Euthalian Traditions

Vemund Blomkvist
Euthalian Traditions
Texte und Untersuchungen
zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur
Archiv für die Ausgabe der Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller

der ersten Jahrhunderte
(TU)
Begründet von
O. von Gebhardt und A. von Harnack
Herausgegeben im Auftrag der

Berlin-Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
von Christoph Markschies
Band 170
De Gruyter
Vemund Blomkvist
Euthalian Traditions
Text, Translation and Commentary
Including the Appendix

Parainesis as an Ancient Genre-Designation
by
David Hellholm and Vemund Blomkvist
De Gruyter
Dieser Band wurde im Rahmen der gemeinsamen Forschungsförderung
im Akademienprogramm mit Mitteln des Bundesministeriums für Forschung
und der Senatsverwaltung für Wirtschaft, Technologie und Forschung
des Landes Berlin erarbeitet.
Gutachter dieses Bandes:

Hans-Gebhard Bethge und Christoph Markschies
Vemund Blomkvist. Born 1967. Dr. Philos. Senior Lecturer in Greek and
New Testament Isagogics at the Faculty of Theology, University of Oslo.
This publication has been supported by the Research Council of Norway.
ISBN 978-3-11-029179-7
e-ISBN 978-3-11-029196-4
ISSN 0082-3589
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress.
Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek

Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen
Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet
über http://dnb.dnb.de abrufbar.
쑔 2012 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Layout and typesetting: Progressus Consultant AB in Karlstad, Sweden
Druck: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen
⬁ Gedruckt auf säurefreiem Papier
Printed in Germany
www.degruyter.com
Contents
Preface ................................................................................................................xi
Part One
Introductory Issues
I. Introductory Issues ........................................................................................3

1. Introduction ..............................................................................................3
1.1. What is the ‘Euthalian Apparatus’? ................................................3
1.2. Manuscript Evidence and Editions................................................5
2. History of Research ..................................................................................8
2.1. Survey ................................................................................................8
2.2. Conclusions ....................................................................................31
3. Aim and Structure of the Study............................................................33
3.1. The Euthalian Apparatus and the Biblical Text ..........................33
3.2. The Sequence and Style of the Present Commentary ...............34
3.3. Themes of the Commentary .........................................................36
3.3.1. The Pre-text ............................................................................36
3.3.2. The Meta-terminology of the Apparatus ............................36
3.3.3. The Apparatus as Paraphrase ...............................................40
3.3.4. Parallel Materials ...................................................................42
Part Two
Text and Translation
II. The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι ..............................45

vi Contents
Κεφάλαια .....................................................................................................45
Ὑποθέσεις ....................................................................................................73
Πρόλογοι .....................................................................................................99
Part Three
Commentary
III. Commentary............................................................................................121
1. Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι ...............................................121
1.1. The Genre κεφάλαιον-τίτλος .....................................................121
1.2. The Structure of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι......................123
1.3. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the Division of the Pre-text............124
1.4. The meta-terminology of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι ......125
1.4.1. ΠΑΡΑΙΝΕΣΙΣ ......................................................................125
1.4.2. ΠΑΡΑΚΛΗΣΙΣ ....................................................................129
1.4.3. ΕΥΧΑΡΙΣΤΙΑ.......................................................................130
1.4.4. ΕΥΧΗ ....................................................................................134
1.4.5. ΕΠΑΝΑΛΗΨΙΣ ...................................................................136
1.5. The meta-terminology of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι: Concluding
Remarks ................................................................................................138
1.6. Transformations and Additions to the Pre-text .......................139
1.7. The ‘Paulusbild’ of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι....................................140
2. Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις ..........................................................142
2.1. The Genre Υποθεσις ....................................................................142
2.2. The Hypotheses of the Pauline Letters ......................................147
2.2.1. Authorship ............................................................................147
2.2.2. Structure ...............................................................................147
Contents vii
2.2.3. Διὰ τί: An Ancient Introduction to the Ὑποθέσεις of the

Pauline Letters ................................................................................147
2.2.4. Hypothesis of Romans ........................................................148
2.2.5. Hypothesis of 1 Corinthians ..............................................154
2.2.6. Hypothesis of 2 Corinthians ..............................................157
2.2.7. Hypothesis of Galatians ......................................................160
2.2.8. Hypothesis of Ephesians .....................................................161
2.2.10. Hypothesis of Colossians..................................................165
2.2.11. Hypothesis of 1 Thessalonians .........................................167
2.2.12. Hypothesis of 2 Thessalonians .........................................168
2.2.13. Hypothesis of Hebrews .....................................................170
2.2.14. Hypothesis 1 Timothy.......................................................171
2.2.15. Hypothesis of 2 Timothy ..................................................172
2.2.16. Hypothesis of Titus ...........................................................172
2.2.17. Hypothesis of Philemon ...................................................173
2.2.18. The Hypotheses of the Pauline Letters: Summary ........174
2.3. The Hypotheses of the Catholic Letters ....................................176
2.3.1. Authorship ............................................................................176
2.3.2. Structure ...............................................................................176
2.3.3. Hypothesis of James ............................................................178
2.3.4. Hypothesis of 1 Peter ..........................................................179
2.3.5. Hypothesis of 2 Peter ..........................................................182
2.3.6. Hypothesis of 1 John ...........................................................183
2.3.9. Hypothesis of Jude ...............................................................186
2.3.10. The Hypotheses of the Catholic Letters: Summary.......188
viii Contents
2.5. The List of Apostles and Deacons ..............................................192

2.6. The List of Wonders .....................................................................192
2.7. The Hypotheses: Summary .........................................................193
3. Commentary on the Prologues ..........................................................194
3.1. The Genre ‘Prologue’ ...................................................................194
3.2. Commentary on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul ............... 196
3.2.1. Structure of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul ............... 196
3.2.2. The Heading to the Prologue to the Letters of Paul ......... 197
3.2.3. Prologus praeter rem ...........................................................197
3.2.3.1. The Genre ‘Prooemium’ .............................................197
3.2.3.2. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’ ................................198
3.2.4. Prologus ante rem ................................................................200
3.2.4.1. The ‘Life of Paul’ ..........................................................200
3.2.4.2. The ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ .........................206
3.2.4.3. The ‘Editorial Notice’ ..................................................211
3.2.4.4. The ‘Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul’ ..................213
3.2.5. Prologue to the Letters of Paul: Summary .........................216
3.3. Commentary on the Prologue to the Catholic Letters ............. 218
3.3.1. Structure of the Prologue to the Catholic Letters ............. 218
3.3.2. The Heading to the Prologue to the Catholic Letters ....... 218
3.3.4.1. Comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’ .........................219
3.3.5. The Prologue to the Catholic letters: Summary...............220
3.4. Commentary on the Prologue to Acts ...................................... 220
Contents ix
3.4.1. Structure of the Prologue to Acts ...................................... 220

3.4.2. The Heading to the Prologue to Acts ................................ 221
3.4.3.2. The ‘Encomium of Melete’ .........................................223
3.4.4.1. Comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’ .........................224
3.4.4.2. Comments on the ‘Epitome of Acts’ .........................225
3.4.5. Prologue to Acts: Summary ...............................................226
3.5. The Prologues: Summary ...........................................................226
Part Four
Résumé
IV. Résumé......................................................................................................231
1. Introduction ..........................................................................................231
2. Aim of the Present Commentary .......................................................232
3. The Meta-terminology of the Euthalian Apparatus.........................233
4. The ‘Paulusbild’.....................................................................................235
5. The Catholic Letters in the Euthalian Apparatus .............................240
6. Acts in the Euthalian Apparatus.........................................................241
7. The Composition of the Euthalian Editions .....................................242
8. The Ancient and Medieval Parallel Materials in Relation to the Eu-
thalian apparatus ......................................................................................244
9. Comparison of the Parallel Materials ................................................246
x Contents
Part Five
Appendices
V. Appendix I .................................................................................................253
1. ‘Marcionite’ Prologues .........................................................................253
2. Edition of Priscillian ............................................................................255
3. Theodoret’s Arguments .......................................................................269
4. Theophylact’s Arguments ....................................................................286
VI. Appendix II ..............................................................................................299

1. What is a Genre-Designation? ...........................................................299
2. Parainesis — paraineo — parainetikos as Genre-Designation ........302
2.1. A short History of parainesis as Genre-Designation ...............302
2.2. The Evidence from Euthalius .....................................................304
2.2.1. Evidence from the Chapter-Lists (CAP) ..........................305
2.2.2. Evidence from the Affiliated Argumenta .........................336
2.3. Evidence From Ps-Libanios or Ps-Proclos ...............................340
3. Conclusion ............................................................................................343
Bibliography ...................................................................................................345
Index of Modern Authors ............................................................................377
Index of Passages ...........................................................................................383
Preface
Many people have contributed to this study. First, I am deeply grateful for the countless
hours Professor David Hellholm has guided me with exceptional knowledge and strong
support during my work on this dissertation. Berit Hellholm, Prof. David Hellholm’s wife,
has generously supported my work and served some memorable dinners. Christer Hell-
holm, their son, has done excellent work with typesetting and editing. I would also like to
thank Cristina Hellholm, Christer Hellholm’s wife for her hospitality.
Bjørg Tosterud gave me valuable advice on the translation. Andrey Sand, David Jour-
dan, and Dr. Stephen Kidd helped me improve the English style. Dr. Simon Crisp in-
spired me with his enthusiasm, and Dr. Louis Charles Willard generously gave me access
to his notes. I also had the pleasure to discuss the Euthalian matter with the late Professor
Neville Birdsall when I was a guest at the meeting of Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas
in Pretoria, South Africa in 1999. I also want to express my gratitude to the late Professor
Nils Alstrup Dahl, who introduced me to the Euthalian apparatus in 1994. The University
of Oslo and the Faculty of Theology gave me the opportunity to work on this dissertation.
I want to thank Professor emeritus Jerker Blomqvist and Professor Dieter Sänger for
accepting the task of being opponents at the defence of my thesis. Their criticism was
very valuable. Professor Øyvind Norderval was the administrator of the committee, and I
want to thank him for helpful advice and support. Finally, I wish to extend my gratitude
to Professor Christoph Markschies, editor of Texte und Untersuchungen, who accepted
this study for publication in this renowned series.
I am, of course, responsible for all errors in this work.
The essay by David Hellholm and Vemund Blomkvist, “Parainesis as an Ancient Genre-
Designation. The Case of the ‘Euthalian Apparatus’ and the ‘Affiliated Argumenta’” first
published in J. Starr and T. Engberg-Pedersen (eds.), Early Christian Paraenesis in Con-
text #;/8 #FSMJOt/FX:PSL8BMUFSEF(SVZUFS oIBTJOTMJHIUMZ
revised and supplemented form been reprinted in this volume as VI. Appendix II.
Part One
Introductory Issues
I. Introductory Issues
1. Introduction
1.1. What is the ‘Euthalian Apparatus’?
The Acts, the Pauline letters, and the Catholic letters are epitomized in a corpus that is
known as the ‘Euthalian apparatus’, (hereafter called the ‘apparatus.’) The apparatus has
been transmitted without a title in the majority of manuscripts, but its common designa-
tion derives from ‘Euthalius,’ a person about whom very little is known. Some writers
believe he was an Egyptian cleric who lived in the 4th or 5th century,1 while others place
him much later, describing him as a deacon from the East who became bishop of Sulci in
Sardinia in the 7th century.2 The name ‘Euthalius’, however, is not the only one which ap-
pears in the manuscripts, but also ‘Evagrius,’ who has been identified both with Evagrius
Ponticus3 and Evagrius of Antioch,4 both of the 4th century.
The apparatus originally appeared in two volumes:
1. The first volume contained the fourteen letters of Paul, with Heb placed after 2
Thess.5
2. The second volume contained Acts together with the seven Catholic letters.
These two volumes are described in the so-called Euthalian prologues—although the
term ‘prologue’ is in a sense unfortunate, since the ‘prologues’ were probably something
closer in form to dedicatory letters.6 These letters once accompanied the Euthalian vol-
umes, which should be considered model codices for the Euthalian editions, although
these codices themselves are no longer extant. The first volume was thus an edition of
the Pauline letters and the second volume an edition of Acts and the Catholic letters.
Although it may be objected that the use of the term ‘edition’ applied to manuscripts is
anachronistic, the terminology adopted in the present work will reflect the stance repre-
1 L. Zacagni MYJJoMYW BOEJ. Wettstein (1752: 73) place him in the 5th century, while F. C. Cony-
beare o QMBDFTIJNJOUIFth century.
2 This identification was first suggested by Herm. von Soden o BOEMBUFSTVQQPSUFECZW.
Bousset o
3 See A. Ehrhard 1891.
4 See J. N. Birdsall 1970.
5 See the heading to the Prologue to the Pauline Letters: Πρόλογος Εὐθαλίου διακόνου προτασσόμενος τῆς
βίβλου τῶν ἐπιστολῶν Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου. ‘Prologue by the Deacon Euthalius prefixed to the Book
of the Letters of Paul the Apostle.’ This is called ‘The Apostolic Book’ in the Prooemium of the Prologue to
Acts.
6 See J. R. Harris 1893: 82; G. Zuntz 1953: 19.
4 Introductory Issues
sented by Elizabeth Eisenstein, who notes that biblical scholars often refer to ‘editions of
the Bible’ made before the age of printing.7
Each of the prologues contains an editorial notice where the volumes are described.
It should however be remembered that no two identical manuscripts exist, and from the
very moment a copy is made, the ‘first edition’ is subject to change. Apart from changes
in the text, entire sections that were added as help for readers may be omitted, and new
material added. The great variety found in Euthalian manuscripts shows that this has
occurred.8 For this reason, it is important to emphasize that the Euthalian editions did
not survive in their original form since both the arrangement of the biblical text and the
introductory material have been subject to change. Regarding the arrangement of the
biblical text, it is commonly assumed that the Euthalian editions were written in sense-
lines,9 even though this is not the case with the great majority of extant manuscripts. The
justification for referring to editions is therefore not a uniformity found in the textual
tradition, but a hypothetical starting point behind that tradition.
The editions were probably not planned as a two-volume work, since the first volume
does not announce any sequel. In the prologue to the second volume there are, however,
references to the first. Thus we may speak of two Euthalian editions that later were com-
bined into one.10 All scholars have presupposed that the two volumes were the work of
one author, who incorporated earlier material into his editions. The voice of this author
is presumably heard in the prologues. However, the possibility exists that the second vol-
ume was calqued onto the first, and that the author of the second consciously wrote the
prologues to Acts and the Catholic letters in the style of his predecessor. If this is the case,
the question of authorship is even more complex than scholars often have assumed. To
this question we will return in the commentary below.
The original editions with the Euthalian prologues were not the starting point for the
entire tradition of auxiliary material that exists in Greek manuscripts of the NT. Much of
this material existed prior to the apparatus, and has also been transmitted through other
channels. Thus we find the same texts transmitted together with the prologues and with-
out them. This was emphasized by Albert Ehrhard, and also by Nils Alstrup Dahl.11
To begin, it is necessary to offer some preliminary comments on the most important ele-
ments of the apparatus:
1. Κεφάλαια-τίτλοι (chapter titles).12 The biblical text was early divided into chapters,
each with its own title. Κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are often prefixed to each biblical book,
and the titles may be repeated in the biblical text.
7 See E. Eisenstein 1979/2005: 11.

8 See the great variety of constellations in L. Ch. Willard oo
9 See Zacagni 1698: lix; Wettstein 1752: 73; ZuntzoBOEWillardo
o
10 This is the case eg in minuscule 181, which contains Acts, the Catholic and the Pauline letters and the
Apocalypse.
11 See Ehrhard 1891: 397; N. A. DahlEo
12 This term is not ancient, but was invented by von Soden. The manuscripts use the term κεφάλαια. In the
present study von Soden’s term is adopted, as it has a more precise reference. See von Soden 1902: 405.
Introduction 5
2. Ὑποθέσεις (argumenta). The ὑποθέσεις are separate summaries for each biblical
book.
3. Πρόλογοι (prologues).There are three prologues (to the Pauline letters, to Acts,
and to the Catholic letters). The prologues explain that the author has been asked
to edit the biblical books, and they provide introductory material of interest to the
reader, such as biographies of the biblical authors and short summaries of their
work.
1.2. Manuscript Evidence and Editions
Elements belonging to the apparatus are found in hundreds of Greek biblical manuscripts.
A survey of the Greek manuscripts and the elements of the apparatus they contain was
made by Louis Charles Willard.13 His survey shows that only a limited number of manu-
scripts have been used in the printed editions of the apparatus. The first printed edition
of the entire apparatus is that of Lorenzo Zacagni, published in Rome in 1698, in the first
(and only) volume of his Collectanea monumentorum veterum ecclesiae Graecae ac Latinae.
Zacagni used nine manuscripts, his most important witness being minuscule 181.14 This
eleventh-century manuscript contains Acts, the Catholic letters, the Pauline letters, and
the Apocalypse, in that order (since the Apocalypse is not transmitted with the Euthalian
apparatus, it will not be considered here). The text of the original manuscript ends at
Tit 2:3, and the Apocalypse was supplemented later.15 Minuscule 181 contains the three
Euthalian prologues, with the ὑποθέσεις and κεφάλαια-τίτλοι prefixed to each biblical
book, as well as lists of biblical quotations and other auxiliary material. Through the edi-
tion of Zacagni, this manuscript has had a great influence on later scholarship. Therefore,
the name ‘Euthalius,’ which occurs in this manuscript, was established as the name of the
author, despite the fact that the apparatus in the majority of manuscripts is anonymous.
The edition of Zacagni forms the basis of the editions of Andreas Galland (1774), Jacques
Paul Migne (1864), and Hermann von Soden (1902).
The earliest witness that contains Euthalian material is Codex H 015 of the Pauline let-
ters (6th cent.).16 This fragmentary manuscript is written in sense-lines. The sense-lines
are quite short, some of them consisting only of a single word. This manuscript contains
several elements of the apparatus, (even though it does not have any prologue), including
(1) Lists with numbered κεφάλαια; (2) numerals in the margin which indicates where a
chapter begins;17 (3) a numbering of the OT quotations in the margin with indication of
the source of the quotation;18 and (4) a colophon with phrases that are very close to mate-
13 See the manuscript survey in Willard oo

