The Pre-Christian Paul

MARTIN HENGEL

The Pre-Christian Paul in collaboration with R o l a n d Deines

SCM PRESS London T R I N I T Y PRESS

INTERNATIONAL

Philadelphia

T r a n s l a t e d by J o h n B o w d e n from the G e r m a n ' D e r vorchristliche P a u l u s ' , first p u b l i s h e d in M . H e n g e l a n d U . H e c k e l ( e d s . ) , Paulus, Missionar und Theologe und das antike Judentum, W U N T , by J . C . B . M o h r (Paul S i e b e c k ) , T u b i n g e n 1 9 9 1 . © M a r t i n H e n g e l 1991 T r a n s l a t i o n © J o h n B o w d e n 1991 T h i s edition first p u b l i s h e d 1991 S C M Press Ltd 26-30 T o t t e n h a m R o a d London N l 4BZ

Trinity Press International 3 7 2 5 C h e s t n u t Street P h i l a d e l p h i a P A 19104

All rights reserved. N o part o f this publication m a y be reproduced, stored in a retrieval s y s t e m , or transmitted, in a n y form or by a n y m e a n s , electronic, m e c h a n i c a l , p h o t o c o p y i n g , recording or otherwise, w i t h o u t the prior written permission of the publishers, S C M Press Ltd and Trinity Press International.

British Library

Cataloguing in Publication

Data

Hengel, Martin T h e pre-Christian Paul. 1. Saint Paul, the A p o s t l e I. T i t l e I I . D e i n e s , R o l a n d 225.92 ISBN

0-334-02497-8

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication

Data

Hengel, Martin [Vorchristliche P a u l u s . E n g l i s h ] T h e pre-Christian Paul / M a r t i n H e n g e l in collaboration w i t h Roland Deines. p. cm. T r a n s l a t i o n of: D e r vorchristliche Paulus. I n c l u d e s bibliographical references a n d index. ISBN 1-56338-009-9 1. Paul, the A p o s t l e , Saint. 2. Bible. N . T . - C r i t i c i s m , interpretation, etc. 3. C h u r c h history—Primitive a n d early church, ca. 3 0 - 6 0 0 . 4. Christian s a i n t s — T u r k e y — T a r s u s — B i o g r a p h y . I. D e i n e s , R o l a n d . I I . Title. BS2506.H4713 1991 225.9'2-dc20 [B] 91-12154 CIP

P h o t o t y p e s e t by I n p u t T y p e s e t t i n g Ltd, L o n d o n a n d printed in Great Britain by C l a y s L t d , St I v e s pic, B u n g a y , Suffolk

For M a r c Philonenko Pierre Prigent m y S t r a s b o u r g Friends

Contents

Preface Introduction I Origin and Citizenship 1 Tarsus as a cultural metropolis 2 The political situation of Tarsus and citizenship of the city 3 Roman citizenship and the names Paul and Saul 4 Social origin and profession II Upbringing and Education: Tarsus or Jerusalem? 1 Luke's accounts (Acts 22.3; 26.4f; 23.6) and Paul's own testimony 1.1 The thesis of W.C.van Unnik 1.2 Galatians 1.22 and the objections to an early stay by Paul in Jerusalem 1.3 The role ofJerusalem in Paul 2 Paul's own testimony about his origins 2.1 A Hebrew of the tribe of Benjamin 2.2 The Pharisee 2.3 The problem of the Diaspora Pharisee 3 A 'Hebrew of the Hebrews' who writes Greek: the problem of Paul's 'Greek education' 4 Summary hypotheses I I I Pharisaic Study of the Law in Jerusalem 1 The Pharisaic house of learning 2 The problem of'Pharisaic teaching' before 70 3 Pauline theology and rabbinic literature 4 Parallels from apocalyptic and the Essenes 5 The character of Pharisaism before 70

ix xiii 1 1 4 6 15 18 20 22 23 24 25 25 27 29 34 37 40 40 42 46 49 51

IV Greek-speaking Jerusalem and Greek Synagogue Education 1 Jerusalem as a 'Greek city' 2 Possibilities for higher Jewish-Greek education in Jerusalem 3 Summary hypotheses

54 54 57 61

V T h e Persecutor 1 The question of chronology 2 The biography of the persecutor 3 The persecutor and his opponents 3.1 The Greek-speaking Jewish Christians in Jerusalem 3.2 Problems in Luke's account of Stephen and parallels with Paul 3.3 The meaning of nopSeiv in Paul and Luke 3.4 The place of the persecution: the problem of Gal. 1.22f. 4 The theological reasons for the persecution 5 Summary: Paul the persecutor

63 63 65 68 68

Notes

69 71 72 79 85 87

Abbreviations

147

Index of Biblical References

152

Index of Modern Scholars

158

Preface

A n a b b r e v i a t e d form of this study was first given at a s y m p o s i u m to c o m m e m o r a t e the fiftieth anniversary of the d e a t h of Adolf Schlatter (16 A u g u s t 1852-19 M a y 1938) in S e p t e m b e r 1988, in T u b i n g e n . T h e t h e m e of this j o i n t meeting of D u r h a m a n d T u b i n g e n N e w T e s t a m e n t scholars was ' P a u l , Missionary a n d Theologian, a n d Ancient J u d a i s m ' . T h e G e r m a n version of the text here translated by J o h n B o w d e n is being published as p a r t of the s y m p o s i u m in the series Wissenschaftliche U n t e r s u c h u n g e n z u m N e u e n T e s t a m e n t , by Mohr-Siebeck in T u b i n g e n . A n abbreviated version was given as a lecture in late a u t u m n 1988 in University College, L o n d o n , a n d at the Oxford C e n t r e for P o s t g r a d u a t e H e b r e w Studies, Y a r n t o n . R o l a n d Deines has been extraordinarily helpful to m e in provid­ ing the original contribution to the s y m p o s i u m with extensive notes. T h e often substantial bibliographical details a n d in p a r t also the text of the major notes are his work. I recall with g r a t i t u d e the fruitful discussions with h i m which have similarly found expression in this study. After he left for a study year in Israel, J o r g Frey helped m e with the final editorial work. T h e study follows on almost w i t h o u t a break from earlier investigations, like m y studies 'Between J e s u s a n d P a u l ' a n d ' T h e " H e l l e n i s t s ' " , " T h e S e v e n " a n d Stephen (Acts 6.1-15; 7.54-8.3)', in Between Jesus and Paul. Studies in the Earliest History of Christianity, L o n d o n a n d Philadelphia 1983,1-30,128-56, a n d The 'Hellenization' of Judaea in the First Century after Christ, L o n d o n a n d Philadelphia 1989. T h e y are all bricks in the construction of a history of early Christianity, which is growing slowly a n d which will a t t e m p t to correct at decisive points t h a t earlier picture of primitive Christianity developed by the history of religions school a n d continued by its successors d o w n to the present day. As a result of

the n u m e r o u s archaeological discoveries in J e r u s a l e m a n d in J e w i s h Palestine, the historical profile of the original h o m e of Christianity at the time of J e s u s a n d the apostles is emerging more clearly today t h a n it could in the time of o u r p a r e n t s a n d g r a n d p a r e n t s . So we can also have a better g r a s p t h a n before of the cultural a n d spiritual milieu in which the earliest c o m m u n i t y was formed a n d therefore u n d e r s t a n d our sources - P a u l , the m u c h misunderstood Luke, a n d also J o s e p h u s a n d the early r a b b i n i c accounts - in a more a p p r o r i a t e way t h a n h a d been possible earlier from the perspective of an often incomprehensible radical criticism. Nevertheless, I a m a w a r e t h a t in m a n y details the a t t e m p t m a d e here to describe the pre-Christian development of the apostle to the Gentiles a n d first C h r i s t i a n theologian rests on hypotheses, though these a r e always based directly or indirectly on s t a t e m e n t s in the sources. H e r e Luke in particular, if he is u n d e r s t o o d against the J e w i s h b a c k g r o u n d of his time, proves to be a m o r e reliable witness t h a n m a n y people n o w a d a y s a s s u m e u n d e r the influence of an all too cheap criticism of his writings. W e a r e j u s t not a w a r e of how m u c h basic knowledge we owe to the first C h r i s t i a n 'historian' a n d 'apologist'. Although I have tried to a r g u e strictly in historical terms, the aim of this investigation is nevertheless ultimately a theological one. M y concern is for a better u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the apostle's doctrine of justification, which n o w a d a y s is often misinterpreted a n d disputed, against the b a c k g r o u n d of his own career a n d his encounter with the risen C h r i s t which changed this radically. Because of our familiarity with Paul, we often easily overlook w h a t an extraordinary, indeed in a way u n i q u e , religious figure he was - the kind of person given to h u m a n i t y p e r h a p s only once in m a n y centuries. H e was of absolutely fundamental significance for the rise of Christianity. Something of his personality is already visible - albeit still in a very veiled form - in the accounts which we have of his p r e - C h r i s t i a n period: the tension between Hellenistic a n d Jewish-scribal education, between the R o m a n citizen a n d the Pharisaic J e w , between the zealot for the law and the ambitious y o u n g teacher a n d preacher. T h a t Paul was able to teach to the Gentile Christian c o m m u n i t y t h a t he founded the m e a n i n g of G o d ' s radical grace - 'But if it is

by grace, then it does not rest on deeds done, or grace would cease to be grace' ( R o m . 1 1 . 6 ) - is connected w i t h his special past. T h e question of the unconditional c h a r a c t e r of grace, raised by Paul for the first time w i t h this clarity a n d sharpness, is one of the foundations of the C h r i s t i a n faith - a n d yet at t h a t time it could be raised only by a J e w on the basis of his O l d T e s t a m e n t - J e w i s h heritage. So its significance lies on quite a different f u n d a m e n t a l level from the historical question over which there is so m u c h a r g u m e n t today, w h e t h e r the apostle rightly interpreted the view of the L a w in the Palestinian J u d a i s m of his time. P e r h a p s there was n o such thing as this one Palestinian J u d a i s m with the one b i n d i n g view of the law. Be t h a t as it m a y , m y view is t h a t the apostle gave expression to his own - personally thoughtout - view, which at the s a m e time was quite a p p r o p r i a t e for those circles in which he moved. I n reality, however, w h a t we have here is a p r o b l e m within Christianity: P a u l was already discussing controversially - with Christian brothers the view t h a t salvation rests only on G o d ' s free grace a n d not on h u m a n actions. T h e actions are ' t h e fruit of the Spirit' (Gal.5.22), a n d as such a r e G o d ' s own work: '...for it is G o d w h o works in you, inspiring b o t h the will a n d the deed, for his own chosen p u r p o s e ' (Phil.2.13). O n e could also say t h a t they are signs of overwhelming g r a t i t u d e to the one to w h o m we owe everything. I n this dispute within Christianity, which r u n s t h r o u g h the whole of c h u r c h history d o w n to the present day a n d in which all too often the law t r i u m p h e d over the gospel a n d works over grace, if we are still concerned with the C h r i s t i a n t r u t h we have to m a k e a decision: in the end one c a n n o t really m e d i a t e between Augustine a n d Pelagius, L u t h e r a n d E r a s m u s , J a n s e n a n d M o l i n a . C o n ­ versely, the message of the grace of G o d , which does not require any h u m a n presupposition, b u t gives w h a t it d e m a n d s , already meets us in the O l d T e s t a m e n t a n d in individual J e w i s h texts, for example in D e u t e r o - I s a i a h a n d the Yahwistic p a t r i a r c h a l history. H e r e I would simply refer to the fine study by m y T u b i n g e n colleague Otfried Hofius, 'Rechtfertigung des Gottlosen als T h e m a biblischer Theologie' (in Paulusstudien, W U N T 5 1 , 1989, 12147): the ' n e w ' feature in Paul lies in the fact t h a t he 'sees the "justification of the godless", promised a n d attested in " s c r i p t u r e " , fulfilled in the atoning a n d reconciling event of the d e a t h a n d

resurrection of J e s u s C h r i s t a n d therefore u n d e r s t a n d s it as the "righteousness of faith" which is effectively promised a n d a p p r o ­ priated in the gospel as the saving w o r d of G o d ' (146). T h i s grace which becomes manifest here is at work in the old covenant as well as the new. It is especially with J e w i s h conversation p a r t n e r s that n o w a d a y s one often finds m o r e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the unfathomable grace of G o d , rab hesed we'met (Ex.34.6), t h a n in a Christianity which because of its sheer pluralism has lost its binding character a n d now only moralizes. T h u s I read in Michael Wyschogrod: 'Every J e w knows, or should know, t h a t if G o d were to pay h i m w h a t he deserves, neither m o r e nor less, he would be lost. His only c h a n c e d e p e n d s on the mercy of God. If God decides to overlook his sorry record a n d to bestow mercy r a t h e r t h a n justice on h i m , then he has a chance. But certainly not otherwise' ('The I m p a c t of Dialogue with Christianity on M y Self-Understand­ ing as a J e w ' , in Die Hebrdische Bibel und ihre zweifache Nachgeschichte, Festschrift fur Rolf Rendtorff zum 65. Geburtstag, Neukirc h e n - V l u y n 1990, 371). T h a t also applies to the C h r i s t i a n , w h o can learn in Paul that God in C h r i s t has p u t grTce before justice. At a time w h e n it has become almost fashionable to interpret Paul 'untheologically' a n d only 'historically' a n d thus to misinterpret his real intention, the present a p p a r e n t l y 'untheological' study, a r g u i n g completely in historical terms, is m e a n t to help towards a better u n d e r s t a n d i n g of P a u l ' s career u p to that change which altered the whole history of the world a n d thus make clear why his doctrine of justification was necessarily so fundamental to his later p r e a c h i n g as a missionary to the Gentiles. At the same time I hope it will become evident h o w deeply his gospel is moulded by the language a n d spirit of the old people of God. Tubingen, January 1991

