Among the various collections of Greek writings essential to understanding early Judaism and emerging Christianity is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, commonly called the Septuagint (LXX). What is this translation? Where did it come from? What sort of books were in it? In this piece I seek to provide a short snapshot of this ancient Bible translation, surveying the origin and contents of this corpus, noting its impact on Second Temple Judaism and the New Testament, and its role in Bible transmission will be an indispensable starting point for Bible students.
Origins
The traditional “origin story” of the Septuagint is told in the Letter to Aristeas, a self-described “narrative” recounting how the Jewish Law arrived in Alexandria, Egypt, and was translated into Greek by 70–72 Judean scribes during the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (282–246 BCE).[1] This translation of the Law–and Greek translations of the rest of the Old Testament–is commonly called the Septuagint, for being the translation of the alleged seventy (abbreviated LXX).[2] The historical accuracy of the account in Aristeas is heavily questioned by scholars, but a mid-third century BCE dating and an Alexandrian setting for this translation is regarded as the most likely historical scenario.[3] Additionally, the origin of the Greek translations of the rest of the Old Testament is not well understood except that they were likely present by the first century.
Content
The LXX became the Bible for Jews living in the Hellenic world and the “first scriptures” for an emerging Christianity, but it must be remembered that the LXX was not a set corpus of books. According to Aristeas, the Pentateuch alone was translated into Greek. Later the LXX would include “all of the books of what [is called] the Hebrew Bible,” additional writings translated from Hebrew or Aramaic, and a body of Greek literature.[4] These additional books are called Apocryphal by Protestants and Deuterocanonical by Roman Catholics, 13 of these are typically found in collections together while the Greek Orthodox and Slavonic Bibles include others. The earliest “complete” Greek Christian Bibles from the fourth and fifth centuries CE (Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus) do not include the same list of these books.[5] It is anachronistic, then, to treat the content of the LXX as a stable list of books that determined which books should be in the Bible.[6]
Influence
Nevertheless, its impact on Judaism and the New Testament is unmistakable. The LXX provided Greek-speaking Jews of the Hellenistic period with the word of God throughout the diaspora, but its reception was not without extremes. Some ancients (and some modern people) shared the belief, as suggested in Aristeas, that the LXX was inspired; meanwhile, other ancient believers were not persuaded and continued to produce editions of the LXX reflecting varying translation philosophies (Theodotion, Aquila, and Symmachus).[7] Early Christians, being Jewish, used the LXX as their “first Bible.” The New Testament books cite passages from the LXX, even revisions of passages, quotations from memory, or employ modifications.[8] As Christian use of the LXX went “mainstream” as their Bible, Bruce Metzger notes, “more and more Jews ceased using the Septuagint” by the end of the first century CE. As a result, the Greek translation became the “only source” in the church for access to the Old Testament.[9]
Textual Witness
The LXX tradition is a vital witness to our knowledge of the state of the transmission of the “original reading of the biblical text” of the Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts.[10] The LXX tradition contributes to Old Testament textual criticism by giving insight into the “original” biblical manuscripts the LXX translators had in front of them which no longer exist today. The study of the LXX also helps to assess the habits of both translators and scribes.[11] Sometimes, for example, these translators and scribes changed a reading believed to be discrepant; other times, they “updated” the text to fit the context of their times. Still, modern study of the LXX in light of the Dead Sea Scrolls has underscored that its translators provided, “reliably and accurately reflect what lay before them.”[12]
Conclusion
The influence of the Septuagint in the history of the Second Temple Period and its career for early Christianity as the Bible of God’s people continues today regardless of whether it is perceived by the average Bible reader.
Benjamin G. Wright, III, “Aristeas, Letter of,” Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism, eds. John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010),376.
I will use LXX in this paper to refer to this Greek translation tradition of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Edmon L. Gallagher, Translation of the Seventy: History, Reception, and Contemporary Use of the Septuagint (Abilene: Abilene Christian University Press, 2021), 33–34.
Leonard J. Greenspoon, “Septuagint,” Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism, eds. John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 1218.
On this point of what additional books were included, Lee Martin McDonald describes how in the early church there was a “lack of universal agreement on the scope of and order of the church’s OT canon, though by the fourth century there was broad but never universal agreement on the scope of church’s first scriptures [i.e., LXX],” in John J. Collins, Craig A. Evans, and Lee McDonald, Ancient Jewish and Christian Scriptures: New Developments in Canon Controversy (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2020),79.
Gallagher, Translation, 52–55. In Gallagher’s assessment, the LXX did not impact the development of the biblical canon, “The Septuagint had no bearing on the development of the canon of Scripture” (47).
Gallagher, Translation, 113–20.