14 Zacagni refers to this as the ‘Codex Regio-Alexandrinus Vaticanus’, as it was donated by Queen Christina
to Pope Alexander VIII, see Zacagni 1698: liv.
15 See von Soden 1902: 219.
16 See the edition of Codex H by H. Omont (1890) and the material reproduced by J. A. Robinson (1895:
o
17 These can only be seen in a few intances, see Ehrhard 1891: 394.
18 On the OT testimonies in Codex H, see Robinsono
rial found in the apparatus. This colophon is reproduced in the following section dealing
with the history of research.
Although the history of the apparatus is primarily linked to the history and reception
of the Greek New Testament, some other versions do exist. Euthalian material exists in
Syriac, Armenian and Georgian, as well as traces of the apparatus in Gothic and Latin.
The apparatus for the Pauline letters was translated into Syriac. The first scholar to offer
a comprehensive treatment of the Syriac version was Ernst von Dobschütz (1899), who
based his study on two NT manuscripts, L (8th cent.) and O (11th cent.).19 L contains the
Peshitta version, while O represents the Harclean revision. The apparatus is used differ-
ently in these two manuscripts: in L, it was added as an independent tract to the NT, while
in O the apparatus was inserted into the biblical text, as in the Greek tradition.20 The two
versions of the apparatus are not independent, but are evidence of a complex history of
transmission.21
The apparatus for the Pauline letters, Acts and the Catholic letters was translated into
Armenian. This material was introduced to European scholars by Frederick Cornwallis
Conybeare in 1895, whose work on this material was carried further by James Armitage
Robinson in his Euthaliana. These scholars studied the Armenian manuscripts with the
apparatus from the 13th century22 although the Armenian translation of the apparatus
itself is much older, (dating perhaps to the 5th century, as Conybeare argued).23 In the
1920s, P. Aristaces Vardanian wrote a series of articles on the Armenian version of the
apparatus which were later published together in one volume.24 Vardanian argues that
parts of the apparatus were translated into Armenian at an early date (5th cent.), but that
the ὑποθέσεις were translated later, since these texts represent a later form of Armenian,
indicating that they were not included in the original Greek apparatus. However, since
Vardanian wrote in Armenian, his work has a limited readership. Luckily, Willard has
provided an English summary and discussion of his work.25
The apparatus also exists in different recensions in Georgian. This material was first
referred to by Theodor Kluge in 1911, which he returned to in a later study.26 Neville
19 L = British Library, Add 7157. O = Oxford, New College 333. See E. von DobschützoBOE
128.
20 See von Dobschütz 1899: 129.
21 A chart of the process of transmission is given in von Dobschütz o ćJTJTSFQSPEVDFEJO
Willard (1970: 139/2009: 103). The work of von Dobschütz has been carried further by S. Brock (1979),
who adds the manuscript Mingana syr. 343 (~1350 AD), see Brock 1979: 121.
22 B. M. Add. 19,730 (~1270 AD) and the Venice Bible at San Lazzaro (1220 AD). In addition, they refer to
the Bible of Lord Zouche, which according to Conybeare was copied from a 13th century manuscript, see
ConybeareoBOERobinsono
23 See ConybeareoBOE
24 See P. A. Vardanian 1930.
25 See WillardooćJTTVNNBSZXBTCBTFEPOWillard’s transcripts of Miss V.
Semerjian’s oral translation.
26 See Th. Kluge 1911 and 1956. The first article contains only a reference to the material, which is not
identified explicitly as Euthalian. The second article brings a German translation of parts of the Prologue
to the Letters of Paul, the Martyrdom as well as lists of chapters and lections.
Introduction 7
Birdsall presented in 1984 a survey of the Georgian evidence and found that it survived
in two forms—a shorter form of the apparatus to the Pauline letters that may have origi-
nated in the 5th century and an expanded form in the 7th century. According to Birdsall,
the apparatus to Acts and the Catholic letters belongs only to the later recensions of these
writings (11th cent.).27
In 1956, James W. Marchand suggested that traces of the apparatus are also found in
Gothic manuscripts. In the Codices Ambrosiani A and B (6th cent.) there are divisions of
the text which often correspond to Euthalian divisions, and they also have an affinity to
the Euthalian edition as they indicate sense-lines. Marchand conjectures that this prac-
tice goes back to Wulfila (d. ca. 383) himself, who in turn adopted it from a Euthalian
edition.28
Some ancient fragments of the apparatus in Latin are also known.29 Nils. A. Dahl found
that a part of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul is found in four medieval manuscripts
from Monte Cassino. Here the Euthalian material is fused with excerpts from the Mura-
torian Fragment. This discovery was never published.30
The Euthalian apparatus also exists in an Old Church Slavonic version. This material was
edited in 2003 by Johannes G. van der Tak.31
One may conclude this survey of the different versions of the apparatus by saying that
the apparatus is found mainly in Eastern churches. von Dobschütz suggested that it also
may have been translated into Coptic and Ethiopic.32 To my knowledge, however, no such
version has yet been found. The vast majority of manuscripts are Greek, and apart from
a few witnesses, the apparatus was apparently never in wide circulation in the West. It is
also important to note that the editio princeps of Zacagni does not incorporate readings
from the various non-Greek versions, since they were unknown to him.
The work on a new edition of the Greek text has been initiated by David Parker and
Simon Crisp. For this reason, the present study does not focus on the textual transmis-
sion of the apparatus and its translation of the apparatus has been made from the text
of von Soden (1902), which is strongly dependent on the text of Zacagni. The degree of
dependence varies, however, in different parts of the apparatus: von Soden reproduced
Zacagni’s text of the prologues with some few but important alterations, leaving out, for
example, Zacagni’s textual conjectures. In reproducing the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the
27 See N. Birdsall 1984/2006: 233 and 236. He lists four manuscripts with the apparatus to the Pauline let-
ters from the 10th and 11th centuries. The apparatus for Acts and the Catholic letters has been edited from
five manuscripts. For the list of manuscripts, see Birdsallo -FUUFSTPG1BVM BOE
(Acts and the Catholic letters).
28 See J. W. MarchandoBOEoWillardoo
29 Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Hebrews are found in some Latin manuscripts, see von Dobschütz (1899:
111).
30 It was included in one of the drafts the present author made for Dahl 2000d, but it was left out in the
printed version. For the text of the Monte Cassino manuscripts, see A. HarnackoHarnack
did not identify the material as Euthalian, since the study is mainly concerned with the text of the Mura-
torian Fragment.
31 See J. G. van der Tak 2003 and Willard 2009: VII.
ὑποθέσεις, von Soden acted with greater independence, offering an eclectic text based
on Zacagni and early printed editions of the NT. Although his eclectic method may be
criticized from a purely theoretical point of view, it is difficult to reject von Soden’s text so
long as no new critical edition has appeared. In the present work, von Soden’s text is used,
mainly because of its clear separation of different elements of the apparatus.
2. History of Research
2.1. Survey
In his 1516 edition of the Greek and Latin NT, Erasmus printed the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις
of the Pauline letters. The Euthalian ὑποθέσεις belonged to the Greek NT which had been
rediscovered by scholars in the West. Erasmus followed the ancient practice of prefixing
the ὑπόθεσις to each biblical book—a practice which is found in the manuscripts of many
ancient authors. Thus the plays of Euripides are often found in medieval manuscripts
with a prefixed ὑπόθεσις, and a similar practice was actually continued in some early
translations of the NT into modern European languages. The important change was that
the reformers often wrote their own introductions in the style of the ancient ὑποθέσεις,
for example, Luther’s Vorreden. This genre was a useful vehicle for the reformers who
wanted to promote a new interpretation of Scripture in a form that was easy to under-
stand. For this reason, the ancient ὑποθέσεις were soon forgotten. Also abandoned was
the Euthalian system of chapter divisions in favor of the chapter divisions of Stephen
Langton (12/13th cent), which are still in use today. It was thus natural that the apparatus
was left out from Bible editions in modern European languages, and no longer consid-
ered useful for readers of the Bible, becoming instead a curious subject for scholars.33
In this scholarship, there have been historically four important themes (the first three of
which were treated by Zacagni, and all of which returned to by later scholars): (1) The
question of authorship, including the question of the identity of the dedicatee, and that of
the unknown father who made the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι for the Pauline letters; (2) the ques-
tion of which elements of the apparatus that are genuine, i.e. that belonged to the edition
of Euthalius; (3) the question of how the biblical text was arranged by Euthalius; (4) the
question of how the apparatus has applied rhetorical methods to the biblical texts.
The edition of Zacagni included the Greek text with Latin translation. The apparatus
contains in his edition the following elements:
1. Acts
a) Prologue (Πρόλογος).
b) Lection list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις τῶν ἀναγνώσεων), which statistically records the
number of lections, chapters, quotations and verses.
33 The apparatus is given little attention in modern introductions to the New Testament. One notable excep-
tion is the work of Adolf Jülicher, see Jülicher/Faschero
History of Research 9
c) Introduction (Πρόγραμμα) to the short quotation list.
d) Short quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν), which does not repro-
duce the quotations, but merely points to them by means of numbers.
e) Long quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν), which gives the full text
of the biblical quotations.
f) Argument (Ὑπόθεσις).
g) The Travels of Paul (Ἀποδημίαι Παύλου).
h) Chapter list (Κέφαλαια-τίτλοι), which contains forty chapters with subdivisions,
all having titles.
i) A division of Acts into thirty-six chapters, without titles, but marked by quotation
of each chapter’s opening words.
2. The Catholic letters

a) Prologue (Πρόλογος).
b) Lection list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις τῶν ἀναγνώσεων).
c) Introduction (Πρόγραμμα) to the short quotation list.
d) Short quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν).
e) Introduction (Πρόγραμμα) to the long quotation list.
f) Long quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν).
g) Argumenta (Ὑποθέσεις ) and chapter lists (Κεφάλαια-τίτλοι) for each letter.
h) Stichometric note.
i) Colophon, which records that the manuscript was compared with books at the
library of Caesarea, the text resembling the colophon of Codex H.
j) The Inscription on the Altar in Athens (Ἐπίγραμμα τοῦ ἐν Ἀθήναις βωμοῦ), which
is a short gloss giving the full text on the altar that Paul saw in Athens.
k) The Voyage of Paul the Apostle to Rome (Πλοῦς Παύλου ἀποστόλου ἐπὶ Ῥώμην).
This piece is often referred to as the ‘Navigatio Pauli’ recounting the itinerary of
Paul’s voyage to Rome.
N.B. The two last pieces belong to Acts rather than the Catholic letters—although
since Acts and the Catholic letters originally formed a single volume, the two notes
are not entirely misplaced.
3. The Pauline letters

a) Prologue (Πρόλογος)
b) The Martyrdom of Paul the Apostle (Μαρτύριον Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου)

c) Lection list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις τῶν ἀναγνώσεων)
d) Introduction (Πρόγραμμα) to the short quotation list
e) Short quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν)
f) A list of the cities where Paul wrote his letters.
g) A list of the Pauline letters that records the letters he wrote alone and the letters he
wrote with various co-workers.
h) Introduction (Πρόγραμμα) to the long quotation list
i) Long quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν)
j) List of the Pauline letters, which begins with the words Τάδε ἔνεστιν Παύλου
Ἐπιστολαί.
k) A note on why the book is called ‘The Fourteen Letters of Paul’, beginning with the
question Διὰ τί Παύλου Ἐπιστολαὶ δεκατέσσαρες λέγονται, followed by an answer
to that question. The piece is often referred to in the secondary literature as ‘Διὰ τί.’
l) Argumenta (Ὑποθέσεις) and chapter lists (Κεφάλαια-τίτλοι) for each letter.
Prefixed to the material is a long introduction by Zacagni that remains one of the most
important works on Euthalius. The main points of Euthalius’ work as summarized by
Zacagni are the following: Euthalius was asked by a father, whose name he does not men-
tion, to write a prologue on the deeds of Paul. Euthalius obeyed and produced not only
a prologue, but also divided the text of the letters into lections and verses. The list of lec-
tions provided scribes with a check-list of the letter’s statistics (including a στιχομετρια—
the total number of lines of each lection), while the division into verses aimed at a more
elegant way of reciting the biblical text. He also collected the testimonies (quotations)
from the Old Testament in Paul, and added κεφάλαια-τίτλοι that he had borrowed from
BOVOLOPXO(SFFLGBUIFSMJWJOHJO4ZSJB QQMJYoMY
That this father lived in Syria, was not stated in the work of Euthalius, but was an infer-
ence that Zacagni made on the basis of the Martyrdom of Paul the Apostle. This text was
transmitted together with the apparatus, and has been much discussed from Zacagni
onwards. Since it has been considered the key to the questions of the date and locality of
Euthalius, it is worth quoting in full:
Μαρτύριον Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου [Text: The Martyrdom of Paul the Apostle
Robinson 1895: 29 and 47] My translation
Ἐπὶ Νέρωνος τοῦ Καίσαρος Ῥωμαίων There, under Nero, emperor of the Romans,
ἐμαρτύρησεν αὐτόθι Παῦλος ὁ ἀπόστολος, Paul the Apostle suffered martyrdom, by hav-
ξίφει τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀποτμηθεὶς ἐν τῷ ing his head cut off with the sword, having
τριακοστῷ καὶ ἕκτῳ ἔτει τοῦ σωτηρίου πάθους, fought the good fight in Rome in the thirty-
τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα ἀγωνισάμενος ἐν Ῥώμῃ, sixth year after the passion of the Savior, on
πέπμτῃ ἡμέρᾳ Πανέμου μηνός, ἥτις λέγοιτο ἂν the fifth day of the month Panemos, which is
παρὰ Ῥωμαίοις ἡ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων, called by the Romans the third day before the
καθ᾽ ἣν ἐτελειώθη ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος τῷ calends of July. On that day the holy Apostle
κατ᾽ αὐτὸν μαρτυρίῳ, ἑξηκοστῷ καὶ ἐννάτῳ reached perfection with the martyrdom at
ἔτει τῆς τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ his [Nero’s] time, in the sixty-ninth year after
παρουσίας. Ἔστιν οὖν ὁ πᾶς χρόνος ἐξ οὗ the coming of our Savior Jesus Christ. So the
ἐμαρτύρησε τριακόσια τριάκοντα ἔτη μέχρι XIPMF QFSJPE o GSPN UIF NBSUZSEPN UP UIF
τῆς παρούσης ταύτης ὑπατείας, τετάρτης present consulship, the fourth of Arcadius and
μὲν Ἀρκαδίου τρίτης δὲ Ὀνωρίου τῶν δύο the third of Honorius, the two brothers rul-
ἀδελφῶν αὐτοκρατόρων Αὐγουστῶν, ἐννάτης ing Augusti, the ninth indiction in the cycle
ἰνδικτιῶνος τῆς πεντεκαιδεκαετηρικῆς of fifteen years, on the twenty-ninth day of the
περιόδου, μηνὸς Ἰουνίου εἰκοστῇ ἐννάτῃ NPOUI PG +VOF o JT UISFF IVOESFE BOE UIJSUZ
ἡμέρᾳ. Ἐσημειωσάμην ἀκριβῶς τὸν χρόνον years. I have indicated precisely the date of the
τοῦ μαρτυρίου Παύλου ἀποστόλου. martyrdom of Paul the Apostle.
[Egyptian paragraph:] [Egyptian paragraph:]
καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς ὑπατίας τετάρτης μὲν And from the fourth consulship of Arcadius
Ἀρκαδίου τρίτης δὲ Ὀνωρίου, μέχρι τῆς and the third of Honorius to the present con-
παρούσης ταύτης ὑπατίας, πρώτης Λέοντος sulship, the first of Leo Augustus, the twelfth
Αὐγούστου, ἰνδικτιῶνος δωδεκάτης, Ἐπιφὶ indiction, the fifth of Epiphi, the hundred
ε´, Διοκλετιανοῦ ροδ´, ἔτη ξγ´. ὡς εἶναι τὰ and seventy-fourth year of Diocletian, there
πάντα ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν παρουσίας are sixty-three years. So all the years from the
μέχρι τοῦ προκειμένου ἔτους ἔτη τετρακόσια coming of our Savior until the present year are
ἑξηκόντα δύο. four hundred and sixty-two.
There are two textual problems that should be noted: 1. The Egyptian paragraph is not in
the majority of manuscripts,34 and 2. In some manuscripts, the reference to the Egyptian
month Epiphi also occurs in the first section of the text. This insertion is attested in two
readings:
(a) It is inserted into the Roman date: πέμπτῃ ἡμέρᾳ Πανέμου μηνός, ἥτις λέγοιτ᾽ ἂν
παρὰ Ῥωμαίοις, κατ᾽ Αἰγυπτίους Ἐπιφὶ ε´, ἡ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων.
(b) It is inserted before the Roman date: πέμπτῃ ἡμέρᾳ κατὰ Συρομακεδόνας Πανέμου
μηνός, ἥτις λέγοιτο ἂν παρ᾽ Αἰγυπτίοις Ἐπιφί, παρὰ δὲ Ῥωμαίοις ἡ πρὸ τριῶν
καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων.
Robinson argues that the first reading contains a gloss (κατ᾽ Αἰγυπτίους Ἐπιφὶ ε´) that
has crept into the text. Its insertion is awkward since it breaks up the sentence, separat-
ing the reference to the Romans and their calendar. The second reading is a correction of
34 See Willardoo
the first, with the gloss being worked into the text with greater care, and the phrase κατὰ
Συρομακεδόνας clarifying the provenance of the different calendars.35
Another problem is that the Martyrdom refers to two different years as the ‘present con-
sulship.’ This clearly reflects two stages in the development of the text. Zacagni found
that 29 June in the fourth consulship of Arcadius and the third of Honorius corresponds
to 29 June, 396, while 5 Epiphi in the first consulship of Leo Augustus corresponds to 29
June, 458. He thus noted the discrepancy between the chronology of Euthalius and the
Dionysian chronology current today.36 According to the chronology of the Martyrdom,
$ISJTUEJFEBUUIFBHFPGUIJSUZUISFFJOUIFZFBSXIJDIDPSSFTQPOETUPPVS QQMYJo
lxii). While this problem was easily solved, the use of different methods of dating was a
more demanding puzzle. In the first paragraph, the anonymous author says that Paul suf-
fered martyrdom on the third day before the calends of July (29 June) which he equates
with 5 Panemos. Zacagni considered this equation particularly important and based his
argument on the dissertations of cardinal Enrico Noris on the Syro-Macedonian calen-
dar.37 In his work, Noris had quoted a passage from the Martyrdom, which he knew from
Oecumenius’ commentary on Acts. In Oecumenius, the text form explicitly referred to
Panemos as a Syro-Macedonian month.38 According to Noris, 5 Panemos would be the
correct date only in cities of Palestine such as Raphia, Ascalon and Gaza. In this area the
Syro-Macedonian month Panemos corresponded exactly to the Egyptian month Epiphi,
both beginning on 25 June.39 Zacagni thus assumed that the Martyrdom was first dated in
Palestine in 396 by the anonymous predecessor of Euthalius, who used the version of the
Syro-Macedonian calendar prevalent in areas of Syria under Egyptian influence.
ćJT4ZSJBOCBTFE(SFFLGBUIFSXBTBMTPSFTQPOTJCMFGPSUIFϨϣϲрϩϟϧϟϰцϰϩϭϧ QQMWJJJo
lix). He conjectured that the second year given in the Martyrdom (458) was the year when
35 For a list of the manuscripts and a discussion of these readings see Robinsono
36 The Martyrdom reckons years from the birth of Christ by moving the date four years backward on the
calendar according to our time-reckoning. The system of dating from the birth of Christ became common
much later, cf. H. Lietzmann (1934/1984: 5): ‘Die christliche Ära (nach Christi Geburt) ist die in der mo-
dernen Kulturwelt allgemein gültige. Sie ist von dem römischen Mönch Dionysios Exiguus erfunden und
in seiner Ostertafel vom Jahre 532 zuerst angewendet worden. Seinem Beispiel folgen anfangs nur gelehrte
in chronographischen Werken, aber im 8. Jahrhundert finden wir Datierungen nach Christi Geburt schon
vereinzelt auf Urkunden, privaten und königlichen; im 9. Jh. begegnen wir sie öfter, und seit dem 10. Jh.
erscheint diese Datierungsweise auch auf päpstlichen Urkunden. Schliesslich wird sie im hohen Mittelal-
ter allgemein üblich.’ von Soden (1902: 374) thinks that the original text of the Martyrdom (the ‘Urstück’
without the Egyptian paragraph) did not include the reckoning from the birth of Christ. The recalculation
was, according to von Soden, added to the ‘Urstück’ at an early stage. In the Egyptian paragraph (458 AD),
on the other hand, this system of dating is used. Even this is earlier than Dionysius. Most scholars believe
that the dates in the MartyrdomUIBUSFGFSUPJUTDPNQPTJUJPODBOCFUSVTUFEćVT UIF.BSUZSEPNoBUMFBTU
JOJUTFYQBOEFEGPSNoJTFBSMZFWJEFODFGPSUIFVTFPGUIFOFXTZTUFN%JFUFS4ÊOHFSCSPVHIUUIJTGFBUVSF
of the Martyrdom to my attention.
37 De annis et epochis Syromacedonum (first printed in Florence, 1691). I have not had access to this edition,
but use an edition printed in Leipzig in 1696 (Noris 1696).
38 E. Noris (1696: 22) offers the following translation: quinta die, juxta Syromacedones, mensis Panemi, qui
apud Ægyptios dici potest Epiphi; apud Romanos vero III Kalendas Julias, vicesimo nono mensis Junii.
Cf. the text as printed by Robinson (1895: 46): πέμπτῃ ἡμέρᾳ κατὰ Συρομακεδόνας Πανέμου μηνός, ἥτις
λέγοιτο ἂν παρ᾽ Αἰγυπτίοις Ἐπιφί, παρὰ δὲ Ῥωμαίοις ἡ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων.
39 See NorisoBOEo
Euthalius published his volume on Paul. Euthalius had expanded the Martyrdom and
included a reference to the Era of Diocletian and the Egyptian month Epiphi, which indi-
cates that Egypt was his home.40 Zacagni also found his hypothesis confirmed in the Acts
of Chalcedon, which mentioned a deacon of the Alexandrian church who was named Eu-
thalius (p. lxii). Zacagni also tried to place the name ‘Sulci’ into this Egyptian setting, as-
TVNJOHA4VMDJUPCFBDPSSVQUJPOPGA1TFMDIB UIFOBNFPGBO&HZQUJBOUPXO QMYJJJoMYJW
The second volume of Euthalius, containing the Acts and the Catholic letters, was
dedicated to Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria. Euthalius, in his preparation of the vol-
ume, visited the library of Caesarea in Palestine in order to compare his text with biblical
manuscripts in that library.41 In this volume, Euthalius had made the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
himself, using the work of the Syrian father on the Pauline letters as a model (p. lxvi). Za-
cagni identified the dedicatee of the edition of Acts as Athanasius Celetes, archbishop of
Alexandria from 490 (pp. lxiv), but this identification created a new problem. Euthalius
had been present at Chalcedon in 451 and had made his volume on Paul in 458, as this
was the year mentioned in the second paragraph of the Martyrdom. Since he was referred
to as the ‘Deacon Euthalius’ in the title to the Prologue to the Letters of Paul he must
have been at least twenty-five in 458, Zacagni reckoned, as younger men could not be
ordained. Since Zacagni assumes that archbishop Athanasius Celetes was the dedicatee,
it could only be after 490 that Euthalius made his volume on Acts and the Catholic letters.
But, if so, how could he, in the introductory paragraph to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts,
have referred to himself as ‘young in years and in learning’? Zacagni assumed that these
words of Euthalius should be understood as an allegory, referring to the ‘recent times’ in
which he lived, and that his learning is considered insignificant compared to the great
learning of the ancient fathers of the Church (p. lxiii).
Regarding the question of the genuine Euthalian elements, Zacagni doubted that the
ὑποθέσεις were included in the original editions of Euthalius. His main reason was that
they are never referred to in the prologues. There were also some contradictions between
the ὑποθέσεις and the list of cities where Paul wrote his letters, a list which he considered
genuine. He discussed the possibility that the ὑποθέσεις were written by the unknown
Syrian father who also had made the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, but concluded that they most
probably belonged to a later period. The ὑποθέσεις, then, were composed by ‘some pious
and learned man,’ and scribes had added them to the apparatus (p. lx).
Zacagni also observed that Euthalius had arranged the text so that the reading aloud
of the text would be more elegant. This he did by dividing the text into verses, ‘some-
what similar to song’ ad quandam cantus similitudinem QQMJYoMY ćJTWJFXIFCBTFE
on the Euthalian Prologue to Acts, where Euthalius said that he had read the text κατὰ
40 See Zacagni 1698: lxi. Zacagni noted that the reference to the twelfth indiction is problematic, as he
would expect the 29th of June to fall in the year of the eleventh indiction. He suggests that Euthalius used
a different system. On reckoning by indiction, see E. J. Bickermano
41 See Zacagni 1698: lxv. The basis of this is the end of a stichometrical note at the end of the edition of Acts
and the Catholic letters: Ἀντεβλήθη δὲ τῶν Πράξεων καὶ καθολικῶν Ἐπιστολῶν τὸ βιβλίον πρὸς τὰ ἀκριβῆ
ἀντίγραφα τῆς ἐν Καισαρείᾳ βιβλιοθήκης Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου. ‘The book of the Acts and the Catholic
letters was compared with the exact copies of the Caesarean Library of Eusebius son of Pamphilus.’ The
note is found in Zacagni’s edition on p. 513 and in PG 85: 692AB.
προσωδίαν. The theory, however, is probably based on a misunderstanding, since the