1

Introduction

As the first Christian a u t h o r , theologian a n d missionary to the Gentiles, w h o not only b r o u g h t the Gentile C h r i s t i a n c h u r c h into being b u t founded C h r i s t i a n theology in the real sense, P a u l has always a t t r a c t e d the attention of theologians concerned with the N e w T e s t a m e n t - p e r h a p s m o r e t h a n any other figure of early Christianity. However, these theologians h a v e almost forgotten the Jew S a u l u s / s a ^ / . W h e r e a s the literature of the p a s t century a b o u t the C h r i s t i a n apostle is too vast to cover, relatively little attention has been paid to the Pharisee a n d persecutor of the churches. G r a n t e d , his verdict on his own / w - C h r i s t i a n p a s t (as on the p a s t of a n y Christian) is t h a t 'the old has passed a w a y ' ( I I Cor.5.17), b u t at the s a m e time he gives the readers of his letters information a b o u t t h a t past, sometimes very personal information - m o r e so t h a n a n y other C h r i s t i a n a u t h o r before the m i d d l e of the second century. Nevertheless, the usual m o n o g r a p h s on Paul seldom devote m o r e t h a n a couple of pages to the apostle's p r e C h r i s t i a n p e r i o d . O n l y J u s t i n , a n d before h i m p e r h a p s at best H e r m a s , give a n account of themselves at such l e n g t h . 2

3

4

I n addition to P a u l ' s well-known a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l testimonies, indirect conclusions can be d r a w n from his theological a r g u m e n ­ tation, which - a n d I deliberately p u t this in a pointed way c a n n o t be u n d e r s t o o d as Christian theology w i t h o u t attention to its Jewish roots, indeed I would v e n t u r e to say its latent Jewish' character. K n o w l e d g e of Saul the Jew is a precondition of u n d e r ­ s t a n d i n g Paul the Christian. T h e better we know the former, the m o r e clearly we shall u n d e r s t a n d the latter. P a u l ' s own testimony is s u p p l e m e n t e d by the n u m e r o u s accounts of L u k e in his Acts of the Apostles, which scholars n o w a d a y s are fond of denigrating as being largely or completely unreliable, t h o u g h it is a valuable addition to P a u l ' s own a c c o u n t s . G r a n t e d , 5

6

even such a n otherwise s y m p a t h e t i c J e w i s h scholar as Leo Baeck t h o u g h t t h a t ' t h e T h i r d Gospel a n d the Acts of the Apostles offer us m o r e historical belles lettres t h a n history', b u t he forgets that, m e a s u r e d by m o d e r n s t a n d a r d s , this could be said of the majority of ancient historians, not least including J o s e p h u s , as they were always biassed writers w h o also w r o t e w i t h rhetorical d r a m a and, since they were i n t e n t on the i m p a c t they m a d e on their hearers a n d readers, never r e p o r t e d in a strict, positivistic sense along the lines of R a n k e ' s 'as it really h a p p e n e d ' . A Hellenistic historian always-at t h e s a m e time w a n t e d to provide good entertainment for his r e a d e r s (or to edify t h e m ) , a n d h e r e L u k e was no exception. But we should never forget h o w difficult, indeed virtually impossible, it would be to give P a u l a historical setting if we did not have Acts. 7

8

9

I

Origin and Citizenship

Let us p l u n g e straight in a n d begin with P a u l ' s origins. I t m u s t be stressed quite emphatically, against a c u r r e n t trend in scholarship which seeks to see Paul exclusively as a 'Hellenistic I ) i a s p o r a J e w ' , that in his own testimonies, in the letters, the Pharisee connected with J e w i s h Palestine s t a n d s in the foreground, to w h o m J e r u s a l e m seems to be m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n a n y w h e r e else. O n l y from L u k e d o we learn t h a t he c a m e from T a r s u s , the capital of Cilicia, a n d t h a t he was a citizen of b o t h T a r s u s a n d R o m e . Paul the a u t h o r of the letters no longer thinks this p a r t of his p a s t w o r t h mentioning; it seems to h i m to be m u c h m o r e r e m o t e t h a n his time as a Pharisee in Palestine. 10

1 T a r s u s as a c u l t u r a l m e t r o p o l i s " I n other w o r d s , only L u k e describes P a u l as a D i a s p o r a J e w w h o was already privileged by virtue of his origins. P a u l comes from a major Hellenistic city famed for its high culture, which in his y o u t h achieved a special degree of pre-eminence as a result of the favour of A u g u s t u s a n d was elevated to become the 'metropolis' of Cilicia. T h i s d e v e l o p m e n t makes m o r e comprehensible P a u l ' s later mission focussed on the provincial c a p i t a l s . W h e r e a s m u c h is said in the Gospels a b o u t the open c o u n t r y a n d villages, a n d (with the exception of J e r u s a l e m ) h a r d l y a n y t h i n g is said of cities, precisely the opposite is the case in the letters of Paul. I t is r e m a r k a b l e that despite the present w i d e s p r e a d tendency to ques­ tion almost everything t h a t L u k e says, this information that Paul c a m e from T a r s u s is, as far as I can see, barely d o u b t e d . A n d that despite the fact t h a t the apostle never speaks of his h o m e city, a n d on the basis of his letters we should have, rather, to a s s u m e t h a t he c a m e from the J e w i s h m o t h e r c o u n t r y or somewhere 12

13

14

15

n e a r b y . If we did not h a v e L u k e ' s account, w h y should Paul not have come from C a e s a r e a , T i b e r i a s , D a m a s c u s , the Decapolis, or from J e r u s a l e m itself? I n P a u l ' s autobiographical account in Galatians 1 a n d 2, w h i c h m i g h t be called a brief 'Acts of the Apostles of a special kind', h e first m e n t i o n s D a m a s c u s , a n d then the region of N a b a t a e a - w h i c h is p r o b a b l y w h a t he m e a n s by A r a b i a . H e then speaks ofJ e r u s a l e m , t h o u g h only in connection with a brief stay; only after t h a t does he talk of the 'regions of Syria a n d Cilicia'. T h e n he comes back to J e r u s a l e m in connection with the Apostolic Council; only n o w a n d at this point is Antioch mentioned, as the scene of the clash with Peter. T a r s u s plays no p a r t in any of this, in complete c o n t r a s t to J e r u s a l e m , which Paul mentions relatively often. O n e simply c a n n o t assume on the basis of the letters t h a t P a u l c a m e from the capital of Cilicia. At any rate, J e r u s a l e m is m e n t i o n e d nine times in the authentic letters a n d J u d a e a four t i m e s ; by contrast, C o r i n t h is mentioned only three t i m e s , E p h e s u s a n d D a m a s c u s twice, a n d Antioch only o n c e . H e r e , however, for once people h a v e been ready to believe Luke, because if P a u l c a m e from T a r s u s it was possible to connect him broadly with Hellenistic e d u c a t i o n a n d culture a n d with the syncretistic practices of Syria a n d Asia M i n o r from his earliest youth. For it was the verdict of S t r a b o t h a t in the capital of Cilicia 'there was so m u c h zeal for philosophy a n d all the other aspects of education generally a m o n g the i n h a b i t a n t s t h a t in this respect they surpassed even A l e x a n d r i a , A t h e n s , a n d any other p l a c e ' . 16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

However, it is a n o p e n question w h e t h e r a n d how far the young Paul in T a r s u s a c q u i r e d a n y of this 'general education' that flourished there, in c o n t r a s t to his older contemporary Philo of Alexandria, whose n a t u r e w a s so different. Certainly in Paul's letters we meet a few m a x i m s a n d c o m m o n p l a c e s from the popular philosophers, b u t these go w i t h the style of missionary a n d apolo­ getic preaching in the s y n a g o g u e s ; by contrast, we find virtually none of the knowledge of the classical Greek literature which formed p a r t of the general c a n o n of education in his letters. It is completely uncertain w h e t h e r he h a d every seen a Greek tragedy or a mime. T h e most p o p u l a r d r a m a of the Hellenistic period was Euripides' Bacchae - a n a b o m i n a t i o n to strict J e w s , certainly, and the same went for the lascivious m i m e . T h e pious Pharisaic J e w rejected the p a g a n t h e a t r e h a r d l y a n y less bitterly than the orator 24

25

26

1

a n d C h r i s t i a n T e r t u l l i a n in his de spectaculis? At best one m i g h t p e r h a p s a s s u m e t h a t Paul h a d occasionally h e a r d one of the recitations of poetry which were p o p u l a r at the time. However, there are no references to this in his letters. H i s l a n g u a g e shows no trace of any knowledge of Greek poetry, i.e. of epics, d r a m a a n d poetry. T h e only lyric which he quotes, in I C o r i n t h i a n s 15.33, comes from M e n a n d e r ' s Thais a n d - like m a n y other verses of the comic poet - h a d long since b e c o m e a d e t a c h e d s a y i n g . T h e l a n g u a g e of H o m e r a n d the Greek tragedians is as alien to Paul as the imitation of the Attic orators or the purity of classical language. N o r does the pseudo-classical verse of the J e w s play a n y p a r t in his a r g u m e n t a t i o n . It only b e c a m e significant again a century later, for the C h r i s t i a n apologists, t h r o u g h w h o m early Christianity deliberately m a d e its w a y into the world of Greek e d u c a t i o n . S t r a b o concludes his h y m n of praise to T a r s u s by saying t h a t the city also h a d 'all kinds of schools of the rhetorical a r t s ' , a n d intrinsically it would be conceivable t h a t the y o u n g Saul also m a s t e r e d literary Greek at a very early stage, so thoroughly, t h a t for h i m , 'the true m a s t e r of the speech, to w h o m ideas c a m e in a n overwhelming flood', it b e c a m e ' a n a p p r o p r i a t e i n s t r u m e n t ' . T h e only question is h o w long he lived in T a r s u s . I d o u b t w h e t h e r P a u l was trained in one of the usual schools of rhetoric, since a clear distinction m u s t be m a d e between the Greek elementary school a n d instruction in rhetoric. Even the question w h e r e he received his Greek elementary education m u s t r e m a i n open. Both J e r u s a l e m a n d T a r s u s a r e possibilities, since in P a u l it is impossible to s e p a r a t e Greek education from J e w i s h . Even in Greek g a r b he r e m a i n s a J e w t h r o u g h a n d t h r o u g h . So Paul does not a d o p t the course of the Syrian L u c i a n of S a m o s a t a (in the second century C E ) , w h o was a ' b a r b a r i a n ' in origins a n d lan­ g u a g e . H e r a n a w a y from his uncle, w h o was teaching h i m to be a sculptor, a n d w e n t to Greece to get ' e d u c a t i o n ' a n d become an orator - succeeding a d m i r a b l y . Possibly the negative verdict of the C o r i n t h i a n s in I I Cor. 10.10 (cf. 11.6) on P a u l ' s way of speaking developed from a similar a t t i t u d e to t h a t a d o p t e d by L u c i a n to an oriental m a n of letters active in A t h e n s , whose knowledge of Greek h a d evidently not reached the heights of elegance achieved by L u c i a n himself. L u c i a n describes this m a n ' s w a y of talking as an 28

29

30

31

32

33

incessant m o n o t o n e , G r e e k , b u t in i n t o n a t i o n a n d pronunciation betraying his ( b a r b a r i a n ) o r i g i n s . A l t h o u g h to o u t w a r d a p p e a r a n c e P a u l is a ' w a n d e r e r between two w o r l d s ' , his theological t h i n k i n g displays a quite astonishing unity. T h a t will a l r e a d y h a v e b e e n the case with the J e w Saul, a n d the two periods of his life, t h e J e w i s h a n d the Christian, are closely interlocked. T h i s m a k e s it clear t h a t faith in the Messiah J e s u s was not s o m e t h i n g alien to t h e J e w , s o m e t h i n g which c a m e from outside. T o d a y hardly a n y o n e a r g u e s t h a t the later Paul, as H J . S c h o e p s a n d L.Goppelt conjecture, w a s a t least indirectly influenced in his christology by impressions from his y o u t h , going back to the public cult of the vegetation god S a n d o n - H e r a c l e s worshipped in T a r s u s , or to titles used in t h e H e l l e n i s t i c - R o m a n ruler cult; this is extremely i m p r o b a b l e . T r a c e s of a Cilician 'syncretism', or even a syncretism from Asia M i n o r a n d Syria, are simply not to be found in the Pauline letters t h a t h a v e c o m e d o w n to us. 34

35

36

37

2 T h e political s i t u a t i o n of T a r s u s a n d c i t i z e n s h i p of t h e city According to Luke, as I h a v e a l r e a d y p o i n t e d out, Paul was not only born in T a r s u s b u t w a s a citizen of the city as well as being a R o m a n citizen. Both these assertions h a v e been constantly dis­ puted in recent times. T h e q u e s t i o n of the origin a n d social status of Paul's family is closely c o n n e c t e d w i t h this. T h e r e are p r o b l e m s in d e c i d i n g w h e t h e r P a u l was a citizen of the city in which he w a s b o r n . I t is striking t h a t scholars have either completely failed to discuss this question or - with few exceptions - have t r e a t e d it q u i t e superficially w h e n they have done so. I n the context of t h e tense n a r r a t i v e a b o u t Paul's arrest in J e r u s a l e m , L u k e constructs a dialogue. W h e n the tribune Lysias asks in a m a z e m e n t in the A n t o n i a citadel, ' D o you u n d e r s t a n d Greek? Are you not t h a t E g y p t i a n w h o recently sparked off a rebellion', Paul describes himself as a J e w a n d 'from T a r s u s in Cilicia, the citizen of n o m e a n c i t y ' . T h e question is how we are to u n d e r s t a n d the w o r d s T a p a e w ; a n d iToXtTiq?. Already in the third century B C E , u n d e r A n t i o c h u s I I or I I I , T a r s u s was called 'Antioch on the C y d n u s ' a n d w a s given the constitution of a Greek polis, though we do not k n o w m u c h of the d e t a i l s . Caesar came 38

39

to T a r s u s in 47 B C E a n d evidently showed such great favours to the city t h a t in r e t u r n it a d o p t e d the n a m e J u l i o p o l i s . After the m u r d e r of C a e s a r , his s u p p o r t e r s gained the u p p e r h a n d in the city, a n d for t h a t Cassius, one of his m u r d e r e r s , imposed a heavy tribute on t h e m in s u m m e r 4 3 . All the resources of the city a n d temple were used to m a k e the p a y m e n t , a n d in addition a large n u m b e r of the p o p u l a t i o n h a d to be sold into slavery. T h e city's fortunes c h a n g e d only with the victory of C a e s a r ' s p a r t y . Because of its loyalty to C a e s a r ' s cause, after the battle of Philippi in 42 B C E against C a e s a r ' s m u r d e r e r s B r u t u s a n d Cassius the city was given the status of a civitas libera a n d exemption from taxes, a n d its territory w a s substantially enlarged at the expense of other cities so t h a t it also included p a r t of the Cilician coast. A l t h o u g h T a r s u s was a b o u t eight miles inland, T a r s u s b e c a m e a p o r t (cf. Acts 9.30). I n the n o r t h its territory m a y h a v e reached as far as the gates of Cilicia. 40

