who were the ioudaioi
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
1/31
Who Were the ?
Author(s): Malcolm LoweSource: Novum Testamentum, Vol. 18, Fasc. 2 (Apr., 1976), pp. 101-130Published by: BRILLStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1560764.
Accessed: 13/09/2014 00:46
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
BRILLis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toNovum Testamentum.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=baphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1560764?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1560764?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
2/31
Novum
Testamentum,
Vol.
XVIII,
fasc.
2
WHO WERE THE IOTAAIOI
BY
MALCOLM
LOWE
Van Leer
Foundation,
erusalem
The
meaning
f the word
'IouSoc"oL
n
John's
Gospel
has
long
been a puzzle. Although irtually ll modern ranslationsender
it
"Jews",
almost the
only point
of
agreement
etween com-
mentatorss
that
his annot n
general
e
its
meaning.
ccasionally
it has been
conjectured
hat t
means
"Judeans",
.e. that t
has
a
territorial ather han a
merely eligious
enotation,
nd this is
recognised
n the
Revised
tandard
Version
RSV)
to
the
extent
that "or
Judeans"
s
given
s an
alternativen a
note to
Jn
vii
I.
Sometimes
t
is
suggested
hat t
refers o the
Pharisees,
r more
specificallyo thoseJewswhorejectedJesus
).
It has even been
proposed
hat the term
must
be
some
symbolic
mode of reference
to the wicked
of
this
world
or something
f
the
kind),
o
that t
does not
essentially
efer
o the
Jews
t all
2).
Commentatorsend either o
force ne
of these
meanings pon
every
occurrence
f the
word,
or to
use
a
mixture f
different
possibilities
without
ttempting
o
establish
ny systematic
on-
nexion between the varietyofmeanings proposed. In neithercase
is
the result
convincing ).
1)
E. L.
ALLEN,
"The
Jewish
hristian hurch n
the
Fourth
Gospel",
JBL,
74
(1955),
88-92,
thinks that "the
Jews"
means the
leaders of the
Jewish
community,
ut as
representing
he
majority
who
rejected
Jesus
(yet
not
the
minority
who
accepted
him).
C. K.
BARRETT,
he
Gospel
according
o
St.
John
(I955),
thinks t
means
"Judaism
and its official
eaders"
whose
headquarters
were
in
Jerusalem
(p.
143),
but
alleges:
"John speaks
in-
discriminately
f
the
Jews'
and 'the
Pharisees',probably
withno
clear
know-
ledge
ofconditions n Palestine beforeA.D.
70o"
p.
299).
2)
Thus E.
GRASSER,
"Die
antijiidische
Polemik m
Johannesevangelium",
NTS XI
(1964-5), speaks
of
"ein
in
der
Auslegung
des
vierten
Evangeliums
unbestrittener
atbestand,
nimlich
die
Synonymitlt
der
Begriffe
Iou8sioq
and
x60aEo,"
(p.
88),
and
sums
up
(p.
89):
"Ein
Paradigma
also
fiir
ie
Offen-
barung
als
Krisis-so
k6nnten
wir
die
AuseinandersetzungJesu
mit
den
Juden
umschreiben. Denn
'Iou8Gaoq
und
x6ayoo0
ind
in
gleicher
Weise
Chiffren
iir
den
Unglauben
schlechthin."
3)
R. BULTMANN
pplies
the
symbolic
interpretation
ystematically
n
Das
Evangelium
des
Johannes IIth
ed.,
1950):
"Das
fiir
den
Evangelisten
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
3/31
102
MALCOLM
OWE
This
paper
aims
to
showthat
the
puzzles
and
confusionre
due
not to
any peculiarities
f
usage
of the author
of
John's
Gospel,
butsimply o ourdistance rom heperiod bout whichhewrote.
It first
xplains, y
a
systematic
emantic
nalysis,
what
variety
of
meanings
might
be
anticipated
for
the word
'Iou80-Xo (and
its
Semitic
quivalents)
n
the
natural
veryday
sage
of
Palestine
n
the
period
f
Jesus.
Then t shows hat all
uses of
the word
n
the
four
ospels
re instances f one or
another f
these
variousmean-
ings.
t
also establishes hich
meanings
redominate
nd
why.
SEMANTICS AND
HISTORY
The
word
Iou80co0
s related to
the word
Io368
(Judah)
and
even more
closely
o
'Iousaox
Judea),
since
the
atter s
merely
its
feminine
ingular. Something
imilar
holds
for its
Semitic
equivalents.
n the
other
and,
oday
ts
only
meaning
s
"members
of
the
Jewish
eligion"
and
the word
ta'trm
n
modern
Hebrew
likewisehas no
territorial
onnotation).
We
may
thus
presupposethree asic
meanings
f the word:
(a)
"members f the
tribeof
Judah"
as
opposed
o members f
other
ribes;
charakteristische
0
Iou8xotL
fasst die
Juden
n
ihrer
Gesamtheit
zusammen,
so wie
sie
als Vertreterdes
Unglaubens
(und
damit
...
der
ungliubigen
'Welt'
iiberhaupt)
vom
christlichen
Glauben aus
gesehen
werden."
(p.
59).
He adds that on occasion,however, he representatives funbelief re not
the
people
in
general
but the
latter's
spokesmen.
C. H.
DODD,
Historical
Tradition
in the
Fourth
Gospel, (1963),
p.
242,
says
that
the term s
used
"imprecisely"
o
mean
usually
the
general
body
of
the
Jewish
people
or the
Jewish
authorities
n
Jerusalem,
hough
sometimes
apparently
the
inhabitants
of
Judea,
but that it
anyway
always
seems
to
mean the enemies
or
potential
nemies)
f
Christ.
According
o R. E.
BROWN,
Anchor
ible,
vol.
29
(1966),
p.
LXXI,
the term
normally
means
the
religious
authorities ostile
o
Jesus,
but
means
Jews
n
general
n
referenceo
national
and
religious
ustoms
&op-7
7v
'Iousalco,
etc.)
or
when
Jesus peaks
to
foreig-ners,while n a few ccurrencespossiblyn ater nsertions)tmeansJudeans.
Yet
I.
H.
BERNARD,
The
Gospel
according
to
St.
John
(1928),
vol.
I,
pp.
34-35,
thought
t
usually
meant
Judeans
and
especially
Jerusalemites,
ut
Jews
n
general
as
regards
social
and
religious
customs,
sometimes
by equating
Jn
i
19
and
24)
the
Pharisees as the
popular
leaders of
the
Jews,
and
once
(Jn
vi
41,
52)
Galileans who are
perhaps
"Jews"
by
religious
onviction.
None
of these
proponents
of a
variety
of
meanings
explains
how such a
variety
might
rise
(since
to
cite
supposedly
distinct
ources
only
postpones
solution of
the
problem,
s
it
may
then be
asked
why
precisely
hat
variety
occurs n the
various
sources).
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
4/31
WHO WERE
THE
IOTAAIOI?
0I3
(b)
"Judeans"
as
opposed
o
people
living
n
(or
originating
from)
ther
reas
4)
(notably
oth
Galileans
nd
Samaritans,
ifJudea s understoodn the strict ense
)
of the area west
of the
Jordan
etween
amaria
and
Idumea);
(c)
"Jews"
as
opposed
o members f other
religions
notably
Samaritans, omans,
Greeks).
At
the same time
'Iousco
need not
always
mean
"Judea
n
the
strict
ense"
(as just
defined),
ince
t
was
used
as an
official
itle
of
larger
administrative
units
6).
Thus
'Ious~doL
n a
purely
geo-
graphical ensecouldconceivablymeansimply he nhabitantsf
the
province
r
kingdom
f
Judea,
whereverts
boundaries
ap-
pened
to lie
7).
