The point here has been to ask whether the 3-year or 4-year chronology of Jesus' ministry fits better with Roman events. To recap:
In November, this series started out to answer the question: "Was Sejanus more likely dead or alive when Antipas killed John the Baptist?" That question quickly turned out to be more inconclusive than I'd previously thought. After the third post, I began thinking more about the period after John's death. Examining the withdrawals of Jesus more closely led me into examining again how Antipas could have overlooked Jesus for so long in the first place, but that's a question for another series. The point is, the original question stalled out and - so far, for me - has not revived.
It did, however, spark related questions that may prove more fruitful. The last three posts in this series (here, here and here) essentially wound up shifting the original question into its converse: "Was John the Baptist more likely alive or dead when Sejanus fell?" That one seems more conclusive, depending on the relationships Antipas had with Sejanus & the Sanhedrin (respectively). I blogged about Antipas & Sejanus last summer, but the relative depth of their connection needs more attention. I should also outline my thoughts on Jesus' first withdrawal from Judea a bit better as well.
That gives me at least two new series to work on in pursuit of this topic. With that said, I'll leave my thoughts from post #6 open for more feedback. As always, even harsh critiques will be much appreciated.
I wish historical/chronological rigor was less complicated. Stay tuned...