41

T h o s e w h o h a d been sold into slavery at the time were freed again, a n d in some cases could have been given R o m a n citizenship at the s a m e t i m e . T a r s u s also h a d m a n y ties with A u g u s t u s . Because of its positive a t t i t u d e to R o m e in the period between P o m p e y a n d A u g u s t u s , R o m a n citizenship was bestowed on a large n u m b e r of citizens of the city. O n e of its citizens was A t h e n o d o r u s , son of S a n d o n , w h o t a u g h t A u g u s t u s philosophy. I n his old age he b e c a m e h e a d of the city, in order to i m p l e m e n t necessary reforms. D u r i n g the e m p i r e a census of 500 d r a c h m a e was a requisite for citizenship of T a r s u s , or, as seems to m e m o r e likely, citizenship could be b o u g h t for this sum. Since citizenship was not readily bestowed on aliens in Greek poleis conscious of their traditions, R a m s a y conjectured t h a t right from the time of the refounding of the city by the early Seleucids, the J e w s h a d h a d their own phylef* a n d that P a u l ' s family h a d settled there at t h a t time. I n his view an alternative was t h a t citizenship could have been g r a n t e d to P a u l ' s father or grandfather for special services. However, the close connection between P a u l ' s family a n d the m o t h e r country tells against the first h y p o ­ thesis, since it makes descent from an old D i a s p o r a family i m p r o b ­ a b l e ; it is m u c h m o r e likely t h a t P a u l ' s father or grandfather h a d been given citizenship of T a r s u s as a R o m a n citizen or freedman. T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t we d o not k n o w the constitution of the city, 42

43

45

46

which h a d been reformed b y A t h e n o d o r u s . W e might further suppose t h a t from his b i r t h P a u l h a d b e e n a m e m b e r of the Jewish c o m m u n i t y in T a r s u s . W e h a v e q u i t e a n u m b e r of hints t h a t there were special political, e c o n o m i c a n d p e r s o n a l links between Cilicia, particularly T a r s u s , a n d J e w i s h Palestine. J o s e p h u s identifies the famous biblical T a r s h i s h in S p a i n w i t h T a r s u s in Cilicia. As in other places in t h e East, t h e J e w s p r o b a b l y h a d certain privileges, b u t not full citizenship, there, a n d polites in Luke, as in the Septuagint a n d in some p a s s a g e s in J o s e p h u s , does not denote full legal citizenship b u t o r i g i n . T h e very question of the isopoliteia of the J e w i s h minority over a g a i n s t t h e ' G r e e k ' citizens w a s vigorously d i s p u t e d in some E a s t e r n cities like A l e x a n d r i a , Caesarea, and Antioch. W e can infer again from D i o C h r y s o s t o m t h a t in some circum­ stances there were g r a d a t i o n s in citizenship in T a r s u s ; he speaks of a large proletarian g r o u p w h o were called 'textile workers' (\1vovp701) a n d h a d ' a n o b s c u r e constitutional s t a t u s ' . O n the one h a n d they did n o t h a v e full citizenship (coairep e£o)6ev TroXxTeCaq), b u t on the o t h e r they could take p a r t in assemblies of the demos. Dio advises t h a t they s h o u l d all b e given full citizenship ( T O U S a i r a v T a q dvorypdifiai). If we are to take L u k e a t his w o r d , in view of the sources it seems to me most plausible t h a t P a u l ' s citizenship of T a r s u s came through purchase, especially as w e also h a v e other reports about the purchase of citizenship in G r e e k poleis. A u g u s t u s is said to have banned the A t h e n i a n s from e n g a g i n g in such trade, which served above all to fill t h e s t a t e coffers a n d increase the n u m b e r of those liable to taxation a n d l i t u r g y . So w h a t is said a b o u t Luke's Paul in Acts 21.39 c a n n o t b e held to b e either incorrect or certainly correct. 47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

3 R o m a n citizenship a n d t h e n a m e s Paul a n d Saul Still less is there a d e q u a t e r e a s o n for d o u b t i n g Luke's reports that Paul was a R o m a n c i t i z e n . T h e reasons recently once more brought forward against this a r e n o t a t all c o n v i n c i n g . T h u s Paul may have been flogged t h r e e times ( I I C o r . 11.25) because he kept quiet a b o u t his R o m a n citizenship deliberately in order to follow Christ in his suffering. F o r h i m t h e ' m a r k s of J e s u s on his body' 58

59

(Gal.6.17) were tokens won in a n h o n o u r a b l e battle. Moreover, for his p r o c l a m a t i o n of the Kyrios Iesous crucified by the R o m a n authorities, m e n t i o n of his possession of R o m a n citizenship would have been m o r e of a h i n d r a n c e . W e m u s t also consider the possibility t h a t in acute states of emergency individual city magis­ trates a n d R o m a n magistrates were not very b o t h e r e d a b o u t the fact of P a u l ' s c i t i z e n s h i p , not to m e n t i o n the difficulties there would have been in d e m o n s t r a t i n g this citizenship d u r i n g the kind of t u m u l t which usually preceded his arrests. At t h a t time people did not go a r o u n d with a personal passport in their p o c k e t s . M o r e o v e r we h a v e a whole series of accounts from the first century of R o m a n citizens having been crucified - a m u c h m o r e serious m a t t e r t h a n a m e r e flogging. Before the o u t b r e a k of the J e w i s h W a r in 66 C E , the p r o c u r a t o r Gessius Florus h a d two J e w s w h o were R o m a n equites publicly flogged a n d executed by crucifixion. Some R o m a n s suffered the s a m e fate on R h o d e s in 44 C E , h a v i n g been c o n d e m n e d to d e a t h by the city authorities of the old civitas libera etfoederata. By contrast, flogging was merely an act of local police coercitio, which was performed m u c h m o r e frequently a n d m o r e swiftly. M o r e o v e r the fact t h a t Paul never speaks of the privilege of his citizenship does not m e a n a n y t h i n g , since h e keeps quiet a b o u t almost all of his family m a t t e r s . H a d Paul been a m e r e peregrinus, he would very p r o b a b l y have been c o n d e m n e d in J u d a e a without m u c h fuss a n d would not have been sent for the verdict of the e m p e r o r in R o m e . I n d e e d p e r h a p s his citizenship of T a r s u s also played some p a r t in t h i s . M o r e o v e r a trial lasting a r o u n d five years is almost inconceivable in the case of a J e w i s h provincial w i t h o u t m e a n s . T h e claim of Wolfgang S t e g e m a n n t h a t this was because of the 'political significance of the case' a n d because the apostle was 'accused of causing a riot by the s u p r e m e self-governing body in J e r u s a l e m ' replaces clear s t a t e m e n t s with incredible hypotheses. W e should not confuse P a u l w i t h a long-standing, successful a n d therefore politically d a n g e r o u s b a n d i t leader like Eleazar ben Dinai or a p o p u l a r agitator in a big w a y like the weaver J o n a t h e s in C y r e n e , w h o as Moses redivivus led a large n u m b e r of people into the wilderness in order to show t h e m 'signs a n d w o n d e r s ' . Eleazar was sent to R o m e by Felix as a n example of his military successes; J o n a t h e s , because m a t t e r s h a d got out of h a n d 60

61

62

63

64

65

for the governor as a result of t h e n u m e r o u s denunciations of the prisoner, which h a d r e a c h e d as far as R o m e . If Paul's R o m a n citizenship a n d t h u s t h e basis of his trial is a L u k a n invention, then o n e s h o u l d finally come clean a n d regard the whole of Acts as r o m a n t i c fiction. But even its severest critics do not w a n t to d r a w this conclusion. O n l y W.Schmithals, who is unsurpassed in imaginative, speculative, 'radical' criticism, is also consistent here. H e conjectures t h a t P a u l was first arrested in R o m e . But even h e is not yet radical a n d consistent enough. For if Luke is deceptive to this degree, did P a u l h a v e to come to Rome at all? P e r h a p s he h a d a l r e a d y b e e n liquidated in J e r u s a l e m or disappeared w i t h o u t trace s o m e w h e r e else in the East. It is remarkable t h a t w h e r e t h e r e is radical mistrust of the ancient sources because of their ' b i a s ' , the possibilities of a scholar's own biassed imagination extend all the further because all the boundary posts have been taken d o w n . Nor does the objection t h a t P a u l n o w h e r e mentions his complete three-part R o m a n n a m e m e a n a n y t h i n g . First, this usage was seldom c u s t o m a r y in Greek-speaking circles a n d went against the usage of J u d a i s m a n d early C h r i s t i a n i t y even more. W e do not have the R o m a n n a m e s for m a n y other early Christians, for example already in the list of people w h o m Paul greets in R o m a n s 16, in C l e m e n t of R o m e , in t h e list of bishops of R o m e until well into the third century, a n d even in the case of such prominent teachers as H i p p o l y t u s . S u c h information first emerges with African notables like T e r t u l l i a n a n d C y p r i a n . T h e important thing for Christians was not t h e privilege of a n earthly citizenship but the fact t h a t they were b r o t h e r s a n d sisters. So we can certainly say t h a t Paul did not a t t a c h a n y special value to his citizenship. However, t h a t does not exclude the possibility that he was a R o m a n citizen w h o m a d e use of the fact in particular circumstances, especially w h e n they were threatening. As he urgently w a n t e d to get to R o m e , he will have thrown his R o m a n citizenship on to the scales at the decisive m o m e n t to achieve his purpose. 66

67

68

69

70

It has to be said t h a t t h e n a m e ' P a u l ' itself is not very common a m o n g R o m a n s ; it was extremely r a r e a m o n g n o n - R o m a n s , above all in the Greek East, a n d does not occur at all a m o n g J e w s . In the substantially later J e w i s h inscriptions of Beth She'arim in 71

Galilee (second to fourth c e n t u r y ) , all w e find is a spice-seller w i t h the n a m e P a u l i n u s , w h i c h is m o r e frequent only from the third to fourth c e n t u r i e s . I t continues to be unclear w h y the y o u n g J e w with the p r o u d biblical-Palestinian n a m e S h a ' u l , which at the s a m e time e m p h a s i z e d the descent of his family from the tribe of Benjamin, was given this L a t i n cognomen. T h e most plausible conjecture is still t h a t it m a y be connected with the personal associations of P a u l ' s father, p e r h a p s w i t h his p a t r o n . However, further speculations, for e x a m p l e t h a t P a u l ' s family h a d as p a t r o n s the family of Sergius P a u l u s in Pisidian Antioch, should not be p u r s u e d . I t seems to m e to b e questionable w h e t h e r the u n u s u a l n a m e was chosen because of the assonance between Saulus a n d P a u l u s , as S h e r w i n - W h i t e c o n j e c t u r e d . O n e m i g h t r a t h e r s u p ­ pose t h a t the usual Greek way of writing S h a ' u l 2aov>X ( L X X ) or SaouXos in J o s e p h u s a n d in a later J e w i s h foundation inscription from A p a m e a was assimilated to t h e p r o n u n c i a t i o n of the R o m a n n a m e ELauXos in the form of the simplified SoruXos. L u k e w a s fully a w a r e of this difference in writing the n a m e . I n the threefold description of the vision at the apostle's call P a u l is always addressed by the L o r d with the biblical form of the n a m e . It is also w o r t h m e n t i o n i n g t h a t with two very late exceptions, the inscription from Syrian A p a m e a m e n t i o n e d above a n d a second from Phthiotic T h e b e s on the borders of Thessaly, Saul(os) never a p p e a r s a m o n g D i a s p o r a J e w s b u t does so quite often in J o s e p h u s , in r a b b i n i c texts, a n d on ostraca a n d in inscriptions in P a l e s t i n e . L u k e is also our sole source of information a b o u t the H e b r e w n a m e . W h y should he not also h a v e invented this in order to m a k e Paul a Palestinian J e w t h r o u g h a n d t h r o u g h - s o m e t h i n g of which he is often accused - so t h a t h e could then s h a p e the shift in P a u l ' s life with d r a m a t i c effect? Sometimes the radical critics seem to be afraid of their own courage. H e r e , however, there is a striking connection between the n a m e S h a ' u l , the most famous of the Benjaminites, a n d the quite e x t r a o r d i n a r y information, given twice by Paul himself, t h a t he was a m e m b e r of the t r i b e . At the only point at which L u k e mentions the two n a m e s together he does so connecting t h e m in the w a y in which nomen a n d cognomen are often connected in p a p y r i a n d i n s c r i p t i o n s . So the transition to the new n a m e does not take place at the call b u t at the point w h e r e for the first time Paul moves from a J e w i s h - C h r i s t i a n to a p a g a n 72

73

74

75

7 6

77

78

79

80

environment as missionary to t h e Gentiles; a n d at the same time an eminent ' n a m e s a k e ' , Sergius P a u l u s the governor of C y p r u s , a p p e a r s as the first 'Gentile C h r i s t i a n ' convert of Paul's to be mentioned by n a m e . F r o m the time of the early church on, certain speculations have been associated with this link between the change of n a m e a n d the emergence of Sergius P a u l u s . H e r e it is p r o b a b l y enough to s u p p o s e t h a t this coincidence derives from the n a r r a t o r Luke, w h o while k n o w i n g h o w to a r r a n g e facts effectively, need not necessarily h a v e m a d e t h e m u p himself. But there is possibly a connection between Sergius Paulus the governor of C y p r u s a n d the Sergii Pauli attested by inscriptions in the R o m a n colony of A n t i o c h i a C a e s a r e a in Pisidia; a n d it could be that the visit to Pisidian Antioch on the so-called first missionary j o u r n e y is connected w i t h P a u l ' s missionary success with the governor of C y p r u s . H o w e v e r , as I h a v e already said, we need not infer any wider client relationship between this high official a n d his family a n d the family of t h e J e w P a u l from T a r s u s . T h a t the missionary to t h e Gentiles uses only his non-Jewish n a m e in the letters m a y well be a n indication t h a t in this more external point he w a n t e d to p u t himself on the s a m e footing with the non-Jews to w h o m h e p r o c l a i m e d the gospel (I Cor.9.21). His own H e b r e w n a m e Saul, linked to the first king of Israel, h a d now become u n i m p o r t a n t to h i m , as h a d his descent from the tribe of Benjamin (Phil.3.5,7). Finally, the reality of P a u l ' s R o m a n citizenship is also supported by the fact that geographically this b e a r e r of a rare R o m a n n a m e thinks entirely in R o m a n c a t e g o r i e s , a n d in his world-wide plans for mission has only the e m p i r e a n d its provinces in view: the P a r t h i a n east, the b a r b a r i a n n o r t h a n d the A r a b - L i b y a n south are u n i m p o r t a n t to h i m (for L u k e things a r e different). T h e HellenisticJ e w i s h metropolis of A l e x a n d r i a (the great rival, indeed the ideological enemy of R o m e ) plays n o role in his concerns. At a very early stage his gaze focusses on the R o m a n capital (Rom. 1.1 Off.), a n d then extends further to the Western provinces of the Iberian peninsula ( R o m . 15.24), the end of the world, where people spoke p r e d o m i n a n t l y L a t i n . I t is quite conceivable that as a R o m a n citizen Paul himself spoke some Latin. His travel strategy is orientated on the n a m e s of t h e R o m a n provinces - starting from J u d a e a with its capital J e r u s a l e m ( R o m . 15.25), t h r o u g h the double 81

