that he was dead, he granted the corpse to Joseph.
The Centurion verified that Yeshua was already dead and then Pilate did something interesting—he actually granted Joseph’s request. What does this mean? It means that Pilate doesn’t believe that Yeshua is guilty of treason or sedition because with his mentor Sejanus in trouble for just that, he isn’t going to take any chances unless the charges are obviously trumped up. Now, as I said before, it was considered to be a duty and an act of righteousness to bury one’s relatives or one’s teacher. Although his mother Mary was there, it is clear that her other children are not there to support her. We can only imagine her state of mind at this point, or I guess we can’t even do that. It has been an unthinkable day for her. What we do know for certain is that Joseph was going to need a lot of help getting Yeshua down from the Cross and it wasn’t like soldiers were going to be helpful. Except maybe that Centurion but still, he had to take that body and move it to where his newly carved out family tomb was. Joan Taylor and most other scholars believe that the most likely site really is where the Church of the Holy Sepulcher sits. It had been a limestone quarry during the iron age (Israel’s monarchy) and it was a very convenient site to carve out tombs. It is also only about 200 meters (half a lap around a track) away from the crucifixion site outside the Genneth Gate. As he had to move and prepare the body quickly, before sundown, due to Deut 21:22-23 “And if a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is cursed by God. You shall not defile your land that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance.” Being that this was a local custom by Roman reckoning, and probably one that Pilate was familiar with, the request itself was not odd even if the circumstances were—Joseph being neither family nor a previously recognized disciple.
Why was it so odd, really? Why was this not a casual decent act? Besides what we’ve already talked about, this was a festival. Joseph was willingly taking on the severest state of ritual impurity (uncleanness) possible, one that required seven days of rituals and waiting, and he wouldn’t be able to set foot near the Temple for the entire festival week. It meant he couldn’t bring his festival chagigah, the special offering of each Israelite male—completely separate from the Passover. Likely Joseph had never failed to do this since coming of age. He could not be there as a witness of the waving of the first sheaf of the barley harvest on Yom HaBikkurim (Yom meaning day and HaBikkurim meaning the first fruits) the day after the Sabbath—which occurred on Sunday morning. Becoming ritually unclean at this time was a supreme act of love. This was no small sacrifice on Joseph’s part. Which leads us to the unanswerable question of “who helped him?” John claims that Nicodemus helped him but even with just the two of them it was an insanely difficult job. If any of you have held a dead pet then you know how much more difficult it is, and a grown man would have been incredibly heavy and awkward to lift and carry. Perhaps the women helped? We do not know for sure.
46 And Joseph bought a linen shroud, and taking him down, wrapped him in the linen shroud and laid him in a tomb that had been cut out of the rock. And he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb.
Joseph bought a linen shroud, which would suggest that this is not a High Sabbath, the first day of Unleavened Bread, but instead the actual date of the slaughtering of the Passover lambs. However, as burials were necessary and a good deed, I imagine it was always possible to purchase what was needed no matter what day it was. It was considered so terrible not to properly prepare a body that even the washing of a corpse was permissible on the Sabbath. Life happens, and a wise application of the Torah allows for life and tragedy and need to supersede almost any commandment. If one’s interpretation of Torah leads them to refuse to care either for the living or the dead, they have failed to honor God and neighbor. What isn’t discussed is the very tender act of washing Yeshua’s body, something that had to be done before they laid Him in the tomb. Let’s look at m. Shabbat 23.5 which is the Mishnah tractate dealing with what is and is not permissible on the Sabbath concerning a corpse, with my added commentary within parenthesis (based on Kehati’s commentary) because it will not immediately make sense without it:
“They may make ready all the needs of the corpse, they may anoint and wash it, provided they do not move its limb (meaning they are not permitted to move any part of the corpse once the Sabbath has arrived). They may take away the cushion from under it, and place it on the sand so that it will keep (presumably, the corpse will decompose less if it is on the ground instead of upon bedding). They may tie the jaw—not so that it will rise, but so that it may not increase (meaning, they aren’t doing work to lift the jaw but simply to keep it from opening any further). And, similarly, if a beam is broken, one may support it with a bench or with the long ones of the bed—not so that it will rise, but so that it may not increase (if the bed or whatever that the corpse is resting on breaks somehow, it can be propped up). They may not close the eyes of a corpse on the Shabbat, and not on a weekday with the departure of the soul (meaning that one cannot close the eyes of a person near death). And if one closes the eyes with the departure of the soul, then such a one sheds blood (because if you close the eyes of one near death in order to hasten their death before the Sabbath, it is as though you are wishing their death and murdering them).” (Mishnah, Seder Moed Vol I, pg 233-234. Pinchas Kehati)
You can see the problems here. After the Sabbath arrived, they may only wash and anoint the body with oils but it must be left wherever they are located. And a corpse out in the wilderness would be in danger of being picked apart by predators and guarding It would have been very dangerous. Of course, this was written 170 years later and so we have no idea how much of this actually would have held sway over Joseph, Nicodemus and whoever else was assisting them. The one thing above all that becomes abundantly clear is the love, goodness, decency and devotion in this act. Like the woman who anointed Yeshua for death, Joseph is named in all four Gospels for doing this. Although it says he rolled the stone against the entrance, these things were huge and he would have needed help.