Greek word προσωδία may refer to accents or other reading signs.42
In the prolegomena to his 1707 edition of the New Testament, John Mill suggested that
the Syrian father who had written the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters was Theo-
dore of Mopsuestia. Mill gives the following reasons for this conjecture: (1) Theodore
was a Syrian, a presbyter in Antioch and that before 396, the first year mentioned in the
Martyrdom, he became bishop of Mopsuestia in Cilicia. (2) He was known as a learned
man, who had also written a commentary on the Pauline letters. (3) The fact that Eutha-
lius does not mention his name actually supports his hypothesis. Theodore was despised
and later condemned as a heretic at the Second Council of Constantinople, so it was not
advisable to name him explicitly.43 The theory of Mill has had some influence on other
scholars, such as Harris (see below).
Jacob Wettstein included an entry on Euthalius in the prolegomena to his edition of the
NT. The article is largely dependent on Zacagni’s work, but contains some new ideas. Wet-
tstein believed, like Zacagni, that Euthalius lived in 5th century Egypt, basing this belief on
the Egyptian paragraph of the Martyrdom.44 The most important difference from Zacagni
lies in his view on what Euthalius had done with the biblical text since he emphasized the
influence of Origen on Euthalius. This influence was not so much from Origen the theo-
logian as the philologist. Wettstein believed that Euthalius had furnished the text with
accents and breathing marks, possibly in imitation of the Origen’s Hexapla. He argued
that Origen had supplied accents to his Greek transliteration of the Hebrew in order to
avoid incorrect pronunciation, and that Origen’s treatment of the poetical books of the
OT corresponded to the writing the text in sense-lines.45 Wettstein also rejected Zacagni’s
view that the dedicatee to the edition of Acts was the bishop Athanasius Celetes. Instead
he identified the dedicatee as the presbyter Athanasius, a nephew of the patriarch Cyrillos.
To this Athanasius he ascribed the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, a collection of ὑποθέσεις of
all biblical books.46 The ὑποθέσεις of the Euthalian editions are also found in the Synopsis,
and Wettstein believed that Athanasius had borrowed the work of Euthalius.47
In 1883, James Rendel Harris published his study on stichometry. The first part of the
study is devoted to the practice of stichometry in antiquity, while the second part dis-
cusses the stichometry of the NT writings and the work done by Euthalius in this respect.
Harris first notes that the term στίχος early came to denote a standard hexameter line of
sixteen syllables48 and was also used to measure prose texts. It was on a per-στίχος basis
that scribes received their payment.49 Harris also noted a change in the meaning of the
42 See Zuntz 1945: 90.

43 See J. Mill 1707: lxxxvii.
44 See Wettsteino
45 See Wettsteino
46 The work is treated by Robinson o
47 See Wettstein 1752: 76.
48 The number 16 may have been picked because of its symmetrical character, or because the first line of the
Iliad contains this number. See Harris 1883: 139.
49 See Harris 1883: 154.
term στίχος under the influence of the ‘sense-line’, and found that the word may also
designate a ‘sentence.’ This use of the term may reflect the fact that a hexameter line very
often corresponds to a sentence unit.50 In the second part of the study, Harris examines
the stichometry of the NT and finds that the figures in the Euthalian lection lists reflect
a measuring of the text in units of sixteen syllables.51 This study of stichometry is one
aspect of the broader work of Harris, which really may be considered a development of
Wettstein’s ideas; also a Wettstein development is Harris’ suggestion that the greater part
of Euthalius’ work originated in the time and school of Origen.52
In 1890, Codex H was edited by Henri Omont. Although this manuscript had been con-
nected to Euthalius also by earlier scholars,53 the edition of Omont instigated more inten-
sive research on its relation to the Euthalian apparatus. Ehrhard published in 1891 a study
of codex H and Euthalius,54 using a manuscript which has been important for study of the
apparatus not only because it is written in sense-lines and contains κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and
marginal notes on testimonies, but especially because it contains a colophon placed after
Tit. which resembles the prologues of the apparatus. The opening line of the colophon has
been damaged, and cannot be read with certainty. The second part of the colophon is a
dialogue between the personified coronis—the flourish of the pen at the end of the text—
and the owner of the book. The end of the text, however, is not preserved in Codex H.
Just like the Martyrdom, this short text has been very important for scholars and should
therefore be reproduced here:
50 See Harris 1883: 151.

51 See Harris 1883: 317. Harris presupposes that the text of Euthalius used abbreviated forms of the words
θεός, κύριος, Ἰησοῦς and Χριστός.
52 Harris 1883: 331.
53 Wettstein (1752: 74) considered this manuscript an early representative of the Euthalian edition.
54 See Ehrhard 1891.
Colophon of Codex H 015 My translation

(after Omont 1890: 189)a
ἔγραψα καὶ ἐξεθέμην στειχηρὸν κατὰ δύναμιν I wrote and edited this volume of Paul the
τόδε τὸ τεῦχος Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου πρὸς Apostle, arranging it in verses according to my
ἐγγραμμὸν καὶ εὐκαταλημπτὸν ἀνάγνωσιν· abilities, so that the text of our brothers may be
τῶν καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς ἀδελφῶν παρ᾽ ὧν ἁπάντων clearly writtenb and easy to understand, and I
τολμῆς· συνγνώμην αἰτῶ· εὐχῇ τῇ ὑπὲρ ἐμῶν· ask all of them for forgiveness for my audacity,
τὴν συνπεριφορὰν κομιζόμενος· that I may receive acceptance through prayer
for my [work (?)].
Ἀντεβλήθη δὲ ἡ βίβλος· πρὸς τὸ ἐν Καισαρίᾳ The book was compared with a copy in the li-
ἀντίγραφον· τῆς βιβλιοθήκης τοῦ ἁγίου brary of Caesarea, written with the hand of the
Παμφίλου· χειρὶ γεγραμμένον. holy Pamphilus.
προσφώνησις Address
Κορωνίς εἰμι δογμάτων θείων διδάσκαλος· ἄν I am the Coronis, teacher of the divine doc-
τινί με χρήσῃς· ἀντιβίβλον λάμβανε. οἱ γὰρ· trine. If you lend me to anyone, you should get
ἀποδόται κακοί· a receipt, because borrowers are evil.
ἀντίφρασις· Answer
Θησαυρὸν ἔχων σε πνευματικῶν ἀγαθῶν καὶ I keep you as a treasure of spiritual blessings,
πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ποθητὸν· ἁρμονίαις τε καὶ one which is longed for by all men, combined
ποικίλαις γραμμαῖς κεκοσμημένον· νὴ τὴν from many parts and adorned with writing in
ἀλήθειαν· οὐ δώσω σε προχείρως τινὶ· οὐδ᾽ αὖ various colors. In truth, I will not rashly give
φθονέσω τῆς […] you to anyone, nor again will I grudge the […]
a Since my aim is simply to give an idea of the content of the piece, I reproduce the texts in minuscule letters with added
word divisions and without the line breaks of the original. For a full discussion of the textual variants of the colophon, see
Willardoo
b The word ‘ἐγγραμμὸν’ does not make any sense in this context, and the translation presupposes that the word represents
’εὔγραμμον.’
Ehrhard compared codex H with minuscule 88 which contains the same colophon.55
Minuscule 88 is a 12th century manuscript containing Acts, the Catholic and Pauline let-
ters with the Euthalian apparatus and also the Apocalypse. The most important textual
variant is that the colophon in min. 88 begins with the words Εὐάγριος ἔγραψα. It is pos-
sible that this reading is supported in Ehrhard’s examination of a codex H facsimile, where
UIFMFUUFST&:y*0$FYJTU"UUIFSFRVFTUPGEhrhard, H. Omont examined the line and
arrived at the conclusion that the name Εὐάγριος apparently could be discerned.56 The
presence of the name ‘Evagrius’ in the earliest Euthalian manuscript led him to assume
that it was Evagrius who was the author of the apparatus. Ehrhard identified him with the
Egyptian monk Evagrius Ponticus (4th cent.), although he acknowledged that Evagrius
was a common name, and that there were likely many Egyptian monks with that name.
Ehrhard noted that the name ‘Euthalius’ was found in very few manuscripts and that
other names, such as Athanasius, Pamphilus and Ecthalios also occur. Moreover, there
55 The dialogue beginning with The ‘Address’ is however separated from the first part of the colophon by The
Voyage of Paul the Apostle to Rome. See EhrhardoćFUFYUPGUIFDPMPQIPODPOUJOVFTJO
min. 88 with ὠφελειας. χρήσω δὲ τοῖς φίλοις, ἀξιόπιστον ἀντίβιβλον λαμβάνων. Robinson (1895: 9) gives
the following translation of the end of the colophon (based on the Armenian version): ‘Nor again will I
grudge the benefit of any, but when I lend thee to my friends, I will take a goodly copy in exchange.’
56 See Ehrhard 1891: 397.
was little historical evidence about ‘Euthalius.’57 These problems were solved by assuming
that ‘Euthalius’ had never existed, and that this name was substituted for ‘Evagrius’ after
Evagrius had been condemned as an Origenist. This would also explain why someone
would try to erase the name in Codex H. That is, the tradition had adopted the work of
Evagrius, but did not want to mention the name of the heretic.58 The introduction of the
name ‘Evagrius’ was a new turn in the history of research. A related hypothesis was later
proposed by Birdsall, who suggested that it was Evagrius of Antioch, not Evagrius Ponti-
cus, who was the author of the apparatus.59
The hypothesis of Ehrhard was criticized by von Dobschütz, who in 1893 published an
article where he argued that Codex H represents a late form of the Euthalian edition, and
that the colophon is dependent on the Euthalian prologues.60 Some of his arguments
based on the phraseology of the colophon were also used by Robinson (see below).
In 1893, Harris published a new edition of his study of stichometry. In this treatise, he
also included a lecture on the origin of the codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The work of
Euthalius is quite important for this argument on origins. Harris connects Euthalius to
Caesarea and its library on the basis of the following evidence: (1) The colophon at the
end of the Euthalian edition of Acts and the Catholic letters mentions Caesarea explicitly.
(2) The colophon of Codex H is a Euthalian text that is very close to the archetype.61 This
also refers to Caesarea. (3) In Codex Coislinianus 25, the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of
Acts has the heading ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων τῶν πράξεων τοῦ Παμφίλου. Regarding this
third argument, Harris argues that even if this does not prove that Pamphilus was the
author of the list, the heading does show that the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι were once
ascribed to Pamphilus.62 Harris found that the Caesarean origin of the apparatus also
had some explanatory value: the list of thirty-six chapters that is found at the end of the
apparatus to Acts corresponds to the original chapter divisions of Acts in Codex Vatica-
nus. A system of division used at the library of Caesarea is supposed to lie behind this.63
Harris also has his original views regarding the circle of Euthalius.64 His starting point is
the long Encomium of Melete in the Prologue to Acts, where Melete is the personification
of scriptural studies or meditation upon the scriptures. In this section, Harris finds that
Euthalius is playing with the word Melete: ‘[H]e has personified her and made her into a
fair bride for the good father to whom he writes. But why should he say of her that she is
his foster sister, ay! and his namesake?’65 Harris gives the following answer: The name of
57 See Ehrhardo
58 See Ehrhardo
59 See Birdsall 1970.
60 See von Dobschütz 1893.
61 Harris does not refer to the work of Ehrhard or to the name ‘Εὐάγριος.’
62 See Harris 1893: 88. Harris had earlier argued that there were connections between Codex Sinaiticus and
Caesarean manuscripts that were used to correct it. Thus both Vaticanus and Sinaiticus were somehow
related to the library of Caesarea. See Harris 1893: 75. See the translation of these κεφάλαια-τίτλοι to
Acts in S. D. Salmond 1886.
63 See Harriso
64 His theory regarding the origin of the apparatus is found in Harriso
65 Harris 1893: 81.
the dedicatee was not Athanasius, but Meletius, and the name Meletius was often associ-
ated with heresy. ‘Athanasius’ is not an historical person, but only the orthodox substitute
for the name of the heretic. The correct heading of the prologue is thus Εὐθαλίου ... πρὸς
Μελέτιον. Harris finds three possible candidates, but considers Meletius of Mopsuestia,
the pupil of Theodore, the most plausible. The reason for this choice is that Harris con-
nects Euthalius to the second edition of the Martyrdom in 458, as Zacagni also had done.
Harris differs, however, from Zacagni with regard to the date of the edition of Acts and
the Catholic letters, arguing that the editions of the Pauline letters and that of the Acts
and the Catholic letters were not separated by thirty years, but were produced almost at
the same time.66 When Harris had suggested Meletius of Mopsuestia as the dedicatee of
the edition of Acts and the Catholic letters, he was delighted to find that this idea was
indirectly supported by Mill, who had conjectured that Theodore of Mopsuestia was the
unnamed Syrian father who wrote the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters. Harris also
recorded some correspondences between the Euthalian material and the commentary on
the Pauline letters by Theodore.67 The third conjecture of Harris concerns the dedicatee
of the edition of Paul. Harris suspects that this was no other than Nestorius. Thus, he has
drawn the Euthalian apparatus into the sphere of the heretics Theodore, Nestorius, and
Meletius. This is supposed to explain why the text of the apparatus is so vague about its
origin.
In 1895, F. C. Conybeare introduced Armenian evidence into the discussion. His most
important witness was an Armenian manuscript in the British Museum (B. M. Add.
19,730), which he dates to the late 13th century. It contains the apostolic books in the fol-
lowing order: 1. Apocalypse 2. The Pauline letters with Heb placed after 2 Thessalonians.
3. Acts 4. The Catholic letters. This order is significant, as it is also found in other ancient
Armenian manuscripts and has points of contact with Codex Sinaiticus.68 The manuscript
also contains the Euthalian prologues. Among other Euthalian materials we find The Voy-
age of Paul the Apostle to Rome prefixed to Acts. An important element for the argument
of Conybeare is the colophon found after Philemon, which he identified as the colophon
of Codex H. This piece he also found in the Venice Bible (1220 AD) and in the Zouche
Bible. Conybeare gives the following translation:69
I wrote out and arranged as far as possible verse by verse (= κατὰ δύναμιν στιχηρόν) the
writings of Paul the Apostle, disposing (them) also in easily understood (or ‘grasped’)
readings (ἀναγνώσεις) for (or of) our brethren. Of all of whom I crave indulgence for my
boldness; in order that by means of the prayers, to be offered in our behalf, I may receive
your condescension towards me. This book was copied according to (or ‘from’) an exem-
plar of Caesarea, which lies there in the chest of books, and which was written with his
own hand by the holy Pamphilus.
66 Harris can place also the edition of Acts and the Catholic letters in that year or immediately after because
he no longer needs to bring Athanasius Celetes on the scene, see Harris 1893: 83.
67 He mentions the ὑποθέσεις to Eph and Col, which both state that Paul at the time had not met the recipi-
ents but heard about them. The third κεφάλαιον to Eph is also very close to Theodore’s interpretation, see
Harris 1893: 86.
68 In the Codex Sinaiticus the Pauline letters are placed before Acts. Within the Paulines, Heb follows 2 Thes-
salonians. See Conybeare 1895: 245.
69 Conybeareo
Advice
I am master and teacher of the divine religion.70 If thou lend me to anyone, thou shalt take
a goodly copy in my stead, for those who (?+have to) restore (i.e. books) are evil.
Reply
I keep thee a treasure of spiritual blessings, adorned with embellishments (or ‘arrange-
NFOUT EFTJSFEPGBMMNFOBOEXJUIBMMTPSUTPGPSOBNFOUT:FB *TQFBLUSVMZ*XJMMOPU
vainly lend thee to anyone. Nor another time will I be jealous of (or? for) the weal of
anyone. But when I shall lend thee to my friends, I will take a goodly copy (or exemplar)
in exchange for thee.
Conybeare assumed that the colophon is the work of Euthalius, and that the sense-lines
of Codex H are those of Euthalius himself. The Armenian text of the Martyrdom also
indicated that the Armenian represented an early version of the apparatus. He found that
the text of the Martyrdom in the Zouche Bible did not contain the Egyptian paragraph
or the inserted reference to Epiphi in the first paragraph.71 In addition to his discussion
of Euthalian texts, Conybeare also discussed external evidence on Euthalius from the
Armenian ‘Book of the Caesars.’ He discusses four short notices, the first is the following:72
Arcadius and Honorius, sons of Theodosius the Great, ruled 24 years. In his (sic) third
year there was Euthalius, a blessed (father), an Alexandrine, who in admirable copies ar-
ranged (or ‘drew up’ lit. ‘ordered’) the preface and the particulars (or sections), and the
lections of the Holy Apostles and of the seven Catholic Epistles, on account of the her-
esies then existing, of Kalabros and Karpokrates, of Katharos and Eklaros (sic), who said
that Christ was a mere man, and rejected the Old Testament and despised its testimony
concerning Christ.
The third notice contains the remarkable information that Euthalius had made the edi-
tion of the Pauline letters at the request of ‘the great father’ Theophilus, while the edition
of Acts and the Catholic letters was made at the request of the ‘royal ecclesiastic’ Atha-
nasius. Although Conybeare cannot tell what significance ‘royal’ has in this context, he
identifies Theophilus as the bishop of Alexandria from 385 AD. The value of the evidence
is debated. von Dobschütz points out that the notices to a large extent are derived from
the prologues and the Martyrdom. What goes beyond this, he is willing to ascribe to the
free imagination of an Armenian heresiologist.73
The work of these critics were used by Robinson in his Euthaliana.74 Robinson had recov-
ered the text of several leaves of codex H. As in the work of Ehrhard and Conybeare, the
colophon is very important for his views on Euthalius. Robinson does not consider the
70 The Armenian translation of ‘κορωνίς’ as ‘master’ seems to Birdsall (1984/2006: 221) like a wild guess. It
is however possible that the translator has confused ‘κορωνίς’ with ‘κοίρανος.’
71 See Conybeareo
72 The texts are reproduced in Conybeareo
74 Conybeare 1895 and Robinson 1895.
colophon Euthalian, but believes that it is based on the Euthalian prologues.75 His main
arguments are the following:76
(1) In the colophon, the author refers to himself as ‘I’ not as ‘we’, as in the parallel
material in the Euthalian Prologue to Acts.
(2) The colophon uses ἐξεθέμην for the whole edition of the Pauline letters, while
Euthalius uses this verb for the exposition or list of chapters.77
(3) The colophon uses the word στειχηρόν to describe the arrangement of the text in
lines. This term is apparently a contamination of the terms στιχηρῶς and στιχηδόν
that are found in Euthalius.
(4) The phrase εὐχῇ τῇ ὑπὲρ ἐμῶν τὴν συνπεριφορὰν κομιζόμενος in the colophon
seems to be an unhappy reworking of the introduction to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of
Acts: εὐχῇ τῇ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν τὴν συμπεριφορὰν κομιζόμενοι. The word ἐμῶν has ap-
parently replaced ἡμῶν, but the meaning of the phrase in the colophon is unclear.78
It is thus evidence of a careless rewriting of the text in the singular. The epitomizer
should have replaced ἡμῶν with ἐμοῦ. Robinson suggests that the difficult ἐμῶν
may not be the work of the epitomizer, but of a later scribe who was trying to
improve the text.
In his discussion of Robinson’s work, Willard points out that the source-critical method
that Robinson applied to the colophon led him to treat the Martyrdom similarly. Not only
the colophon but also the Martyrdom could be the work of a later editor, and Robinson
sought to demonstrate that the Martyrdom was a later addition, dependent on the Pro-
logue to the Letters of Paul.79 His main reasons for assuming literary dependence were the
following observations.80
(1) The Martyrdom first refers to the date of Paul’s death with the Roman designation
‘the third day before the calends of July.’ Close to the end of the first paragraph (see
text above) it uses the more modern designation ‘on the twenty-ninth day of the
month of June.’ This last form may represent the idiom of the author of the Mar-
tyrdom, while the use of the Roman calendar seems to be derived from Prologue
to the Letters of Paul.81
(2) The relative clause καθ᾽ ἣν ἐτελειώθη ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος τῷ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν μαρτυρίῳ
is difficult to understand. One should expect that the words κατ᾽ αὐτόν referred
75 See Robinsono
76 See Robinsono
77 This argument was also used by von Dobschütz (1893: 50): ‘Die Phrase ἔγραψα καὶ ἐξεθέμην ist aus
Euthalius überhaupt nicht zu belegen.’
78 This was pointed out also by von Dobschütz (1893: 50), who could not make any sense out of ὑπὲρ ἐμῶν.
79 See Robinsono
80 See Willardoo
81 Ῥωμαῖοι δὲ περικαλλέσιν οἴκοις καὶ βασιλείοις τούτου λείψανα καθείρξαντες, ἐπέτειον αὐτῷ μνήμης
ἡμέραν πανηγυρίζουσι, τῇ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων, πέμπτῃ Πανέμου μηνὸς, τούτου τὸ μαρτύριον
ἑορτάζοντες. In the present volume, see section “[The Celebration of his Martyrdom]” on page 104.
to Nero in whose reign Paul died as a martyr. The problem with this interpreta-
tion is that Nero has not been mentioned since the opening line of the Martyrdom.
Robinson found that the corresponding passage in the Prologue to the Letters of
Paul provided the solution to this puzzle. There we read καὶ ἐῤῥύσθην ἐκ στόματος
λέοντος· τοῦτον τὸν Νέρωνα εἶναι λέγων· περὶ δὲ τῆς δευτέρας, ἐν ᾗ καὶ τελειοῦται
τῷ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν μαρτυρίῳ, φησίν· τὴν καλὴν διακονίαν σου πληροφόρησον·.82 There
is no difficulty with the syntax, and αὐτόν clearly refers to Nero. Thus, the problem
in the text of the Martyrdom is apparently caused by a mechanical copying of this
passage, and the epitomizer has ignored the previous circumstances; in doing so
the reference to Nero became obscure.
(3) The author of the Martyrdom says that Paul died a martyr on 29 June. This is
however not the date of Paul’s death, but the date of the depositio of his remains
that happened almost two centuries later. Robinson stated that although this error
is common in later times, it was not found in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul.
In addition to these main points, Robinson also argued on a more general basis that
Euthalius would not have imitated his own language in this slavish manner. The wealth
of expression that is found in the Euthalian prologues suggested to him a more original
author. He also rejected the possibility that the Martyrdom was a source-text for Prologue
to the Letters of Paul, arguing that it was, in fact, the opposite. After all, the three main
arguments referred to above, as well as the great intervals between the parallel passages
in the prologue, made it improbable that the Martyrdom could have been a source-text.83
Robinson thus was convinced that the Martyrdom was the work of a later hand. A new
dating was necessary: he had to place the Euthalian edition of the Letters of Paul some
time before 396, the earliest year that was mentioned in the Martyrdom. The Prologue to
the Letters of Paul refers to Eusebius, and thus Euthalius could be placed somewhere in
the 4th century. Thus it was possible to consider the great Athanasius (d. 372) the dedica-
tee of the volume of the Acts and the Catholic letters.84
Another feature of the study of Robinson is the connection he made between the Mar-
tyrdom and the colophon. Both texts were derived from the Euthalian prologues, and he
assumed that they both belonged to a later editio minor of the apparatus. Since the name
‘Evagrius’ occurred in some copies of the colophon, Robinson was inclined to believe that
Evagrius Ponticus was responsible for this abridged edition.85 Regarding the question
of the genuine Euthalian elements, Robinson is one of the most radical critics, since he
used the text of the prologues as a criterion of authenticity. That is, only the items that
Euthalius explicitly referred to in the prologues should be considered original. Thus only
three items could be considered genuine: The prologues, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the
collections of testimonies.86
82 In the present volume, the section “[Chronological summary]” on page 108.
83 See Robinson 1895: 29.
84 See Robinsono&WFOJGUIF"UIBOBTJVTPG"MFYBOESJBXBTBQPTTJCMFEFEJDBUFF Robinson
hesitated to draw any conclusion regarding the locality of Euthalius.
85 See Robinson 1895: 71.
86 See Robinsono XJUIIJTDPODMVTJPOPOUIFMBTUQBHF
In 1896, Harris published an essay focusing on the relations between Euthalius and Euse-
bius.87 Harris argued that Euthalius was not an original writer with ‘so great a wealth
of expression’ as Robinson believed.88 Harris first observed that Euthalius himself had
pointed to Eusebius as one of his sources, and he proceeded to examine this literary
relationship in greater detail. He found that large portions of the Euthalian prologues
were derived from the The History of the Church and Chronicon of Eusebius, and thus
that Euthalius was a ‘systematic plagiarist.’89 This dependence on Eusebius was used by
Harris to restore the Martyrdom as belonging to the original apparatus. While Robinson
had argued that the Martyrdom was based on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, Harris
now suggested that both texts were derived from Eusebius. In order to show this, Harris
criticizes the three arguments of Robinson on the Martyrdom:90
(1) Harris finds it natural that the author of the Martyrdom, in a passage that brings
the dates down to his own day, refers to 25 June. The calendrical dating of Paul’s
martyrdom to 5 Panemos is older than both Eusebius and Euthalius. It is therefore
not necessarily derived from the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. Eusebius does not
use the Syro-Macedonian calendar, but refers to dates by Roman months with
Syro-Macedonian names.
(2) The clause with the difficult phrase κατ᾽ αὐτὸν is not derived from the Prologue to
the Letters of Paul, but from Eusebius (H. E. ii, 22): δεύτερον δ᾽ ἐπιβάντα τῇ αὐτῇ
πόλει, τῷ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν τελειωθῆναι μαρτυρίῳ. Harris finds that there is a similar
obscurity in the use of κατ᾽ αὐτόν here, and concludes that the Martyrdom here
actually is closer to Eusebius.
(3) Regarding the error concerning the date of the Paul’s martyrdom, Harris inter-
prets the evidence of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul differently. Again, he builds
his argument on the text of Eusebius. In H. E. iii, 31, Eusebius refers to his earlier
treatment of the deaths of Paul and Peter and their depositio in the Vatican and
on the Ostian way in H. E. ii, 25 respectively. Harris finds that even Eusebius is
unclear at this point, and argues that the error in the Martyrdom does not neces-
sarily represent a misunderstanding of the text of Eusebius or the Prologue to the
Letters of Paul.
A further consequence of these three criticisms, is that Robinson’s theory of a second