For the time
f
Jesus,
hree
elevant
ossible
enses
of
'Iouaoca
may
be
anticipated:
(I)
Judea
n the
strict
ense;
(2)
the
procurate
f
Pontius
Pilate
(i.e.
Judea
s
above
together
with
dumea
and
Samaria);
(3) thekingdom f Herod theGreat and thelast Hasmoneans
(i.e.
approximately
hewhole f
he
historic and of
srael)
8).
The
corresponding eanings
f
'IousacoL
may
be
designated
s
(bI),
(b2)
and
(b3) 9).
We
cannot,
however,
dequately
examine
the
meanings
of
'Iou8aXo
and
'
'Iou8oaoc
without
also
considering
he word
Iap
'?%,
which ccurs
widely
n
the
gospels
n the
meanings
the
People
of
Israel" (i.e. theJews, ometimes s olxoqIapa?) and "theLand
of
srael"
(in
Mt
i
21
as
yl
Iapa~x).
In
other
words,
his s
a
possible
4)
The
earliest
occurrence f
a
geographical
ense is
II
Ki xvi
6
(for
men
of
Judah"
as
opposed
o
the
inhabitants f
the
kingdom
f
Israel).
Note
also
II
Ki
xviii
26,
28
(as
Is
xxxvi
II,
13);
here
r'T1~~
(Sept.
'Iouatazr)
means
"the
language
of
Judah".
6)
The
Judea
of
the
pre-Hasmonean
period
was
even smaller han
this,
not
e.g. reaching
to
the
sea.
6)
The
"Iudaea
provincia"
of
e.g.
Tacitus,
Ann.
II,
42.
7)
This
seems to
be
the
explanation
of
Tacitus,
Ann.
XII,
54;
here
the
"Galilaeorum
natio"
and the
"Samaritae"
are
referred o
collectively
as
"Iudaei",
apparently
because
they
were all
living
n
"Iudaea".
8)
The
occurrence
f the
same
name for
different
reas
in
the same
period
(and
even
the
same
writer)
hould not
cause
surprise:
today
"England"
is
often
used
for
"Britain"
and
"Holland" for
"the
Netherlands",
although
they
are
strictly
arts
of those
wholes.
9)
In
what
follows,
for
simplicity,
Judeans"
without
qualification
will
normally
mean
Judeans
in
the
strict
ense
(bi).
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
5/31
104
MALCOLM
LOWE
rival to both n theirwidest
enses.
t
could
tself lso
conceivably
refer
n
occasion
o
the
ancientnorthern
ingdom,
r to the
rem-
nantsof the northernribes
0).
Now of
the
possible
meanings
of
IouacoL,
the
strict
geographical
sense
(bI)
would have
much
relevance
or
Jews
n
Palestine
but
almostnone
for hose
n
the
Diaspora,
while
xactly
he reverse
s
true
for the
religious
meaning
c).
In
fact,
even
well
before he
New
Testament
eriod
Diaspora
Jews
began
to
accept
the
name
oi
Iou
tZoL
n
place
of
'IJpa-X
11),
whereas
the latter
persisted ong
enough
n
Palestine o be
virtually
he
only
elf-name f the
Jews
in theMishna
c.
200
A.D.) 12).
It
should
not be
thought,
owever,
hat the
geographical
enses
of
IouOZoL
quickly
died
out,
since
they
are
clearly
ttested
by
Josephus.
He
uses
the
wordto mean:
i)
"Judeans",
ometimesn
the
strict ense
nd sometimesn
thatof
nhabitantsf
the
province
of
Judea;
i)
"Jews"
whenever
here s a need
to
distinguish
etween
Jews
nd Gentiles
thus lways
for
Jews
n the
Diaspora);
moreover
he even uses the word in differentenses n the samepassage,
supposing
hat
the reader
an
easily
guess
the
correct ense from
10)
Lk ii
36
says
that
Anna the
prophetessbelonged
to Asher.
n
Susanna
(or
Daniel
xiii)
IJpa?X
occurs n both wider
and narrower
enses:
Susanna is
described first s a
daughter
of
Israel
(Sus
48),
but then as
not a
daughter
of
Israel
but a
daughter
of
Judah (Sus 57).
11)
A
difference etween
Palestinian
Jewish
and
Diaspora
Jewish
usage
seems
to be
already
attested
n
differencesetween
and
II
Maccabees.
Thus
the
relevant
section,
by
K.
G.
KUHN,
n
the article on
'Iapoc)
in
vol. III
(ed. G. KITTEL) of the TheologischesWarterbuch es Neuen Testaments
(pp.
360-366,
see
esp.
p.
362) suggests
that the latter
book uses
'Iou80CotL
freely
s
a
name
for the
Judeans
n
all
contexts,
but that the
former
ook
uses
'Ia
pocX
n
religious-national
ontexts and
'Iousakot
n
civil-administra-
ative
ones
(parallelling
*71Tfl7
n their
coins).
In
other
words,
Iapocrp
s
used
in
place
of
'Ious8cot
n
sense
(c),
so that the latter
has
normally nly
sense
(bI).
Even in I
Maccabees,
however,
non-Jews
re
represented
s
using
only
'Iou8otot.
(W.
GUTBROD's
ection on the
gospels
in the same
article
fails to
notice
the
relevance of this
situation
for the later
period.)
Esther
too
(e.g.
ii
5)
uses
(0)"'7*1
to
mean
"Jew(s)".
12)
In theMishna
?It'V
is thecommonrendering f "the
Jews"
and also
of
"Jews"
(Hallah 4.7.,
etc.)
and
"a
Jew" (Berachoth
8.8,
etc.
etc.).
There
s
also
WDI'?W
(Erubin
6.i,
Abodah
Zarah
4.11).
V111'1 occurs at
Nedarim
I
1.12
in
a
possibly
stereotyped
aying.
Otherwise
"T''r
occurs
only
in
the
quotation
of
Esther i
5
at
Megillah
2.3.
Sometimes
WVtZ'
eans
an
ordinary
Jew"
as
opposed
to
priests
Terumoth
1.9,
Pesahim
7.3,
etc.)
or to
priests
and
Levites
(Taanith 4.2,
etc.);
also
lt"r'
(Peah
8.6,
Taanith
4.2,
etc.).
Wt
'WV
'
(as
"the
Land of
srael"
contrasted
.g.
with
Syria,
Baba Kamma
7.7.)
also
occurs
widely
as
a
standard
term
still
used
e.g.
by
Rabbi
Akiba
(Shebiith
6.2;
compare
Yebamoth
16.7).
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
6/31
WHO
WERE
THE
IOrAAIOI
?
I05
the context.Thereare
especially
wo kindsof
passage
n which
geographical
meaning
can be
recognized:
i)
ones in which ot
'IousMLoL
nd I 'IoustL occurtogethern such a way that the
former
re
precisely
the inhabitants of the latter
13);
(2)
ones in
which
'Iousc'to
are
contrasted
with
Jews
from ther areas of Pales-
tine
as
raochLoL,
tc.)
14).
The
meaning Judeans"
in
some
ense)
should
thus be considered
likelypossibility
henever
osephus
talks of
'IouscL-noL
n a
Palestinian ontext
5),
especially
s he has
no
other
ingle
wordfor he nhabitants f
Judea
or Palestine
6).
Even as late
as
the
early
third
entury,
io
Cassius
explicitly
distinguishes
etween
geographical
nd a
religious
meaning
f
'Iou8sooL;
moreover
e
treats he formers the basic sense
7).