Greenspoon, “Septuagint,” 1219.
Bruce M. Metzger, The Bible in Translation: Ancient and English Versions (Grand Rapids, MI: Abaker Academic, 2001), 18.
Amy Anderson and Wendy Widder, Textual Criticism of the Bible, rev. ed., Lexham Methods Series, ed. Douglas Mangum (Bellingham: Lexham, 2018), 40–41.
Anderson and Widder, Textual Criticism, 95. There is a movement within Old Testament textual criticism that has shifted from seeking the wording of the original manuscripts (i.e., the autographs) to seeking the earliest authoritative form of the text. This latter focus places the goal away from the original words of the text and emphasizes that from various versions one became the authoritative form.
At 18 I began in earnest to expand my reading beyond the Bible and gathered literature to inform my studies of the Scriptures. Months after my conversion to the Christian faith, I began transforming my bedroom so that I could study. My main hurdle was that as a high school drop-out I had no “equipment” that I imagined other kids my age would have had at the time: a desk, a bookshelf, highlighters, paper–you get the picture–study stuff.
On top of that, I felt I had a lifetime of study to catch up on. After reading the gospels and coming to faith in Jesus, I wanted to know more. Sermons and Bible classes seemed to talk about things that just went over my head, and I had more questions than the preachers had time to sit with me. I had great teachers and they often answered my questions, but like Johnny Five–a warbot that became alive–I needed “more input.”
Back then Bible tracts were the best way to share Bible studies, essays, and mini-monographs. Today we would call these blog posts. As I collected, collated, and created a cache of these tracts I had a problem of organizing and housing them. My solution was to repurpose something from my gaming life.
I remember it well. It was an old Nintendo Entertainment System Cartridge Library. Originally, it was designed to hold 18 NES games on three columns with six slots. It was my first “bookshelf” dedicated to my training and knowledge building as a young Christian interested in biblical studies.
Above: This is not my original shelf, but someone on eBay is selling theirs if you’re in the market.
How My Library Began
My modest library began with tracts and booklets. An older preacher encouraged me to collect tracts and booklets on whatever topics I could find. Church foyers were like scavenger hunts in my quest to stockpile tracts on subjects I had not heard of before, or topics I wanted multiple studies on. The best part of it is they were free for the curious student.
Back then I used to don a moss green pullover jacket with a kangaroo pouch from Abercombie and Fitch. I would always find a way to “smuggle” some tracts out of every church service I attended. The outcome: a pile of tracts began to collect upon my desk.
There came a point when I did not know where to place my cache of tracts and booklets. So what was an eighteen-year-old, new convert, who had not grown up on Bible lessons and sermons to do? I needed to find a better way to organize my pile. Remember, the internet was still a hit-and-miss resource, and pretty much the wild, wild West when it came to content. Google would not be born, so no real search engines. If I wanted a digital encyclopedia I needed a computer and a CD-ROM. AOL reigned supreme. Amazon wouldn’t be consequential for years.
Amid the chaos of my childhood relics came the NES cartridge library case. It had served me well in the past to house my games. Now it would be my “little library” bookshelf to fuel my newest interest of reading a variety of theological topics.
And so it was; I began to organize my little volumes in alphabetical order. The tracts that would fit I kept organized within the NES Library, and as my library expanded the more I became resourceful to contain it (the larger ones when into my drawers). Not only would I be able to house and organize them, but I began to strengthen my reading muscles that had atrophied.
Today, I have a couple thousand volumes in my library. At times, I am surprised to think that it started with this little box about a foot long by 10 inches tall. Now I have books on shelves and in boxes, journals, and magazines in filing cabinets, the near-limitless possibilities of software and the internet allow for e-books and audiobooks.
In the process I have learned that some books are worth keeping, others reading and passing on, and still others worth discarding. Books are much like selecting fruit: the joy is all in picking and savoring. But the rotten ones need to be tossed away!
Everyone Needs a Biblical Library
I firmly believe that God intends for His people to be readers, thinkers, and meditators:
You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. (Deuteronomy 6:5 ESV)[1]
Simply looking at the word “heart” (lēbāb) should cause us to consider that it is “the totality of man’s inner or immaterial nature” by which God’s people must love God.[2] Its root lēb refers to three elements of this inner world: emotion, thought, and will.[3] Much like its counterpart in the Greek Old Testament and New Testament, the metaphoric use of kardía points to the center of “the whole inner life.”[4] The heart controls the spiritual culture of one’s inner world, and love for God leverages such control.
Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life. (Proverbs 4:23)
It is then important to inform the heart, guide the heart, and supply the heart with the meditations which will strengthen our faith. Reading is an essential aspect of our faith. There is no way around that. The content of the faith reaches the heart through the mind. To do that God gave us a collection of sixty-six volumes mediated through a wide range of literary genres and styles, each with different rules of engagement.