epitomizer, working after Euthalius, is unnecessary, and Harris suggests that Euthalius
had written the Martyrdom himself.91 Harris did not confine himself to source-criticism,
but was also conscious of the influence of generic convention upon the prologues. The
prologues could be read in a wider context, as texts belonging to a literary culture with
certain expectations as to what a prologue should contain. Thus he described the opening
87 See Harris 1896.

88 Harris 1896: 64, cf. Robinson 1895: 29.
89 Harris)JTFWJEFODFGPSUIJTWFSEJDUJTQSFTFOUFEPOQQo
90 The discussion of these three arguments is found in Harriso
91 See Harriso
of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul as ‘a conventional opening to a new book.’92 However,
the reading of Euthalius in the light of literary conventions is not so much a concern for
Harris, as it is to show the invidual borrowings from the Eusebius’ text.
The study of von Dobschütz on the Syriac version of Euthalius, referred to above, is to a
large extent concerned with the history of the Syriac NT, but is, nevertheless, clearly of
importance also for general research on Euthalius. Regarding the date of Euthalius, von
Dobschütz noted that the versions of the Martyrdom in L and O refer to the 819th year
of Alexander the Great, which corresponds to our 508 AD. This is also the year in which
the Philoxenian revision of the Peshitta was produced. The manuscript O brings some
additions to the text of the Martyrdom, as it looks back to that year (508 AD) as the year
when a previous translation of this writing from Greek into Syriac was made.93 This edi-
tion led von Dobschütz to associate the text of the Martyrdom in O with the Harclean
version from 616 AD. The implication is that not only the Martyrdom, but also a form of
the Euthalian apparatus was present already in the Philoxenian version.94 Regarding the
question of the genuine Euthalian elements, it is worth noting, however, that the Syriac
manuscripts von Dobschütz examined did not contain the ὑποθέσεις.
In the first volume of von Soden’s Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments (1902) a large
amount of auxiliary material to the NT writings was included. Among this material
we find the complete Euthalian apparatus, albeit in separated elements. von Soden also
reconstructs a biography of Euthalius, employing a method that is basically a close read-
ing of the prologues and some related texts as sources for the life and times of Euthalius.95
Unfortunately, von Soden did not refer to the work of Harris from 1896 where the influ-
ence of generic conventions was acknowledged. von Soden tends to take the rhetoric of
Euthalius seriously as a personal testimony of the author. He noted a marked difference
both in style and content between the Prologue to the Letters of Paul and the Prologue to
Acts, considering the former a respectable piece of work, while the latter is full of self-
deprecating phrases that stress the incompetence and audacity of the author, containing
almost nothing of interest to the reader of Acts. von Soden thought that this Euthalius is
a transformed person, different from the deacon who wrote the first prologue. Between
the two works, Euthalius seemed to have broken his back. What had happened? The solu-
tion, according to von Soden, was found in a document discovered by Wobbermin, one
of his co-workers. Wobbermin had come across the Confession of Euthalius in an 11th
cent. manuscript in Athos. The full title of the document is Εὐθαλίου ἐπισκόπου Σούλκης
ὁμολογία περὶ τῆς ὀρθοδόξου πίστεως.96 von Soden declared triumphantly that this dis-
92 Harris 1896: 69. For an introduction to the conventions of the genre in late antiquity and medieval times,
see H. Brinkmann 1964.
93 This probably refers to a translation of the Pauline letters from Greek into Syriac.
94 See von DobschützoćFRVFTUJPOPGUIFSFMBUJPOTIJQCFUXFFOUIFWFSTJPOTJTBMTPUSFBUFE
in Brock 1979.
95 The reconstructed biography of Euthalius with the documents used for the reconstruction is found in von
Sodeno
96 ćFUFYUJTGPVOEJO"UIPT-BXSB GPMoćFGVMMUFYUPGUIF$POGFTTJPOJTQSJOUFEJOvon Soden
o
covery had put an end to the Penelopearbeit of earlier research.97 The piece purports to be
a retraction of heretical views in the form of a confession. After a personal introduction,
where Euthalius presents himself as ‘a humble man and a sinner, bishop of the most Holy
Church of Sulci,’ he confesses his belief in the main trinitarian and Christological dogmas.
He condemns monotheletism in particular, and regrets that he had been led by a certain
John to sign an earlier heretical confession. This document also contains references to the
first five ecumenical councils:
From the Confession of Euthalius. Text in My translation

von Soden 1902: 640–641.
Οὓς δὲ ἀπεβάλλετο καὶ ἀποβάλλεται ὁ We reject and condemn all those whom the ap-
ἀποστολικὸς καὶ πρωτόθρονος τοῦ ἁγίου ostolic First Chair of the Holy Apostle Peter re-
Πέτρου τοῦ ἀποστόλου ἤγουν ἡ ἁγία τοῦ jected and rejects, and all those whom the holy,
θεοῦ καθολικὴ καὶ ἀποστολικὴ μεγάλη catholic and apostolic Great Church of God
ἐκκλησία Ῥώμης κατέκρινεν ἢ κατακρίνει, condemned and condemns. And we accept
ἀποβαλλόμεθα καὶ κατακρίνομεν· καὶ οὓς firmly and without hesitation all those whom
προσεδέξατο καὶ προσδέχεται, ἀσφαλῶς καὶ it accepted and accepts. We know them as our
ἀνενδυάστως προσδεχόμεθα καὶ ὁμοπίστους fellow-believers, without any doubt, and those
ἡμῶν γινώσκομεν ἄνευ οἱάσουν ἀμφιβολίας, who do not confess or believe or proclaim like-
καὶ τοῖς μὴ οὕτως ὁμολογοῦσιν ἢ πιστεύουσιν wise, let them be anathematized from the pure
ἢ κηρύττουσιν ἀνάθεμα ἔστω ἐκ τῆς ἀχράντου and life-giving Trinity of the Father, of the Son
καὶ ζωοποιοῦ τριάδος τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ and of the Holy Spirit, and from the holy, cath-
υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος καὶ ἐκ τῆς olic and apostolic orthodox Church of God.
ἁγίας καθολικῆς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἀποστολικῆς I praise and accept the four holy ecumenical
ὀρθοδόξου ἐκκλησίας· ἀποδέχομαι δὲ καὶ councils, the one in Nicaea, in Constantinople,
περιπτύσσομαι τὰς ἁγίας καὶ οἰκουμενικὰς the first in Ephesus, and in Chalcedon, in addi-
τέσσαρας συνόδους, τὴν ἐν Νικαίᾳ, τὴν tion to these also the second council that took
ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει, τὴν ἐν Ἐφέσῳ τὸ place in Constantinople under Justinian, who
πρότερον καὶ τὴν ἐν Χαλκηδόνι, πρὸς αὐταῖς died as a pious man. I accept in addition to all
καὶ τὴν ἐκ δευτέρου ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει these also the holy council that was assembled
γενομένην ἐπὶ τοῦ ἐν εὐσεβεῖ τῇ λήξει in Rome under Pope Martin, the most holy
Ἰουστινιανοῦ τοῦ βασιλέως. προσδέχομαι δὲ man in apostolic memory, a council assembled
μετὰ καὶ τούτων ἁπάντων καὶ τὴν ὑπὸ τοῦ in order to confirm the orthodox and apostolic
ἐν ἀποστολικῇ τῇ μνήμῃ ἁγιωτάτου πάπα teachings of our, the Christians, blameless faith,
Μαρτίνου συναθροίσθησαν ἐν Ρώμῃ ἁγίαν and in order to condemn the recent rashness.
σύνοδον ἐπὶ βεβαιώσει τῶν ὀρθοδόξων καὶ
ἀποστολικῶν δογμάτων τῆς ἀμωμήτου ἡμῶν
τῶν Χριστιανῶν πίστεως καὶ εἰς κατάκρισιν τῆς
νέας θρασύτητος.
von Soden is convinced that the document is genuine because the name ‘Euthalius’ is
unimportant in the dogmatic controversies of the period. If this argument is accepted,
it is also possible to date the document with some accuracy. The council in Rome under
Pope Martin was held in 648. Pope Martin himself died after a controversy in 655, so von
Soden believed that the piece was written some time after this, in the late 7th century. As
to the location of the document, certain linguistic details led him to identify the Sulci of
Euthalius. The final paragraph of the Confession refers to the person who had seduced

Euthalius into signing the earlier confessionary document: an otherwise unknown
John, who is referred to as ‘exceptor of the duchy’ (Ἰωάννης ὁ ἐκσκέπτωρ τῆς δουκιακῆς
ἀρχῆς)—a duchy being a subdivision of the Byzantine exarchies, and exceptores being
members of the duchy’s administration. Thus, since this John was an exceptor, and “Sulci”
(on Sardinia) a city within a Byzantine exarchy, von Soden felt certain that he had found
the Sulci of Euthalius on Sardinia.98 von Soden was not impressed by the contents of the
Confession, saying that ‘what we have dug out is a monument made by a weak soul.’99 The
signing of the heretical confession, and its later retraction were the painful events that
had destroyed him.
The discovery of the Confession was not the only new material that von Soden could offer.
He also found the solution to an old problem in Euthalian scholarship: In minuscule
181, the main witness used by Zacagni in his edition, Zacagni had found in the end of a
stichometrical list the mysterious phrase Καὶ τὸ πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν στίχοι κζ´. The text this
phrase referred to, however, was not found in the manuscript. The problem was solved
when another of von Soden’s co-workers, von der Goltz, found the following text on the
island of Chalki:
98 See von Soden 1902: 643. This possibility had been considered already by Zacagni MYJJoMYJW XIP
rejected it because Euthalius wrote in Greek and rather seemed to be connected to the Church of Alexan-
dria.
99 ‘Es ist das Denkmal eines schwachen Geistes, das wir hier ausgegraben haben.’ von Soden 1902: 644.
The Πρὸς ἐμαυτόν of Euthalius. Text in von My translation

Soden 1902: 646–647.
Πρὸς ἐμαυτόν To Myself
Τὰ πάντα πάντη καιρὸν ἔχει· ἀκμάζει γὰρ τὰ Everywhere, there is a time for every thing. For
ἕκαστα καὶ λήγει παλιν. ἐν πᾶσιν δὲ ἀπάθεια each thing will bloom and then disappear. In
μόνη νικᾶν ἔχει. ὑπεροπτικὸς τοίνυν μὴ all, only indifference can prevail. Soul, do not
γίνου, θυμέ, ταῖς εὐδοξίαις μηδὲ ταπεινὸς be haughty in your happiness, and do not be
ταῖς δυστυχίαις. οὕτω γὰρ ἂν δίκαιος ἔσῃ τοῦ abased in adversities. For thus you will with
βίου ζυγοστάτης. οὐχ ἁπλαῖς οὐδ᾽ ἀσυνθέτοις justice guard the equilibrium of life. I was
συσκευαῖς ἐμπεπτώκαμεν ἀλλὰ δὴ πλεισταῖς not the victim of simple and straightforward
καὶ πικραῖς και διαφόροις. τούτων ἡμῖν οὐδεὶς schemes, no, of many different ones, cruel ones,
ἦν ὁ παρήγορος· πάντων γὰρ ἄρδην τῶν and there was no one who helped me out of
ἀγαθῶν ἡμεῖς ἐστηρήμεθα, πατρίδος ὁμοῦ them. We were completely bereft of all benefits:
καὶ δόξης καὶ περιουσίας, μόνην δ᾽ ἀρωγὸν homeland, honor and possessions, the only
εὗρον τῶν κακῶν την ἀναισθησίαν. πολλαῖσιν helper I found was indifference. My soul, you
οὖν μοι συμφοραῖς προσομιλήσασα ψυχὴ, μὴ who have experienced so many misfortunes,
δὴ κάμῃ ἐμοί, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπόμεινον, φίλη. ὥσπερ do not grow weary, but, my friend, endure.a As
γὰρ ἀρίστη ταῦτα εἰλονιζομένη καρτερήσεις, the bravest you will endure if you keep this in
ὅτι οὐχ᾽ ὃ θέλει τις καὶ βούλεται δρᾷ, ἀλλ᾽ ὃ your mind, because a man does not do what
μὴ ζητεῖ καὶ φεύγεται. ὁ γὰρ θεῖος ὅρος τῶν he wants and wishes for, but he does what he
πάντων κρατεῖν ἐμελέτησεν· εἶπεν δέ τις, εἶπεν does not seek and what he tries to avoid. For
ἡμῖν ὥδε ποιητικὸς στίχος· ἐλπίδες ἐν ζωοῖσιν, the divine law has power over everything. And
ἀνέλπιστοι δὲ θανόντες. οὐκοῦν τοὺς πάθους so goes a poetic line: ‘Hope is among the living,
τλῆναι χρὴ καὶ γενναίως φέρειν; οὐδεὶς γὰρ but the dead do not possess it.’b Should we not
οὐδὲν ἐστὶ τῶν ἐν βίῳ βροτῶν καὶ οὐδὲν ἐν endure and carry our sufferings with dignity?
ταὐτῷ γένει τῶν ἀνθρώπων. ὡς ἐν τροχῷ δὲ For he who takes part in the life of mortals and
πάντα στρέφεται καὶ τρέχει ἄλλων· ταῦτ᾽ ἐγὼ belongs to mankind, is nothing. But as in a
πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν πάντα γράφω νῦν καὶ πρὸς wheel, everything revolves and moves on. All
ἑστίαν πατρὸς ἐμοῦ τὴν τρισαθλίαν Εὐθάλιος. this I, Euthalius, now write to myself and to
οἴμοι τὴν μεταβολὴν ἐννοῶν, τῶν ἀνθρώπων the thrice-stricken house of my father. Woe is
δὲ πάντα ὡς ἄνθρωπος βλέπων μίαν ἔλιπον me, as I consider the change! Seeing the affairs
ἐμαυτῷ εὔπιστον ἐλπίδα, τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ μόνην of humans as a human being, I left for myself
μοι φιλανθρωπίαν. στίχων κζ´. one hope in good faith, the one love of God for
mankind. Twenty-seven lines.
a This translation was suggested to me by Jerker Blomqvist.
b The line is Theocritus Idylls 4.42, see von Dobschütz 1899: 114.
It turned out that this piece corresponded to the Prayer of Euthalius which was known
from Armenian manuscripts. The German translation of the Armenian printed by von
Dobschütz is slightly different, and some of the personal elements of the Greek text are
left out. This explains how the piece could appear as a kind of epilogue in the printed
editions of the Armenian NT.100 von Soden used the Greek original of To Myself, the
Confession, the Martyrdom, and the Euthalian prologues as if they were pieces in a puzzle.
He considered the Martyrdom in its form without the Egyptian paragraph a part of the
original edition of Euthalius.101 Moreover, since the use of the Syro-Macedonian calendar
100 On the Armenian version, see von Dobschütz o XJUIUSBOTMBUJPO BOEConybeare (1904:
47).
101 For his view on the textual history of the Martyrdom, see von Sodeno
in the Martyrdom connected Euthalius with the East, von Soden was able to reconstruct
a biography of Euthalius with the following main points:102 Euthalius was a deacon in
the East, possibly in Syrian Antioch, when he edited his volume of the Pauline letters,
dedicated to an unknown father. After a controversy, Euthalius was forced to move to Sar-
dinia. Here he signed an unorthodox confession. When he later made a retraction, in the
form of the orthodox Confession that has come down to us, he was made bishop of Sulci
on Sardinia as a reward. Only at that point, in order to rehabilitate himself completely,
did he produce the volume of Acts and the Catholic letters. To Myself is a late, autobio-
graphical product, which gives us intimate knowledge of the inner life of Euthalius after
his many struggles. von Soden also had original views concerning the elements of the
apparatus: While Zacagni and others had excluded the ὑποθέσεις using internal criteria,
stressing the fact that they were not mentioned in the prologues, von Soden argued that
the ὑποθέσεις with absolute certainty belonged to the original edition, as they occur in
all the manuscripts. For similar reasons, he was willing to accept most of the material,
including the Martyrdom, as genuine.103 Another aspect of von Soden’s work concerned
the writing of the biblical text. von Soden believed that Euthalius divided the Acts and the
Letters into sense-units simply by adding points in the text. In this view, he differs from
earlier scholars.104 The edition of von Soden also departs from that of Zacagni in its order
of presentation, since the ὑποθέσεις, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, and the prologues are treated
separately. von Soden did not adopt the juxtaposition of ὑποθέσεις and κεφάλαια-τίτλοι,
so common in the manuscripts, being convinced (like Zacagni) that separate traditions
had been fused in the apparatus, and letting this insight determine the order of presenta-
tion. Thus the different genres of apparatus (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, ὑποθέσεις, prologues) were
separated in his edition.
Conybeare soon raised objections against von Soden.105 While admitting that the dis-
covery of the Confession represented a problem, he blamed von Soden for neglecting the
work of Robinson. He argues that Robinson had shown that the Martyrdom is depen-
dent on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, and this made von Soden’s view untenable.106
Conybeare drew attention to the fact that the apparatus in the majority of manuscripts is
anonymous, and that only a few identify the author as Euthalius bishop of Sulci. He also
assumes that the apparatus was translated into Armenian in the middle of the 5th century.
One reason for this assumption is the Armenian date given in the Martyrdom, where an
Armenian translator has added the name of the Armenian month Margotz as a gloss on
‘June.’ According to Conybeare, 1 June fell on 1 Margotz in the year 448 AD, since only in
that year were the months in exact alignment. Of course, the two months would partly
DPWFSFBDIPUIFSJOUIFQFSJPEo FOPVHIGPSBOBVUIPSUPIBWFHJWFOBOFTUJNBUF
102 See von Sodeno