82

83

84

85

province of Syria a n d Cilicia, G a l a t i a (I firmly s u p p o r t the hypothesis of a s o u t h e r n G a l a t i a n province), Asia, M a c e d o n i a a n d A c h a e a ( R o m . 15.26), going on to Illyricum (15.19). H e r e h e concentrates on the provincial capitals, a n d it is p r o b a b l y no coincidence t h a t R o m a n colonies like Antioch in Pisidia, I c o n i u m , L y s t r a , T r o a s a n d Philippi also play a n i m p o r t a n t r o l e . Philippians 3.20f. becomes particularly significant in a letter from a R o m a n citizen to the C h r i s t i a n c o m m u n i t y of t h a t famous R o m a n foundation in the East: it is a b o u t ' o u r citizenship' ( T T O \ I T € V | X O : ) which is c o m m o n to b o t h . T h a t R o m a n s 13.1-7, which m a n y people find so offensive (and which m u s t be j u d g e d in the wider context of 12.1-13.14 with its focal point in 13.8a) fits a d m i r a b l y into this picture of Paul the R o m a n citizen need h a r d l y be mentioned. W e can only v e n t u r e hypotheses with relative degrees of p r o b ­ ability a b o u t h o w P a u l ' s father (or his ancestors) acquired R o m a n citizenship. It is relatively i m p r o b a b l e t h a t it was bestowed on t h e m for political or military services, t h o u g h this c a n n o t be ruled out completely. C a e s a r on his E g y p t i a n a d v e n t u r e already received powerful s u p p o r t from J e w i s h troops of the high priest H y r c a n u s I I u n d e r the leadership of A n t i p a t e r a n d showed himself particularly well disposed t o w a r d s the J e w s . After his d e a t h the J e w s especially are said to h a v e m o u r n e d h i m a n d to have 'come to visit his funeral pyre night after n i g h t ' . As early as 50 B C E a large n u m b e r of J e w s were already R o m a n citizens a n d h a d been e x e m p t e d from military service by the consul Lucius L e n t u l u s . I n Sardes, as R o m a n citizens they were g r a n t e d freedom of assembly a n d their own j u d i c a t u r e . A m o r e i m p o r t a n t reason for extending this privilege, particu­ larly a m o n g J e w s w h o c a m e from Palestine, w a s , however, the e m a n c i p a t i o n of J e w i s h slaves by R o m a n citizens, even if there were still certain restrictions on the citizenship of the libertus in the first (and possibly second) g e n e r a t i o n . H e r e p u r c h a s i n g freedom by relatives a n d friends m a y have played a p a r t . I n ancient J u d a i s m it was r e g a r d e d as a religious d u t y . S t e g e m a n n overlooks this decisive point, either because he m i s u n d e r s t a n d s its significance or because he deliberately w a n t s to play it d o w n . According to Philo's well-known report, which has to be taken very seriously by historians, the majority of J e w s living in R o m e were R o m a n 86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

citizens. H a v i n g been carried off to I t a l y as prisoners of war, in due course they were freed b y their owners w h o 'did not compel them to corrupt their ancestral l a w s ' . A u g u s t u s , on being given precise information a b o u t their religious practices, 'did not expel them from Rome nor deprive t h e m of R o m a n citizen rights because they were concerned to keep their J e w i s h f a i t h ' . Despite some sporadic compulsory m e a s u r e s on the p a r t of individual emperors against the Jews, especially in R o m e , this toleration towards new citizens (which was typically R o m a n ) w a s not a b a n d o n e d in the case of a strange and exclusive religion. As a rule they were exempt from military service, t h o u g h it m u s t be stressed here that in the late Republic and the period of the early E m p i r e the R o m a n a r m y was made up of volunteers. Notice was taken of religious peculiarities in a variety of o t h e r w a y s . Unless he held office, a J e w , whether a R o m a n citizen or not, did not have to perform any religious actions in connection w i t h the e m p e r o r cult, either in Rome or in the Greek-speaking East, w h e r e the emperor cult flourished more strongly after the period of the Hellenistic mon­ archies than in the capital itself. S o m e exemptions merely confirm this rule, and in times of crisis they did not so m u c h affect R o m a n citizens as peregrini. O n l y the short period of the reign of Caligula is an exception here. However, even such an educated J e w as Philo, who came from the richest J e w i s h family in Egypt, as a Roman citizen never moved an inch in the direction of the d e m a n d s of the ruler cult, b u t p r o d u c e d vigorous polemic against it in his Legatio ad Gaium. His n e p h e w T i b e r i u s J u l i u s Alexander became an apostate not because of external compulsion, but for the sake of his brilliant career. W i t h the t e n d e n c y which existed in the early principate to encourage citizens w h o c a m e from the East a n d citizens of R o m e w i t h o u t m e a n s to e m i g r a t e to the East, J e w i s h freedmen will have been q u i t e r e a d y to follow this course. 94

In attributing to J e w s with R o m a n citizenship 'a high degree of a d a p t a t i o n to p a g a n i s m ' a n d n u r t u r i n g 'the greatest d o u b t as to whether Paul's father a n d P a u l himself can have been orthodox J e w s a n d R o m a n citizens at the s a m e t i m e ' , Stegemann is completely overlooking w h a t the sources say; clearly he does not know t h e m well e n o u g h . I n fact R o m a n J e w r y with its high proportion of R o m a n citizens was m u c h closer to the 'orthodox' mother country t h a n the A l e x a n d r i a n s , w h o were more indepen95

d e n t of it - a n d they too, or at least the great majority of t h e m , were n o t negligent in questions of their faith. M o r e o v e r the J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y in R o m e carried on a successful mission a m o n g p a g a n citizens, a b o u t w h i c h R o m a n writers like H o r a c e , Seneca a n d J u v e n a l c o m p l a i n e d b i t t e r l y . Finally, the freeing of a J e w i s h slave a n d the acquisition of citizenship w h i c h w e n t with it w a s not u p to the slave, b u t his m a s t e r , w h o often derived financial benefit from it. I n addition w e h a v e m u c h information a b o u t the r e t u r n of J e w i s h freedmen to J u d a e a ; they t h e n lived there as R o m a n citizens. P r o b a b l y the R o m a n authorities even e n c o u r a g e d such a r e t u r n , because it gave t h e m the possibility of r e d u c i n g the n u m b e r of s u p p o r t e r s of the m a n y oriental cults in the imperial capital, w h o were suspect to t h e m . C e r t a i n l y the nucleus of the cruvoyya>7T|... AiPepTivoov m e n t i o n e d in Acts 6 consisted of such R o m a n libertini a n d their families - h o w else could such a designation h a v e a r i s e n ? T h e T h e o d o t u s son of V e t t e n u s w h o founded a synagogue in J e r u s a l e m w a s also p r e s u m a b l y a d e s c e n d a n t of such a person; his p a t r o n y m indicates R o m a n origin a n d the title priest t h a t he w a s one of the J e w i s h nobility by b i r t h . W h e n P o m p e y c a p t u r e d the T e m p l e in 63 B C E m a n y priests were taken as prisoners to R o m e ; w h e n they were later e m a n c i p a t e d , they eagerly looked for possible ways of r e t u r n i n g to the H o l y City. 96

97

98

99

100

According to L u k e , Silas-Silvanus of J e r u s a l e m , w h o a c c o m p a n i e d P a u l on the so-called second missionary j o u r n e y , w a s also a R o m a n c i t i z e n . H o w respectable a R o m a n freedman could be in J u d a e a is evident from the t o m b of the ' G o l i a t h ' family in J e r i c h o , w h e r e the ossuary of a son of the ancestor of the family bears the inscription: © C O O O T O V direXevBepov PacriXiorrns A7punr€LViri -yap uu,&). T h e 'zeal' of the y o u n g Pharisee in J e r u s a l e m w a s certainly no less t h a n t h a t of the apostle w h o h a d grown older. T h a t w a s w h a t had to be d o n e . Yet then everything w a s t u r n e d upside down: the crucified Messiah w h o according to L u k e ' s account m e t h i m j u s t before D a m a s c u s with the question 'Saul, Saul, w h y do you persecute me?' b e c a m e the g r o u n d a n d content of his life. T h e one w h o according to Deut.21.22f. w a s 'accursed', w h o h a d been p u t to d e a t h on the tree of s h a m e , e n c o u n t e r e d h i m in the s p l e n d o u r of divine gloryf Exalted to the right h a n d of G o d , i.e. to s h a r e G o d ' s throne on the M e r k a b a , h e revealed himself to P a u l as Son of God, as messiah of Israel and r e d e e m e r of all w h o believe. W h a t h a d previously been a s t u m b l i n g block c a m e to occupy the centre of his new existence, a n d his Pharisaic theology orientated on the gift of the T o r a h a n d its d e m a n d s now b e c a m e the theology of the cross, the message of the M e s s i a h w h o h a d already come, w h o 'died for us while we were still sinners' (Rom.5.8) a n d w h o reconciles his 'enemies' with G o d t h r o u g h his d e a t h (5.10). I n Paul's vision of Christ, which called h i m to b e c o m e apostle to the Gentiles, he - the former e n e m y - was e n t r u s t e d with the gospel t h a t proclaims the G o d of Israel and of the Gentiles w h o is gracious 'in Christ', the F a t h e r ofJ e s u s Christ, w h o justifies the godless. 3 3 6

5 Summary: Paul the persecutor It seems to m e to be quite possible, by taking seriously b o t h the m a i n sources, P a u l and Luke, a n d weighing t h e m u p critically, in b r o a d outline to arrive at s o m e t h i n g like an overall picture of the 'pre-Christian P a u l ' . I n it, the apostle's own testimonies indeed have priority over Luke, b u t despite his c o n t r a r y tendency Luke's accounts, some of which correspond with Paul in an a m a z i n g way, m a y not j u s t be swept a w a y as being fictitious a n d utterly incredible. T o e n d with, we m u s t a t t e m p t to reconstruct the last d r a m a t i c events before the great c h a n g e in P a u l ' s life. H e r e , as often in our discipline, I can offer only a hypothetical reconstruction, b u t it is one which seems to m e to be relatively plausible on the basis of all the evidence in the sources a n d after weighing u p all the other hypotheses. As the result of the agitation of the new messianic J e s u s move­ m e n t , or m o r e precisely the J e w i s h C h r i s t i a n 'Hellenists', in the Greek-speaking synagogues of J e r u s a l e m , considerable unrest developed there a n d there was a n energetic reaction. T h e procla­ m a t i o n of the Greek-speaking followers of the messiah J e s u s of N a z a r e t h , crucified a short time earlier, which was critical of the ritual p a r t s of the T o r a h a n d the cult, was a provocation to the majority w h o were loyal to the law. T h e most active spokesman of the new g r o u p , Stephen, was stoned to d e a t h after a t u m u l t u o u s gathering in one of these synagogues. O n this occasion S h a ' u l / P a u l , the scribal s t u d e n t a n d y o u n g teacher, played only a subsidiary role. But w h e n the representatives of this enthusiastic g r o u p which was hostile to the law did not lie low, b u t continued to agitate, he took the initiative a n d b r o u g h t a b o u t a ' p o g r o m ' within the limited sphere of the 'Hellenistic' synagogues of J e r u s a l e m against these sectarians. H e r e he followed the e x a m p l e of P h i n e h a s in his 'zeal for the law' a n d did not shrink from the use of b r u t e force. P r e s u m a b l y 'Hellenists' were arrested as they discussed in the synagogues, a n d c o n d e m n e d to the usual p u n i s h m e n t of thirtynine lashes; some m a y even have suffered m o r e serious physical h u r t a n d even have been killed. I n this way the relatively small c o m m u n i t y of the 'Hellenists' was largely destroyed a n d fled from J e r u s a l e m to n e i g h b o u r i n g territories a n d cities. S h a ' u l / P a u l accepted a mission from these synagogues in J e r u s a l e m to D a m a s -

cus, to take proceedings against the agitators w h o h a d fled there a n d their local s u p p o r t e r s . W h e n he was almost at his destination he h a d t h a t vision of the risen C h r i s t which shattered his old life a n d opened u p a completely new a n d unexpected future for him. For the most p a r t Pauline theology rests on the radical reversal of former values a n d aims which c a m e a b o u t t h r o u g h the e n c o u n t e r with the crucified a n d risen J e s u s of N a z a r e t h . T h e J e w i s h teacher becomes the missionary to the Gentiles; the 'zeal for the law' is replaced by the p r o c l a m a t i o n of the gospel w i t h o u t the law; justification of the righteous on the basis of their 'works of the law' is replaced by justification of the 'godless' t h r o u g h faith alone; the free will is replaced by the faith which is given by grace alone as the creation of the word; a n d h a t r e d of the crucified a n d accursed pseudo-messiah is replaced by a theology of the cross which g r o u n d s the salvation of all m e n a n d w o m e n in the representative accursed d e a t h of the messiah on the cross. Although people n o w a d a y s are fond of asserting otherwise, no one understood the real essence of Pauline theology, the salvation given sola gratia, by faith alone, better t h a n A u g u s t i n e a n d M a r t i n Luther. Despite this rigorous reversal of all previous values a n d ideals (Phil.3.7-11), Pauline t h e o l o g y - a n d therefore also C h r i s t i a n theology - remains very closely b o u n d u p with J e w i s h theology. Its individual elements a n d t h o u g h t - s t r u c t u r e derive almost exclusively from J u d a i s m . T h i s revolutionary c h a n g e becomes visible precisely in the fact t h a t its previous theological views r e m a i n present even in their critical reversal as a negative foil, a n d help to d e t e r m i n e the location of the new position. Paul first learned his theological thinking in no other place t h a n a J e w i s h house of learning, a n d before he proclaimed Christ to the Gentiles, he h a d interpreted the law in the synagogue - very p r o b a b l y in J e r u s a l e m itself - to J e w s from the D i a s p o r a . O n l y against this b a c k g r o u n d can we u n d e r s t a n d t h a t formula which is f u n d a m e n t a l to him: 'For Christ is the end of the law, that everyone w h o has faith in h i m m a y be justified' ( R o m . 10.4) It describes the revolutionary shift in his life, a n d he experienced its t r u t h personally - in a m o r e radical way t h a n a n y o n e else.