To be ignorant of God’s word is to be in a dangerous position. Hosea lamented saying that his people are destroyed due to a lack of knowledge (Hosea 4:6). To be ignorant of how to approach scripture may equally be disastrous.
Moreover, the maintenance of our faith and impact upon our salvation is also to be accomplished through the “public reading” of the Scriptures. Paul makes this abundantly clear to Timothy (1 Tim 4:13; Col 4:16). And while the Bible is a book that can be understood by the average person, any astute reader of this small library will acknowledge that sometimes we need help to guide us through the text (Acts 8:30–31).
To be a diligent student of God’s word requires us to explore other areas of knowledge. From Geography to regional political backgrounds; or from linguistics to religious thematic studies, etc., – good resources are essential to illuminate the text to promote an accurate understanding. Helpful resources prevent us–readers separated by thousands of years–from making uninformed conclusions.
This principle has been well stated:
[I]t is the epitome of folly to ignore the labors of countless Bible scholars across the centuries who have made available, by means of the printed page, the results of their research.[5]
Wayne Jackson, A Study Guide to Greater Bible Knowledge (1986)
There seems to be a connection, then, between being “people of the book” and being “book people.” It is one of the tragic currents of contemporary Christianity that it has become of religion that embraces being “people of emotion” rather than God’s written word–the subjective over the objective.
Every Christian and Christian home should have a budding romance with good literature which reinforces an understanding of God’s word, the Christian worldview, and engage reading that critiques our views.
Build A Library
There is a sense in which we will always be learning. In the apocryphal book Ecclesiasticus, the grandson of Jesus ben Sirach (c. mid-second century BC) writes about the importance of reading for spiritual growth:
Many great teachings have been given to us through the Law and the Prophets and the others that followed them, and for these we should praise Israel for instruction and wisdom. Now, those who read the scriptures must not only themselves understand them, but must also as lovers of learning be able through the spoken and written word to help the outsiders.So my grandfather Jesus, who had devoted himself especially to the reading of the Law and the Prophets and the other books of our ancestors, and had acquired considerable proficiency in them, was himself also led to write something pertaining to instruction and wisdom, so that by becoming familiar also with his book those who love learning might make even greater progress in living according to the law. (Ecclesiastes/Sirach Prologue, NRSV)[6]
Reading the scriptures and “other books” can be very helpful. They create dialogue partners. When I opened those little tracts, I would often think what can this person add to my thinking about this topic. Sometimes I learned how to best summarize an idea, other times I learned about an approach to avoid. Some tracts proved outdated in the examples, but strong in the timeless instruction. There were plenty of times, the author would address the topic so firmly and with the conviction it was of “vital importance” but I left the conversation unconvinced or worse confused. Reading is a battlefield, but that is where we learn.
I soon began to find authors who had a gift for writing and I began to single them out. There is something artistic and soul-nourishing to be found in good writing–whether I always agree with the author(s) or not in every detail.
I started going to used book stores to find books and authors referenced in my little library. I found a small paperback copy of Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis (1898–1963) for a few bucks. I bought that and a Bible–the shop owner gave me the Bible. I found his writing style so compelling and personal. Lewis had a knack for not just pulling you in with his preliminary words but he could hold you together disarmingly well as he made his case for Christian theism or philosophy.
At a Gospel Meeting in South San Francisco, CA, I heard a preacher–Wayne Jackson (1937–2020)–who I had only read in his articles. I purchased a copy of his A Study Guide to Greater Bible Knowledge. To this day, it is probably one of the most important books in my personal developement as a young Christian. Jackson had a crisp, no fluff, popular writing style which made reading an enjoyable experience. Whether you agreed with him or not, he never left you to wonder if you understood his conclusion.
There is little doubt in my mind that reading is an experience of the soul, and we should do what we can to have the best, brightest, and engaging soul experiences possible. Reading has been my main strategy for fulfilling Paul’s command:
I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. (Romans 12:1–2)
For this reason, I encourage everyone to build their own personal library.
Some Suggestions
I offer five (5) suggestions about what types of books should be included in a personal Bible-focused library. Solomon reminds us, “of making many books there is no end” (Eccl 12:12).
(1) Choose materials that respect biblical inspiration and authority.
Moses told the Israelites not to “add” or “take from” the Lord’s word:
You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you. (Deuteronomy 4:2)
John closes the Revelation with the same sobering warning (22:18–19).