103 See von Soden 1902: 657. The Martyrdom is considered genuine in the sense that it was included in the
edition of Euthalius. Since it originated in 4th century, it belongs to the material that Euthalius inherited.
104 See von Soden 1902: 666.
105 See Conybeare 1904.
106 See Conybeareo6OGPSUVOBUFMZ Conybeare does not here discuss the objections of Harris
against the work of Robinson.
date), but Conybeare believes that the ‘middle date’ 448 is the most plausible.107 He also
used Armenian sources in order to prove that Robinson’s dating of the Greek Euthalian
material was correct. Some of this material had already been introduced in his previous
work on Euthalius (see above). The earliest of the Armenian texts used by Conybeare is
a 10th century manuscript containing a chronicle he ascribes to Ananias of Shirak (7th
cent.).108 In this manuscript Euthalius is said to have published his volume of the Pauline
letters in 396. Conybeare admits that this date evidently is based on the Martyrdom, and
thus has no value as an independent source, but he wants to draw attention to the fact
that the chronicle does record traditions about Euthalius at such an early date. Conybeare
also introduced a rather late source, a commentary on Acts by the Armenian presbyter
Matthew (1411).109 Here Euthalius is said to have produced the volume of the Pauline
letters for Alexander, patriarch of Alexandria, who died shortly after the first Ecumenical
Council of Nicaea. According to Conybeare, Matthew’s commentary was compiled from
many sources including John Chrysostomos, Ephrem, and Michael the Syrian. He was, at
that point, inclined to place confidence in this account, especially since Matthew seems
to have information that is not found elsewhere. He gives an early date for Euthalius, and
resists the assumption that Athanasius was the great Athanasius of Alexandria. The main
point of Conybeare is that the Armenian traditions, though contradictory, prove that an
early date for Euthalius is more accurate.110
In the same year, Theodor Zahn published an article on Euthalius where he criticized von
Soden’s views.111 The essence of his criticism is similar to that of Conybeare: Zahn finds
that the identification of Euthalius with the 7th century bishop has a weak foundation.
He is willing to accept that a Greek from Syria may have become bishop of the mainly
Latin-speaking church of Sulci on Sardinia in the second half of the 7th century. He finds
it, however, unthinkable that this bishop could have failed to mention that his work on
the biblical texts was made primarily for the benefit of the Greek churches in the East
and not for his own community. In addition, Zahn could also draw attention to the fact
that the Confession of Euthalius was known in the West even before von Soden published
it: The Dominican friar Bonacursius of Bologna (13th cent.), who had lived 45 years in
the Greek East, had quoted parts of this confession (in the original Greek and with Latin
translation) in his Thesaurus veritatis fidei (c. 1275). Here, the Confession served as Greek
evidence supporting the doctrine of the primacy of Rome.112 Zahn thinks that the ‘To
Myself ’ is much closer to the Euthalian prologues. Here, he finds the same kind of rhyth-
mic prose and a similar use of pagan authors.113 The most important texts are, according
to Zahn, not the Confession or the ‘To Myself ’ but the Euthalian prologues and the Mar-
tyrdom. To him, the 4th cent. Martyrdom proves that the 7th century Confession was not
107 See Conybeare 1904: 50. The method of dating implies that this is an approximation only.
108 See Conybeareo
109 See Conybeareo
110 See ConybeareoBOEWillardoo
111 Zahn 1904.
112 See Zahno
113 See Zahn 1904: 316.
the work of the author of the apparatus. The Euthalian edition was made, according to
Zahn, somewhere in Syria between 330 and 390 AD.
The works of Conybeare and Zahn may be said to mark the end of the discussion that
had followed after the publication on Codex H by Omont in 1890. After this period of
intensive research came to an end, there have been relatively few studies on Euthalius.
The Armenian work of Vardanian published in the 1920s was probably read by very few
scholars in Europe. For this work, most scholars are dependent on the summary that
Willard had acquired. Vardanian basically agrees with Conybeare regarding the date of
the Armenian translation, which he places in the middle of the 5th century. His method
of discerning between genuine and secondary elements of the apparatus is linguistic:
only elements written in the classical language are considered genuine. On the basis of
this criterion, he accepts the Martyrdom, but not the ὑποθέσεις. He also considers the
Armenian colophon, The Voyage of Paul the Apostle to Rome, and The Travels of Paul as
genuine writings.114
An important work of the subsequent period is Günther Zuntz’ The Ancestry of the Har-
klean New Testament which appeared in 1945. The focus of this study is not the apparatus,
but the history of the Syriac NT. Zuntz’ main concern is to demonstrate close connec-
tions between the NT text of Pamphilus on the one hand, and the Philoxenian (508) and
Harklean (616) versions on the other. He argues that the Euthalian elements were not a
part of the Peshitta, but were introduced in the Philoxenian version. He reconstructs the
Greek text of a colophon in the Philoxenian version, and finds that the first half of this
colophon is identical with that of Codex H and min. 88 (without the dialogue), while its
second half is identical with the summary of the Euthalian lection list of the Letters of
Paul.115 He finds that this indicates that these manuscripts are interdependent, and, fur-
ther, that this interdependence is related to the library of Caesarea where the colophon
was originally a guarantee of authenticity of copies issued from the Caesarean scripto-
rium.116 The apparatus was thus a Caesarean product, and Pamphilus was the origina-
tor of the work. ‘Euthalius’ is only a pseudonym of an author who was not particularly
creative, since only the prologues were his own. Besides, ‘Euthalius’ had distributed the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι in his copy, so that they appear before the text of each letter.117 Other
aspects of Zuntz’ work should be mentioned: He placed the apparatus within the larger
context of Greco-Roman literary culture, introducing parallels to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
and the ὑποθέσεις.118 He also discussed the arrangement of the biblical text against the
background of ancient scribal practices.119
114 For a detailed summary of the work of Vardanian, see Willardoo

115 For the reconstructed text of this colophon, see Zuntz 1945: 77.
116 See Zuntz 1945: 87.
117 See Zuntz 1945: 83. In a later study, Zuntz has conjectured that ‘Euthalius’ is a pseudonym for Euzoios,
and that the name of the dedicatee Athanasius also is a pseudonym. Behind ‘Athanasius’ stands Acacios.
Both are associated with the Library of Caesarea in the 4th century. For this conjecture, see Zuntz 1953.
118 See Zuntzo
119 See ZuntzoćJTBTQFDUPGZuntz’ work may be considered a development of Harris’ work on
stichometry (Harris 1883).
In 1970, Willard finished A Critical Study of the Euthalian apparatus, an important dis-
sertation for Euthalian studies. Willard noted that the secondary literature was partly
disconnected; some authors had apparently been writing without sufficient knowledge
of previous research. For this reason, he collected and summarized material from all
relevant fields, including the Armenian and Syriac versions. In his views on the origin
and development of the apparatus, Willard tends to agree with Zuntz, as he considers the
apparatus a Caesarean product of the 4th century.120 Willard acknowledged that an Eng-
lish translation of the apparatus was needed, and made an annotated translation of the
Prologue to the Letters of Paul.121 In an appended survey of more than 400 manuscripts, he
gave detailed information of their contents, which was a first step towards a new critical
edition.
Dahl, who had acted as 8JMMBSETTVQFSWJTPSBU:BMF SFUVSOFEUPUIFBQQBSBUVTJOBOBS-

ticle published in 2000.122 Dahl demonstrated that the apparatus contained a meta-termi-
nology that was very sophisticated, indebted to ancient rhetorical theory and suggestive
of modern-day pragmatics.123 While earlier commentators had focused on the identity
of Euthalius, Dahl studied the function of the apparatus in a wider context, as a source
document for the history of piety. He suggested that the apparatus may have been used by
lay people, and thus could give an impression of how Paul was read in wider circles. He
also wrote a sketch of the teachings of the apparatus, and showed that this was a neglected
subject worthy of study.124
Inspired by the work of Dahl, David Hellholm and I published in 2004 a study of the meta-
language of the apparatus, focusing on the term παραίνεσις.125 This was the first study
exclusively devoted to the content of the apparatus. After defining the concept ‘genre-des-
ignation’ by means of ancient and modern text-theory, we argued that παραίνεσις and its
cognates appear as genre-designations in the apparatus.126 This has special interest, as the
term parainesis is not a genre-designation in the NT. Our article was thus an attempt to
answer the question of when this genre-designation gained currency within the church.
In a recent study, Simon Crisp has returned to the question of how the biblical text was
arranged.127 The study of Crisp uses a comparative method to throw light on the arrange-
ment of the text in Euthalian editions. Crisp compares major section breaks in various
Pauline manuscripts (H D F G 1243 1891 1720) and finds that the manuscripts represent
a relatively stable tradition.
120 See Willard 1970: 175/2009: 131.

121 See Willardoo
122 See Dahl 2000d.
123 See Dahl 2000d: 257.
124 See DahlEBOEo
125 See D. Hellholm/V. Blomkvist 2004 (App. II).
126 See Hellholm/BlomkvistoBOEo
127 See S. Crisp 2005.
2.2. Conclusions
At the beginning of the preceding section, four major themes in the history of research
were highlighted. After this survey of the history of research, the following conclusions
may be drawn:
The first is the question of authorship. This topic is impossible to separate from the other
main theme—the question of which elements of the apparatus should be considered
genuine. Two texts that have received much attention by scholars regarding these ques-
tions are the Martyrdom and the colophon of Codex H. The Martyrdom is often quoted
as evidence for the date of Euthalius, as this is the only document in the apparatus that
has references to specific years. The problem is how to interpret this material. The view
of Zacagni, that the author of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is identical with the author of the
Martyrdom, has a weak foundation, and is rejected by most scholars.128 The hypothesis of
Robinson regarding the Martyrdom, that this text is based on the Prologue to the Letters
of Paul, has been accepted by many. Zuntz considered this the ‘most brilliant achievement
of Robinson’s justly famous Euthaliana.’129 It is my view that Zuntz at this point neglected
the arguments of Harris, who argued that Eusebius is the source behind both the Pro-
logue to the Letters of Paul and the Martyrdom. The arguments of Harris are worthy of
consideration. His model of influence, where the text of Eusebius stands as a source for
both the Prologue to the Letters of Paul and the Martyrdom, is an attractive explanation
of literary relations between the texts. Moreover, it is supported by the explicit references
to Eusebius in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. Thus, it should not be taken for granted
that the Martyrdom belongs to the time after Euthalius.
The colophon of Codex H has also been very important for the question of authorship.
It occurs in an early manuscript and may for this reason be evidence for an early date of
Euthalius. The important question is whether the colophon is dependent on Euthalius or
not. It is my view that the arguments of von Dobschütz and Robinson for the dependence
of the colophon on Euthalius are convincing. It appears that the ‘we’ in the Euthalian par-
allel material has been changed to ‘I’ in the colophon. If literary dependence is assumed,
the question remains of how this dependence should be explained. Robinson conjectured
that both the Martyrdom and the colophon belonged to an editio minor of the apparatus,
but this view seems unfounded. Willard finds that the colophon represents an eclectic
production similar to that of the Martyrdom, but does not attempt to establish a link
between the two texts. Willard’s interpretation at this point seems the most convincing:
namely, that just because the two texts both can be characterized as eclectic products,
this in itself does not establish any historical link between them. The evidence of Codex
H, as well as the early translation of the apparatus into Syriac, Armenian and Georgian
make the late date that von Soden assigns to Euthalius impossible to defend. Still, the
Confession of Euthalius is an enigmatic document: There is a connection between it and
the titles of the Euthalian prologues transmitted in a number of manuscripts—the con-
128 Zacagni’s view is supported in the work of Wettstein (1752: 73), M. Islinger (1867: 5) and von
Dobschütz (1893: 68). von Dobschütz later came to reject Zacagni’s view, see von Dobschütz 1899:
137 n.1.
129 Zuntz 1945: 79 n. 2.
nection being the name ‘Euthalius’ and the reference to him as ‘bishop of Sulci.’ Scholars
have rightly pointed out that the apparatus in the majority of manuscripts has been trans-
mitted without a name. We are apparently left with two possibilities:
(1) That Euthalius bishop of Sulci was an historical person of the 7th century whose
name for some reason became associated with the apparatus at a later stage. Different
explanations may be given. Conybeare suggests that the name ‘Euthalius’ was in the
tradition already before the 7th century. About 670 AD a Euthalius, bishop of Sulci, be-
came well-known, and scribes after 700 AD expanded the tradition by adding the words
‘bishop of Sulci.’130 Dahl, on the other hand, considers the possibility that the 7th century
bishop of Sulci presented a restored edition of the apparatus, with original and secondary
elements combined.131 This would explain why this name appears only in a small group
of manuscripts.
(2) That the Confession is not an historical document, but a pseudonymous work writ-
ten in the name of Euthalius. von Soden rejects this, as it is very hard to imagine why
anybody should write in the name of an author who is so obscure. This argument of
von Soden is convincing. The Confession should be considered an authentic historical
document. As to the question of how the name ‘Euthalius’ was associated with the appa-
ratus, it seems best to withhold judgment. The other text that von Soden introduced, To
Myself, represents another genre. von Dobschütz has aptly characterized its style as that
of Ecclesiastes, and this text can not be used as a source for the life of Euthalius. Even if
von Soden’s reconstruction of the life of Euthalius is rejected as speculative, it should be
remembered that he made some important observations. His point of departure was the
observation that the style of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul and that of the Prologue to
Acts differs markedly from each other, a fact which has not received much attention by
scholars. It must be admitted that the question of authorship is a difficult subject at the
present stage of research. Scholars have frequently referred to two theological schools of
UIPVHIUćFĕSTUJTUIFMJOFPG0SJHFOo1BNQIJMVTo&VTFCJVTćJTBTTPDJBUFTUIFBQ-
paratus with Caesarea and its library. It has been suggested that the bulk of the apparatus
may go back to Origen or his school. The theory that Evagrius Ponticus, who was con-
demned as an Origenist, was the author of the apparatus, also belongs here. The other line
often referred to by scholars is that of Theodore of Mopsuestia and Nestorius. This theory
draws the apparatus into the sphere of Nestorianism. Possibly, a detailed analysis of the
apparatus may confirm some of these hypotheses.
The second main theme, the question of the genuine elements, has already been intro-
duced with respect to the Martyrdom. The most important of the disputed elements is
the series of ὑποθέσεις. Here, the edition of Zacagni has exerted a great influence, since
Zacagni included a large amount of material in the Euthalian apparatus, taking the com-
prehensive manuscript 181 as his model codex. Even if Zacagni himself did not consider
the ὑποθέσεις part of the original editions, their inclusion in the print has constantly
associated them with Euthalius. Scholars after Zacagni have often tried to reduce the
Euthalian apparatus by isolating certain elements as the original ones. Here Robinson is
the most radical critic. At the other end of the spectrum stands von Soden, who accepted
130 See Conybeare 1904: 45.