Notes

In the notes, books are cited in chronological order; commentaries are cited by author and details of series. 1. General literature: T.Zahn, 'Zur Lebensgeschichte des Apostels Paulus', NKZ 15, 1904, 23-41, 189-200; A.Steinmann, 'Zum Werdegang des Paulus. Die Jugendzeit in Tarsus', Verzeichnis der Vorlesungen an der Staatlichen Akademie zu Braunsberg, Braunsberg 1928, 1-39; E.Barnikol, Die vorchristliche und friihchristliche Zeit des Paulus. Nach seinen geschichtlichen und geographischen Selbstzeugnissen in Galaterbrief, FEUC 1, Kiel 1929; A.Oepke, 'Probleme der vorchristlichen Zeit des Paulus', ThStKr 105, 1933, 387424 (reprinted in Das Paulusbild in der neueren deutschen Forschung, WdF 24, ed. KH.Rengstorf with U.Luck, Darmstadt 1982, 410-46); K.Adam, 'Der junge Paulus', in Paulus-Hellas-Oikumene. 1900th Anniversary of the Coming of St Paul to Greece, Athens 1951, 9-21. 2. M.Dibelius/W.G.Kummel, Paul, London 1953, 15-45, does not discuss the pre-Christian Paul separately, but within the chapters 'The Jewish and Greek Worlds', 'Paul the Man' and 'Paul Turns to Christ'; G.Bornkamm, Paul, London and New York 1971, 3-12: 'Paul's Descent and Environment before his Conversion'; 13-25: 'Paul's Persecution of the Church and his Conversion and Call'; O.Kuss, Paulus, Regensburg 1971, 37-44: the beginnings of Paul up to his activity as an active persecutor of believers in Jesus (brief but informative); J.Becker, Paulus. Der Apostel der Volker, Tubingen 1989, 34-59: Paul as a Pharisee from Tarsus; 60-87: the call to be apostle to the Gentiles, in which there is also a discussion of Paul as persecutor. Even D.Hildebrandt, Saulus Paulus. Ein Doppelleben, Munich and Vienna 1989, devotes only a few pages (5565) to the young Paul in his novellistic portrait written with much understanding and great empathy towards the biographical and historical details of Paul's life. This is surely a reflection of the present situation in research, which is concerned ad nauseam with Paul's understanding of the law but reflects very little on Paul the Pharisee in this connection. We cannot understand the former if we do not take the latter into account. 3

3. Justin, Dial.2.3-8.2: for Justin as teacher cf. now U.Neymeyr, Die christlichen Lehrer im zweiten Jahrhundert. Ihre Lehrtdtigkeit, ihr Selbstverstdndnis und ihre Geschichte, VigChrSuppl 4, Leiden 1989, 16-35; in Vis. I, 1. If (the so-called 'bathing of Rhoda'), Hernias also contains a brief section the autobiographical character of which is disputed. For this and 'the problem of the autobiographical in the Shepherd', see M.Leutzsch, Die Wahrnehmung sozialer Wirklichkeit im 'Hirten des Hernias', FRLANT 150, Gottingen 1989, 20-49. Compare the introductions to the other Visions and Similitudes, in all of which there are biographical echoes. 4. Gal.l.13-17; ICor.15.8f.; II Cor.11.22; Rom. 11.1; Phil.3.4-6. 5. On this see A.Deissmann, Paul, London 1926, 'Paul the Jew', 83110; W.D.Davies, Paul and RabbinicJudaism. Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology, London 1955, especially the conclusion, 321-4; D.Flusser, 'Die judische und griechische Bildung des Paulus', in Paulus, ed. E.Lessing, Freiburg 1980, 11-39: 16ff. There is a survey of scholarship up to his own day in H.J.Schoeps, Paul. The Theology of the Apostle in the Light ofJewish Religious History, London 1961,37-42, 'The Palestinian-Judaic Approach'. Relatively little space remains in Bultmann's work for the Jewish heritage of Paul, cf. R.Bultmann, 'Zur Geschichte des Paulus-Forschung'. ThR 1, 1929, 26-59 (reprinted in WdF 24 [see n . l ] , 304-37); he enthusiastically celebrates the works of the history of religions school with their completely one-sided stress on Hellenistic influence (322f.); cf. also section 16 of his Theology of the New Testament, Vol.1, London and New York 1951: 'The Historical Position of Paul'. K.H.Schelkle, Paulus. Leben-Briefe-Theologie, EdF 152, takes too little account of the Jewish character of Pauline theology: after a short section on Hellenism (42-5) the historically questionable chapter on 'Gnosis' follows, taking up more room than that on the Jewish roots of Paul. 6. In particular the commentaries on Acts by E.Haenchen, H.Conzelmann and G.Schille are marked by a radical scepticism towards the historical value of Luke's accounts. The following quotation from Schille is typical: 'When it depicts the actions of the leading figures and their convincing speeches, Acts reproduces the picture that the second Christian generation created of its most important men. It is concerned neither with historical circumstances, about which Luke was never very bothered, nor even with indicating a psychological development in the modern sense; Luke sets down the picture of the apostles circulating in his own day, which had become wreathed in a first halo! Therefore we best do j ustice to Luke and Acts by taking their statements as a contribution not to the persons of the apostles but to the formation of the tradition about them, i.e. to the picture of Peter and Paul that was unfolding', T h H K 5, Berlin 1983, 50. For the history of scholarship cf.W.W.Gasque, A History 2

of the Criticism of the Acts of the Apostles, BGBE 17, Tubingen 1975 (for Haenchen see 235-47; for Conzelmann see 247-50); id., 'Recent Commentaries on the Acts of the Apostles', Themelios 14, 1988/9, 21-33, see 30f.: a review of the English translation of Conzelmann's commentary. By contrast the works of G.Ludemann attempt a link between radical criticism and the discovery of historically reliable traditions, cf. Paul: Apostle to the Gentiles, 1. Studies on Chronology, Philadelphia and London 1984, 21-5; Early Christianity according to the Traditions in Acts. A Commentary, London and Philadelphia 1989, 1-18. 7. L.Baeck, T h e Faith of Paul'J/53,1952,93-110. This disparagement of Luke the historian has its parallels in the tendency criticism of the nineteenth-century Tubingen school, which made the mistake of denying Luke any historical reliability because of his manifest 'tendencies'. This approach was rightly attacked already by the great ancient historian E.Meyer, Ursprung und Anfdnge des Christentums III, Stuttgart and Berlin 1923, 64: 'The Tubingen school, F.C.Baur and his followers, were quite right in asserting that Acts is dominated by a tendency and is therefore one-sided... Bat it would be a misconception to conclude from this that it is a late book, which falsifies the original material and therefore is hardly usable historically. Rather, what we find here is the view of a contemporary who was involved in the events: we see how Luke, Paul's pupil and companion, himself a Gentile by birth, who studied the Jewish revelation zealously and became convinced of the certainty of salvation, dealt with the great problem which concerned the growing church and led it to hard internal struggles, under the influence of the teaching of his master. That necessarily leads to a shift in the conception of individual events and to the attempt to bridge over the oppositions. But the basic lines of development have nevertheless been drawn rightly.' 8. It is to be doubted whether there is ever historical writing, of whatever kind, which can fulfil the alleged postulate of absolute objectivity. Thus H.-G.Gadamer {Truth and Method, London and New York 1989, 204-12, 'Ranke's historical worldview') can also speak of his method in terms of 'naivete' (208) which, influenced by Hegel's philosophy, begins from the complete 'self-transparency of being' (212). Moreover it is precisely Ranke who shows the abiding relatedness of historian and poet (216). 9. It is to the credit ofClaus-Jurgen Thornton that in his 1990 Tubingen dissertation Der Zeuge des Zeugen. Lukas als Historiker der Paulusreisen (to be published in W U N T , first series) he has demonstrated this convincingly; cf. also E.Pliimacher, Lukas als hellenistischer Schriftsteller, StUNT 9, Gottingen 1972; M.Hengel, Acts and the History of Earliest Christianity, London and Philadelphia 1979, esp. 59-68; id., 'Luke the Historian and the Geography of Palestine in the Acts of the Apostles', in Between Jesus and 2

Paul, London and Philadelphia 1983,97-127; C J.Hemer, The Book ofActs in the Setting of Hellenistic History, W U N T 49, Tubingen 1989. 10. For citizenship of Tarsus see Acts 21.39; cf. 22.3; 9.11,30 (cf. 11.25); for Roman citizenship see Acts 16.37f.; 22.25; 23.27. 11. I. Ancient sources on Tarsus: Strabo, Geog. 14.5.9-15: the descrip­ tion of Cilicia begins in 14.5.1; 2 describes the slave trade of the Cilician pirates and 3ff. is a description of the smaller Cilician cities; 8 describes the Rhodian settlement of Soloi from the eighth century BCE, the old rival of Tarsus, which had, however, completely lagged behind Tarsus since the first century BCE. Soloi was the place from which Chrysippus, head of the Stoic school (third century BCE), came; his father had moved here from Tarsus, and his pupil and successor Zeno also came from there. So, too, did the comic poets Philemon (fourth to third century BCE) and Aratus, the author of the famous Phainomena (Acts 17.28); for the foundation inscription of Sardanapalus in Anchiale, which recalls the foundation of this city along with Tarsus on the same day, reported by Strabo, cf. I Cor. 15.32b, where Paul quotes Isa.22.13 (LXX). The inscription reads: 'Eat, drink, play, for other things are not worth a snap of the fingers.' Dio of Prusa (= Dio Chrysostom, c.40-115 CE), Or.33; 34. The following passages are particularly interesting. 33.5: an allusion to the numerous famous teachers who were already active in the city; this is at the same time a reference to the omnipresence of orators; 33.28: the decadence of the city is attacked - more cities perish from decadence than from wars; 33.45 enumerates the pantheon of Tarsus, cf. also 33.47: Heracles visits the place of his sacrifices in Tarsus; 33.48 mentions the veiling of women as a sign of their virtue, cf. I Cor. 11. Iff. (for this see Steinmann, 'Werdegang des Paulus' [n.l], 10; C.B.Welles, 'Hellenistic Tarsus', MUSJ 38, 1962, 67; W.Ramsay, The Cities of St Paul, London 1907,202-5); 33.62-64: vigorous attacks on the fashion in Tarsus according to which the men shave off all their hair and on the tendency to become a hermaphrodite; 34.7f.: the city received special favours of a political kind from Augustus (which is certainly also where the generous bestowal of Roman citizenship belongs, since at the time of Augustus the number of Roman citizens in the empire grew by 900,000 between the two censuses which he carried out in 18 BCE and 14 CE; thus of the fifty million inhabitants of the Roman empire [including slaves], about five million possessed Roman citizenship, cf. Res Gestae 8 and M.Giebel, Augustus, Reinbek bei Hamburg 1984, 74f., see also n.54 below); 34.21-23: on the citizenship of the linen weavers (see n.54 below). For Dio's information about Tarsus see T.Callandar, 'The Tarsian Orations of Dio Chrysostom'J//S24,1904,58-69; Welles, 'Hellenistic Tarsus', 62-75; D.Kienast

and H.Castritius, 'Ein vernachlassigtes Zeugnis fur die Reichspolitik Trajans: Die 2. tarsische Rede des Dion von Prusa', Historia 20, 1971, 6283. Philostratus, Apollonios-Vita 1.7: Apollonius was taken from Tyana in Cappadocia to the north side of the Taurus to be educated in Tarsus: 'When he was fourteen years old, his father took him to Tarsus, to the house of Euthydemus, who was from Phoenicia. Euthydemus was a good rhetorician, and began to teach him; for his part, he was attached to his tutor, but he found the nature of the city unpleasant, and not conducive to studying philosophy: for more than anywhere else it is a place where there are mocking and immoral men who seize upon luxury, and devote themselves more to fine linen cloths than the Athenians do to wisdom. With his father's permission, therefore, he transferred his teacher to Aegae nearby, in which there was the peacefulness that is helpful for philosophizing, and activities more suitable for young men, and a temple of Asclepius, and Asclepius himself manifest to mortals.' For 1.12 cf. Rom.l.26f.; VI.34 refers to Jews in Tarsus. In 51/50 BCE Cicero was governor of Cilicia in Tarsus, and he reports on it in numerous letters, for example in those to Atticus and Caelius and in' Book 3 of the collection ad familias, cf. M.Fuhrmann, Cicero und die rbmische Republik, Munich and Zurich 1989, 173-85 on his governorship in Cilicia (175 has a list of his letters from this period). II. Secondary literature on Tarsus: W.Ramsay, The Cities of St Paul, London 1907,85-224; H.Bohlig, Die Geisteskultur von Tarsos im augusteischen Zeitalter mit Beriicksichtigung derpaulinischen Schriften, FRL ANT 9, Gottingen 1913; Steinmann, 'Werdegang' (n.l); W.Ruge, 'Tarsus', PW IV A 2, 1932, cols.2413-39; W.C.van Unnik, Tarsus or Jerusalem. The City of Paul's Youth, in id., Sparsa Collecta I, NT.S 29, Leiden 1973, 259-320; id., 'Once again Tarsus or Jerusalem', ibid., 321-7; H.Goldman (ed.), Excavations at GozluKule, Tarsus, three double volumes, NewJersey 1950-63; C.B.Welles, 'Hellenistic Tarsus', MUSJ 38, 1962, 41-75; CJ.Hemer, 'Tarsus', ISBE IV, 1988, 734-6. For the geographical and climatic situation of this area and for the further development of Tarsus up to modern times, see L.Rother, Die Stddte der Cukurova: Adana - Mersin - Tarsus. Ein Beitrag zum Gestalt-, Struktur- und Funktionswandel tiirkischer Stddte, Tubinger Geographische Studien 42, Tubingen 1971; for the Pauline period see 36f.: 'The Hey-day of Cilician Cities in the Hellenistic-Roman Period'. III. For the history of Roman rule in Asia Minor or Cilicia cf. A.H.M.Jones, The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces, Oxford 1937; id., 'The Economic Life of the Towns of the Roman Empire', RSJB 7, 1955, 161-94 (also in id., The Roman Economy. Studies in Ancient Economic and Administrative History, ed. P.A.Brunt, Oxford 1974, 35-60); id., The Greek