God’s word is to be respected and observed without any intrusion of human opinion. It is a hard task to limit our opinions but if we are vigilant we can acknowledge them or debunk them in our study. Every word within the sacred text is from God (2 Tim 3:16–17). Consequently, it is important to select literature that is in keeping with these truths.
(2) Choose materials that have ongoing usefulness.
Not one can be expected to know everything, not even the expert. One of the keys to learning is to know where to locate information.
For this reason, I highly recommended getting access to Bible dictionaries, encyclopedias, handbooks, and Bible atlases. Most of these types of resources are available digitally.
Use them to refresh your mind, to introduce you to a topic, or expand your thinking. These resources are indispensable.
(3)Choose materials that illuminate the biblical text.
There is too much spiritual fluff peddled in the “Christian” markets. They do little to help understand the Scriptures. They may provide personal inspirational value, but they do not offer textual insight.
In his book Making Sense of the Old Testament, Old Testament scholar Tremper Longman, III, reminds us to respect the fact that the Bible we read is an ancient text, translated from an ancient language, set in an ancient world with ancient socio-economic customs. We would be wise to recognize the danger of imposing our own modern perspective when reading them.[7] This caution applies for both testaments.
It is important to include special background studies which will improve one’s knowledge of the world of the Scripture (archaeology, word studies, culture, and religion, etc.). These often contain information that is often inaccessible. Today, however, specialty blogs, background Study Bibles, and websites provide greater access to this information.
(4)Choose materials that have practical importance for a life of faith.
It is important to obtain practical and useful volumes which address marriage and the family, Christian Apologetics, how the Bible came to man, Christian history and denominationalism.
Books on doubt, the problem of pain and suffering, moral issues, or matters of personal nature are also important for faith development; issues that confront our faith daily.
In an age when we often feel our way to a conclusion, we must fight against the current and reason our way to solid ground.
(5)Choose faithful authors who are experts in their field.
An important criterion for selecting books is that they are written by those of proven worth, ability, and faithfulness. Some authors are well known for their knowledge depth on particular matters – experts.
No one would want a self-trained novice operating on them; but rather, a board-certified surgeon. So it is with those authors we invite into our minds and engage in our studies in the Scriptures.
Concluding Thoughts
As we conclude, we pray that our readers will begin to build a useful faith-building library. It does take time and money to accumulate the needed volumes, but the results of such an investment are tremendous. As Desiderius Erasmus (1469-1536) once said, “When I get a little money I buy books, and if any is left I buy food and clothes“.[8] Only someone who knew the value of study and learning could make such an irrational statement.
In the shadow of Paul’s final days, he asks Timothy to have John Mark accompany him on Timothy’s visit to the imprisoned apostle in Rome (2 Tim 2:11). Among the items Paul requests is a cloak, “the books” (to biblia), and “the parchments” (tas membranas; cf. 2 Tim 2:13).
There is no telling exactly what “the books” are but evidence shows that the apostle was quite familiar with a wider world of literature (cf. Acts 17); yet, “the parchments” is a unique technical term referring to a codice (a bound volume like a book) which retains copies of letters – possibly his letters.[9]
The point we conclude with is that as Christians we have a long tradition of reading and studying. Let us not lose sight of this noble task. Let our homes be a place where we may have access to resources to better inform our faith in order that we may do the most important work ahead of us – understanding and applying Scripture.
Sources
Unless otherwise stated all quotations of The Holy Bible are from the English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016).
Andrew Bowling, “lēbāb,” Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999), 466.
TWOT 466.
Johan Lust, Erik Eynikel, and Katrin Hauspie, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, rev. ed. (Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft: Stuttgart, 2003).
Wayne Jackson, A Study Guide to Greater Bible Knowledge (Stockton, CA: Apologetics Press, 1986), 83.
New Revised Standard Version of The Holy Bible (Nashville, TN: Nelson, 1989).
Tremper Longman, III, Making Sense of the Old Testament: Three Crucial Questions (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006).
The present study is an inquiry into the interconnected reciprocal nature of patronage in the Greco-Roman imperial social setting, as one background component from the New Testament world. One would be wrong to think that such a social dynamic’s presence was minimal. In actuality, patronage and its vocabulary not only appears specifically in the New Testament (Luke 22:25; Acts 10:38; Rom 16:2; Philm 17-20, Phil 4:14-20, etc), but the social reciprocal dynamics in which its value and cultural powers are also assumed(shame, honor, unity, gratitude, fellowship, etc.). The reader who knows what to look for will see it in numerous contexts shaping the life of the body.[1] Unfortunately, the many elements vital to the matrix of patronage can only be pointed to. Yet, as Bruce J. Malina observes, it was “the most significant form of social interaction in the limited-good world of the first century is an informal principle of reciprocity, a sort of implicit, non-legal contractual obligation, unenforceable by any authority apart from one’s sense of honor and shame.”[2] The challenge in this paper is to briefly and accurately describe it.
