Tacitus simply didnt mention Jesus, as you agree. 'Christ' means 'annointed', and Christs were ten a penny in Palestine, in fact, every King of Israel was a 'Christ', a Messiah. Tacitus' reference may also be a late addition to his annals, the 'author' even gets Pilate's title wrong.
Very well -
name ten where the term was employed.
Are you claiming that (1) Tacitus was referring to some other movement, and/or that (2) the reference was a later interpolation? If not, the comments seem just a bit disingenuous to me.
Doesn't it make more sense that he was simply relying on current (i.e., early 2nd century CE) Christian sources?
Parenthetically, the Encyclopedia Judaica defines Messiah as:
"an adaptation of the Aramaic meshiha, a translation of the Hebrew (ha-melekh) ha-mashi'ah, "the Anointed [King]"; a charismatically endowed descendant of David who the Jews of the Roman period believed would be raised up by God to break the yoke of the heathen and to reign over a restored kingdom of Israel to which all the Jews of the Exile would return. This is a strictly postbiblical concept."
™ Version 4.2