The practice of Roman governors releasing Jewish criminals is never mentioned in ancient books, except in the New Testament. Moreover, many ancient manuscripts don’t have it mentioned in Luke, but this is of no real import, because, even if Luke doesn’t mention it in Luke 23:17, it is mentioned in all three of the other Gospel narratives (Matthew 27:15; Mark 15:6; John 18:39). Moreover, the fact that there is no mention of the practice in Jewish literature is no reason to conclude that the Gospel narratives are wrong, because many ancient records would have been destroyed in the Roman-Jewish War in 66-70 AD. The fact is that Rome did practice such a custom in other countries of the Empire, where it is recorded that Roman governors released local prisoners during a lectisternium, festivals of the local gods. If this was introduced by Pilate to compensate for the cruelty, for which he at times treated the Jews, it would fit the context of the Passover—an event commemorating the release of Jews from captivity in Egypt (cf. John 18:39).
lectisternium – An ancient Greek and Roman rite in which a meal was offered to gods and goddesses whose images were laid on a couch placed in the street. When it originated in Greece, couches were prepared for three pairs of gods: Apollo and Latona, Heracles and Dana, and Mercury and Neptune. During the feast, which lasted seven or eight days, citizens kept open houses, debtors and prisoners were released and every effort was made to banish sorrow. Other gods were later honoured with the same rite. [Britannica Concise Encyclopedia]
Moreover, Josephus, also mentions the fact that Jewish prisoners were released at the request (or perhaps by bribery) of the Jewish authorities. Such an instance occurred when the high priest’s relatives were kidnapped by local criminals who promised their release, if one or more of their comrades were released from prison by the Roman governor.[1] So, the release of criminals was not a unknown matter for a Roman governor to do.
Therefore, under the guise of releasing a prisoner for the Passover, Pilate decided to release Jesus. However, the chief priests could not abide Pilate’s decision to do so. Therefore, they cried out for the release of Barabbas instead of Jesus (Luke 23:18). But, who was Barabbas (Luke 23:19)? The word “Barabbas” is derived from the Aramaic bar abba and means “son of the father.” Nevertheless, we need to ask son of whom or to what does: “son of the father” refer?
Once we allow the Biblical record to record an actual event and is not purveying myth (as presumed by some), and understand that “Abba” or Abbas” is not the name of the father of the criminal mentioned in Luke 23:19, then we are able to look into Jewish history in an effort to discover the truth surrounding the Barabbas account. Barabbas may have reference to Judas the Galilean who was the father of the fourth sect – the Zealots.[2] This would fit the context of the Barabbas narrative—i.e. the father of the seditious sect.[3]
If such a thing is true, Judas the Galilean’s son would probably be Manaham, who was one of the authors of the Jewish revolt against Rome cir. 66 AD. Manaham was particularly responsible for the killing of Annas, the high priest who was responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus.[4] Therefore, if Barabbas refers to Manaham, the son of the father of Jewish insurrections against Rome, it would be nothing less than poetic justice that the very man the high priests demanded Pilate to release instead of Jesus in 31 AD was not only the murderer of Annas, the high priest, who saved his life, but was also largely responsible for the loss of wealth and the destruction of the Temple the Jewish hierarchy feared would take place, if Jesus was left to continue his ministry (cf. John 11:48-50).
__________________________________
[1] Josephus: Antiquities 20.9.3
[2] Josephus (cf. Antiquities 18.1.6)
[3] Barabbas… is interpreted in the so-called Gospel according to the Hebrews as “son of their teacher.” (Jerome, Commentary on Matthew 4 [on Matthew 27:16]). Since Barabbas is an insurrectionist, this implies he is the son of the author or teacher of Jewish insurrectionists.
[4] Josephus: Wars 2.17.8-9
Smoodock's Blog 