In seeking to understand the New Testament accurately, scholars propose various exegetical principles and contextualizing models to accomplish this task.[3] The process here requires an approach which appreciates the cultural background of the New Testament to contextualize its vocabulary. This, Albert A. Bell reminds, is the “crucial part of understanding any written text.”[4] Greco-Roman words have a socially conditioned context that the modern reader may not readily identify. “Without a comprehension of the sociological dynamics of that world, our understanding… is terribly superficial at best and woefully mistaken at worst.”[5] The most crucial need for the reader of the New Testament, then, is to be able to bridge the cultural and time gap between the original (native) context and the reader’s contemporary context. This linguistic and cultural divide can be managed. In advancing a cultural-anthropological reading model, Jerome H. Neyrey argues that one can avoid ethnocentric and anachronistic readings of Paul (and the New Testament) by appreciating the difference between reading him as member of the same culture (an emic reading), and by reading him informed by the analytical and descriptive works of specialists and ethnographers (an etic reading).[6] As one gets closer to this “emic reading,” the modern reader comes closer to better appreciate the symbolic universe of Paul’s and Jesus’ culture.[7] The goal here is to gain a realistic perception from “native informants” which can illustrate and contextualize patronage as a Greco-Roman phenomenon.[8]
The presentation to follow will demonstrate how significant the social form of patronage was in the daily life of the Greco-Roman world, it will outline the vocabulary of patronage in Latin and Greek primary sources, it will sharpen this outline to differentiate between political and social patronage, and then offer a realistic scenarios that can illuminate reading the New Testament in its social and cultural world.
Daily Significance of Patronage
In modern analogy, patronage was like an ancient informal “welfare system.” Social services, like the modern model of the United States, would have been quite foreign. Instead, patronage was a cultural phenomenon in which there was a reciprocal relationship between the upper class and the lower class. It benefited lower classes with protection and patronage by means of reasonable support (legal, financial, medical, marital, etc.) for public support, the running of errands, odd jobs, escorting through streets, and providing social honor in exchange (a return). In exchange for the daily allowance (sportula), the client was at the patron’s call. Thus, it was a form of social investment between patron-client; interestingly, even slaves of wealthy households were known to have clients who hoped the slave could use their influence upon their master.[9] Greco-Roman and Christian scholarship is unequivocal about the daily and social significance of the patron-client network of relationships.[10]
Martial, in his colorful Epigrams, clocks what city life was like in the urbs (4.8.1-4): “The first and second hours wear out clients greeting their patrons.” The imagery evokes the crushing nature of the daily dependence of clients upon their patronus.A step further, Juvenal shows how important this allowance of money was for the everyday professional and collegia with his sarcastic words in the Satires (1.95-126):
For no deity is held in such reverence amongst us as Wealth; though as yet, O baneful money, thou hast no temple of thine own; not yet have we reared altars to Money in like manner as we worship Peace and Honour, Victory and Virtue, or that Concord that clatters when we salute her nest.[11]
This fits the common view that the patron-client phenomena were important to the daily life of every social stratum of the Greco-Roman world. To this point, Jérôme Carcopinodescribes that whether employed or unemployed, freedman or the parasite do-nothing, aristocrats or lower plebeians, clients “were no sooner out of bed than they were in the grip of the duties inseparable from being a ‘client.’ […] there was no man in Rome who did not feel himself bound to someone more powerful above him by the same obligations of respect, or, to use the technical term, the same obsequium.”[12] This honor-bound relationship allowed those in various professions and collegia to survive by means of this small daily “dole as their main source of revenue.”
Patronage in Latin and Greek Sources
Extant Greek and Latin sources (literary and epigraphic) speak of patronage, benefaction, and euergetism (good-doing) from political and social perspectives. Ideas such protection, assistance, help, advocacy, and philanthropy appear. Consider the following samples. It seems that patronage was initially borne out of political power and civic duty, but that distinction apparently broke down over time into a social network between the upper and lower classes in the Greco-Roman world among the rich, the poor, the freedman and freedwoman.[13]
The Roman historian Livy stretches back about four centuries to the early Roman Republic and recounts the story of Cincinnatus, the famed aristocratic plebeian consul, turn poor plebeian farmer, turn dictator, turn savior of Roman (History of Rome 3.26-29). According to Livy, his actions as dictator were reciprocated with honor and status. Livy frames (stylizes?) the response of the army as recognizing “the benefit [beneficii] they had received at his hands,” honored him with a golden crown, and “saluted him as their protector [patronum salutaverit]” (History of Rome 3.29.3). They had become his “clients,” and Cincinnatus would use this social bond to his advantage to “clear” the charges against his son Caeso who was on the run for charges of murder. The protector of Rome, then, returned his powers of dictator and returned to the rustic farm life. Later, when Augustus consolidates his power, Tacitus recounts his use of “gratuities” (donis) among the military and the poor (Annals 1.2). Michael Grant[14] interprets this as Augustus letting “it be understood that the old institution of patrons and clients had been recast, so that henceforward all the people were his own, personal clients, including the poorest citizens.” Thus, as principis Augustus and the emperors after him would portray (politically?) to the citizens of Rome and its subjects a bond of reciprocal loyalty.