That the
geographical
senses of
'IouAsXor
far
from
having
died
out,
ndeed
formed he
primary
meaning
fthe term n New
Testa-
ment
imes,
s
confirmed
y
the
surprising,
ut
well-attested,
elief
that
the
'IousmcoO
were
certain
Egyptians
or Indians who had
13)
An
example
is
J.Ant.
XVIII,
2.
Coponius
and
Quirinius
re
here
said
to have arrived in
ihv
Iouxda~
(or
`yv
'Iouoov;
in
any
case
Judea
in sense
(2)
is
intended),
he former o rule over
the
'IousooL
and the
atter
to
evaluate
their
property
or
taxation.
Here
it
is
precisely
he
inhabitantsof
the
procurate
presumably
amaritans as
well
as
Jews)
who
were to be ruled
and
taxed,
i.e. ot
Iou8saoL
n
meaning
b2).
14)
An
instructive
xample
is
J.
Ant.
XVII,
254
ff.
Josephus
states first
that
many
Galileans,
dumeans
and
people
from
Jericho
nd Perea
had
come
to
Jerusalem
to
celebrate
Pentecost,
where
they
were
joined by
ohol
'Iousa80oL.
ince all had
come
to a
Jewish
festival,
nd the
Jewish
reas of
Palestine
were
preciselyGalilee, Perea, Judea
and
Idumea, hoL Iou8sozothere
indisputably signifies
he
Judeans
n the trict ense
(bI).
Yet later nthe
same
passage
he
relates how
the Romans
attacked
the
'Iouso'ot,
now
meaning
the whole
crowd,
.e.
he
has
switched
to
meaning
(b3)
or
possibly-as
it
is
Jews
vs.
Gentiles-meaning
(c).
15)
Some
plausible
instances are
J.
Ant.
XVIII,
89
and
Life
346
and
391
('Iouso0ot
nd
Pcao toL
pparentlybeing
contrasted:
n
the
Life
the
Galilean
Jews
are almost
nvariably
oL
ocr;LocoL;
ote also
Against
Apion
I,
48:
"those
whomwe call
rocxaLaoL").
16)
Unlike
Maccabees
and the
Mishna, Iapao
X
does not
occur
throughout
as
a name for
the
Jews
and their
and. The
explanation
s
that
although
a
Palestinian
Jew,
he was
explicitlywriting
orGentiles
gnorant
of the
Jews
(J.
Ant.
I,
5-13),
which
mplies
that the
geographicalmeanings
of
'Iou80c"ot
were familiar o literate
peakers
of
Greek n
general.
17)
At R. Hist.
XXXVII, xvi.5-xvii.I
he
says
of
Palestine that the
area
and its
inhabitants re also
called
'Iou8m0m
nd
'Iou8matot;
hen he adds that
the
latter name
is
also
applied
to all
else,
even of other nations
(&X;XoeOvez),
who adhere to their
customs
(r&
6tuLLo
rc~-ov,
.e. those of the
'IousxZoL
n
the
geographical sense).
Thus
he
distinguishes
etween our
meanings
(b3)
and
(c), regarding
he
latter as derived
rom
he
former.
Note
also
XLVII,
xxviii.3-4:
ot
'Iouso&0oL
as inhabitants of
7
'Iou8soc.
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
7/31
Io6
MALCOLM
LOWE
obtained
heir
urrent
ame
by emigrating
o
the
already
xisting
country
f
Judea.
n
Against
Apion
Josephus
makes
xtraordinary
effortso refute harges hatthe Iou8mZoLeremerely gyptians
who
had
been
driven ut of
their
wn
country
nto
Judea
(II,
8;
compare
I,
252) 18);
he also relates that
Aristotle,
ccording
to
the
latter's
pupil
Clearchus,
believed
the
Ioua'ZoL
to be
Indian
philos-
ophers
whohad
come
to
Judea
nd taken heir
new)
name
rom
hat
place
(I,
179:
o6vota
Xoc6v
res
n
705
T6=ou).
Some
awarenessof
the
connectionwith the
tribe of
Judah
nonethelessontinued.
hus
Pompeius rogus,
Hist.
Phil.
XXXVI,
ii.I-5
(in Justinus' pitome), ays
thatthe
Iudaei originate
rom
Damascus,
where
Abraham nd
Israel were
uccessively ing;
the
latterdivided
his
people
ntoten
kingdoms,
ne
to each of
his
sons,
but
then,
n the
premature
eathof
Judah, ave
them ll the
name
Iudaei
in his
memory.
osephus
tates
J.
Ant.
XI,
173)-probably
again
trying
o combat
misconceptions-that
he
people
and
the
land
(i.e.
o0
'Iou~aoZo
and
"
'Iouam21)
had
got
their current
name
becauseJudahwas the first ribe o return romxile.The Gemara
of the Talmud
at
Megillah
2b-I3a
seems till
to
be
well
aware
of
the
connexion
9).
Even in the ninth
century
sho'dad
of
Merv
repeats
Josephus' tory
about the return
rom xile in
a
more
elaborate form
perhapsderiving
rom
common
ource rather
than
from
osephus
imself)
0).
But
the
general icture
or
he New
Testament
eriod
s that he
primarymeaning
of
'IouasOcoL
was
geographical (in
a
sense which
18)
Compare
Strabo,
Geography
VI,
ii.34-6:
they
were certain
Egyptians
who first
discarded
the
Egyptian
religion
at
the
urging
of the
"Egyptian
priest" Moses )
and
then
left
Egypt
to
become
those
now called
'Iou8acoL (34).
Against
Apion
discusses similar tales in
numerousGentile
authors.
Despite
Josephus'
efforts,
elsus
(acc.
to
Origen,
Against
Celsus
III,
5)
could
still
claim
that the
'Ioua'toL
were
'ALty6rTLoL
)
yVel.
19)
Puzzlement is
espressed
over
whetherMordechai
belonged
to
Judah
or to
Benjamin
(in
Esther ii
5
he
is
successively
described s
f'11Vl
t
and
"2
R).
Then
preposterous explanations
are offered f how
he
could
belongto both tribes at once; these are
probably
learned
okes,
presuming
awareness that
f'1l~l
might
n
principle
have
meaning a)
instead
of
meaning
(c).
(Humorous
commentaries n
Esther
are
a
Jewish
tradition.)
Note
that
in
the Mishna
Tiflf
means the
tribe of
Judah
at
Sotah 8.1 and
WTi 2
a
memberof
the tribe at Taanith
4.5.
20)
Commentaries
Syriac
and
English),
ed.
and
tr. M.
D.
GIBSON,
vol.
V
(I916),
pt.
I,
pp. 6-7.
See
also the
article
(in
Hebrew) by
S.
PINES
in
the
Yacakov
Friedmann
memorial volume
(Jerusalem,
1974),
p.
212.
The
present
paper
incorporates
points
suggested
by
Professor
PINES
in
a
number of
discussions.
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
8/31
WHO
WERE THE
IOrAAIOI?
IO7
might
e broader
r narrower
ccording
o
speaker
nd
to
context).
In
addition,
mongst
Gentiles nd
Diaspora
Jews
the
word had
alreadya secondary eligiousmeaning,whereasPalestinianJews
used
'IapohX
s a
self-name.
The
divergence
etween
Diaspora
and
Palestinian
Jewish
sage
leads
us to
divide
the New Testament
writings
hemselves nto
two
groups:
he
gospels since nly
heother
ospels
re
comparable
with
John's
Gospel
n
dealing
xclusively
ith vents n
Palestine)
and the remainder
which
argely
oncerns
vents
n the
Diaspora).
The
present nvestigation
will therefore eek
to
determine he
meanings
of
o0
'Iou)oTL, 'Iousaoco
nd
'Iapa~h
in the four
gospels.
So far
hree asic
meanings
f
'IousioL
have
been
distinguished.