The tomb had been cut out of the rock, as Dr Taylor pointed out, probably within the Iron Age quarry. John 19:41 says that the Garden tomb was near the crucifixion site, and so placing it within the quarry crater would make a lot of sense. Certainly, they couldn’t have traveled far in the remaining daylight and accomplished what needed to be done with enough time to roll the heavy stone over the opening to keep out predators. And I do understand that it is confusing to hear about a Garden in the same sentence as “iron age quarry” but remember from Mark 64, when we talked about Gethsemane, the word translated “garden” is kepos and that word doesn’t mean a botanical paradise but instead a cultivated area. In the case of the Garden at Gethsemane, it was likely a cultivated olive orchard. Being right outside the Genneth Gate, at the junction of the first and second wall, the Golgotha area was cultivated. My father used to do that actually, he would reclaim mining sites so that they could return to as natural a state as possible. I actually remember the whole family collecting and sowing wildflower seeds on reclaimed hillsides in Northern California to help shore up the soil and to beautify it. Right now the Church of the Holy Sepulcher is in the middle of the Christian quarter of Jerusalem and whatever used to be around it is covered up by buildings now. Fortunately, we have quite a bit of testimony from the early church fathers about the area.
47 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid.
It does seem as though the women were not part of the process based upon this statement, although this could simply be pointing out that because they were helping out, the knew where He was. It isn’t terribly important in the narrative. Joseph is the one being given his rightful moment to shine. Yeshua’s mother, Mary, is not mentioned here and very likely because she was too distraught to even be functional. What had happened within such a short period of time was just unthinkable and especially for a mother watching it happen to her eldest son and being powerless to prevent any of it. And crucifixion during occupation could be like that. There was no due process in those days. Kings and Governors had almost absolute authority and especially against non-citizens. Owners likewise had absolute authority to crucify their slaves and presumably the only things restraining the cruelty of many was the loss of investment and the threat of rioting if the enslaved were treated too badly or capriciously. Six thousand of Spartacus’s followers were crucified from Rome to Capua a hundred years earlier and so they did have to be careful but they also knew that they could only remain in power if there was enough fear to keep the populace and slaves in their places, so to speak.
In the fourth century BCE, Alexander the Great crucified two thousand of the survivors of his siege of Tyre (which is why Jerusalem surrendered willingly and met him at the gates with great enthusiasm and pomp). The Hasmoneans (the “kings” of the Jews who descended from Simon Thassi and his son John Hyrcanus) crucified their fellow Jews. Specifically, Alexander Jannaeus crucified eight hundred Pharisees after slaughtering their wives and children in front of them during the early first century BCE. It was just an unspeakably brutal and unjust time. We really just cannot imagine what the world was like pre-Resurrection. Mercy was something that was done for a show, as theater, and not something that was seen very often for purely altruistic reasons. Mercy was extended to family or for some sort of gain but strangers were considered to be neither deserving of mercy or much of anything else. Mercy, honesty, and honor were rendered to family members and they had no qualms about this. Honor/shame societies are very different from how the western world lives today. Some things are positive but so many are negative that I would never want to live that way. Especially as a woman.
Let’s finish out the stories of Pontius Pilate and Caiaphas before we leave today’s lesson. Pilate was a savvy politician but he could also be very brash and violent and over the top in his responses to situations. He liked to poke the bear. He successfully maintained his position over Judea for eleven years and that was pretty impressive. His downfall came in 36 CE when he slaughtered a group of Samaritans who were on Mt Gerezim trying to find “sacred vessels” that were supposed to have been left there by Moses (Ant 18.85-89). Josephus says they were armed and marched from Tirathana to the Mountain, determined to find these sacred vessels and gaining numbers as they went. Pilate met them with both calvary and infantry and killed some and captured others, including some of the prominent leaders of the Samaritans. The Samaritans complained to the Consul Vitellius, who was the Syrian governor, and Pilate was recalled to Rome for trial and never returned. It isn’t entirely known what happened to him. He lucked out in that Tiberias died before he could arrive and although it is possible that Caligula expunged all the pending cases, Pilate was not reinstated. Nothing is known about his death or his fate after this but like Nimrod, there are so many legends, positive and negative about the end of his life. Some of them redeem him and others make him out to have committed suicide. I am including an article about him by Dr Taylor in the transcript named Pontius Pilate and the Imperial Cult in Roman Judaea.
Caiaphas served as High Priest from 18 to 36 CE, at which time he was deposed by the same Vitellius who had Pilate recalled to Rome. He was a brilliant politician compared to his father-in-law and five brothers in law who all served as High Priest, for anywhere from a few months to four years, although his father-in-law served for ten years before being deposed by Valerius Gratus. And yes, a High Priest had to be a great politician in order to deal with the Romans and stay in power because they served at the behest of Rome and were replaced if the relationship wasn’t working out. Rome, you see, held the garments of the High Priest in the Fortress Antonia, which was adjoined to the NW corner of the Temple Mount and handed them out only when they were absolutely needed—namely, seven days before the festivals so that they could be reconsecrated. The ironic thing is that during the Passover season in which Caiaphas was thrown out of office, Vitellius had returned control of the priestly garments to the Jews. The first century was a crazy time—during the 70 years of High Priests in the first century, there were 21 different High Priests with one serving twice, for 22 different administrations. And within context, Caiaphas served for eighteen of those years and his father-in-law for ten of them. Added to that, the other sons of Annas also served in the position for somewhere around ten more years. Seventy years, thirty-eight years of High Priests from one very corrupt family. Those were the times Yeshua lived in.
https://biblearchaeologyreport.com/2019/04/20/three-tombs-of-jesus-which-is-the-real-one/