2

City from Alexander to Justinian, Oxford 1966; E.Gren, Kleinasien und der Ostbalkan in der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung der romischen Kaiserzeit, Uppsala dissertation 1941; D.Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor II, New Jersey 1950; C.Preaux, 'Institutions economiques et sociales des villes hellenistiques, principalement en Orient', RSJB 7,1955,80-135; G.W.Bowersock,^4w^tus and the Greek World, Oxford 1965; B. Levick, Roman Colonies in Southern Asia Minor, London 1967; T.Pekary, 'Kleinasien unter romischer Herrschaft', ANRWII 7.2, Berlin and New York 1980, 595-675. 12. Cf. R.Riesner, Die Fruhzeit des Paulus. Studien zur Chronologie, Missionsstrategie und Theologie des Apostels Paulus bis zum ersten Thessalonicherbrief Tubingen Habilitationsschrift 1990 (to be published in W U N T first series), 128, 201-4 (on Rom. 15.19), 213f. (literature in notes 100-3); also J.L.Kelso, 'Key Cities in Paul's Missionary Program', BS 79, 1922, 4816; Deissmann, Paul (n.5), 174ff.; W.A.Meeks, The First Urban Christians, New Haven and London 1983, 9-13, 40-50; M.H.Conn, 'Lucan Perspec­ tive and the Cities', Missiology 13, 1985, 409-28. 13. Sepphoris, only three miles away from Nazareth, is not mentioned at all, and Tiberias appears as a geographical feature only in John 6.1,23; 21.1. Tyre and Sidon, the Decapolis and Caesarea Philippi are mentioned only in connection with their territory. 14. Acts 22.3; cf. 9.11,30; 11.25; 21.39; C.Burchard, Derdreizehnte Zeuge, FRLANT 103, Gottingen 1970, 34f. n.42, thinks his origin from Tarsus 'not indubitable'. According to Burchard, an earlier tradition taken over by Luke underlies only the statement in Acts 22.3, while there is nothing comparable for any origin from Tarsus. Barnikol, 'Vorchristliche Zeit' (n.l), 12f., already expressed doubt here. 15. But see Deissmann, Paul (n.5), 70ff.; Pauline imagery reflects 'the civilization of the ancient great city' (71), cf. ibid., 39f; similarly Steinmann, 'Werdegang' (n.l), 37ff. That Paul's association preferred this particular imagery in the dictation of his letters is possibly a reference to the environment which shaped his youth (but it should never be forgotten that Jerusalem, too, was to some degree a great Hellenistic city, see below 54ff.); the attempt of E.F.Synge to draw conclusions for Paul's theology from his youth in Tarsus is speculative: 'St Paul's Boyhood and Conversion and his Attitude to Race', ExpT94, 1983/4, 260-3. 16. Luke's report also deserves trust because it runs counter to his own 'image' of Paul, which attempts to stress Paul's links with Judaea and Jewish Christianity; cf. Burchard, Zeuge (n.14), 34 n.41, who notes that Luke would have 'preferred to indicate a place of birth in Palestine rather than in Tarsus'. Nevertheless he sticks to the historical truth! 17. Cf. Riesner, Fruhzeit (n.l2), 215-18. 18. Rom.15.19, 25f, 31; I Cor.16.3; Gal.l.l7f; 2.1; 4.25f.

19. Rom.15.31; II Cor. 1.16; Gal.1.22; I Thess.2.14. 20.1 Cor. 1.2; II Cor. 1.1,23 (cf. also II Cor 6.11; II Tim.4.20). 21.1 Cor.15.32; 16.8 (cf. also Eph 1.1; I Tim.1.3; II Tim.1.18; 4.12) or II Cor. 11.32; Gal. 1.17. 22. Gal.2.11 (cf.alsoIITim.3.11). 23. Strabo, Geography 14.5,13. 24. Cf. J.B.Lightfoot, 'St Paul's Preparation for the Ministry', in id., Biblical Essays, London 1904, 191-211, on Greek education, 205f.; Meyer, Ursprung (n.7), 111,314; K.L.Schmidt, 'Paulus und die antike Welt', WdF 24 (n.l), 214-45: 223f. (originally Vortrage der Bibliothek Warburg, Leipzig 1927, 38-64); Flusser, 'Judische Bildung' (n.5), 32ff. 25. For this see the only two Jewish Hellenistic synagogue sermons preserved from antiquity, De Jona and De Sampsone, ed. F.Siegert, Drei hellenistisch-jiidische Predigten. Ps.Philon, 'UberJona', 'Ober Simson' und 'Uber die Gottesbezeichnung "wohltdtig verzehrendes Feuer"', W U N T 1.20, Tubingen 1980. A commentary on both by F.Siegert will appear in W U N T first series. For the relationship between synagogue and school see R.Riesner, Jesus als Lehrer, W U N T II.7, Tubingen 1988, 151ff. 26. For the content of the cyclical teaching plan of the Hellenistic school up to the first century CE cf. J.Dolch, Lehrplan des Abendlandes, Darmstadt 1982,47-71,89-95. 27. The conjecture of H.Windisch, KEK 6, 1924, new edition by G.Strecker, 1970, 'that Paul himself had seen the mime and heard of it does not seem to me to be impossible' (316) is improbable. Still less was Paul influenced by the role of the foolish braggart in the mime when he talks of speaking as a fool in II Cor.11.21-12.10. The term 'folly' comes from Jewish wisdom. H.D.Betz, Der Apostel Paulus und die sokratische Tradition, BHTh 45, Tubingen 1972, 79f, follows Windisch, but conjec­ tures that this literary form, too, came to him by way of popular philosophy. See also C.Wolff, T h H K 8, 1989, 20ff. For the problem see now the criticism of U.Heckel, Kraft in Schwachheit, Tubingen theological dissertation, to be published in W U N T in 1991. In my view such an ironically alienating way of talking comes from the rhetorical arsenal of synagogue preaching. The Jewish evidence on the theatre is collected in Bill.IV.1, 401-5; Josephus, Antt. 15.268, also calls the theatre an alien custom, in connection with Herod's building activities. Nevertheless the numerous and great theatres in Israel (Sepphoris, Tiberias, the Herodian buildings in Jerusa­ lem, see R.A.Batey, 'Jesus and the Theatre', NTS 30, 1984, 563-74) show that quite a large number of people enjoyed them. One might also refer to the Jewish tragedian Ezekiel, who in Alexandria in the second century BCE wrote a tragedy on the Exodus from Egypt influenced by Euripides, 3

9

in iambic trimeters, which was conceived of as a stage play (on this see R.G.Robertson, 'Ezekiel the Tragedian', in J. H.Charles worth, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha II, Garden City, NY and London 1985, 803-19). We cannot exclude the possibility that dramas in the style of Ezekiel were performed or recited in Jerusalem and other Jewish centres. The Jewish theatre inscription of Miletus (second to third century CE) also suggests a varied treatment of this question, cf. E.Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age ofJesus Christ (175 BC-AD 135), I I I . 1, revised and edited by G.Vermes, F.Millar and M.Goodman, Edinburgh 1986, 24f, 167f. In addition to this there is the inscription relating to the renovation of an amphitheatre from Berenice in Cyrenaica (from around the beginning of our era), in which a Jew and Roman citizen is honoured by the Jewish politeuma of the city for his services, see G.Luderitz, Corpusjudischer Zeugnisse aus der Cyrenaika, TAVO.B 53, Wiesbaden 1983, no.70; R.Tracey, Jewish Renovation of an Amphitheatre', NewDocsA, Macquarie University 1987, 202-9. We certainly cannot rule out the possibility that Paul went to the theatre, but it is not very probable. For the attitude of the early church to the theatre cf. W.Weissmann, Kirche und Schauspiele. Die Schauspiele im Urteil der lateinischen Kirchenvater unter besonderer Beriicksichtigung von Augustin, Cass.27, Wiirzburg 1972; HJiirgens, Pompa Diaboli. Die Bekanntschaft der lateinischen Kirchenvater mit dem antiken Theaterwesen, philosophical dissertation (typescript) Tubingen 1969 (see ibid., 192 n.2: in Christian polemic against the theatre Jews and Manichaeans are often mentioned alongside the pagans). But here too it should be noted that this rigorism is limited mainly to the West and the church authors wrote polemic against the theatre only because some Christians were evidently very fond of going there, and even justified this with quotations from the Bible, cf. A.von Harnack, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten, Leipzig 1924, 311-15. Cf. also P.Lampe, Die stadtromischen Christen in den ersten beiden Jahrhunderten, W U N T 11.18, Tubingen 1989, 107f. 28. Cf. A.Lesky, Geschichte der Griechischen Literatur, Berne and Munich 1971, 722. The iambic trimeter quoted by Paul appears as no.218 in J.M.Edmonds, The Fragments of Attic Comedy IIIB, Menander, Leiden 1961 (626f), as a proverb in Menander, Monostichoi 808, ed. SJaekel, Leipzig 1964, 79. Probably the best-known proverb from Menander is Caesar's famous alea iacta est ('the die is cast'), a remark which he is supposed to have made after crossing the Rubicon, cf. Suetonius, Life of Caesar 32 (the Greek text of Menander ran dveppuj>8a> KU^OS and came from the comedy A P P H O O P O Z H AYAHTPIZ, cf. A.Koerte, Menandri quae supersunt II, BSGRT, Leipzig 1959, no.59, in Edmonds, no.65 [pp.568f.]). 4

2

3

We do not know in the case of either Paul or Caesar whether they were aware of the origin of these detached sayings. 29. For the texts, which all come from Christian sources, see A.M.Denis, Fragmenta Pseudepigraphorum quae supersunt Graeca, PVTG, Leiden 1970, 161ff.; N.Walter, mJSHRZ IV, Gottingen 1983, 244-73. Collections of testimonies from Greek classical writers would in themselves have been helpful for the Jewish missionary Saul (see below, 60) in his concern to describe to his fellow-countrymen from the Diaspora the superiority of Jewish-Pharisaic piety. That they were evidently no longer used in his time may be connected with the growing influence of Palestine, the mother country, in the imperial period, cf. M.Hengel, 'Der alte und der neue "Schurer'"J&S35,1990,19-72 (57,60f.). Nevertheless such anthologies show that there were trends in Judaism which could also take to heart the Pauline principle from I Thess.5.21 for the Greek dramas; this even applies to Euripides, who despite his polytheistic dramas was later cited as a witness for monotheism (Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticon 6,68,3; cf. Stromateis 5.11.75, where a quotation from Euripides is used as an illustration of Isa. 1.11). 30. Strabo, Geography, 14.5.13. 31. E.Schwartz, Charakterk'opfe aus der Antike, ed. J.Stroux, Stuttgart 1943, 208. That Paul the Jew 'thinks and writes in Greek' and that this 'Greek does not have anything to do with any school or any model, but... comes directly from the heart' is also stressed by the great philologian of antiquity, U.von Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, see 'Diegriechische Literatur des Altertums', in Die Kultur der Gegenwart I 8, Leipzig and Berlin 1912, 3-318: 232. Cf. Deissmann, Paul (n.5), 42, who associates his linguistic ability with his social status: 'A careful investigation of the vocabulary of Paul's Epistles has proved that Paul does not write literary Greek; if further the relation of his style to Atticism be studied, it is still clearer that he made no attempt to write according to accepted Greek standards. These observations confirm our thesis that both as regards his home circumstances and the place he occupies in history he stands below the educated upper classes. But even though his vocabulary is that of the people and the tone of every-day speech is predominant in his letters, yet his unliterary language is not vulgar to the degree that finds expression in many contemporary papyri. On the ground of his language rather Paul should be assigned to a higher class'; Dibelius/Kummel, Paul (n.2), 27f; Bornkamm, Paul (n.2), 9f. arrive at a similar verdict. 3

32. Cf. Lucian, Bis acc. 27 ( = LCL Lucian III, 136); he first learned Greek in the elementary school, cf. further Adv.indoct. 4 (= LCL III, 180); PseudologA ( = LCL V, 372). 33. Cf. Lesky, Geschichte (n.28), 937-41, but he stresses that Lucian,

who read and wrote much, had been spared a deeper penetration into the 'problems of great poetry'. 34. Navig. 2; K.Kilburn translates: 'He spoke in a slovenly manner, one long, continuous prattle; he spoke Greek, but his accent and intonation pointed to his native land' (LCL Lucian VI, 433). 35. Above all S.Ben-Chorin's book on Paul, Paulus, der Vblkerapostel in judischer Sicht, Munich 1970, describes the apostle as a wanderer and mediator between two worlds, but of these the Jewish world often falls by the wayside. His programme of becoming a Jew to the Jews and a Greek to the Greeks makes him suspect to both: 'The Jews felt that he was a dangerous Hellenist and many Christians rejected him as a rabbinic sophist', thus id., 'Paulus - Mittler zwischen Juden und Christen', in his collection Weil voir Bruder sind, Gerlingen 1988, 180-94: 192. 36. Bohlig, Geisteskultur von Tarsos (n. 11), 22-57, collects all the material about Sandon known in his time and interprets this figure in connection with the dying and rising vegetation deities Adonis (Syria), Attis (Phrygia), Osiris (Egypt) and Tammuz (Babylon). In his view mysteries developed from their cults, the binding link in which is the Soter concept. The comparison with Pauline christology is then made on 51-7: 'Just as Paul doubtless coincides with Syrian terminology in the use of the name Kyrios, so too his dying and rising saviour is an undeniable parallel to the Heracles-Sandon apotheosis...' For the further development of this thesis and criticism of it cf. Schoeps, Paul (n.5), 17f, who describes Bohlig's remarks as exaggerations (17 n.2) and at best allows 'the associative influence of the apostle's youthful memories', which as a conceptual world influenced his Christ-soteriology. For L.Goppelt see his Die apostolische und nachapostolische Zeit, K I G 1A, Gottingen 1962, A48; for criticism see Burchard, Zeuge (n.14), 35 n.42. In particular Bultmann and his pupils, referring back to the history of religions school, said that Christianity was a syncretistic religion in which not only Gnosticism but above all the mystery religions were drawn in as the source of important theologoumena (cf. R.Bultmann, Primitive Christianity in its Contemporary Setting, London 1956, 156ff., 175f, 184f; id., Theology [n.5], see especially §13, 'The Sacraments', and §33.3, 'The Death and Resurrection of Christ as a Saving Event'). For a comprehensive criticism of the derivation of Pauline theology from the mysteries cf. A.J.M.Wedderburn, Baptism and Resurrection. Studies in Pauline Theology against its Graeco-Roman Background, W U N T 1.44, Tubingen 1987. W.Burkert, Antike Mysterien, Munich 1990, also energetically stresses the fundamental differences between Jewish and Christian religious feeling on the one hand and the piety of the mysteries on the other, cf. e.g. 9ff.,20f, 53ff., etc. For Sandon cf. further J. Z wicker, 'Sandon', PW 2R. I A 2, 1920, 2264-