But
a
greater
ariety
s
possible,
ince
any
nationality-word
as a
variety
of
stronger
nd
weaker senses.
f we
consider he word
"French"
n
modern
sage,
hen n
the
strictestense Frenchman
is someone
of
French descent
who lives
in
France,
s a French
citizen ndspeaksFrench.Butwemayalso call someone French"
in
a
weaker
ense
f he is
only
ome of these
hings
French
Cana-
dians,
naturalized
renchmen,
hildren
who
happened
o
be born
to
tourists
n
France,
Bretons).
We also
commonlypeak
of "the
French" to mean
the
French
government
r
its
representatives
(when hey ign
n
agreement
ith
the
Russians"),
or
the
French
authorities
when
the
French"
put
a
tourist
n
trialfor
motoring
offence).All threebasic
meanings
f
IouacloL
may
be
expected
o show
comparable
amificationsf
meaning.
ut the
three asic
meanings
are
also
themselves
losely
connected:
Judea
was
(originally)
roughly
he
historical
erritory
f the tribeof
Judah,
while even
non-Judean ews
were
at least
members f the
religion
f
Judea.
The latter
point
an be
appreciated y
recalling
wo
facts.
Firstly,
in
the
ancientMediterranean orld almost
every
people
had its
ownnationalreligion,o thatto be a member f thatreligionwas
in
a
sense to
have
that
nationality1).
Secondly,
s far as the
21)
This
was for
nstancemanifestedn
the
way
in
which
onquering
eoples
tended to
impose
some
part
of
their
religion
upon
conquered
peoples.
(The
Jews
suffered
specially
from
this
tendency,
nd
yet
the
Hasmonean con-
querers
themselves
also
followed
t.)
As
Cicero
puts
it,
in
contrasting
he
Romans
and the
recently onquered
Iudaei
(Pro
Flacco,
69):
"Sua
cuique
civitati
religio,
Laeli, est,
nostra nobis."
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
9/31
Io8
MALCOLM
LOWE
Gentiles
were concerned
Judaism
was
primarily
he
religion
f
Judea
2).
Indeed,
for
long
time
Judaism
was the
religion
merely
ofJudea n the strict ense,namelyduring he centuries rom he
fallof the
northern
ingdom
o the rise
of
the
Hasmoneans
and
of
course
he
religion
was
peculiarly
entered
pon
a
single emple
n
Judea)
23).
The
Jews
hemselves, owever,
ever
eased
to consider
that theirswas the
true
religion
f
the whole
Land of Israel
4).
So there s
a
natural wide
variety
of
possible
meanings
for
'Iou80)oL
in
the Palestine
of
Jesus'
time,
while
yet
all these
meanings
are
systematically
nterrelated.
Yet it is
not
enough
o
listvarious
meanings;
historical imen-
sion must
be
added. For somehow he word
'IoukcZot
eveloped
n
meaning
rom
stage
n
which
t had
only
enses
a)
and
(bI)
to
a
stage
n
which
t had
only
sense
c).
I
suspect
hat two
periods
were
decisive n the course
of
this
development.
he first
was the
period
about
a
century
efore he birth
of
Jesus
when the
Has-
moneansexpandedfrom ncientJudea to conqueralmostthe
whole
Land of
srael.
As each
new
rea was
annexed,
ts nhabitants
were
given
the choiceof
eaving
or
converting
o
Judaism
which
manydid).
So
by
the timeof
Jesus
herewas
a
situation
n which
22)
Thus when Suetonius
says
(Tib.
XXXVI)
that
in
Rome
Tiberius
abolished
"externas
caerimonias,
Aegyptios
udaicosque
ritus",
presumably
"Iudaicus"
no
less
than
"Aegyptius"
ncludes reference
o
a
specific ountry
(especially
as
e.g.
at
Vesp.
VI, 3 "Iudaicus exercitus"means the Roman
army
in
Judea);
similarly
Tacitus on this affair
Ann.
II, lxxxv:
sacris
Aegyptiis
Iudaicisque).
Valerius Maximus
(Fact.
et Dict. Mem.
I,
iii.
3)
reports
the
earlier
139 B.C.) expulsion by
the
praetor
Corneliusof
Iudaei
("repetere
domos
suas
coegit"
acc.
to Paris'
epitome)
to
stop
their
prose-
lytising.
Moreover,
Dio
Cassius
(loc. cit.)
in
effect
ays
that
'Iou8MZto
n
the
religious
sense
are
those
of
any
nation
(even
&koe0sve,)
who
practice
the
customsof
the
people
(i.e.
Ovoq)
f
Judea
(in
his
sense
of the
latter). Compare
also
Cicero
n
the
preceding
note. One
may
well
wonder
whether
n the
period
of
Cicero-or
even
Josephus-"Iudaeus"
was
any
more
religious
erm
han
"Romanus",
"Aegyptius",
tc.
23)
Even
a
century
after the
Hasmonean
conquests,
Strabo
(Geography
XVI,
ii)
recognises
hem
with
reluctance: he defines
'Iou8al
as the
area
between
Phoenicia
(i.e.
the Palestinian
coastland)
and Arabia fromGaza
to
Antilebanon
(ii.21),
but
goes
on
to
say
that most
of
this land was robbed
from
Phoenicia
and
Syria,
as the
'Ioukxtot
had
originally
ettled around
Jerusalem
ii.35-7).
24)
Which
explains
why
the
Judeans
of
I
Maccabees called
themselves
'Iou8dxot
s citizens of the
ethnarchy
f
Judea (or
people
of
Judean
origin),
but
'Iapa-X
as a
national-religious
ntity.
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
10/31
WHO
WERE THE
IOTAAIOI?
IO9
(for
he
first
ime)
heword
'Iouscaio
in
ts
application
o
Palestine25)
would
pply
o
very
ifferent
anges
f
people
n senses
bI)
and
(c).
Nor needtheextensionftheword ohavemeaning b3) or (c)
have been
mmediaten
Palestine
tself,
s the term
oIxoq)
Iopoc'X
was
already
available to mean "the
Jews"
and remained n
use
there
until
much ater.
Moreover,
ven
when
non-Judean
onverts
began
to call themselves
'IouaaoL
the word
would
probably
have
retained connotation
f
Judea
n
the strict
ense,
ince
they
had
(in
the
sense
explained)
become members
f
the
religion
f
the
latter
rea.
The second decisiveperiodwould be theperiodofpersecutions
following
he Bar-Kochba
revolt,
whose
result
was to
eliminate r
expel
most of the
Jewish
population
f
Judea.
Thenceforth
he
Palestinian centreof
Judaism
was
Galilee,
so that
the
word
IouatoL
wouldmuch ess
frequently
eed
o
be
used
n
sense
bi). Eventually
this ensewould
die
out
(since
t
was no
onger
equired
n
Palestine
or
n
the
Diaspora). Possibly
here
was then n
intermediate
tage
in whichthe broadergeographicalense (b3)--'IouaoL meaning
"inhabitants
f
Palestine"-continued
o
survive
6).
Ultimately,
as Palestine
gradually
eased to
be looked
upon
as
the
homeof an
?0vo L6vIoutcov
27),
only
the
religious
ense
(c)
would remain
28).
Thus
semantics
nd
history rovide
n
extensive
ange
f
possible
everyday
uses of
'Iou~axoL
in
Palestine
in
Jesus'
time.
What is
therefore
equired
s
an examination
f all
occurrences
f
the word
in
the
gospels
to see whichof the
possibilities
s most
probably
involved n each case. The remainderf thispaper presents he
25)
There
were scattered
Jewish
communities
n
Palestine
outside
Judea
in
pre-Hasmonean
times,
but not
on
the scale
produced
by
Hasmonean
policy.