131 See Dahl 2000d: 253 n74.
Aim and Structure of the Study 33
even the ὑποθέσεις. The question reflects a methodological problem in textual criticism.
Robinson may be said to emphasize the internal evidence: Only elements that are referred
to in the prologues should be considered genuine. von Soden, on the other hand, argues
on the basis of the manuscripts. According to his view, the inclusion of the ὑποθέσεις in
the majority of manuscripts points to their being genuine. The question of genuine ele-
ments also includes the lection lists and the collection of testimonies and other minor
pieces. The evidence of the Armenian and Syriac versions seems to confirm Robinson’s
critical view on the ὑποθέσεις, but they do not confirm his radicalism at every point. At
the present stage of research, it is difficult to approach these questions because we still do
not have a critical edition of the apparatus reflecting today’s scholarly standards.132 The
manuscript survey of Willard offers an excellent overview of the tradition, but the form
of the text in the majority of manuscripts is unfortunately not described.
The third main theme, the question of how the biblical text was arranged by Euthalius, is
still unresolved. Most scholars believe that the text was arranged in sense-lines, and that
Codex H represents a variant of the original editions. von Soden, on the other hand, has
advocated the view that the sense-lines were expressed only by points in the text. If each
line in the original editions was also a sense-line, the question is why only one exemplar,
Codex H, has survived. A plausible solution is that these manuscripts were quite expen-
sive to produce, and that, for this reason, the tradition was continued by using punctua-
tion. For this reason as well, a new edition of Euthalius would be helpful. A full treatment
of punctuation, however, cannot be given at the present stage.
The fourth main theme is the question of how the apparatus has transformed the biblical
texts by using rhetorical and epistolographic vocabulary. Zuntz noted that the Euthalian
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is the work of a stylist versed in Greek paideia, and Birdsall noted that
the apparatus can teach us much about how rhetorical methods were applied to bibli-
cal texts.133 The close link between the terminology of the apparatus and ancient epis-
tolographic handbooks was discussed by Dahl, and Hellholm and I have developed this
theme further in our study of the term παραίνεσις in the apparatus.
3. Aim and Structure of the Study

3.1. The Euthalian Apparatus and the Biblical Text
The aim of the present commentary is to describe the relationship between the Euthalian
apparatus and the biblical texts. This focus separates the present commentary from most
earlier studies on the apparatus. From the preceding sketch of the history of research, one
may learn that the focus has been on the isagogic questions: ‘Who was Euthalius, where
and when did he live?’ The fact that Euthalius himself was an isagogic writer on the NT
has not stimulated much research. The studies by Dahl, Hellholm and myself seem to be
the few exceptions. The present commentary develops this theme further by focusing on
132 Scholars will welcome the new edition of Euthalius planned by David C. Parker and Simon Crisp in Bir-
mingham.
133 Zuntz 1945: 81; Birdsall 1984/2006: 215.
the apparatus as a ‘meta-text’ vis-a-vis its ‘pre-text’, i.e. the apostolic writings of the New
Testament.134 Thus, the pre-text appears in the present commentary together with the
Euthalian texts since the Euthalian apparatus cannot be properly understood without it.
The reader will therefore find a double lemma adopted throughout the commentary. In
most cases, the entire pre-text cannot be reproduced, but its opening words are always
quoted. The motivation for studying the Euthalian apparatus as a meta-text is my interest
in the history of the reception of the New Testament.135 The presence of Euthalian mat-
ter in a large number of NT manuscripts is generally not recognized but suggests that
these texts once were important for readers of the NT. The scribes, as von Dobschütz
suggested,136 may have considered the apparatus to be a part of the biblical text, just as
readers of modern bible editions today may accept the divisions, headings and arrange-
ment of the text as an integral part of the Bible. The importance of the apparatus for the
study of the reception of the NT has therefore been neglected and the present study is an
attempt to re-establish the Euthalian apparatus as an important source-text for the his-
tory of interpretation. It should be remembered that this study cannot pay attention to
all aspects of the apparatus, since some aspects of the work of Euthalius can no longer be
reconstructed. One of his most important tasks, namely, his work aiming at a clear and
correct pronunciation of the pre-text, remains obscure. We may understand the nature
of this task but only conjecture exactly how he wanted the biblical text to sound. We may
suppose that this knowledge was lost at an early stage due to the development of the
Greek language. The commentary does not make any attempt to reconstruct it.
The student who wants a more complete picture of how the Euthalian editions ap-
peared to their readers will have to read the apparatus together with the complete biblical
texts. One could possibly wish for a commentary on the complete biblical text with the
Euthalian apparatus. But the reader who has some knowledge of New Testament scholar-
ship must admit that such an endeavor would be too ambitious and probably not worth
the effort: The secondary literature on the NT is immense and cannot be compared to the
relatively few works that exist on Euthalius. It would for this reason be difficult to write
a commentary that would meet scholarly standards with respect both to the biblical pre-
text and the Euthalian meta-text. The solution adopted here is therefore to presuppose a
general knowledge of the biblical texts and instead to focus on points where the apparatus
presents something new or unexpected. In these instances, and in these only, is the pre-
text reproduced with references to a selection of NT commentaries.
3.2. The Sequence and Style of the Present Commentary

An initial difficulty for a student of the Euthalian apparatus is the fact that it is transmit-
ted in various forms. Apart from the problem of establishing the text (see below) there
is the more serious problem of how the apparatus appeared to its readers: Which ele-
134 On the useful term pre-text, see W. Raible 1995: 53, S. Alkier 2003 and A. MerzoS. Holthuis
(1993: 18) also uses the terms ‘Ursprungstext’ and ‘Initialtext’ but the short ‘pre-text’ is preferred in the
present commentary.
135 Cf. the new series Novum Testamentum Patristicum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 2007ff.). The
first volume is M. Meiser 2007.
ments were included? The main genres of the apparatus may appear together in different
constellations, the most common being the juxtaposition of ὑποθέσεις and κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι.137 Already at this stage, we may assume that they contain different descriptions of
the pre-text. The reader with access to an apparatus with ὑποθέσεις may get an impres-
sion of the pre-text that is quite different from that of a reader who has another form
of the apparatus, such as the complete collection in min. 181. It would be possible to
write a commentary on the Euthalian apparatus on the basis of this single, comprehen-
sive manuscript (such as 181) where all the elements of the apparatus appear together
JOUIFTFRVFODF"DUTo$BUIPMJDMFUUFSTo1BVMJOFMFUUFST*OUIJTNBOVTDSJQU UIFHFOSFT
are not separated: a prologue introduces each of the three main sections, and ὑποθέσεις
and κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are joined together and prefixed to each biblical book, where they
belong. This solution has not been adopted in the present commentary, where the focus
is not on single manuscripts but rather on the tradition they transmit. This tradition
appears in a variety of forms and the problem is how to write a commentary on the
apparatus that pays attention to this state of affairs. The method adopted here is to treat
the three main genres (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, ὑποθέσεις and πρόλογοι) separately. With the
material thus presented, the reader of the present commentary should keep in mind that
the presentation is artificial and made for the sake of clarity. This both provides a good
overview of the tradition and has the advantage of not limiting the study to one particular
‘constellation’ of materials. Future studies on the apparatus may choose to focus on single
manuscripts. Thus, the different elements of the apparatus are compared only in the final
conclusion. The sequence of the genres does not reflect any historical development but is
based on the relationship the genres have to the pre-text: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are mainly
text-internal, i.e. they do not treat the communicative situation of the NT writings. They
are for this reason placed first. The ὑποθέσεις follow these since they are both text-inter-
nal and text-external with regard to the NT writings: They know, e.g., where Paul was
when he wrote the letters and why he wrote them. Finally, the πρόλογοι are treated. Parts
of the πρόλογοι are meta-texts not only vis-a-vis the biblical text but also vis-a-vis the
apparatus itself, since they contain also information about ‘Euthalius’ and how readers
should use his edition.
The style of the present commentary is not uniform but has different emphases de-
pendent on the different genres of the Euthalian apparatus: (1) The commentary on the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι focuses on the meta-terminology (such as ‘prayer’ or ‘paraenesis’) and
is not divided into sections that correspond to each biblical book. The reasons for this
choice is that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι do not form a continuous text, but are rather short
titles where the meta-terminology is of the greatest importance. Thus, it seemed reason-
able to write a commentary on this material that focused on the meta-terms. (2) The
commentary on the ὑποθέσεις is different. In this section, it was considered necessary to
discuss each biblical book separately, since the ὑποθέσεις are continuous texts that have
much to say on the communicative situation of the pre-texts. The meta-terminology is
also discussed here but only at the various points where the meta-terms occur. The se-
RVFODFGPMMPXFEIFSFJTUIBUPG1BVMJOFMFUUFSTo$BUIPMJDMFUUFSTo"DUT*UXPVMEPGDPVSTF
be possible to treat Acts before the Letters but this procedure seems unnatural because of
the marginal role Acts plays in the Euthalian apparatus. Only the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι give a
137 See the manuscript survey in Willard oo BOEDahl (2000d: 265).
picture of Acts that has some substance. The material pertaining to Acts in the ὑποθέσεις
and πρόλογοι is very superficial. Possibly, this material was compiled at a late stage in
PSEFSUPDSFBUFTZNNFUSZJOUIFBQQBSBUVTćFTFRVFODF1BVMJOFMFUUFSTo$BUIPMJDMFUUFST
o"DUTIBTCFFODIPTFOPOUIFCBTJTPGNBOVTDSJQUFWJEFODF*UIBTCFFODIPTFOJOUIJT
study in order to keep the letters together. (3) The commentary on the πρόλογοι offers a
commentary on the Euthalian prologues section by section. The same sequence as in the
DPNNFOUBSZPOUIFаɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶JTGPMMPXFEIFSF 1BVMJOFMFUUFSTo$BUIPMJDMFUUFSTo"DUT
The πρόλογοι contain a double set of meta-terms, one treating the biblical texts as pre-
text, the other treating the apparatus itself as pre-text. This terminology is discussed at
various points where the terms occur.
3.3. Themes of the Commentary
3.3.1. The Pre-text

The pre-text in the case of the Euthalian apparatus is the Letters and Acts. There is how-
ever no consensus regarding what text-type the apparatus reflects. For a long period
after Zacagni, the biblical text of his main witness 181 was referred to as the ‘Euthalian’
text although Wettstein early had demonstrated the absurdity of this idea.138 It is well
known that a commentary manuscript may often reproduce one particular text-form in
the lemma while the commentary itself clearly presupposes another text-form. A similar
replacement may have occurred also in the Euthalian manuscripts. The present state of
research into the textual history of the Euthalian manuscripts, however, does not allow us
to draw any conclusions regarding the exact form of the pre-text of the apparatus. Given
the diverse character of the apparatus, one may also suspect that different text-types are
involved. The apparatus may have originated at different places and may for this reason
reflect local variations. In the present commentary, the Nestle-Aland text has served as
a starting point since this is the text form that is widely used today. It is reproduced
together with corresponding passages of the apparatus but important textual variants in
the pre-text are given in brackets. This priority given to the Nestle-Aland text in the pres-
ent commentary does not imply that this text should be identified as the pre-text of the
apparatus. The present commentary may occasionally make conjectures regarding the
pre-text on purely internal grounds, but this is not a main concern.
3.3.2. The Meta-terminology of the Apparatus

The entire apparatus is a meta-text in respect of the biblical text, and for this reason, the
meta-terminology contained in the apparatus is of special interest.
The logician Willard Quine has pointed out that there are basically two different types
of meta-texts. The one way to create a meta-text is to use the text to designate itself, i.e. to
present it as a quotation. The other way is to make a substitution, i.e., describe it with an-
other text. Both these types are found in the Euthalian apparatus.139 According to Quine,
138 See Wettstein 1752: 75 and above on the history of research.

139 The quotation type is found primarily in the list of testimonies. These were probably not intended to be
read as a ‘Book of Testimonies’ independently of the pre-text, but as texts having a scholarly purpose.
‘a quotation is not a description, but a hieroglyph; it designates its object not by describ-
ing it in terms of other objects, but by picturing it.140 Thus any word may be used on a
meta-level to designate itself. The discussion of this phenomenon in the Syntax of Apol-
lonius Dyscolus shows that it could represent a real difficulty for the ancient grammar-
ians. Apollonius noticed that the Greek article could be used with any part of speech, as
in his example τὸ λέγε προστατικόν ἐστι ‘λέγε is imperative’. His solution was to supply
a meta-term like ῥῆμα immediately after the article: τὸ ῥῆμα λέγε προστατικόν ἐστι ‘the
verb λέγε is imperative.’ In this way the grammarian could connect the article to ῥῆμα,
and the difficulty was overcome. Apollonius did however perceive that λέγε in the above
example signified nothing more than the word itself.141 The neuter article may be consid-
ered a marker analogous to our quotation marks.142 The meta-term ῥῆμα refers here to
a single word, and belongs to the discipline of grammar in a narrow sense. The ancient
grammarians were also occupied with the classification of sentences, and this discipline
has points of contact with the study of literature. A common typology in the Aristotelian
tradition is thus summarized by Ammonius (5/6th cent):143
However, there are five kinds of sentence (εἴδη τοῦ λόγου), namely the Vocative (κλητικός),
as in: ‘O happy Son of Atreus’, the Imperative (προστακτικός), as in: ‘Go! Away, swift Iris!’,
the Interrogative (ἐρωτηματικός), as in: ‘Who and from where are you?’, the Optative
(εὐκτικός), as in: ‘If only, Father Zeus…’, and last of all the assertoric (ἀποφαντικός), by
which we make an assertion about anything at all, for example: ‘But gods know all things’,
‘All soul is immortal’. (Transl. David Blank)
One may observe in the quotation above that the classification of sentences is closely
related to the grammatical terminology used to describe cases and moods. Thus the
λόγος κλητικός corresponds to πτῶσις κλητική ‘the vocative case.’ Similarly, the λόγος
προστακτικός has the verb in the imperative mood (ἔγκλισις προστακτική), and the
λόγος εὐκτικός uses the optative (ἔγκλισις εὐκτική). The λόγος ἀποφαντικός and the
λόγος ἐρωτηματικός have no counterpart in the verbal system. The terms are intended as
descriptions of sentences, but they may also be considered meta-terms for different speech
acts.144 A classification of letters based on speech acts is found in the epistolographic
They identify the OT quotations in the pre-text by reproducing them. On these lists, see Willard 1970:
oo
140 W. Quine 1951/76: 26.
141 Apollonius Dyscolus, Syntax, 1,37.
142 This use of the article is found also in the NT, e.g. τὸ Ἄγαρ in Gal 4:25. Cf. also the corresponding use of
the Greek article in Latin scientific prose, where the Greek article has the same function as our quotation
marks.
143 Ammonius in his commentary (2, 9) on De interpretatione of Aristole. Transl. David Blank in Sorabij
o
144 After referring to the canonical scheme of five types, Ammonius criticizes the Stoics for their more com-
plex system. In addition to the assertoric, optative and vocative types, they had added five others, the
swearing type (ὀμοτικός), the positing type (ἐκθετικός), the hypothetical type (ὑποθετικός), the quasi-
decision (ὅμοιος ἀξιώματι), and the dubitative type (ἐπαπορητικός). This system is less dependent on
morphological categories, and is rather a classification of different functions or speech acts; see R. Sorabij
2004: 244.
handbooks that have come down to us. In Typi epistolares, a work ascribed to Demetrius,
twenty-one letter types are listed, among which we find the τύπος ἐρωτηματικός:
Pseudo-Demetrius, Typi epistolares, 13 Translated by Malherbe 1988: 39

Ἐρωτηματικός. ὅταν περί τινος πυνθανόμενοι It is the enquiring type when we inquire about
παρακαλῶμεν ἡμῖν ἀντιφωνῆσαι. οἷον· something and urge that a reply be sent to us.
Ἀκούω τὸν δεῖνα ἐπιδεδημηκέναι πρὸς σέ. For example: I hear that So-and-so has been
διασάφησον οὖν μοι πότερον ἔτι πάρεστιν ἢ staying with you. Please let me know, therefore,
κεχώρισται. whether he is still there or whether he has left.
This letter type thus corresponds to the λόγος ἐρωτηματικός in the typology of sentences.
Similarly, the handbook describes a letter type as ἀποφαντικός, which corresponds to
the λόγος ἀποφαντικός. Malherbe translates this as the ‘responding type,’ which makes it
difficult to see the connection between the grammatical and epistolographic terminology
at this point.
Pseudo-Demetrius, Typi epistolares, 14 Translated by Malherbe 1988: 39

Ἀποφαντικός ἐστι τὸ πρὸς τὸν πυνθανόμενον The responding type responds to the person
ἀποφαίνεσθαι. οἷον· Ἔγραψάς μοι NBLJOHBOJORVJSZ'PSFYBNQMF:PVXSPUFNF
πυνθανόμενος εἰ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ὁ δεῖνα. πάρεστιν asking whether So-and-so was with us. He still
οὖν ἔτι καὶ σὲ προσδεχόμενος ἐπιμενεῖν φησιν. is, and furthermore says that he expects to wait
until you arrive.
A similar terminology is also found in the De forma epistolari, a work ascribed to Liban-
ius. Here, a genre called ευκτικη occurs. His example is the following:
Pseudo-Libanius, De forma epistolari, 59 Translated by Malherbe 1988: 74

Εὐκτική. Εἴθε μοι τὸ θεῖον παράσχοι τὴν The prayerful letter. May God grant that I be-
σὴν ἱερὰν θεάσασθαι μορφήν, ἧς ἀπολαῦσαι hold your holy form, in which I have hoped to
πάλαι ἐλπίζω διηνεκῶς εὐχὰς ὑπὲρ τούτου delight. For this I constantly offer my prayers
ποιούμενος τῷ κρείττονι. to almighty God.
The example illustrates the overlap between the grammatical and epistolographic meta-
terms with regard to this letter type. The first verb (παράσχοι) is in the optative mood
(ἔγκλισις εὐκτική), the first sentence in the letter is a λόγος εὐκτικός, and the entire
letter is classified as εὐκτική. There is however a limited number of literary meta-terms
that can be connected to a single grammatical category. In the majority of cases, the use
of the meta-term represents an interpretation of the text which presupposes a general
knowledge of genres.
In the quotation above from Pseudo-Libanius the introductory phrase ‘The prayer-
ful letter’ corresponds to a heading to the following letter-text. Thus it may be labeled a
substitution for the text of the letter. The linguists Elisabeth Gülich and Wolfgang Raible
label this kind of substitution ‘substitution on meta-level.’ This form of substitution does
not necessarily contain any deictic elements relating to the circumstances of the writer or
reader.145 The substitution on meta-level may therefore be considered a text-deicticon.146
145 See E. Gülich/RaibleoHellholmo

146 See Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: 468 (App. II, page 300).
They have the function of guiding the reader in the interpretation of the text. Such sub-
stitutions are not necessarily headings. They may also be an organic part of the text. Thus,
JO3PN ЪϪϟϨϟϮϧϯϪч϶ϭжϰϭ϶SFGFSTUPUIFQSFDFEJOHRVPUBUJPOJOoćFTVCTUJUV-
tion on meta-level is most often manifested in nominal form. A verbal form may also
occur. Hellholm has showed that the verb εἶδον placed at the beginning of a section in an
apocalyptic text may function as a substitution on meta-level. The verb εἶδον ‘I saw’ cor-
responds to a nominal form such as ὅρασις, ‘vision’.147 This is seen in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
that Andreas of Caesarea wrote for the Apocalypse. Andreas refers to 3FW o BT
ὀπτασία ἐν ᾗ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐθεάσατο ἐν μέσῳ λυχνίων ἑπτά, where the εἶδον of the pre-text
(1:12) is represented both by ὀπτασία and ἐθεάσατο in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος.148
Another phenomenon is the explicit reference to the communicative situation. This
may be illustrated by Acts 1:1 Τὸν μὲν πρῶτον λόγον ἐποιησάμην περὶ πάντων, ὦ Θεόφιλε
κτλ. This is labeled a ‘meta-communicative clause’.149 It may refer to the communication
between author and reader, or to communication on various levels in the text. In Acts
2:14 the speech of Peter is introduced by the meta-communicative clause ἐπῆρεν τὴν
φωνὴν αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀπεφθέγξατο αὐτοῖς. Within this speech, still another level of com-
munication is introduced by the clause Δαυὶδ γὰρ λέγει εἰς αὐτόν (Acts 2:25). The meta-
communicative clause may contain a substitution on meta-level. This is the case in the
example above from Acts 1:1, where τὸν πρῶτον λόγον designates the Gospel of Luke.
It may also use a single deictic pronoun, such as ταῦτα, as in Acts 26:24 ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ
ЋɀϭϩϭϡϭϱϪтϫϭϱ XIFSFϰϟѼϰϟSFGFSTUPUIFTQFFDIJOo*OUIJTDBTF ϰϟѼϰϟJTBTVC-
stitution on abstraction-level.150
A previous study by Hellholm and myself examined the term παραίνεσις. In that study,
the language of the apparatus was compared to the different pre-texts.151 This case was
particularly interesting, since here the meta-term used to describe the pre-text is not
found in the pre-text itself. The approach of Hellholm and myself in this previous study is
adopted in the present commentary. As a first step, the motivation for the use of the term
is identified in the pre-text. The most common motivations are the following:
1. A meta-communicative clause in the pre-text

Pre-text (1IJM o ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀ ϰҁ Ϧϣҁ Κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Phil I: εὐχαριστία ὑπὲρ τῆς
μου ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ ὑμῶν … καὶ τοῦτο Φιλιππησίων ἀρετῆς, καὶ εὐχὴ τελειώσεως.
προσεύχομαι (v.9)
In the example above, the verbs found in the pre-text are represented by their cognate
nouns in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος. There is only an apparent change from προσεύχομαι
(προσευχή) in the pre-text to εὐχή in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος. One should also note that the
meta-communicative clauses in the pre-text may be replaced by other terms in the appa-
ratus. Thus, the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 3 John I has ὁμολογία φιλοξενίας τῶν ἀδελφῶν διὰ
147 See Hellholm 1986: 47.