Greek sources also illuminate various aspects of patronage. In the fifth century BCE, Sophocles frames the tragic Oedipus as gratefully exchanging protection from Thebes and “help [prostátisi] of the dread goddesses” who reigns in their districts, with obtaining “a great savior [sōtēr’] for this city, and troubles for my enemies” in him (Oedipus at Colunus 455-460). The Apocrypha[15] likewise points to the political upheavals in the Maccabean storyline connected to concepts of patronage. In 2 Maccabees, Simon slanders Onias, who is designated “a plotter against the government the man who was the benefactor [tòn euergétēn] of the city, the protector [tòn kēdemóna] of his compatriots, and a zealot for the laws” (4:2).[16]
In 3 Maccabees 3:13-29, “King Ptolemy Philopater” declares to his “generals and soldiers” that despite his goodwill (philanthrōpía), a desire to do good (eū poiēsaí), and to honor (timēsai) in the Jewish temple (3:15-17), the Jews “manifest ill-will toward us” and are “the only people among all nations who hold their heads high in defiance of kings and their own benefactors [euergétais], and are unwilling to regard any action as sincere” (3:19). The accommodative and benevolent king (philanthrópōs 3:20) declares that such rebellious Jews should be arrested, bound, and deported and that any who harbor them should be severely punished (3:25-29). Eventually, Philopator descends upon the Jews but is subdued by two angels. The king breaks down to pity and tears, and blames and threatens his “friends” (toís phílois): “You are committing treason and surpassing tyrants in cruelty; and even me, your benefactor [euergétēn]” (6:24).
Political and Social Patronage in Rome
In the Greco-Roman world of the first century CE, there appears to be evidence distinguishing between political and social patronage. This can be confusing since sources often use terms like benefactor, euergetes, and patron in the process of discussion. The masculine form of the Greek prostát– (see verbal use above for “help”) is somewhat problematic. It is often considered synonymous with the Latin patronus. Interestingly, the New Testament the feminine form προστάτις is used in Romans 16:2 and translated as patron and benefactor (ESV; NIV, NRSV, HCSB). Erlend D. MacGillivray[17] takes exception to the view that these two forms are completely synonymous. The masculine appears in both Attic Greek and in the Roman Empire and carries both legal and a variety of leadership benefaction roles, but not the feminine form. MacGillivray argues that applying the masculine meaning upon prostátis is exegetically problematic for this reason. Benefaction is in view, but one must distinguish between political patronage from some interpersonal social networking.
MacGillivray argues that understanding prostátis depends, then, upon understanding the fluid nature of ancient Mediterranean reciprocal dynamics, recognizing the patron-client model is far too limiting and misleading. There is a difference between the narrow and nuanced meaning of classical patronage and the broad euergetistic/altruistic benefaction. While epigraphical gratitude evidence shows that prostátis and prostátes imply civic prestige, the nature of the evidence is, however, often weak to force synonymity. Part of the problem stems from the near normative templates in honorary Greco-Roman epigraphs that do not always neatly distinguish between the various kinds of patronage. Thus, the presence of these terms do not prove exclusively a classical patronage/patronus; consequently, MacGillivray’s work argues that prostátis and prostátes are not demonstrably synonymous.
R. A. Kearsley[18] extends this trajectory and explores several first century CE gratitude (honorarium) inscriptions shedding light on the first-century distinction between political and social patronage. These aristocratic women are named, Iunia Theodora and Claudia Metrodora, and are celebrated as female benefactors/patrons who operated in mid-first century CE Asia Minor. The cities of Lycia (Myra, Patara, Tel-messos) recount the influence of Theodora. Theodora apparently had multiple-citizenships, she freely shared her wealth, applied influenced for political and commercial purposes, and is described consistently in benefactor terms (sōphronōs, philolúkios) in Lycia. Such amounts to Theodora functioning as a social benefactor. On the other hand, Metrodora of Chiot Island likewise held multiple-citizenships, did hold political office as magistrate (stephanephoros), which required benefaction toward the people although she surpassed such requirements. She functioned in banquets, directed imperial games, gymnasiarch, public bathhouse donation, basileia in Ionia, and was praised for her public virtue. She was a benefactor as part of holding office.