See
e.g.
World
History
of
the
Jewish People,
vol.
VI
(1962),
ch.
6
(by
M.
AvI-J
ONAH).
major problem
s the extent o
which
hese
communities
were
evacuated
to
Judea
by
Simon
and
Judas
Maccabeus
(I
Maccabees
v
23, 45),
and
in
particular
he
corresponding
xtent
of forced
onversion
n
Galilee after ts
reconquest
(an
event skimmedover
by Josephus).
26)
Yet
Palestinian
Jews
could still
speak
of
Judea
in
the old
strict
ense
even in
the time of Dio
Cassius;
see
e.g.
Pesahim
4.5,
Erubin
53
a. Con-
ceivably,
however,
these
documents-which aim to
provide
a
definitive
picture
of an
earlier
period-are
also somewhat
archaic
in
terminology.
27)
As
I
Maccabees
viii
25,
etc.
28)
Perhaps
connected
with
this s
the
fact,
noted
by
T.
REINACH
(Textes
relatifs
u
judaisme,
p.
158,
n.
2;
a
number of
the
passages
quoted
above
from
ancient
authors occur
in
this
collection),
that from
the 2nd
century
onwards
'EppatioL
frequently
replaces
'Iou8stior
n
Greek
authors.
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
11/31
IIO
MALCOLM
LOWE
results
of
such
a
survey
n
systematic
orm
but
starting
with
'lapa~X
and
1
'Iousoat).
We shall see that theeverydaymeaningsuffice,o thatthere s
no need to
see
in
John's
Gospel
ome fantastic
llegorical
meaning
of the word
though
ts
author
may
have intended
o
convey
n
allegorical
message
oo).
ISRAEL
As
a
start,
he
meaning
f
this term
may
be determined.
ere
Matthew's
Gospel
s
especially elpful:
t defines
he
term
learlyin
respect
oth of area andof
people,
ince
Joseph
went o Galilee
when
told
in
dreams
o
go
to
y-
'Iapa~X
but
not to
go
to
Judea
(Mt
ii
I9-23),
while
Jesus
told his
disciples
to
go
neither o Samari-
tans
nor to Gentilesbut
only
to
the
lost
sheep
of
o~xoq
'IapocX
(Mt
x
5-6).
In other
words,
IcpacxX
eans
here
he wholeLand of
Israel
(including
udea
as well
as the ancient
northern
ingdom)
or
precisely
he
Jews
(as
opposed
to Samaritans nd
Gentiles).
The word occurswidely n one or otherofthese two senses n
Matthew
nd
Luke,
though
ther
ossible
meanings
annot
lways
be
so
decisively
xcluded,
and
twice
n Mark
9).
Particular are s
needed
n
examining
he occurrences
n
John's
Gospel
n view of its
suggested
amaritan
origin 0).
There s
no
evidence,
owever,
f
any
deviation
rom he
meanings
f
'IpapcX
defined n
Matthew. hus
when
Jesus
s said to have been
greeted
as
"King
of srael"
on
entering erusalemJn
xii
13),
thereference
is
certainly
o thewholeLand of sraeland not
merely
he ancient
northern
ingdom.
or
firstly
he crowd
s
said
to have come
to
Jerusalem
or the Passover
(Jn
xii
12),
thus
they
subscribed o
29)
See Mt
ii
6,
viii
10,
ix
33,
x
23,
xv
24,
31,
xix
28, xxvii
42;
Lk i
16,
54,
68,
80o,
i
25,
32,
34,
iv
25,
27,
Vii
9,
xxii
30,
xxiv
21
(also
olxoq
'Iaxc4p,
Lk
i
33).
In Luke the context
s often
Judean,
ruling
out
the
possibility
hat
merely
thenorthern rea is involved. Some of these occurrences re ratherpoetical,
but
a sufficient umber
are
not.
Note
also
Lk xvii
15-18: Jesus
called the
Samaritan
a
"foreigner"
&XXoyev+q).
ark has
only
LU?ae6
'Japx
at
xv
32
(parallelling
Mt xxvii
42)
and a
quotation
of
'W
7VW
at
xii
29.
The Mishna
too
distinguishes
"Israel" from the "Cuthites"
(i.e.
Samaritans;
see
Berachoth
8.8,
Nedarim
3.1o).
30)
See G.
W.
BUCHANAN,
"The
Samaritan
Origin
f the
Gospel
of
John"
n
the
Goodenough
memorial volume
Religions
in
Antiquity (ed.
NEUSNER).
The
present
paper
does
not
essentially
conflict
with the thesis of
a
Samaritan
origin,
nor does
it
presuppose
uch an
origin
for
John's Gospel. (Its
format,
however,
owes a considerable
debt to advice
from Professor
BUCHANAN.)
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
12/31
WHO WERE THE
IOTAAIOI?
III
the wider
ense
of
srael;
secondly hey
ame out to welcome
him
on
account of
what
they
had
heard
from he
'Ioul'xoL
who
had
witnessed heraising fLazarus
31);
and thirdlyt is added that
this fulfilled
he
prophecy Zech
ix
9):
"Fear
not,
daughter
f
Zion;
behold
yourking..."
This last is
particularlyignificant,
since
t shows
hat
the author f
John's
Gospel
himself
nderstood
Israel
here
o
include
Jerusalem.
Moreover,
when
Jesus
addressed
Nicodemus
the
Jerusalemite
Pharisee and member
f
the
Sanhedrin)
2)
as "the
teacher
of
Israel"
(Jn
ii
Io),
the
referenceannotbe
to the
northernribes
alone, and Nicodemuswould
presumably
ave understood he
word o
mean
precisely
he members f the
Jewish
eligion
to
the
exclusion
f
Samaritans).
There s no evidence hat
Jesus
himself
meant
anything
lse.
Since,
however,
John's
Gospel
nowhere
reports
Jesus
explicitly
o have
excluded
the
Samaritans
from
Israel,
a
Samaritan
reader would be at
liberty
o
suppose
that
Jesus
did
not
mean
exactly
what Nicodemus
might
ave
thought.
In otherwords, hisgospelhas no instance f thetermIapa
X
33)
which
s
in
conflictwith
Jewish
sage
(as
attested
n
Matthew),
but lsonone
whichwould f
necessity
ave offended
amaritans
4).
JUDEA
Above
there
were
distinguished
hree
enses
f
"Judea"
relevant
to the
gospels.
We
may
attempt
o
establish
which ense
of the
word
s
meant
n
its various
occurrencess
follows:
f
Judea
ap-
31)
See
Jn
xii
17-18
and ch.
xi
passim.
These
'Iou8c0oL
were
probably
all
Judean
friends nd
relatives of
Lazarus,
as
they
had
come to mourn him
immediately
fter
his
death;
they
would
certainly
have
understood srael
to
include
Jerusalem.
32)
See
Jn
iii
i
and
vii
45-52.
The
question
"Are
you
from Galilee
too ?"
seems
obviously
rhetorical.
The
Mishna's exclusion
(just
noted)
of the
Samaritans from srael
may
be considered
o
state
the standard view of
the
Pharisaic
school
(as
creators
of
the
Mishna).
33)
The
other wo cases in
John i 31, 49)
are less
clearcut,
but
are not
such
as to
suggest
hat
anything
lse is meant thanin the cases
just
discussed.As
for
Jesus'
greeting
Nathanael as a "true
Israelite"
(Jn
i
47),
the
term
need
not exclude
Judeans.
On the
contrary,
he
implication
f
Jn
ii
io
and
xii
13
is that
"Israelite" here
means
"Jewish
inhabitant of the
Land of
Israel",
although
once
again
a
Samaritan
reader
could
suppose
himselfnot to
be
excluded.