8; H.Goldman, 'The Sandon Monument of Tarsus', JAOS 60, 1940, 54463; id., Sandon and Herakles, Hesp.Suppl. 8, American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1949, 164-74 (it was the Greeks under Alexander who first fused the two figures together); W.Fauth, 'Sandon', KP 4, Munich 1972, 1541 f. Sandon-Heracles was not a mystery god at all. For the foundation legends of Tarsus see M.P.Nilsson, HAW V .2.2, Munich 1988, 57; for the Mithras cult of the Cilician pirates (who were the first to acquaint the Greeks with this cult, see Plutarch, Pompey 24.7). Coins from Tarsus depicting the bull sacrifice of Mithras were minted in the third century CE by Gordian I I I (ibid., 186 n.118); there is a photograph of the coins in Nilsson, plate 16.2. For the history of religion in this area generally see Bohlig, Geisteskultur von Tarsos (n. 11), 8-107, 'Die Religion von Tarsus'; Goldman, Excavations (n.ll) I: this volume lists the finds from the Hellenistic-Roman period which emerged in the excavation of the earlier deeper strata. Goldman stresses in his preface that Tarsus from the time of Augustus and Paul is still not excavated, because of its location under modern Tarsus. Nevertheless the abundance of terra cotta figures of Greek gods and heroes which have been found give an impressive picture of the religious variety of this city: T.S.MacKay, 'The Major Sanctuaries of Pamphylia and Cilicia', ANRWII 18.3, Berlin and New York 1990, 2045-129. 37. Cf. Steinmann, Werdegang (n.l), 7; KienastandCastritius, 'Zeugnis' ( n . l l ) , 66, 106f. (the beginning of the emperor cult in Asia Minor from 30 BCE; an intensification began only from 9 BCE on), 202-14; H.W.Tajra, The Trial of St Paul, W U N T 11.35, Tubingen 1989, 39ff., who rightly stresses that the emperor cult was still at a very early stage during the time of Augustus and participation in it was not yet obligatory, see also Schoeps, Paul (n.5), 18, and his final evaluation and rejection of attempts exclusively or predominantly to explain Paul in terms of pagan Hellenistic culture: 'Essentially one must rather say - and this consideration qualifies all pagan-Hellenistic interpretations of Paul - that a considered assessment of the spiritual forces of his environment as possible sources or influential factors in his theology must exclude pure Hellenism, however certain it may be that he was directly acquainted with it as a reality of his age. The "Hellenistic" trait in his thought which undeniably exists is not to be explained by direct influence, was obviously not an independent "formative factor" stemming from his youth in Tarsus, but rather the result of a process of assimilation, since Hellenism had long before been penetrated by the spirit of the Jewish Diaspora' (23). This was not seen clearly enough in the account of Paul in R.Reitzenstein, Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen, Stuttgart 1927 ( = Darmstadt 1956), 333-93 (Paul as a pneumatic), 417-25 (on the history 4

3

of Paul's development), and in turn had such a baneful influence on Bultmann's understanding of Paul, and Schoeps rightly criticized it, cf. M.Hengel, The 'Hellenization' of Judaea in the First Century after Christ, London and Philadelphia 1989, 58f. n.4. 38. Acts 21.37-39. 39. On this see e.g. Jones, Cities (n.l 1), 159-62, 172-4, on citizenship in the Greek poleis in the East (Tarsus, 174). In all the cities, in addition to the full citizens there were 'a number of domiciled aliens (usually called K ( X T O I K O I ) who had some rights, but not full citizenship' (160). In contrast to the situation in Rome, slaves were not given citizenship immediately on their emancipation. It is important for Paul's situation that 'Roman citizenship was under the principate compatible with local citizenship, whose obligations were unaffected by it' (172). D. Norr, 'Origo. Studien zur Orts-, Stadt- und Reichszugehorigkeit in der Antike', TRG3\, 1963, 525-600, points out that from the time of Cicero it is the case that 'the Roman citizen, who may not hold double civitas in the constitutional sense, can still have a twofold standing in law' (555), cf. 556-64, on dual citizenship in antiquity: citizenship of a town was sometimes given very generously, since in this way the city could raise the number of those liable to taxes and liturgy (558). In addition honorary citizenship was frequently bestowed (one example is Dio of Prusa, the citizen of Apamaea, Nicomedia, Nicaea and other cities of the East, cf. Or.38, 39,41). The Romans attempted in vain to control Greek law in this matter. Conflicts betwen Roman and peregrinus citizenship emerge for the first time in the first century BCE, but the strict maxim 'that Roman citizenship cannot be reconciled with peregrinus citizenship' (Norr, 562) was got round from the beginning, and there is no evidence that the Romans took action against this misuse, so that 'in the period of the empire...the thesis of the compatibility of citizenships had generally at least found a footing formally' (563). In the course of the period of the principate the bestowing of citizenship increased, especially by Greek states to the Roman citizens living in them, though the legal problems resulting from this cannot be clarified in detail. 40. Thus according to Dio Cassius, 47.26, Soloi had already been named Pompeiopolis earlier by Pompey. Here we can see the rivalry between the two cities: Tarsus, which was friendly to Caesar and Augustus, and 'republican' Soloi, see n.l 1. 41. On this see Norr, 'Origo' (n.39), 567f. 42. For these events in Tarsus see Dio Cassius, 47.30f; Appian, Bellum civile, IV. 64; V.7. 43. Dio Chrysostom 34.21-23 reports that in the time of the empire, citizenship of Tarsus could be bought for 500 drachmae (this corresponds

to the income of an ordinary day labourer for two years), cf. W.Ruge, 'Tarsus', / W 2 . R . 4 , 1932, 2431f. (for citizenship of Tarsus generally and that of Paul, 2420f.). 44. On this see the literature listed in Schurer, History (n.27), I I I . 1,126 n.2. 45. W.M.Ramsay, St Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen, London 1908, 3If. 46. See below, 25-29. 47. See Bohlig, Geisteskultur ( n . l l ) , 128-67, on the Judaism of Tarsus; V.Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews, Philadelphia 1961, 2879; Welles, 'Hellenistic Tarsus' ( n . l l ) , 59-62; Schurer, History (n.27), III. 1, 33f., and the additional material in H . B l o e d h o r n , ^ 35, 1990, 68. Moreover there seem to have been close connections between Cilicia and Judaea; for example, Josephus mentions Cilician mercenaries which Alexander Jannaeus had hired (Antt. 13.374, see A.Schalit, Kb'nig Herodes, SJ 4, Berlin 1969, 168); there were dynastic links between Herod the Great and King Archelaus of Cappadocia (whose realm since 20 BCE had also included rugged Cilicia bordering on Tarsus: Herod's son by Mariamne, Alexander, married Glaphyra, a daughter of Archelaus), on this cf. D.Kienast, Augustus. Princeps und Monarch, Darmstadt 1982, 408 n.195 and 279-81; Schalit, Herodes, 588f., 597f., 610-13, 620-8. Herod was also active in Cilicia as a benefactor and master-builder, cf. Josephus, BJ 1.48 and Schalit, 417,425. So it is not suprising that rabbinic literature records an intensive trade with Cilicia: after agricultural products above all in textiles, cf. Bill.3.611, 665, 746f. and CIJ II, no.931, the epitaph of a presbyter Isakis from Tarsus who describes himself as XxvoirwA/nq (cf. Schurer, History [n.27], 111.1,35). Paul's origin might be sought in this milieu and that also offers the possibility that he had citizenship of Tarsus, cf. Bohlig, Geisteskultur ( n . l l ) , 132f. For Josephus on Tarsus see Antt. 1.127; 8.181 J o n a h tried to sail there, 9.208. Cf. Isa.66.19 LXX and Bill. 3.621. 48. The word occurs only four times in the New Testament, three times in Luke (Luke 15.15; 19.19; Acts 21.39) and once in Hebrews, 8.11. Outside the Acts passage a political context is never implied, and the two texts from the Gospel show that Luke knows a wider significance, cf. Tajra, Trial (n.37), 79. 49. But see Josephus, Antt. 12,119; Seleucus Nikator granted the Jews full citizenship of the places in Asia and Syria which he founded, on this see Hemer, Book of Acts (n.9), 540, 573, on the 'ethical conception of the polis' (Dio Chrysostom, Or.32.87) as a place of Tct^iq and €t>Kocr|iia. For the terminology in Josephus, Philo and the LXX see Tajra, Trial (n.37), 79. 10

50. Cf. ibid., index, s.v. 'citizenship, Greek, held or desired by Jews' and 'civic status, of Jews' (579), and Schurer, History (n.27), I I I . 1, 12637, 'Civic Rights'. 51. The Jewish struggle for citizenship of Alexandria is particularly well attested, cf. Josephus, Antt. 14. 110-18 and the letter of the Emperor Claudius from 41 (P.LondVI, 1912 = CP/no. 153). See E.M.Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule, SJLA 20, Leiden 1981, 224-55; Tajra, Trial (n.37), 18ff. 52. Smallwood, Jews (n.51), 285-8. 53. Ibid., 359-64. 54. Or. 34.23, and on this Ruge, 'Tarsus' (n.43), 2432; Preaux, 'Institutions economiques' (n.l 1), 123 and n.3. For the linen weavers of Tarsus see Kienast and Castritius, 'Zeugnis' ( n . l l ) , 65f., 69f.. They conjecture that the low reputation of the linen weavers is connected with the fact that 'above all non-Greeks worked in the linen factories, who were only slightly Hellenized and therefore regarded as foreigners' (66). That does not necessarily mean that they were all without means and belonged to the lower social stratum. This is shown very well by the classification of this group of the population by Jones, which coincides strikingly with that of Deissmann (see above, n.31). In connection with Dio's report he writes: 'He represents them as poor but respectable men, who would enjoy the rights of citizenship if they could afford the registration fee of 500 drachmae. The weavers must therefore have been free men of modest means, not necessarily very poor, for 500 drachmae is a large sum, about two years pay for a legionary. This suggests an organization in small family workshops, with a few apprentices and labourers, slave or free, as in the villages and towns of Egypt' (359, in 'The Cloth Industry under the Roman Empire', in id., Roman Economy [n.l 1], 350-64, originally in EcHR 13, 1960, 183-92; for family businesses in the textile industry see 357). An interesting parallel to conditions in Tarsus is offered by an inscrip­ tion from Cyrene, cf. Liideritz, 'Zeugnisse aus der Cyrenaika' (n.27), no.8; on the one hand it shows that there were Jews who had citizenship and on the other it mentions particular crafts which excluded people from citizenship. 55. Cf. the inscription from Dyme in Achaea (in H.Collitz, Grieckische Dialektinschriften 2, Gottingen 1899,1614 = no.531 in Dittenberger, SylP): the inscription probably comes from the first half of the third century BCE. It is clear from it that all foreigners were given citizenship provided that they were free and descended from free parents, and paid a talent within a year. Sons up to seventeen and unmarried daughters were given citizenship along with the father or, in the case of a widow, with the 2

mother. For Byzantium there is a similar report in Ps.Aristotle, Oecon 1346b. There is also evidence of the sale of citizenship in Ephesus for 6 minae in the third century BCE, cf. SyW, no.363, and P.Roussel, 'La vente du droit de Cite (Note sur une Inscription d'fiphese)', RevPhil 37, 1913, 332-4; M.Holleaux, 'Ephese et les Prieniens du Charax\ R&G 29, 1916, 29-45, see esp. 38f, 45. There are further instances from Thasos (see C.Picard, BCH45, 1921, 153 no.6; L.Robert, RevPhil 3.ser 10, 1936, 1313) and Tritea (see A.Wilhelm, Neue Beitrdge zurgriechischen Inschriftenkunde I, SAWW.PH 166.1, 1911, 37.1ff), and from the Egyptian Aspendos (see M.Segre, 'Decreto di Aspendos', Aegyptus 14, 1934, 253-68, see esp. 267f.; I am indebted for these references to a seminar paper by N.Forster in connection with my seminar on the early Paul in the winter semester of 1989/90). 56. Dio Cassius 54.7, cf. Norr, 'Origo' (n.39), 559. 57. The closing verdict of Tajra, Trial (n.37), 78-80 (Paul a polites of Tarsus) is rather different. He does not see any compelling indication in Acts 21.39 that Paul had citizenship of Tarsus: 'We would like to conclude by saying that Paul's Tarsian citizenship cannot be proved on the basis of Acts XXI,39. The use of the wordpolites in that passage was in a nonjuridical sense and most likely refers to Paul's membership in the resident Jewish community at Tarsus rather than to any citizenship in the Greek polis. His mention of Tarsus in this verse is a statement of domicile and not a proclamation of citizenship... Paul's statement that he was a polites of Tarsus did not - and could not - have the same legal effect on the supreme Roman authority in Jerusalem as did his subsequent proclamation of Roman citizenship' (80). The last statement is possibly false. Citizenship of a civitas libera guaranteed its holder free choice of a place of trial. Possibly, therefore, Paul could thank his citizenship of Tarsus among other things for his being brought to Rome, since his Roman citizenship guaranteed him only a hearing before a Roman court, cf. P.Garnsey, 'The Lexlulia and Appeal under the Empire', JRS56,1966, 167-89, on Paul's case, 182-5; id., Social Status and Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire, Oxford 1970: on Paul 75f., 268. Garnsey shows that there were still differences within Roman citizenship which played a part in the granting of an appeal to the emperor. 58. General literature: L.Wenger, 'Biirgerrecht', RAC2, 1954, 778-86; A.N.Sherwin-White, TheRoman Citizenship,Oxford 1974;id, 'TheRoman Citizenship. A Survey of its Development into a World Franchise', ANRWI.2,1972,23-58; E.Ferenczy, 'Rechtshistorische Bemerkungen zur Ausdehnung des romischen Biirgerrechts und zum ius Italicum unter dem Prinzipat', ANRWII. 14, 1982, 1017-58. For Paul's Roman citizenship: Zahn, 'Lebensgeschichte' (n.l), 23-34; 2