148 Text in von Soden 1902: 472.
149 See Gülich/RaibleoHellholmo
150 See Hellholmo
151 See Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004 (App. II).
Χριστόν. Here, the term ὁμολογία represents μαρτυρέω in the pre-text: οἳ ἐμαρτύρησάν
σου τῇ ἀγάπῃ ἐνώπιον ἐκκλησίας (1:6).
2. The use of a particular mood in the pre-text

Pre-text (ćFTT ЪϢсϨъϮϧϭ϶ϨϟϰϣϱϦъϫϟϧ Κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Thess IV, second
ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας εἰς τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος: εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εἰς
ἀγάπην θεοῦ
This type of motivation is common where the pre-text uses the optative. When the opta-
tive verb has θεός or κύριος as subject, the text is often described as a prayer. This clas-
sification of a subsection thus corresponds to the description of the prayerful letter in
Pseudo-Libanius. The use of mood is also an important motivation for a group of meta-
terms that describe imperatival sentences, such as παραίνεσις, προτροπή and ἀποτροπή.
Thus in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Thess IV, παράκλησις εὐχῆς ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἔργου,
the noun παράκλησις reflects the use of the imperative in the pre-text: προσεύχεσθε,
ἀδελφοί, περὶ ἡμῶν (3:1).
3. The apparatus uses a meta-term that is not found in the pre-text

Pre-text (1IJM o ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀ ϰҁ Ϧϣҁ Ὑπόθεσις of Phil: καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται
μου ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ ὑμῶν...μάρτυς γάρ μου αὐτῶν τὴν πίστιν, καὶ σημαίνει μνημονεύειν
ὁ θεὸς ὡς ἐπιποθῶ πάντας ὑμᾶς ἐν σπλάγχνοις αὐτῶν.
Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ (v.8)
The pre-text cannot be determined with certainty, but it seems to correspond to the pre-
UFYUJOUIFĕSTUFYBNQMFBCPWF 1IJMo ćFDPOUSBTUJOUFSNJOPMPHZCFUXFFOUIF
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος and the ὑπόθεσις is striking. In the ὑπόθεσις, the thanksgiving is inter-
preted as praise of the Philippians. The act of prayer is not mentioned. Instead the focus is
on Paul’s remembrance of the addressees. Thus, other aspects of the texts are emphasized.
The different transformations may be clearly perceived when the pre-texts and vari-
ous auxiliary materials are brought together and analyzed as a system.
3.3.3. The Apparatus as Paraphrase

In the present study, the term ‘paraphrase’ is used in a wide sense to designate any refor-
mulation of the pre-text that goes beyond the mere genre-designation or meta-term.
Thus, in the example quoted above from the chapter list of Andreas of Caesarea, the meta-
term ὀπτασία introduces a short paraphrase of the pre-text, ἐν ᾗ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐθεάσατο ἐν
μέσῳ λυχνίων ἑπτά.152 In his study of the different types of commentary, Wolfgang Raible
distinguishes between texts that represent a reduction of the pre-text, the creation of a
parallel text, and those that represent an amplification of the pre-text.153 A single text may
have a different status according to the context.154 These processes are of fundamental
152 This kind of paraphrase is what G. Genette (1997: 309) refers to as the ‘indirect synopsis’ in medieval
chapter lists. See below.
153 Raibleo idemo DGBMTPHellholm 2010: §2.3.(regarding the composition of the
Shepherd of Hermas) and M. Leutzsch 1998: 131 (on the Oneirocriticon of Artemidorus)
154 This is the case e.g. with the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. They appear as meta-texts in biblical manuscripts but
when they are found in a separate collection, the Pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, they may
importance both for ancient and modern literature. Here, only a few examples from the
NT can be mentioned: (a) The Gospel of Matthew represents an amplified version of
Mark, the most important additions being the Q material. (b) 2 Thess is probably both
a reduced and amplified version of 1 Thess. Here the eschatological teaching in 2 Thess
oIBTCFFOBEEFE D ćFTPDBMMFE%UFYUPGUIF"DUTJTBOBNQMJĕFEWFSTJPOPG
that book. (d) In late antiquity, the biblical texts were often paraphrased to meet the
standards of Greek learning. One of the most famous examples is the paraphrase of the
Gospel of John in Greek hexameters by Nonnus of Panopolis (5th cent.). Thus, the pro-
cess of paraphrasing is found both in the creation of new texts (parallel texts) and in the
transformation of the form of an already existing text. There are obviously many different
motivations for the making of revisions or paraphrases. In his recent commentary on
Acts, Richard Pervo has pointed out that the D-text of Acts attempts to keep the text of
Acts ‘up to date’. He describes this process as ‘contemporization’, and finds that not only
the D-text of Acts, but also the Deutero-Pauline letters and the editorial changes in the
Pauline corpus are examples of this process.155 This revision evidently contains a creative
element. New motifs are added that were not present in the pre-text.156
In this context, we should not neglect the influence of various auxiliary materials
that can be added to the text. Texts such as prologues, summaries and titles may exert
a strong influence on the reader. This was pointed out by Dahl in his study of the so-
called Marcionite prologues to the Pauline letters. According to Dahl, these prologues
exemplified how great the influence of an editor can be, especially if the editor also is a
composer of prologues. In these prologues, Paul is repeatedly depicted as fighting against
the ‘false apostles’, who represent a relapse into Judaism. The description of the conflict
between Paul and the ‘false apostles’ became a paradigm for numerous later commenta-
tors, regardless of whether they had direct knowledge of these prologues or not. Mediated
through the works of Ambrosiaster and Pelagius, their influence extended through the
centuries, perhaps even to Ferdinand Christian Baur and his followers.157 This example
shows that the study of an edition is not necessarily a narrow textual study, but may also
be rewarding for the study of theology and intellectual history in general. Thus, each edi-
tion of Paul with auxiliary materials presents a ‘Paulusbild’, an image of Paul, that may
once have been intended as a ‘contemporization’. This updated image, however, with the
passage of time may itself become frozen and be treated as a fixed part of the tradition.158
be considered parallel texts to the biblical material, see Hellholm/Blomkvisto "QQ**

304o305) and below III.2.1. fin.
155 See R. I. Pervo 2009: 4. As examples of this process, Pervo here mentions the baptismal confession in Acts
8:37, the secondary form of the Apostolic Decree (Acts 15:29) and a general Anti-Judaic tendency in the
additions to the text.
156 On the addition of new elements in commentaries, cf. G. Schoeler o XIPQPJOUTUPUIF
discovery of the system of blood circulation in an Arabic commentary on a work of Avicenna.
157 See Dahl (1978/2000: 204).
158 The present study uses the German word ‘Paulusbild’, for which there seems to be no good English equiva-
lent. The standard work on this theme is A. Lindemann TFFFTQFDJBMMZQQo BOEidem 1999:
o
3.3.4. Parallel Materials

In his study of the Euthalian apparatus, Willard suggests that an analysis of the apparatus
in the light of patristic exegesis may contribute to the solution of the question of author-
ship. According to Willard, the presence of a notable or unusual observation both in the
Euthalian apparatus and in some patristic commentary may locate Euthalius in a theo-
logical milieu with greater precision.159 This attractive method should not be rejected. It
presupposes, however, that the notable or unusual elements in the apparatus have been
identified so that the student of the patristic authors will know what to look for. This
identification of notable features is one of the tasks of the present commentary. The sec-
ond step, that of placing Euthalius in a theological milieu, has to be left to other scholars.
The main reason for this restriction is the wealth of material that should be examined.160
This examination can only be done by reading the patristic sources in the original, since
an electronic search of the texts in this study would be unsatisfactory and unreliable.
One may through this means possibly find authors who use some of the key terms of
Euthalius, but the important questions relating to the ideas and their expression cannot
be studied with such tools. For this reason, the present study has refrained from using
any electronic tools and relies on the reading of texts. The parallel material used in this
study is therefore chosen not because they supposedly are close to the apparatus in time
and space, but rather because they have some generic affinities with it. The parallel mate-
rial quoted throughout the present study is (a) The so-called Marcionite prologues to the
Pauline letters, possibly dating to the 2nd cent.; (b) The Canones of Priscillian (4th cent.);161
(c) the 5th cent. commentary on the Pauline letters by Theodoret including ὑποθέσεις
of each letter;162 (d) The 11th cent. commentary on the letters and Acts by Theophylact
including ὑποθέσεις of all the books.163 In addition to these, the History of the Church and
Chronikon of Eusebius are referred to, since these are the only patristic works that are
explicitly mentioned in the text of the apparatus.
159 See Willard 1970: 180/2009: 134.

160 Dahl suggested to me that a reading of the Euthalian apparatus in the light of the works of Origen could
be rewarding, as his name has been associated with the apparatus through Evagrius.
161 On Priscillian and Priscillianism, see J. Fontaine 1997; H. C. Brennecke 1999 and W. Löhr 2003.
162 On Theodoret, see A. Viciano 2000; J.-N. Guinot 2002 and S.-P. Bergjan 2005.
163 On Theophylact, see G. Podskalsky 2000; Chr. Hannick 2002 and Brennecke 2005. The ὑποθέσεις of
Acts and the Catholic letter in Theophylact are identical with the Euthalian material.
Part Two
Text and Translation
II. The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι
Hermann von Soden’s Greek Text with My Translation
Κεφάλαια Chapters
Ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων καθολικῶν καθ᾽ Survey of the general chapters of every let-
ἑκάστην ἐπιστολὴν τοῦ ἀποστόλου ter of the Apostle Paul, some of them also
Παύλου ἐχόντων τινῶν καὶ μερικὰς having subdivisions written in red ink.
ὑποδιαιρέσεις τὰς διὰ τοῦ κινναβάρεως.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Ῥωμαίους Chapters of the Letter

ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ $o$ to the Romans
εὐαγγελικὴ διδασκαλία περί τε τῶν ἔξω Teaching according to the gospel about
χάριτος Χριστοῦ καὶ τῶν ἐν χάριτι, καὶ περὶ both those with and those without the
ἐλπίδος, καὶ πολιτείας πνευματικῆς. grace of Christ, about hope and spiritual
citizenship.
α (1:18) πρῶτον μὲν οὖν μετὰ τὸ προοίμιον, I (1:18) First, after the prooemium, about
περὶ κρίσεως τῆς κατὰ ἐθνῶν τῶν οὐ the judgment against Gentiles who do not
φυλασσόντων τὰ φυσικά. follow the natural principles.
β (2:12) περὶ κρίσεως τῆς κατὰ Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ II (2:12) About the judgment against Israel
μὴ φυλάσσοντος τὰ νόμιμα. that does not follow the precepts of the
Law.
γ (3:1) περὶ ὑπεροχῆς Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ III (3:1) About the superiority of Israel that
τυγχάνοντος τῆς ἐπαγγελίας. received the promise.
δ (3:9) περὶ χάριτος, δι᾽ ἧς μόνον ἄνθρωποι IV (3:9) About grace, the only means by
δικαιοῦνται, οὐ κατὰ γένος διακεκριμένως, which men are justified, as they are not
ἀλλὰ κατὰ θεοῦ δόσιν ἰσοτίμως, κατὰ τὸν evaluated according to race, but equally,
Ἀβραὰμ τύπον. according to the gift of God, following the
example of Abraham.
ε (5:1) περὶ τῆς ἀποκειμένης ἐλπίδος. V (5:1) About what we hope for, waiting in
store.
46 The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι
Ĵ (5:12) περὶ εἰσαγωγῆς τοῦ πρὸς σωτηρίαν VI (5:12) About the access through Jesus
ἡμῶν ἀνθρώπου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἀντὶ τοῦ Christ, a human being for our salvation, in
πεσόντος ἐξ ἀρχῆς γηγενοῦς Ἀδάμ. the place of the earth-born Adam, he who
fell from the beginning.
ζ (6:1) περὶ τῆς ὀφειλομένης ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει VII (6:1) About the good behavior we owe
πράξεως ἀγαθῆς. because of faith.
η (7:1) ἐπανάληψις περὶ τῆς ἐν χάριτι ζωῆς. VIII (7:1) Repetition about life in grace.
θ (7:7) περὶ τῆς ὑπὸ νόμου κατακρίσεως IX (7:7) About condemnation under the
διὰ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν. Law because of sin.
ι (7:18) περὶ τῶν ἐν ἀνθρωπίνῃ φύσει X (7:18) About the desires in the human
παθῶν, ἀδύνατον ποιούντων τὴν πρὸς nature, making life according to the Law
νόμον συμφωνίαν. impossible.
ια (8:3) περὶ τῆς ἀποδύσεως τῶν φυσικῶν XI (8:3) About putting off natural desires
παθημάτων, διὰ τῆς πρὸς τὸ πνεῦμα through conjunction with the Spirit.
συναφείας.
ιβ (8:18) ἐπανάληψις περὶ τῆς ἀποκειμένης XII (8:18) Repetition about the glory that
τοῖς ἁγίοις δόξης. lies in store for the saints.
ιγ (8:35) περὶ τῆς ὀφειλομένης ἀγάπης XIII (8:35) About the love we owe to
Χριστῷ. Christ.
ιδ (9:1) περὶ ἐκπτώσεως Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ XIV (9:1) About the fall of the rejected Is-
ἀποβληθέντος, καὶ κλήσεως τοῦ ἀληθοῦς, rael and the calling of the true one that was
τοῦ ἐκλεχθέντος μετὰ ἐθνῶν. elected along with the Gentiles.
ιε (9:30) ὅτι κατὰ ἀπιστίαν ἡ ἔκπτωσις διὰ XV (9:30) That the fall happened due to
τῆς εἰς ἄγνοιαν ἐγκαταλείψεως, καὶ τοῦ μὴ unfaithfulness, because their understand-
ἁρμόζοντος αὐτοῖς κηρύγματος. ing was turned to ignorance and because
the message did not appear to be suitable
for them.
ιĴ (11:1) περὶ τοῦ σκοποῦ, καθ᾽ ὃν XVI (11:1) About the plan, according to
ἐξεβλήθησαν, ὥστε δεύτερον ἐπανελθεῖν which they were rejected, so that they may
ζήλῳ τῶν προτιμηθέντων ἐθνῶν, return on a second occasion, in zeal of the
συνταχθέντων τῷ πιστῷ Ἰσραήλ. Gentiles who had the privilege of being
joined to the faithful Israel.
ιζ (12:1) παραίνεσις περὶ ἀρετῆς τῆς πρὸς XVII (12:1) Exhortation about virtue be-
τὸν θεὸν καὶ ἀνθρώπους, ἐν ᾧ fore God and men. In this:
͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟo$IBQUFST 47
(12:3) περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἀλλήλους ὁμονοίας, (12:3) About concord with one another.
(12:10) περὶ τῆς πρὸς θεὸν λατρείας, (12:10) About service to God.
(12:14) περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἀντικειμένους (12:14) About forbearance toward adver-
ἀνεξικακίας, saries.
(13:1) περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἄρχοντας ὑποταγῆς, (13:1) About subordination under rulers.
(13:11) περὶ σωφροσύνης καὶ πραότητος, (13:11) About prudence and gentleness.
(14:1) περὶ τῆς ἐν βρώμασι καὶ ἡμέραις (14:1) About peaceful attitude regarding
ἀμάχου διανοίας. food and days.
ιη (15:1) περὶ μιμήσεως τῆς Χριστοῦ XVIII (15:1) About imitation of the for-
ἀνεξικακίας. bearance of Christ.
ιθ (15:15) περὶ τῆς λειτουργίας αὐτοῦ, τῆς XIX (15:15) About his service in the East
ἐν ἀνατολῇ καὶ δύσει. and in the West.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Κορινθίους Chapters of the First Letter

ɀϮьϰϥ϶ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ $o$ to the Corinthians
περὶ πλειόνων καὶ διαφόρων ἡ ἐπιστολὴ This letter contains correction of the many
διόρθωσιν ἔχει τῶν Κορινθίοις and different errors of the Corinthians.
ἡμαρτημένων.
I (1:10) After the prooemium, about not
α (1:10) μετὰ τὸ προοίμιον, περὶ τοῦ μὴ disagreeing with one another out of desire
διχονοεῖν πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἐκ φιλοδοξίας for glory, caused by human wisdom. In
τῆς ἐπὶ σοφίᾳ ἀνθρωπίνῃ, this:
ἐν ᾧ (1:26?, 2:1?) About divine wisdom.
(1:26?, 2:1?) περὶ θείας σοφίας, (3:5?) About ministries.
(3:5?) περὶ λειτουργιῶν, (4:1) About not judging teachers.
(4:1) περὶ τοῦ μὴ κρίνειν διδασκάλους, (4:6) About not exalting oneself.
(4:6) περὶ τοῦ μὴ ἐπαίρεσθαι.
II (4:21) Against fornicators and fornica-
β (4:21) κατὰ πορνῶν, καὶ πορνείας καὶ tion, and those who consort with such
τῶν τούτοις κοινωνούντων. people.
III (6:1) About not demanding trials, and

γ (6:1) περὶ τοῦ μὴ δεῖσθαι δικῶν, καὶ ταῦτα not doing this in view of unbelievers.
ἐπὶ ἀπίστων, In this:
ἐν ᾧ (6:12) About not committing adultery.
(6:12) περὶ τοῦ μὴ πορνεύειν.
IV (7:1) About marriage, widowhood and
δ (7:1) περὶ γάμου καὶ χηρείας καὶ ἀγαμίας, celibacy. In this:
ἐν ᾧ (7:10) That men should not be divorced
(7:10) περὶ τοῦ μὴ χωρίζεσθαι ἄνδρας τῶν from their wives, even if the other part is
γυναικῶν, μηδὲ εἰ ἄπιστοι εἶεν οἱ ἕτεροι, an unbeliever.
(7:25) περὶ ἀγνείας καὶ διγαμίας. (7:25) About chastity and remarriage.
ε (8:1) περὶ διαφορᾶς ἐδεσμάτων, καὶ V (8:1) About different foods and abstain-
ἀποχῆς δαιμονικοῦ σεβάσματος, ἐν ᾧ ing from worship of demons. In this:
(9:1) περὶ συμπεριφορᾶς, (9:1) About adaptability.
(9:7) περὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ πολυπλόκου (9:7) About his cunning adaptability.
συμπεριφορᾶς, (10:14) About not having fellowship with
(10:14) περὶ τοῦ μὴ κοινωνεῖν δαίμοσι, demons.
(10:18?, 23?) περὶ τοῦ μὴ ἀδιαφορεῖν ἐν (10:18?, 23?) About not showing indiffer-
ὠνίοις, καὶ κλήσεσι. ence to purchased foods and to invitations.
Ĵ (11:1) περὶ σχήματος ἀνδρῶν καὶ VI (11:1) About the appearance of men
γυναικῶν, ἐν εὐχαῖς καὶ προφητείαις. and women in prayer and prophecy.
ζ (11:17) περὶ κοινωνίας θεοπρεποῦς, οὐ VII (11:17) About proper communion be-
πλησμονικῆς. fore God, which does not aim at satisfac-
tion.
η (12:1) περὶ διαφορᾶς χαρισμάτων, καὶ VIII (12:1) About the different gifts and the
οἰκονομίας αὐτῶν, ἐν ᾧ coordination of them. In this:
(12:31b) περὶ ἀγάπης, ὡς μεγίστου (12:31b) About love as the greatest gift.
χαρίσματος,
(14:1) περὶ προφητείας, ὡς μείζονος (14:1) About prophecy as something great-
γλώσσης. er than speaking in tongues.
θ (15:1) περὶ ἀναστάσεως σωμάτων IX (15:1) About the universal resurrection

καθολικῆς, ἐν ᾧ of the bodies. In this:
(15:20) περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ διορθώσεως, (15:20) About the correction and restitu-
καὶ ἀποκαταστάσεως, tion in Christ.
(15:35) ὁμοίωσις τῶν ἀνισταμένων πρὸς (15:35) Likening of the rising bodies to
τὰ ἀναφυόμενα σπέρματα, seeds growing anew.
(15:50) περὶ τῆς εἰς δόξαν καὶ δύναμιν (15:50) About the transformation in power
ἀλλαγῆς. and glory.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Koρινθίους Chapters of the Second

ϢϣϱϰтϮϟ϶ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ #o# Letter to the Corinthians
α (1:3) εὐχαριστία περὶ θεοῦ βοηθείας, ᾗ I (1:3) Thanksgiving for the aid of God, in
πεποιθέναι φησίν. which he says he has confided.
β (1:15) περὶ ἀγάπης τῆς πρὸς αὐτοὺς, II (1:15) About his love for them and his
καὶ φειδοῦς εἰς τὸ μὴ λυπεῖν, εἰ καὶ refraining from giving them grief, even if
λυπῶν ὠφελεῖ, ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ διὰ πορνείαν he in this way could help them, as [he did]
ἐπιτιμηθέντος, ᾧ καὶ συγχωρεῖ.
concerning the man rebuked for adultery,
whom he also pardoned.
γ (2:12) περὶ τῆς δι᾽ αὐτοῦ θείας ὠφελείας III (2:12) About the divine help to friendly
τοῖς ἐπιτηδείοις, δι᾽ ἧς καὶ συνίστασθαί persons through him, for which he says he
φησιν. is also commended.
δ (3:7) περὶ τῆς κατὰ πνεῦμα λειτουργίας, IV (3:7) About ministry according to the
καὶ δόξης θειοτέρας τῆς κατὰ τὸν νόμον. Spirit, and about a glory more divine than
that of the Law.
ε (4:1) περὶ θείας δόξης, καὶ ἀκολούθου V (4:1) About divine glory and the way of
βίου, ὅτι τοῖς ἁγίοις γινώσκεται. life that follows it, because it is known to
the holy ones.
Ĵ (4:7) περὶ τῆς κατὰ σῶμα ἀσθενείας, VI (4:7) About the weakness of the body,
καὶ τῆς τοῦ σώματος ἀποθέσεως καὶ and about taking off the body and putting
ἐπαναλήψεως. it on again.
ζ (5:12) περὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ φιλοθεότητος, καὶ VII (5:12) About his love of God and his
φιλαδελφίας τῆς κατὰ Χριστόν. love of the brethren in Christ.
η (7:2) ἀποδοχὴ τῆς Κορινθίων ὑπακοῆς, VIII (7:2) Praise of the obedience of the
καὶ ἀγάπης εὐφραινούσης αὐτόν. Corinthians and of their love, which makes
him happy.
θ (8:1) προτροπὴ εἰς ἐπίδοσιν χρημάτων IX (8:1) Encouragement to give money to