34)
Note
also
that the
Zechariah
oracle
(quoted
at Mt xxi
5
as well as
Jn
xii
15, though
all
four
accounts of
the
Entry
into
Jerusalem
xemplify
t)
is
at least
evenhanded: "For
I
have bent
Judah
as
my
bow;
I
have
made
Ephraim
its arrow."
(Zech
ix
13
in
the
RSV).
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
13/31
112
MALCOLM
OWE
pears
in
a
given
context
as
contrastedwith
both
Samaria
(or
Idumea)
and
Galilee,
t
may
be
supposed
hat
Judea
n
the
strict
sense is meant;while f it is contrastedmerelywithGalilee (or
Perea),
then either
ense
(I)
or
sense
(2)
is
meant nd
additional
clues
are
needed
o
determinehe
matter.
John's
Gospel
ppears
o
speak
of
Judea
only
n
the
strict
ense.
Thus
at
Jn
v
3-4
it
is said that
Jesus
had
to
go
through
amaria
in
order o return
rom
Judea
to
Galilee,
o
obviously
he
strict
sense is
meant. Since the
occurrences
n
iii
22
35),
v
47
and
54
are
connectedwith
the same
journey,
t
presumably
means
Judea
n
the strict ense n thesecasestoo (Galilee s
certainly
xcluded n
iv
47,
54).
The
occurrences
n
Jn
vii
I,
3
and xi
7
suggest
Judea
in
the
strict ense
n
view of
their
onnexions
ith he mention
f
'IousoatoL
n
Jn
vii
I,
2
and xi
8;
moreover
Jn
vii
I
and
3
exclude
Galilee
and
Jn
xi
7
excludesPerea.
Matthew nd Mark
follow
he same
usage
as
far
s can
be
deter-
mined,
though
occasionallymeaning
(2)
cannot
be
absolutely
excluded.ThusBethlehem fJudea (Mt ii I, 5) is Bethlehem f
Judah
(as
Mt ii
6)
by
contrastwith
Bethlehem
f
Zebulon.
n
Mt
ii
20-22
Joseph
went to
live
in
Galilee as
opposed
to
Judea
(which
probably
xcludes
Samaria,
as he
would not
have
chosen
to
live
there
anyway).
n
Mt
iii
I
John
the
Baptist
was in
the
Judean
desert,
while n
Mt
ii
5
Judea
s at
least
distinguished
rom
Perea
(and
the
ess
explicit
ut
parallel
Mk
5
may
be
interpreted
in
the same
sense).
Mt
iv
25
and Mk iii
7
variously distinguish
JudeafromGalilee, dumea,Perea,Phoenicia nd the
Decapolis.
Comparing
Mt
xix
I
with
Mk
x
I
suggests
hat the
text
of
the
former
s
wrong,
o
that both
distinguish
udea
from
Galilee
and
Perea
36).
Finally,
he
GreatTribulation
was
apparently upposed
35)
Here
most
probably
meaning
the
Judean
countryside
s
opposed
to
Jerusalem
perhaps
thus also Mt iii
5,
Mk i
5
and
other
passages
where
both
Jerusalem
and
Judea
are
mentioned). Similarly,
n
the
Mishna Judea iscontrastedwithboth Galilee and
Jerusalem
t Ketuboth
4.12.
36)
Mt xix i
implies
a
sense of
Judea
which ncludes
Perea
but
excludes
Galilee;
this is
odd,
as at
that
time
Galilee
and Perea
were a
single
dminis-
trative
unit
under
Herod
Antipas,
while
Judea
was
governed
by
Pilate.
Most
probably
one of the
variant
readings
at
Mk
x
i
is the
correct ne here
too.
Ptolemy's
ater
classification
f
Perean
cities
under
Judea
(Geography
,
xvi.9;
here
"Judea
east of
the
Jordan"
s
apparently
his
name
for
Perea)
at
most
reflects
he
mid-second
entury
ituation,
f t
is not
a device
of his own
invention.
.
W. G. MASTERMAN
"Judaea"
in
Int.
Standard
Bible
Enc.,
rev.
ed., 1955)
cites
Josephus,J.
Ant.
XII,
228-236
in
support
of
Ptolemy,
but
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
14/31
WHO
WERE THE
IOTAAIOI?
II3
to
fall
principally upon
Judea
in the
strict sense
37),
so that
this
is the
meaning
f
"Judea"
in
the
parallel
versesMt xxiv
16,
Mk
xiii 14
and Lk xxi
21.
Luke, however,
eparts
from he strict
sage
of
"Judea".
His
calling
Herod the Great and Pilate
respectively
King
of
Judea"
(Lk
i
5)
and
"Governor f
Judea"
(Lk
iii
I)
might
e
discounted,
as
these
if
ndeedhe means
Judea
n
a
wider
ense)
could be
just
official itles.But there
emain hree
assages
wherehe
uses
MR=a
'Iouoc'oc
or
ghX
7
'Iouaocl apparently
to mean the
whole Land
of
Israel,
or
perhaps
ather he
parts
of
t
inhabited
y
Jews
8).
Thus
inLk vii 11-17Jesus aised hewidow's onfromhedead at Nain
(firmly
dentified s
near
Nazareth),
whereupon
is
fame
spread
"through
the
whole of
Judea"
39).
Comparing
Lk
vi
17
with
the
in
fact Perea is here
said
(233)
to
lie
between
udea
and
Arabia.
Ptolemy,
on
the other
hand,
makes the
Arabian desert
begin
mmediately
o
the
east of
Judea
"as defined"
(Geography
,
xix.
I)-the
province
as
from
105
A.D.
37)
Thus
when
Matthew
reaches
he
coming
f
the Son of
Man,
he
apparent-
ly
alludes
(Mt
xxiv
30:
xloc
6e
x6
ovr7a
~anL
act
puhXmiT
y)
to
Zechariah
xii 12
(Septuagint: xoc x6evocL7 y7"xocau& hX&q uX)&; the
cpua
are those of
David, Nathan,
Levi, etc.,
.e.
'
yij
here
means "the
land"),
which
occurs n
a
passage
concerning
n attack
by
all the
nations
of
the
earth
or
land
(Zech
xii
3:
xs-&v
1'
~Ovl
-
yiS)
upon Judah.
While
all three
evangelists
warn
those
n
Judea
to
flee
when
Jerusalem
s attacked
(Luke
explicitly,
Matthew
and Mark in
terms
of
the
"desolating
sacrilege").
38)
The
latter s
suggested
by
Acts
i 8
(where
Samaria is
excluded).
Pliny
similarly
makes Galilee
and
Perea
parts
of
Judea
(though xcluding
dumea
as
well
as Samaria: Nat.
Hist.
V,
70).
That
Luke
on
occasion
means
Judea
in
a wider
sense is
agreed e.g.
by
K. H.
RENGSTORF
Das
Evangelium
nach
Lukas, Ioth ed., 1965) and in the articles on Judea by Masterman (Int.
Standard
Bible
Enc.),
E. G.
KRAELING
Dict.
of
the
Bible,
2nd
ed.
by
GRANT
and
ROWLEY,
1963),
and
J.
BLINZLER
(Lexikon
fiir Theologie
und
Kirche,
2nd ed.
by
HiFER
and
RAHNER,
VOl.
5,
1960;
he
sees the
strict
sense
at
Acts
i
8).
All
see
a wider
sense also
at
Lk iv
44.
The
only
nnovation
here
s
my
suggestion
that Luke
uses an
ampliative
adjective
to
distinguish
he
wider
sense rather
than
introduces
t
indiscriminately.
39)
Lk vii
I,
i
i
furthermore
suggest
that
this Nain was
not
at a
great
distance from
Capernaum,
so that
the incident
is
portrayed
as
having
occurredwell
outside
Judea
in the
strict
ense. There
is thus no
reason
why
the event shouldhave caused a stirprecisely n thislatterarea.
On
Nain see
e.g.
KRAELING
n
Dict.
of
the
Bible,
2nd
ed.
Josephus
does
mention
a Nain
(or Ain)
in
Judea
(J.
War IV,
511-513
and
517);
also
H.
CONZELMANN,
Die
Mitte
der
Zeit
(3rd
ed.,
I96O),
has
tried to
argue
that
Luke's
geographical
knowledge
of
Palestine was
inaccurate
n
many
details
(p.
13,
etc.),
though
without
he
resulting
nconsistencies
xceeding
he
norm
for
good
ancient
historians
p. i1).
But the
placename
n
Josephus
s
almost-
certainly
Ain:
it
is
the
preferred
eading
t
511
and aiam is the
Latin
reading
in
both
cases;
moreover
f7*
"spring")
occurs
n
many
Hebrew
placenames,
whereas
Nain
in
517
could be
a
scribal
error
nduced
by
the Lukan
story.
8
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
15/31
114
MALCOLM
LOWE
parallel
Mt
iv
25
and
Mk iii
7
suggests
hat "all
Judea"
in that
verse
ums
up
the
various
parts
ofthe
Land of
srael
mentioned
y
Matthew nd Mark
0).
Whileat Lk xxiii 5 Pilate was toldthat
Jesus
"stirs
up
the
people,
teaching hrough
he
whole
of
Judea,
and
havingbegun
from
Galilee
up
to
here"
(where
ilate
would
t
least
have
understood
he
whole
of
his
protectorate,
hough
his
informants ore
ikely
meant
Jesus'
ong
walk
through
most of
the
Jewish
reas;
note also
Acts
x
37,
whichomits
"and"
after
"Judea").
Yet when
Luke
speaks
of
4
'Iouscoc
without
dding
he
adjectives
7r(ao(
r 65Xhe seems to meanJudea n the strict ense, o that
those
adjectives
perhaps
signify
conscious
eparture
rom
he
basic sense
1).
Thus
"the hill
country
f
Judea"
(Lk
i
65)
means
Judea
proper the
hill
country
f
Samaria
was
not
populated
by
Jews;
compare
lso
Lk i
39
"into
the
hill
country,
o a
city
of
Judah")
42).
At Lk
ii
4
Judea
xcludes
Galilee
and
ncludes
ethle-
hem).
The
reading
Iousotoc
t
Lk
iv
44
is not
wholly
certain
(rocXthocaccursquitewidelyn themanuscripts);t can also be
explained
as
hinting
t a
visit to
Jerusalem
or some
feast.At
Lk
v
17
Pharisees
re said to
have
come from
Galilee and
Judea
(where
he
latter
thereforelso
excludes
Samaria,
which
had
no
Pharisees).
k
xxi
21 has
already
been
discussed.
In
short,
'Iouaoctoc
eans
Judea
n
the strict
ense
throughout
the
gospels
3),
except
where
uke
makes
what
may
be a
conscious
departure
rom
his
usage.
40)
Thus
whereasLuke
mentions
all
Judea"
and
Jerusalem
nd
Phoenicia,
Mark mentions
Galilee,
Judea,
Jerusalem,
dumea,
Perea
and
Phoenicia.
(This
point
presupposes
no
specific
view
on
the
Synoptic
question.)
41)
In
Matthew,
however,
rrac
'Iousaoc
does not
have
this
meaning
(Mt
iii
5,
nor
probably
n
the
parallel
Mk i
5).
But
Josephus
has
the
same
usage
as
Luke:
precisely
Herod the
Great
and
Agrippa
I
are
termed
rulers
of 1
6),
'Iou80so (J.
Ant.
XV, 2; XIX, 343).
42)
Moreover,
rofessor avid
FLUSSER
has
pointed
out tomethat
)1
peLti
must
here
mean the
toparchy
mentioned
by
Pliny
(as
"Orinen",
Nat.
Hist.,
loc.
cit.),
.e.
a
comparatively
mall
area
centered
upon Jerusalem.
This also
accords
with
Zechariah's
serving
s a
priest
n
the
temple.
Pliny
lists
this
toparchy
s
merely
ne of
the ten
parts
of
Judea
in
the
strict
ense;
a
some-
what
larger
rea is
indicated
by
Shebiith
9.2:
the
three ands of
the
"bicur"-
Judea,
Perea and
Galilee
(as
Ketuboth
13.10o,
aba
Bathra
3.2)-have
each
three
parts,
fli
is
one
part
of
Judea.
43)
As
in
the
Mishna
(compare
preceding
note),
where
Judea
is
explicitly
contrastedwith
Galilee in
almost
every
occurrence.
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
16/31
WHO
WERE
THE
IOTAAIOI?
115
AREAS
AND
COMMUNITIES
Besidesthe
terms
lready ariously
mentioned,
here lso
occurs
the term
PahXhLoo
meaning Galilean")
4).
This is significantn
that
it
enables
us
to
complete
he
following
cheme
of
relations
between areas and
communities)
hat
is
presupposedby
the
evangelists:
Yi
IapocX
(o xo4)
IapodTX,Ipo-?&q
Land of srael
(House
of)
Israel,
sraelite
Galilee Galilean
'Iou~o0oc
) 'IousOCZoS
Judea
?
The
question-mark
s
to be
replaced
with whateverwe think
should
orrespond
o
Judea.
But it has
ust
been een
that
"Judea"
is
normally
meant
n
the
strict
ense
by
the
evangelists.
nd
just
as in
the
other
ases,
they
would
need
a
wordto
signify person
from hisarea; and the appropriateword would be 'IousLcoq. o
thiswould
ccur
with
he
meaning Judean"
n
ordinary
alestinian
usage
of the
period
45).
Thus n
order o
say "person
rom
udea"
the
evangelists
ould
have used
Iouasaoq or
its
Semitic
quivalents).
We now have to
determine
ow
often
the
converse
s
true,
.e.
how
often
they
meant
Judean"
when
hey
wrote
Iou~cXo4.
THE FEASTS OF THE IOTAAIOI
Five times
n
John's
Gospel
there
occur
the
phrases op'T
rirv
'Iou3oLov
Jn
v
I,
vi
4,
vii
I)
or
n'7yX
rjv
'Iouocucov
Jn
i
13,
xi
55),
which
are
unquestioningly
ranslated
the
Feast/Passover
f he
Jews".
The
presence
f
the
appendage
rv
'Iou~oaov
s
sometimes
explained
s
intended
o avoid
confusion
ith he Christian
GicX,
i.e.
Easter
as
f
there ouldbe
an
Easter
before he
Resurrection ),
orpossibly ome Christianariant fthe Passovermeal
6).
44)
Said
of Peter
or
Jesus
at
Mt xxvi
69,
Mk
xiv
7o,
Lk
xxii
59
and
xxiii
6;
and
in
other contexts at
Lk
xiii
1-2
and
Jn
iv
45.
All the
contexts
except
Lk
xiii
1-2)
make it clear
enough
that
"person
from
Galilee"
is meant. In
the Mishna
occurs
a few
times
(e.g.
Yadayim 4.8),
also VI
M38
(e.g.
Ketuboth
4.12).
Contrast S.
Zeitlin,
Jew.Q.R.,
64
(I974),
189-203.
45)
As
in
Josephus, J.
Ant.
XVII,
254.
Note that "those
whom
we
call
aXtLatoL"
AgainstApion
I,
48)
implies
"and not
'IoukZiot".
46)
On
various
hypotheses
see R. E.
BROWN,
Anchor Bible, vol.
29,
esp.
pp. 114,
290.
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
17/31
116
MALCOLM
LOWE
But there s
reason o
suppose
hat the author
f
John's
Gospel
did
not invent hese
phrases,
ince at least the
first f them
has
parallels n the Septuagint7). Some such phrasewould also be
needed
to
distinguish
he
feasts f
Judea
and
earlier
Judah)
from
those
of other
religions
n
the area
48).
The
second
phrase
has no
exact
Septuagint arallels;
but
again, something
ike it
would be
needed
o
distinguish
he Passover f
the
Judeans
rom
hat
of
the
Samaritans,
nd
earlier he
Passover of
Judah
from
hat of
the
northern
ingdom9).
Now the author of
John's
Gospel
uses these
phrases
with
a
perceptible
onnotation f
Judea
in the strictense
(or
even of
Jerusalem
and its
immediate
surroundings).
or
they
occur
only
n
referenceo
feasts
equiring pilgrimage
o
Judea;
moreover,
they
are
employed
recisely
when
omething
s neededto
explain
why
people
are
suddenly
aced
with
a
journey
o
Judea.
Thus
at
Jn
vii
2-3
it
is said:
"Now the
iop-trj
wv
'Iouamxi
Tabernacles
was at
hand. So
his
brothers aid to him:
Leave here and
go
to
'Iouac .....' " (Herethepoint s especially onspicuous ecause
of the
etymological
onnexion.)Journeys
o
Jerusalem
re intro-
duced n a similar
attern
t
Jn
i
13,
v
I
and
xi
55.
On the
other
hand,
whenever he
evangelist's
ccount
has
already
made t
clear
that
Jesus
(or
whoever
lse)
was
in
Jerusalem,
he words
opt~,
7nxZxo
and
other
east
names)
occurwithout
ny appendage.
There s
exactly
ne
exception
o thisrule
0),
namely
n
Jn
vi
4
47)
Ez
xlv 17:
'v
'r~t
opr~ti (Heb. 0Z1)
xo=
'v
'ri
vou~rlvtoa
xoc' v
rozq
a0PP0'oL~
xcat
v
xdacs
'r~S
opt~S
(D'"T9 l)
ogxou
IapocX;
Judith
viii 6
has a more
complicated
formula,
but here
the shorter
Vulgate
version
(praeter
sabbata et
neomenia et festa
domus
Israhel)
agrees
in
spirit
with
the
Ezechiel
passage.
There is also
Na
ii
I
(i 15):
&6procr,
ou8sc,
r&k
&opr'q
(D"11)
aou;
Ez
xxxvi
38:
cg
np6paaococpouacX.
&v
r
ts
&opra'tS
D'tSl71)
asq;
and
I
Maccabees i
39:
ai
op'aocl
(i.e.
of
Jerusalem).
Note
that
the reference
may
be to a
people,
an area
or
a
place.
48)
Israeli
Arabs
today
distinguish
between the feasts
of
the
various
religious
communities s
cId
al-Muslimin,
id
al-Yahild, etc.,
i.e.
by
exact
analogues of1
l
opi zrcovIousgocov.
49)
Note that one of the first cts of
Jeroboam
after the
split
between
Israel
and
Judah
was to
institute feast
n
Bethel "like the feast
n
Judah"
(I
Ki xii
32;
Sept.:
xmr'&
,v
&op'rjv
v
&v
yt
Iou~8).
On
continuity
etween
this dissension
and that
between Samaritans and
Judeans,
see
BUCHANAN
op.
cit.,
pp.
163-165.
The
feast
of I Ki xii
32
was
in
fact
Tabernacles,
but a
northern
nalogue
to Passover
would
presumably
ave been
instituted
n
the
following
pring.)
50)
Jn
xii
I
is not a
genuine
exception:
here
n7rcMa
ppears
without
the
appendage
(even
though
a
journey
ensues)
because the
full
formula ccurs
only
three
verses earlier
(in
xi
55,
while
o5v
of
xii
I
refers
ack
to xi
55-57).
This content downloaded from 130.216.158.78 on Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:46:03 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 Who Were the Ioudaioi
18/31
WHO
WERE
THE
IOTAAIOI?
117
which
comments,
mmediately
efore
the
Feeding
of the Five
Thousand,
hat
Passover
'
opt~
'v
'Iouscdov
was at
hand,
and
yetno journey o Judeaensues. Now this s a remarkable ase of
the
exception roving
herule:
thisversedid not exist n
versions
of
John's
Gospel
known o some
early
uthorities,
nd it has often
been
regarded
s the
main obstacle
to
reconciling
he
chronology
ofthis
gospel
with he
Synoptics
1).
So on theone handwe have
an
extra
reason
for
uestioning
he
authenticity
fthis
verse,
while n
the other
hand there s
reinforcement
or he
suggestion
hat for
the
principal
uthor
of
John'sGospel
(but
not
forwhoeverwas
responsible
or hisverse) hesephrases ad a connotationfJudea.
If
an
explanation
s
sought
or uch
connotation,
t s
perhaps
o
be
found
n
those
earlierhistorical ituations.
or
if
such
phrases
(and
theirSemitic
quivalents)
were
already
current
n
the
long
period
when
Judaism
was
merely
he
religion
f
Judea
n
the strict
sense
and
before hat the
religion
f the
kingdom
f
Judah),
hen
they
would
once
have meant
"feast/Passover
f the
Judeans".
As
the Hasmoneanexpansionhad occurred omparativelyecently,
it is conceivable that such
phrases
continued
omewhat nac-
curately
o
have the
same
meaning 2)
at least
long enough
for
the
main
uthor
f
John's
Gospel
o understandhem
n this
way
3).
In
any
ase,
heir ranslationhould eflectheir se
by
this
uthor;
in
this
respect
he
possibilities
reeither
iterally
s
"feast/Passover
of
the
Judeans"
r
(perhaps
etter)
s
"Judean
feast/Passover"4).
51)
See
HERMANN VON
SODEN,
"Chronology",EncyclopaediaBiblica
(ed.
CHEYNE
and
BLACK).
I
intend
to
go
into
the
chronological mplications
n
a
separate
paper.
The
chronology
f
Johndepends
almost
entirely pon
these
five
mentions
of
feasts;
the
stylistic
feature
ust
explained
indicates that
fourof them were
due to one hand and the fifth o another.
Note that also the mention f Hanukka
(r&
yxata,
the Feast of Dedica-
tion
of the
Temple)
in
Jn
x
22-23
has a
scene-setting
unction:
t
was
a)
Hanukka
and
b) winter(y), xplaining
why
Jesus
was
a)
in
the
temple
nd
b)
moreover n
the
portico
of Solomon
(which
offered
helter).
52)
In fact
the
chief
feasts
of
Judaism
continued
to
be celebratednear
a
Judeantemplerunby Judeans,so that theywere still n a sensepeculiarly
Judean
feasts.The
slaughtering
nd
eating
of the
Paschal
Lamb,
for
nstance,
could
only
take
place
within
the walls of
Jerusalem see
Pesahim
7.
12),
although
the associated Feast
of
Unleavened Bread was
observed
by Jews
everywhere.
53)
But
the
phrase
1'T171
TflZ
J
1T,
which
betrays
a
similar
origin,
was
already
no
longer
understood
by
the
time the Mishna
was
compiled see
Kethuboth
7. 6).
This
observation
comes
from
Professor
LUSSER.
54) Giving e.g.
for
Jn
vii
2-3:
"Now
the
Judean
feast Tabernacles was at
hand. So his
brothers
aid
to
him: 'Leave here and
go
to
Judea...'
".
It is
This content downloaded from 130.216