Steinmann, Werdegang (n.l), 24f.; H.J.Cadbury, 'Roman Law and the Trial of Paul', in F.J.F.Jackson and K.Lake, The Beginnings of Christianity V, London 1933, 297-338; R.Schwartz, 'A propos du statut personnel de l'apotre Paul', RHPR 37, 1957, 91-6: in his view Paul had only Roman citizenship, not that of Tarsus. He only acquired this on the basis of a misunderstanding on the part of an Alexandrian redactor of Acts 21, who had transferred his own Alexandrian conditions to Tarsus; W.Seston, 'Tertullian et les Origines de la Citoyennete romaine de S.Paul', in Neotestamentica et Patristica. FS O.Cullmann, NT.S 6, Leiden 1962, 305-12 (the starting point of the investigation is Tertullian, Scorpiace 15, where Paul's citizenship is taken as a matter of course without the jurist Tertullian indicating how he could have received it); G.Kehnscherper, Der Apostel Paulus als romischer Burger, T U 87 (= Studia Evangelica II, ed. F.L.Cross), Berlin 1964, 411-40 (on this see Kuss, Paulus [n.2], 40 n.2); J.Vogt, 'Der Apostel Paulus als romischer Burger', Universitas 36, 1981, 145-52; M.Carrez, 'Note sur les evenements d'Ephese et l'appel de Paul a sa citoyennete romaine', in A Cause de I'Evangile, FS J.Dupont OSB, LD 123, Paris 1985, 769-77; W.Stegemann, 'War der Apostel Paulus romischer Burger?', ZNW 78, 1987, 200-29; T.Hosaka, 'Lukas und das Imperium Romanum', AJBI 14, 1988, 82-134; Ludemann, Earliest Christianity (n.6), 240f; Tajra, Trial (n.37), 81-9. 59. Stegemann in particular attempted to deny the credibility of Luke's description. There is now a detailed refutation of his arguments in Riesner, Friihzeit (n.12), 127-35, cf. already Tajra, Trial (n.37), 87ff. 60. Cf. H.Windisch, K E K 6, 1924 (new edition by G.Strecker 1970), 356; Hosaka, Imperium Romanum (n.58), 115f; Lampe, Stadtrbmische Christen (n.27), 66f. and n.189; Norr, 'Origo' (n.39), 597, also mentions our relatively slight knowledge of Roman law in the time of the principate. Furthermore it is insufficiently noted that even the appeal to Roman citizenship still left a good deal of freedom to the magistrates, especially as there were also differences among the cives Romani, cf. Garnsey, Social Status (n.57): on Paul, 75f, 268. Cf. also W.Eisenhut, 'Die romische Gefangnisstrafe', ANRWl. 2, Berlin and New York 1972, 268-82, who against the widespread denial of mere imprisonment in Roman law cites a number of instances which make it clear that a limited term of imprisonment was used for lesser crimes. 'It (the punishment of imprison­ ment) was pronounced for lesser crimes which were hardly punishable with the death penalty, or just for crimes which were not generally covered by the law because they were offences only against morality, respectability and custom, without being a direct violation of positive law' (278). It is possible that this legal practice was applied in Paul's case, too. 9

61. For general information about government, Roman administrative

and financial offices, personal archives and regular statistical inquiries, see W.E.H.Cockle, 'State Archives in Graeco-Roman Egypt from 30 BC to the Reign of Septimius Severus',JiL4 70,1984,106-22. For registration of the birth of a new Roman citizen in Alexandria see 118; the registration was also passed on to Rome and put in the archives there. Cf. F.Schulz, 'Roman Registers of Birth and Birth Certificates', JRS 32, 1942, 78-91 and 33, 1943, 55-64; Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship (n.58), 314-16, 'The Registration of Citizenship', and J.F.Gardiner, 'Proofs of Status in the Roman World', JCS 33, 1986, 1-14, which discusses these questions using the example of the status of a freedman, taking Schulz's work as a starting point. He describes the process as follows: the parents reported the child to be entered in the register {professio liberorum), giving name, origin, sex and date of birth, and also place of birth. 'Lastly, the professio contained the declaration that the child was a legitimate child and a Roman citizen. Such a declaration was indispensable, as only legitimate children in possession of the Roman citizenship could be registered' (87). This registration had to take place within thirty days of birth and be made before a magistrate in a tabularium, in Rome before the Aerarium Saturni, in the provinces before that of the governor. The professio was entered twice in a register (cf. Suetonius, Vita Caliguli 8.2): in actis Anti [Antium is the birthplace of Caligula] editum, see also 8.5: publici instrument auctoritas); first provisionally in the album professionum (or on tablets displayed in public) and then finally in a codex or papyrus scroll; it is unclear whether this itself or the building in which it was kept was called the tabellarium. The purpose of this registration 'was to facilitate the proof of a child's birth and status' (63). Possession of proof of birth and status was not obligatory, but very useful, especially when the person concerned did not permanently live in one place, or in the case of children of freedmen, who only in this way could demonstrate their status. These certificates were also used as proof of age (important for marriage, admission to particular offices, legal competence), cf. the instructive account in Apuleius, Apologia 89. If, where he rejects the false accusations about the age of his wife with a reference to the paternal professio and the document produced on this occasion which he can show to the court: 'Her father acknowledged her as his daughter in the usual way. His notices are preserved partly in the public tabularium, partly at his house.' Copies from these albums are known (Schulz, 78f: a list of the texts known to that point), so-called testationes which served as birth certificates: 'It was the Roman custom, practised already in Republican times, to make such testationes and to submit them to the court.' However, the judge was not forced to believe this evidence, though the reference to Roman citizenship contained in it 'furnished a prima facie evidence of the Roman

citizenship of the bearer, being in so far a substitute for a passport' (63). Evidently forgeries of legal texts were by no means rare at that time, cf. Suetonius, Vita Neronis; Apuleius, Apologia 89.3ff., who stresses the intactness ofthe artificial seal which is to protect against forgery. Moreover appropriation of Roman citizenship evidently did not happen very often, because of the Draconian punishment to which it laid people open, cf. Suetonius, Vita Claudii 15,25: trial and execution in the case of false information concerning Roman citizenship, and at the same time a prohibition against the bearing of Roman family names by foreigners (if Pau[l]lus was the family name of the apostle, this would be an indication of his citizenship). Cicero's defence speech for the poet A.Licinius Archias is illuminating here, as the latter was accused of having wrongly claimed his citizenship {pro Arch. 1-11, see also the introduction to this speech by M.Fuhrmann, Marcus Tullius Cicero. Sdmtliche RedenV', Zurich and Munich 1978, 61-5). For giving false personal information and the consequences see Pliny the Younger, Ep.X, 29 + 30 and on this Gardiner, 11. The event among the Christians of Lyons narrated in Eusebius, HE 5,1,47, also shows that it was possible to examine citizenship from the official side, since 'those who appeared to have Roman citizenship had their heads cut off: they were executed immediately in Lyons. By contrast, Pliny the Younger, Ep. X, 96,4, sent citizens to Rome. On Paul's case Schulz writes: 'When St Paul alleged his Roman citizenship before the Roman authorities... he must have produced his birth certificate for corroboration. As he was Roman born he was in possession of such a document, which he doubtless carried with him wherever he travelled' (63f). This more technical information may be helpful in understanding Paul's punishments: Paul certainly did not carry his birth certificate in his coat pocket; it was probably among his scrolls and tools, i.e. at the place where he was a guest or where he lived. Some time could elapse before he got this document. Moreover, the official concerned could challenge its validity. 62. The evidence can be found in M.Hengel, Crucifixion, London and Philadelphia 1982, 39-45: 'Crucifixion and Roman Citizens'. Cf. A.H.M.Jones, 'I appeal unto Caesar', in id., Studies in Roman Government and Law, Oxford 1968, 51-65, who in 56f. mentions cases where Roman citizens were executed in the provinces. 63. Josephus, 5/2,308. 64. Dio Cassius 60.24.4, cf. Hengel, Crucifixion (n.62), 80. Rhodes was therefore threatened by the emperor Claudius with a restriction of its libertas, cf. also Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship (n.58), 273. 65. See n.57 above.

66. For Jonathes see Josephus, BJ 7.437-50; for Eleazar, see Josephus, Antt. 20.161, and M.Hengel, The Zealots, Edinburgh 1989, 359ff. 67. W.Schmithals, ZBK 3.2, 1982. He sees the Roman citizenship simply as 'a motif crudely emphasized by the author Luke' and 'the reference to Paul's having this citizenship belongs in the framework of the apologetic tendency of Luke the author, who in this way makes emphatically clear the political innocence of the missionaries' (153), cf. 205: 'And from all that we know, it is hardly conceivable that already at the time of Augustus, when Roman citizenship was still very restricted, a j e w could be born in Tarsus a Roman citizen.' For the journey to Rome see 219ff. According to Schmithals, to find the historical facts we have to 'depart from Luke's description' and come to the conclusion that 'Paul travelled to Rome as a free man and was only arrested - sooner or later - or suffered martyrdom there' (219). 68. Cf. also Lampe, Stadtrbmische Christen (n.27), 124-53; Meeks, Urban Christians (n.l2), 55ff.; see below n.73. 69. Tertullian's full name was Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, and Cyprian's Thascius Caecilius Cyprianus. It should also be noted that not even the complete tripartite name of the historian Titus Livius is known. Cf. P. R.C. Weaver, Familia Caesaris. A Social Study of the Emperor's Freedmen and Slaves, Cambridge 1972, 37ff., who has investigated over 4000 inscriptions of freedmen; he states 'that over one in three of the Imperial freedmen of whom we have record do not in fact use their nomen or have it recorded on their inscriptions as part of their name' (37). See also G.Fuks, 'Where have all the Freedmen gone? On an Anomaly in the Jewish Grave-Inscriptions from Rome',j[/5 36, 1985, 25-32: among more than 500 Roman tomb inscriptions of Jews, at least 10% of which had Roman citizenship, there is not one which mentions the full Roman name. This shows how much this alien name was inwardly repudiated. 70. Cf. Phil.3.20f.; Gal.3.28; Col.3.11. 71. Josephus mentions a Paulus Apuntius {Antt. 19.102) and two Romans by the name of Paulinus (BJ 3.44; 7.434) and a Roman woman called Paulina (Antt. 18.66, 69, 72, 75, 77). 72. In the ruined door of the family tomb which consists of two rooms, there is nAYAINOY MYPEY(OY), and within the rooms there is the inscription nAYAINOY on three coffins, see N.Avigad, Beth She'arim 3, Jerusalem 1971, 29f. and plate X I I (in Hebrew). 73. Unfortunately it cannot be decided with any certainty whether Paulus was thepraenomen or cognomen. As freedmen normally took over the nomen and praenomen of their patron, this could explain the background to the acquisition of citizenship by Paul's family, cf. Tajra, Trial (n.37), 83, who regards Paulus as the cognomen; thus also Welles, 'Hellenistic Tarsus'

( n . l l ) , 62, who conjectures a completely speculative name, C.Iulius Paulus. The classic article on this theme is H.Dessau, 'Der Name des Apostels Paulus', Hermes 45, 1910, 347-68, though he also puts forward the disputed theory that the cognomen was changed because of Sergius Paulus. Also important for understanding the ZorOXos 6 KOti nauXos in Acts 13.9 is A.Deissmann, Bibelstudien, Marburg 1895, reprinted Hildesheim 1977, 181ff.; id., Die Urgeschichte des Christentums im Lichte der Sprachforschung, Tubingen 1910, 16f. n.4; id., Paul (n.5), 91f. (especially n.6 against Dessau), who has demonstrated that Paul already had the names Saul and Paul before his visit to Cyprus, and that the Greek expression cited above corresponds to the Latin qui et, so that the ancient reader could only understand it as 'Saul who is also called Paul' (see also above 9f.). Building on that, G.A.Harrer, 'Saul who is also called Paul', HTR 33, 1940, 19-33, conjectured that Saul was the signum or supernomen of Paul (21), i.e. the name by which he was called, whereas in his view the Saultt5 of Acts is only a later name formed in analogy to Paulus in the third or fourth century (25), as P mentions only ZaovX. In that case Paulus would be the cognomen (26) and could refer to the gens Aemilia, in which Paul(1)us occurred frequently. The tripartite name could then have run something like L.Aemilius Paullus qui et Saul (33); Bornkamm, Paul (n.2), 6, also argues for Saul as a signum or supernomen; cf. Riesner, Friihzeit (n.l2), 125. But too much stress should not be put on the terminology of P , since it could also be a bigoted whim of the copyist, who preferred for the Jewish name of Paul the version which had as it were divine approbation and therefore kept throughout to the form of the name used by the Damascus voice (moreover P does not have the complete text of Acts, so that it is not possible to examine all the Saul passages). See also G.H.R.Horsley, 'The Use of a Double Name', NewDocs I, 1981, 89-96, who gives an impressive demonstration of the wide distribution of double names; also E.A.Judge, 'Greek Names of Latin Origin', in NewDocs II, 1982, 106-8, who refers to correspondence which is to be evaluated as an indication of the social structure of the early communities in the Pauline mission sphere: 'NT social history must therefore face the possibility that the churches drew heavily upon those classes of lower-level Greeks whom Roman patronage was systematically advancing to citizenship during an era when eminent members of the ruling classes in the Greek cities were still by no means regularly granted Roman citizenship' (107); C.J.Hemer, 'The Name of Paul', TynB36, 1985, 179-83; id., Acts (n.9), 128n.77. 45

45

45

74. Cf. e.g. Harrer, 'Saul' (n.73), 30f. For Sergius Paulus and his family see now Riesner, Friihzeit (n.12), 119-24, and appendix 2, 'Stemma der Sergier', taken from D.Halfmann, Die Senatoren aus dem b'stlichen Teil des Imperium Romanum, Gottingen 1979, 106. See below 108 n.83.

75. A.N.Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testa­ ment, Oxford 1963, 153f. Moreover it is uncertain whether Paul was thought to correspond at all to Saul; cf. Ludemann, Earliest Christianity (n.6),241. 76. CIJ II, no.803 (55f); the inscription comes from 391 CE. 77. Acts 9.4.; 22.7; 26.14; cf. Ananias, 9.17; 22.13. ZavXov appears in 9.17 because of the declension; see also 13.21 ZaouXvlov K[e]i