τοῖς ἁγίοις, καὶ τιμὴν τῶν διὰ τοῦτο the saints and to respect those coming for
ἐρχομένων, ἐν ᾧ this purpose. In this:
(8:16) περὶ τῆς Τίτου ἀποστολῆς, καὶ τῶν (8:16) About the mission of Titus and oth-
ἄλλων πρὸς αὐτούς. ers to them.
ι (10:1) διήγησις τῶν ἰδίων πόνων καὶ X (10:1) Narration of his own toils, his
προθέσεως, καὶ τῆς ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ χάριτος aim, and the grace in him, in order that the
πρὸς τὸ μὴ τοῖς ἐπιπλάστοις προστίθεσθαι Corinthians should not join the impostors.
Κορινθίους, ἐν ᾧ In this:
(11:1) ἀντεξέτασις ἑαυτοῦ πρὸς ἐκείνους, (11:1) A comparison of him with those.
(11:7) ἔλεγχος ἐκείνων, (11:7) A refutation of those people.
(11:21) περὶ ἑαυτοῦ τὸ ἐπίπονον, τὸ παρὰ (11:21) Concerning his labors, his honor
θεῷ τίμιον, τὸ ὠφελίμως αὐτότροφον, before God and his useful self-sustain-
ment.
(12:14) παρασκευὴ πρὸς τὴν μέλλουσαν (12:14) Preparation for his future arrival.
αὐτοῦ παρουσίαν.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Γαλάτας Chapters of the Letter

ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ %o# to the Galatians
α (1:11) μετὰ τὸ προοίμιον, διήγησις τῆς I (1:11) After the prooemium, narration of
ἑαυτοῦ μεταστάσεως ἀπὸ ἰουδαϊσμοῦ κατὰ his own renunciation of Judaism accord-
ἀποκάλυψιν. ing to a revelation.
β (2:1) περὶ τῆς τῶν ἀποστόλων II (2:1) About the testimony of the apostles
ἐπιμαρτυρήσεως εἰς τὴν ἐν πίστει ζωήν. to his life in faith.
γ (2:11) περὶ τῆς πρὸς Κηφᾶν ἀντιῤῥήσεως III (2:11) About his discussion with Ce-
ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐν πίστει, καὶ οὐκ ἐν νόμῳ phas on salvation, which is not by the Law,
σωτηρίας. but by faith.
δ (3:1) ὅτι διὰ πίστεως ἁγιασμὸς καὶ οὐ διὰ IV (3:1) That sanctification is not through
νόμου. the Law, but through faith.
ε (3:7) ὅτι καὶ Ἀβραὰμ ἐκ πίστεως V (3:7) That also Abraham was justified by
ἐδικαιώθη, εἰς τύπον ἡμῶν. faith, to be an example for us.
Ĵ (3:10) ὅτι ὁ νόμος οὐ δικαιοῖ, ἀλλ᾽ VI (3:10) That the Law does not justify, but
ἐλέγχει, καὶ κατάραν ἐπιτίθησιν, ἣν λύει ὁ accuses, and that it brings a curse, which
Χριστός. Christ brings to an end.
ζ (3:15) ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ νόμου, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ VII (3:15) That benefits are not from the
ἐπαγγελίας τὰ ἀγαθά· ὁ δὲ νόμος Law, but from the promise. The Law is a
παρασκευαστὴς δι᾽ ἐλέγχου. preparer through its accusations.
η (4:1) ὅτι ὑπὸ κτίσιν ἦσαν οἱ ἐν νόμῳ. VIII (4:1) That the people of the Law were
subjected to creation.
θ (4:21) ὅτι ἐν τῇ ἐλευθέρᾳ γυναικὶ IX (4:21) That there is no need to be en-

τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ, καὶ τῷ γνησίῳ παιδὶ slaved under the Law if we follow the ex-
ὑποτυπωθέντας, οὐ χρὴ δουλοῦσθαι νόμῳ. ample of the free wife of Abraham and
their legitimate son.
ι (5:2) ὅτι ἡ κλῆσις ἡμῶν οὐχ ὑπόκειται X (5:2) That our calling is not subjected to
περιτομῇ καὶ νόμῳ διὰ τὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ circumcision and the Law because of the
πάθος. suffering of Christ.
ια (5:13) ὑπογραφὴ τῆς κατὰ πνεῦμα XI (5:13) Description of freedom accord-

ἐλευθερίας. ing to the Spirit.
ιβ (6:11) ἀποτροπὴ ἀπὸ τῶν ἑλκόντων ἐπὶ XII (6:11) Warning against those who drag
τὴν περιτομὴν, καὶ προτροπὴ πρὸς νέαν men to circumcision, and encouragement
ζωὴν τὴν ὑπὸ πνεύματι. to a new life under the Spirit.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Ἐφεσίους Chapters of the Letter

ἐπιστολῆς (764AC) to the Ephesians
α (1:3) περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ἐκλογῆς ἡμῶν, I (1:3) About our election, our initiation
καὶ εἰσαγωγῆς, καὶ τελειώσεως. and our perfection in Christ.
β (1:15) εὐχὴ περὶ γνώσεως τῶν ἐν Χριστῷ II (1:15) Prayer for understanding of the
εἰσαχθέντων ἀγαθῶν εἰς ἡμᾶς. benefits brought to us in Christ.
γ (2:1) περὶ τῆς ἐθνῶν καὶ Ἰουδαίων III (2:1) About Gentiles and Jews becom-
οἰκειώσεως πρὸς θεὸν διὰ Χριστοῦ ἐπ᾽ ing God’s own through Christ, for the sake
ἐλπίδι κατὰ χάριν. of hope, according to grace.
δ (3:1) περὶ τῆς δοθείσης αὐτῷ θείας IV (3:1) About divine wisdom, given to
σοφίας εἰς φωτισμὸν ἐθνῶν, καὶ ἔλεγχον him, so that he may illuminate the Gentiles
δαιμονίων. and rebuke the demons.
ε (3:14) εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐκκλησίας εἰς V (3:14) Prayer on behalf of the Church for
δύναμιν καὶ ἀγάπην θεοῦ. the power and love of God.
Ĵ (4:1) παραίνεσις περὶ ἀγάπης ἐνωτικῆς, εἰ VI (4:1) Exhortation about unifying love,
καὶ τὰ χαρίσματα διῄρηται πρὸς ὠφέλειαν even if the gifts of grace are distributed to
κοινήν. common benefit.
ζ (4:17) περὶ σωφροσύνης καὶ δικαιοσύνης VII (4:17) About prudence and righteous-
ποιούσης ἡμᾶς θεοειδεῖς. ness, which make us God-like.
η (5:3) περὶ τοῦ ζῇν ἐπαξίως τοῦ ἁγιασμοῦ, VIII (5:3) About living in a manner wor-
ἔργοις τὴν κακίαν ἐλέγχοντας, μὴ λόγοις· thy of the sanctification, rebuking evil with
πνεύματι πληρουμένους διὰ ψαλμῶν, μὴ deeds, not with words, through hymns be-
οἴνῳ. ing filled with the Spirit, not with wine.
θ (5:22) διάταξις οἰκειακῶν καθηκόντων IX (5:22) Regulation of the domestic duties

ἀρχομένοις καὶ ἄρχουσι κατὰ Χριστόν. of those who are ruled and of those who
rule, according to Christ.
ι (6:10) ἐν σχήματι ὁπλίσεως περὶ τῆς κατὰ X (6:10) About the power of Christ, in the
Χριστὸν δυνάμεως. image of preparing for battle.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Φιλιππησίους Chapters of the Letter

ἐπιστολῆς (765BC) to the Philippians
α (1:3) εὐχαριστία ὑπὲρ τῆς Φιλιππησίων I (1:3) Thanksgiving for the virtue of the
ἀρετῆς, καὶ εὐχὴ τελειώσεως. Philippians, and prayer for their perfec-
tion.
β (1:12) διήγησις τῆς ἑαυτοῦ διαγωγῆς II (1:12) Narration of his life in struggle
ἀγωνιστικῆς, καὶ τῆς προθυμίας. and of his zeal.
γ (1:27) παραίνεσις τῆς κατὰ θεὸν ὁμονοίας, III (1:27) Exhortation to concord accord-
καὶ τῆς ἐνθέου ζωῆς. ing to God and to a life in God.
δ (2:19) περὶ Τιμοθέου καὶ Επαφροδίτου, IV (2:19) About Timothy and Epaphrodi-
οὓς ἀπέστειλε πρὸς αὐτούς. tus, whom he has sent to them.
ε (3:1) περὶ πνευματικοῦ βίου τοῦ μὴ V (3:1) About spiritual life, not in the flesh,
ἐν σαρκὶ, ὅς ἐστι μίμησις θανάτου τοῦ as an imitation of the death of Christ.
Χριστοῦ.
Ĵ (4:1) παραινέσεις ἴδιαί τινων, καὶ κοιναὶ VI (4:1) Exhortations, specific ones for
πάντων. some and common ones for all.
ζ (4:10) ἀποδοχὴ τῆς ἀποσταλείσης αὐτῷ VII (4:10) Praise of the contribution sent
διακονίας. to him.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Κολασσαεῖς Chapters of the Letter

ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ #o" to the Colossians
α (1:3) εὐχαριστία ὑπὲρ Κολασσαέων, I (1:3) Thanksgiving for the Colossians,

οἰκειωθέντων τῷ θεῷ ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι. who have been made God’s own in hope.
β (1:9) εὐχὴ περὶ αὐτῶν εἰς σοφίαν II (1:9) Prayer on their behalf for prudent
πρακτικὴν, εἰς δύναμιν ὑπομονῆς, σὺν behavior, for strength to endure, with
εὐχαριστίᾳ τῆς οἰκειώσεως, τῆς ἐν thanksgiving for being made God’s own in
καθάρσει. purification.
γ (1:14) περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ κτίσεως, καὶ III (1:14) About creation in Christ and re-
ἀνακτίσεως τῆς κατὰ συνάφειαν θεοῦ. creation by union with God.
δ (1:21) περὶ ἐθνῶν προσαγωγῆς τῆς ἐν IV (1:21) About the privilege of entrance
σώματι Χριστοῦ, καὶ πάθει διὰ πίστεως. given to the Gentiles by the body of Christ
and his suffering, through faith.
ε (1:24) περὶ τῆς διὰ τῶν πόνων αὐτοῦ V (1:24) About the teaching that persists
διδαχῆς ἀνακτικῆς εἰς παράστασιν θεοῦ. through his labors, to present them before
God.
Ĵ (2:1) περὶ τοῦ μὴ ὑπάγεσθαι ἀνθρωπίνῃ VI (2:1) About people with wisdom in God,
φιλοσοφίᾳ ἀπατηλῇ τοὺς ἐν Χριστῷ τὴν that they should not be led by deceitful hu-
σοφίαν ἔχοντας. man philosophy.
ζ (2:11) ὅτι ἡ πρὸς θεὸν συνάφεια καὶ τὰ VII (2:11) That contact with God involves
τοῦ νόμου περιέχει πνευματικῶς εἰς τὸ spiritually what belongs to the Law, aiming
συζῇν Χριστῷ. at a life in Christ.
η (2:16) ὅτι οἱ τοῦ σαρκικοῦ νομοῦ VIII (2:16) That the examples of the carnal
τύποι, τοῖς σαρκικοῖς χρήσιμοι, καὶ οὐ Law are useful for those who have the na-
πνευματικοῖς, τοῖς ἐν δυνάμει Χριστοῦ ture of the flesh, but not for the pneumat-
ζῶσιν. ics, who live by the power of Christ.
θ (3:5?) παραίνεσις καθάρσεως, ἁγιασμοῦ, IX (3:5?) Exhortation to cleansing, sancti-

φιλανθρωπίας, φιλοθεότητος φιλομαθίας, fication, love of men, love of God, love of
ψαλμῳδίας εὐφήμου, εἰς θεὸν διαγωγῆς, learning, singing of psalms, life in praise of
εὐχαριστίας. God and thanksgiving.
ι (3:16) τὰ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους ὁμονοητικῶς, X (3:16) Relations to members of the fam-
ἐν ᾧ ily, in harmony. In this:
τὰ πρὸς τοὺς ἀλλοτρίους ἐμφρόνως Relations to outsiders, in a prudent and
οἰκονομικῶς. well-ordered manner.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς Chapters of the First Letter

ɀϮьϰϥ϶ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ %o# to the Thessalonians
α (1:3) ἔπαινος Θεσσαλονικέων ἐπὶ τοῖς I (1:3) Praise of the Thessalonians for their
ἀξίοις τῶν ἀποστόλων ἀγῶσιν. struggles worthy of the apostles.
β (2:17) πόθος αὐτῶν καὶ χαρὰ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς, II (2:17) His longing and joy for them, and
καὶ μέριμνα, ὡς ἂν τελειωθῶσιν. his concern for their perfection.
γ (3:11) εὐχὴ πρὸς θεὸν Χριστὸν περὶ III (3:11) Prayer to God and Christ for his
ἀφίξεως τῆς αὑτοῦ, καὶ τῆς αὐξήσεως, καὶ own arrival and for progress and strength-
βεβαιώσεως Θεσσαλονικέων, ἕως τῆς ening of the Thessalonians until the com-
παρουσίας Χριστοῦ. ing of Christ.
δ (4:1) παραίνεσις σωφροσύνης καὶ IV (4:1) Exhortation to temperance, justice

δικαιοσύνης, ὡς ἐπὶ κρίσει, φιλαδελφίας, as if before the judgment, brotherly love
ἐργασίας ἰδιοπράγμονος. and work with one’s own business.
ε (4:13) διδασκαλία περὶ τῆς τοῦ θανάτου V (4:13) Teaching about the abolition of
καταλύσεως ἐπὶ ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν ἐν death for the living and the dead when
ἐπιφανείᾳ Χριστοῦ. Christ appears.
Ĵ (5:1) περὶ τοῦ αἰφνιδίως ἥξειν Χριστὸν, VI (5:1) About the sudden coming of
ὥστε δεῖν εὐτρεπίζεσθαι σπουδῇ, πίστει, Christ, so that we should prepare ourselves
ἐλπίδι, ἀγάπῃ, τιμῇ, εἰρήνῃ, μακροθυμίᾳ, with zeal, faith, hope, love, honor, peace,
φιλομαθίᾳ. patience and love of learning.
ζ (5:23) εὐχὴ περὶ ἁγιασμοῦ πνεύματος, καὶ VII (5:23) Prayer for sanctification of spirit,
ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος. soul and body.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς Chapters of the Second Letter

δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς (773AB) to the Thessalonians
α (1:3) εὐχαριστία ὑπὲρ τῆς τῶν I (1:3) Thanksgiving for the faith of the
Θεσσαλονικέων πίστεως, καὶ ἀγάπης καὶ Thessalonians, their love and their stead-
ὑπομονῆς, ἐπὶ τιμῇ αὐτῶν καὶ κολάσει fastness, for the sake of their honor and
τῶν θλιβόντων· καὶ εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ τελειώσεως the punishment of their persecutors. And
αὐτῶν ἐν δόξῃ ἐπὶ δόξῃ Χριστοῦ. prayer for their glorious perfection, to the
glory of Christ.
β (2:1) περὶ τέλους, ὅτι μετὰ ἀντίχριστον II (2:1) About the end, that it is after Anti-
πεμπόμενον ἐπὶ ἐλέγχῳ Ἰουδαίων τῶν christ, who is sent to convict the Jews who
ἀπιστησάντων Χριστῷ. did not believe in Christ.
γ (2:13) εὐχαριστία τῆς κλήσεως, ἐν ᾧ III (2:13) Thanksgiving for the call. In this:
προτροπὴ ἐπιμονῆς Encouragement to endure.
εὐχὴ πρὸς θεὸν καὶ Χριστὸν περὶ στεριγμοῦ Prayer to God and Christ for their suste-
αὐτῶν. nance.
δ (3:1) παράκλησις εὐχῆς ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ καὶ IV (3:1) Exhortation to pray for him and
τοῦ ἔργου, ἐν ᾧ his work. In this:
εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εἰς ἀγάπην θεοῦ. Prayer for them to obtain the love of God.
ε (3:6) προτροπὴ ἐργασίας, καὶ V (3:6) Encouragement to work and to

παραιτήσεως τῶν ἀργῶν καὶ περιέργων. avoid idle and meddlesome people.
Ĵ (3:16) εὐχὴ περὶ εἰρήνης τῆς παρὰ θεοῦ. VI (3:16) Prayer for peace from God.
Kεφαλαια τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον Chapters of the First

ɀϮьϰϥ϶ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ $o$ Letter to Timothy
α (1:3) περὶ τῆς εἰς ἀγάπην θεοῦ ὁδηγίας, I (1:3) About guidance to love God, which
τὴν ἀπροσδεῆ νομικῆς ἀνάγκης. does not need the constraint of the law.
β (1:12) περὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ ἐκλογῆς εἰς II (1:12) About the election of him as an
εὐαγγελιστὴν ἐκ διώκτου κατὰ χάριν θεοῦ. evangelist from being a persecutor, accord-
ing to the grace of God.
γ (1:18) παραγγελία περὶ πιστῆς καὶ III (1:18) Instruction about faithful service,
εὐσυνειδήτου διακονίας, ἧς ἄνευ κίνδυνος. with good conscience, without which there
is danger.
δ (2:1) περὶ εὐχῆς, ὅτι ὑπὲρ πάντων IV (2:1) About prayer, that it should be for
πανταχοῦ, ἀκάκως, ἀταράχως, σεμνῶς. everybody, everywhere, without evil, quiet
and solemn.
ε (2:11) περὶ διδασκάλων, ὅτι ἄνδρας χρὴ, V (2:11) About teachers, that they must
καὶ οὐ γυναῖκας εἶναι διὰ τὴν φύσιν, καὶ be men and not women, because of na-
τὸ πάθος, τὸ ἐξ ἀπάτης, ὃ λύει γέννησις ἡ ture and the suffering after the deception,
Χριστοῦ, καὶ πίστις αὐτῶν, καὶ βίος. removed by the birth of Christ, their faith
and their manner of living.
Ĵ (3:1) περὶ ἀρετῆς ἐπισκόπων, VI (3:1) About the virtue of bishops.

ἐν ᾧ In this:
(3:8) περὶ διακόνων ἀνδρῶν τε καὶ (3:8) About deacons, men as well as wom-
γυναικῶν. en.
ζ (3:16) περὶ θείας σαρκώσεως, VII (3:16) About the divine incarnation.
ἐν ᾧ In this:
(4:1) περὶ τῶν ἐσομένων αἱρέσεων (4:1) About the coming demonic heresies.
δαιμονικῶν.
η (4:8) περὶ ἀγῶνος εὐσεβείας ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι. VIII (4:8) About the struggle for piety, in
hope.
θ (4:11) περὶ ἐπιμελείας αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς IX (4:11) About giving heed to himself and
ἐκκλησίας. to the Church.
ι (5:1) περὶ τοῦ ἁρμοζόντως ἑκάστῳ X (5:1) About dealing with everyone in a
προσφέρεσθαι. proper manner.
ια (5:4) περὶ χηρῶν ἡλικίας καὶ τρόπου καὶ XI (5:4) About the age of widows, their
διοικήσεως. manner and how to look after them.
ιβ (5:17) περὶ πρεσβυτέρων τιμῆς. XII (5:17) About the honor of the elders.
ιγ (5:22) περὶ χειροτονίας ἀσφαλοῦς. XIII (5:22) About safe voting.
ιδ (5:24) ὅτι οὐδὲν ἔργον λανθάνει. XIV (5:24) That no deed remains hidden.
ιε (6:1) περὶ δούλων ὑπακοῆς. XV (6:1) About the obedience of slaves.
ιĴ (6:3) κατὰ φιλοκερδῶν καὶ XVI (6:3) Against the greedy and the false
ψευδοδιδασκάλων. teachers.
ιζ (6:13) παραγγελία φοβερὰ περὶ καθαρᾶς XVII (6:13) Frightful command about pure
ὑπακοῆς ἄχρι τέλους. obedience until the end.
ιη (6:17) πλουσίων ὁδηγία ἐπὶ τὴν ὄντως XVIII (6:17) Guidance to the rich about
ζωήν. true life.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον Chapters of the Second

δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς (785AB) Letter to Timothy
α (1:3) ἔπαινος τῆς Τιμοθέου πίστεως, καὶ I (1:3) Praise of Timothy’s faith, and en-
πρoτρoπὴ ὑπομονῆς κατὰ τὸ couragement to steadfastness, as befits
πρέπον τῇ χάριτι, ἐν ᾗ καὶ αὐτὸς, φησὶν, faith, in which also he, he says, constantly
διακαρτερεῖ πάσχων. endures suffering.
β (1:15) περὶ τῆς ἁρμοζούσης μεταδόσεως II (1:15) About the proper sharing of the
τῶν θείων δογμάτων. divine teachings.
γ (2:3) περὶ τῆς ἀφρόντιδος ἐν τῷ νῦν βίῳ III (2:3) About citizenship in the present
πολιτείας ἐπὶ ταῖς ἀπόνοις τροφαῖς. life being without worry, in sustenance
without toil.
δ (2:11) περὶ τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν πίστεως, καὶ IV (2:11) About faith in Christ and stead-
ὑπομονῆς, ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι ζωῆς. fastness, in hope of life.
ε (2:22) περὶ ὀρθῆς διδασκαλίας, καὶ βίου V (2:22) About right teaching and a pure,
καθαροῦ, εἰρηνικοