or Pontius Pilate, was governor of Judea when our Lord was crucified. Of his family or country we know but little, though it is believed that he was of Rome, or at least of Italy. He was sent to govern Judea in the room of Gratus, in the year 26 or 27 of the vulgar era, and governed this province for ten years, from the 12th or 13th year of Tiberius to the 22d or 23d. He is represented both by Philo and Josephus as a man of an impetuous and obstinate temper, and as a judge who used to sell justice, and to pronounce any sentence that was desired, provided he was paid for it. The same authors make mention of his rapines, his injuries, his murders, the torments that he inflicted upon the innocent, and the persons he put to death without any form of process. Philo, in particular, describes him as a man that exercised an excessive cruelty during the whole time of his government, who disturbed the repose of Judea, and gave occasion to the troubles and revolt that followed after. St Luke (xiii. 1, 2, &c.) acquaints us, that Pilate had mingled the blood of the Galileans with their sacrifices; and that the matter having been related to Jesus Christ, he said, "Think you that these Galileans were greater sinners than other Galileans because they suffered this calamity. I tell you nay; and if you do not repent, you shall all perish in like manner. It is unknown upon what occasion Pilate caused these Galileans to be slain in the temple while they were sacrificing; for this is the meaning of that expression of mingling their blood with their sacrifices. Some think they were disciples of Judas the Gaulonite, who taught that the Jews ought not to pay tribute to foreign princes; and that Pilate had put some of them to death even in the temple; but there is no proof of this fact. Others think that these Galileans were Samaritans, whom Pilate cut to pieces in the village of Tirataba, as they were preparing to go up to mount Gerizim, where a certain impostor had promised to discover treasures to them; but this event did not happen before the year 35 of the common era, and consequently two years after the death of Jesus Christ. At the time of our Saviour's passion, Pilate made some endeavours to deliver him out of the hands of the Jews. He knew they had delivered him up, and pursued his life with so much violence, only out of malice and envy (Matt. xxvii. 18.) His wife also, who had been disturbed the night before with frightful dreams, sent to tell him she desired him not to meddle in the affair of that just person (ib. 19.) He attempted to appease the wrath of the Jews, and to give them some satisfaction, by whipping Jesus Christ (John xix. 1. Matth. xxvii. 26.) He tried to take him out of their hands, by proposing to deliver him or Barabbas, on the day of the festival of the passover. Lastly, he had a mind to discharge himself from pronouncing judgment against him, by sending him to Herod king of Galilee (Luke xxiii. 7, 8.) When he saw all this would not satisfy the Jews, and that they even threatened him in some manner, saying he could be no friend to the emperor if he let him go (John xix. 12, 15.), he caused water to be brought, washed his hands before all all the people, and publicly declared himself innocent of the blood of that just person (Matt. xxvii. 23, 24.); yet at the same time he delivered him up to his soldiers, that they might crucify him. This was enough to justify Jesus Christ, as Calmet observes, and to show that he held him as innocent; but it was not enough to vindicate the conscience and integrity of a judge, whose duty it was as well to assert the cause of oppressed innocence as to punish the guilty and criminal. He ordered to be put over our Saviour's cross, as it were, an abstract of his sentence, and the motive of his condemnation (John xix. 19.), Jesus of Nazareth, king of the Jews, which was written in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. Some of the Jews found fault with it, and remonstrated to Pilate that he ought to have written Jesus of Nazareth, who pretended to be king of the Jews. But Pilate could not be prevailed with to alter it, and gave them this peremptory answer, That what he had written he had written.

Towards evening, he was applied to for leave to take down the bodies from the cross, that they might not continue there the following day, which was the passover and the sabbath-day (John xix. 31.) This he allowed, and granted the body of Jesus to Joseph of Arimathea, that he might pay his last duties to it, (ib. 33.) Lastly, when the priests, who had solicited the death of our Saviour, came to desire him to set a watch about the sepulchre, for fear his disciples should steal him away by night, he answered them, that they had a guard, and might place them there themselves (Matt. xxvii. 65.) This is the substance of what the gospel tells us concerning Pilate.

Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Eusebius, and after them several others both ancient and modern, assure us, that it was formerly the custom for Roman magistrates to prepare copies of all verbal proceedings and judicial acts which they passed in their several provinces, and to send them to the emperor. And Pilate, in compliance to this custom, having sent word to Tiberius of what had passed relating to Jesus Christ, the emperor wrote an account of it to the senate, in a manner that gave reason to judge that he thought favourably of the religion of Jesus Christ, and showed that he should be willing they would decree divine honours to him. But the senate was not of the same opinion, and so the matter was dropped. It appears by what Justin says of these acts, that the miracles of Jesus Christ were mentioned there, and even that the soldiers had divided his garments among them. Eusebius intimates that they spoke of his resurrection and ascension. Tertullian and Justin refer to these acts with so much confidence as would make one believe they had them in their hands. However, neither Eusebius nor St Jerome, who were both inquisitive, understanding persons, nor any other author that wrote afterwards, seem to have seen them, at least not the true and original acts; for as to what we have now in great number, they are not authentic, being neither ancient nor uniform. There are also some pretended letters of Pilate to Tiberius, giving a history of our Saviour, but they are universally allowed to be spurious.

Pilate being a man that, by his excessive cruelties and rapine, had disturbed the peace of Judea during the whole time of his government, was at length deposed by Vitellius the proconsul of Syria, in the 36th year of Jesus Christ, and sent to Rome to give an account of his conduct to the emperor. But though Tiberius died before Pilate arrived at Rome, yet his successor Caligula banished him to Vienne in Gaul, where he was reduced to such extremity that he killed himself with his own hands. The evangelists call him governor, though in reality he was no more than procurator of Judaea, not only because governor was a name of general use, but because Pilate in effect acted as one, by taking upon him to judge in criminal matters; as his predecessors had done, and other procurators in the small provinces of the empire where there was no proconsul, constantly did. See Calmet's Dictionary, Eckard's Ecclesiastical History, and Beaupore's Annot.

With regard to Pilate's wife, the general tradition is, that she was named Claudia Procula or Procula; and in relation to her dream, some are of opinion that as she had intelligence of our Lord's apprehension, and knew by his character that he was a righteous person, her imagination, being struck with these ideas, did naturally produce the dream we read of; but others think that this dream was sent providentially upon her, for the clearer manifestation of our Lord's innocence.