Realistic Patronage Scenarios for Reading the New Testament
The above illustrations provide insight into the deep and ancient tradition of patronage and how such played out in various settings. There are two passages where patronage vocabulary is explicitly found in the New Testament.
First, in Luke, the political aspect of patronage is evident in Jesus’ counter-intuitive teaching on greatness. Jesus corrects the “greatness debate” among the disciples by saying,
“The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and those in authority over them are called benefactors [euergétai]. But not so with you. Rather, let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves” (22:25-26).
Frederick W. Danker observes, euergétai “served as a title for rulers in Syria and Egypt… In many cases the title would conceal tyranny under extravagant expenditure” (cf. Greek Esther 16:2-3, 13-14).[19] One might argue that Jesus is taking for granted a political euergétai known to abuse such roles, and parts from the fundamental principle of the patron-client relationship: “a service performed or a favor done shall not be transformed into status and honor.”[20] Jesus’ leadership principle, then, is that one serves detached from the demands of reciprocity and the honor and status it brings (cf. Acts 10:38).[21]
Second, in Romans 16:1-2 patronage appears to have a social component. Paul commends Phoebe to the church as “a servant of the church at Cenchreae” and as one who should be helped —reciprocally— “for she has been a patron [prostátis] of many and of myself as well.” Caroline F. Whelan[22] relates this passage to the context of Roman reciprocal social conventions within associations (collegia). Whelan maintains that women not only had the Roman legal standing to operate their wealth independently of guardians, they also functioned as civic patrons for collegia. Secondly, comparable “recommendation” letters reveal two types of reciprocal relationships. There is the superior-inferior recommendation rhetoric, and two, the social-equals recommendation rhetoric; each reflecting in some sense the inherent nature of reciprocity in Rome’s social structure, the matrix of which fuses together the economic and social. Romans 16:1-2, then, points to one of these realistic scenarios. Whelan argues that the patronage between social equals (amica, friends) is probably in view. Phoebe needs Paul’s influence among those addressed in Romans 16 (thus the recommendation), but as “equals” such rhetoric is not for his own social benefit. Instead, it is a gesture of gratitude for her own social activity as a social patron (euergetistic) to the collegia of the church in Cenchrea.
Conclusion
Robert Wilken asserts: “We have a distorted view of the history of early Christianity… The historian of Christianity has given the impression that the rest of the canvas is simply background for the closeup —relegating the general history of the times to an introductory chapter of vague generalities.”[23] Hopefully, this paper provides a closer, native (emic) reading. The smaller the cultural and linguistic gap is, the more accurate the reading. May this paper accomplish its task, to gain realistic perceptions from primary sources which can illustrate and contextualize patronage as an important Greco-Roman imperial phenomenon.
Endnotes
David A. deSilva, “Honor and Shame,” “Patronage,” DNTB 518-22, 766-71; Donald Walker, “Benefactor,” DNTB 157-59; Halvor Moxnes, “Patron-Client Relations and the New Community in Luke-Acts,” in The Social World of Luke-Acts, ed. J. H. Neyrey (1991; repr., Peabody: Hendrickson, 1993), 241-68; Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 66-69.
Bruce J. Malina, The New Testament World (Louisville: John Knox, 1981), 80.
Ralph P. Martin, “Approaches to New Testament Exegesis,” in New Testament Interpretation, ed. I. Howard Marshall (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 220-51.
Albert A. Bell, Jr., Exploring the New Testament World (Nashville: Nelson, 1998), 2.
M. Robert Mulholland, Jr., “Sociological Criticism,” in Interpreting the New Testament, eds. David A. Black and David S. Dockery (Nashville: B&H, 2001), 171.
Jerome H. Neyrey, Paul, In Other Words (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1990), 13.
Neyrey, Paul, 14-17. Neyrey’s distinctions and concerns have value, but he makes a hardline dichotomy between Paul as one who receives supra-cultural insight (i.e., from God) and Paul as a fully incarnated product of his times (18). This distinction ignores Paul’s stated role from God. This is one of Mulholland’s four critiques of this model, it tends to be human-centered, often grounded in dynamic models foreign to the Roman world, imposes the model on the evidence, and lends itself to sociological reductionism (“Sociological Criticism,” 178-80).
David A. deSilva, The Hope of Glory: Honor Discourse and New Testament Interpretation (Collegeville: Liturgical, 1999). The “native informants” are “our best instructors” (xi).
Bell, Exploring the New Testament World, 191-92.
Ferguson, Backgrounds, 67; Florence DuPont, Daily Life in Ancient Rome, trans. C. Woodall (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993); Micahel Grant, A Social History of Greece and Rome (New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1992).
Jérôme Carcopino, Daily Life in Ancient Rome, ed. Henry T. Rowell, trans. E. O. Lorimer (1940; repr., New Haven: Yale University, 1968), 171.
Grant, Social History of Greece and Rome, 30, 54, 70-76, 114-119.
Grant, Social History of Greece and Rome, 75-76.
See also the verbal, and substantival, usages in Wisdom 3:5, 11:5, 13, 16:2, 19:13-14; 2 Macc 8:6; 4 Macc 8:6; Greek Esther 16:2-3 = 8:12c (tōn euergetoúntōn), 13 = 8:12n (euergétēn). Of these sources, Mordecai is framed as sōtēra and euergétēn (cf. God in LXX Psa 12:6, 56:3, 114:7).
Quotations for the Old Testament Apocrypha are taken from New Revised Standard Version of the Holy Bible (Nashville: Nelson, 1989). The Greek text is from Septuaginta (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1996).
Erlend D. MacGillivray, “Romans 16:2, prostátis/prostátes, and the Application of Reciprocal Relationships to New Testament Texts,” NovT 53 (2011): 183-99.
R. A. Kearsley, “Women in Public Life in the Roman East: Iunia Theodora, Claudia Metrodora and Phoebe, Benefactress of Paul,” TynB 50.2 (1999): 189-211.
Frederick W. Danker, Jesus and the New Age According to St. Luke (St. Louis: Clayton Publishing, 1979), 222.
Moxnes, “Patron-Client Relations,” 261.
Halvor Moxnes, The Economy of the Kingdom (1988; repr., Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2004), 158.
Caroline F. Whelan, “Amica Pauli: The Role of Phoebe in the Early Church,” JSNT 49 (1993): 67-85.
Robert L. Wilken, The Christians as the Romans Saw Them (New Haven: Yale University, 1984), xiv.
Bibliography
Bell, Albert A., Jr. Exploring the New Testament World: An Illustrated Guide to the World of Jesus and the First Christians. Nashville, TN: Nelson, 1998.
Carcopino, Jérôme. Daily Life in Ancient Rome: The People and the City at the Height of the Empire. Edited by Henry T. Rowell. Translated by E. O. Lorimer. 1940. Repr., New Haven, CT: Yale University, 1968.
Danker, Frederick W. Jesus and the New Age According to St. Luke: A Commentary on the Third Gospel. 1972. Repr., St. Louis, MO: Clayton Publishing, 1979.
deSilva, David A. “Honor and Shame.” DNTB. 518-22.
deSilva, David A. The Hope of Glory: Honor Discourse and New Testament Interpretation. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1999.
deSilva, David A. “Patronage” DNTB. 766-71.
DuPont, Florence. Daily Life in Ancient Rome. Translated by Christopher Woodall. Oxford: Blackwell, 1993.
Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. 3rd edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003.
Grant, Michael. A Social History of Greece and Rome. New York, NY: Scribner’s Sons, 1992.
Kearsley, R. A. “Women in Public Life in the Roman East: Iunia Theodora, Claudia Metrodora and Phoebe, Benefactress of Paul.” TynB 50.2 (1999): 189-211.
MacGillivray, Erlend D. “Romans 16:2, prostátis/prostátes, and the Application of Reciprocal Relationships to New Testament Texts.” NovT 53 (2011): 183-99.
Malina, Bruce J. The New Testament World: Insight from Cultural Anthropology. Atlanta, GA: Knox, 1981.
Moxnes, Halvor. The Economy of the Kingdom: Social Conflict and Economic Relations in Luke’s Gospel. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress, 1988. Repr., Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2004.
——-. “Patron-Client Relations and the New Community in Luke-Acts.” Pages 241-68 in The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation. Edited by Jerome H. Neyrey. 1991. Repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993.
Mulholland, M. Robert, Jr. “Sociological Criticism.” Pages 170-86 in Interpreting the New Testament: Essays on Methods and Issues. Edited by David Alan Black and David S. Dockery. Nashville, TN: B&H, 2001.
Neyrey, Jerome H. Paul, In Other Words: A Cultural Reading of His Letters. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 1990.
Walker, Donald D. “Benefactor.” DNTB. 157-59.
Whelan, Caroline F. “Amica Pauli: The Role of Phoebe in the Early Church.” JSNT 49 (1993): 67-85.
Wilken, Robert L. The Christians as the Romans Saw Them. New Haven, CT: Yale University, 1984.
biblicalfaith.online 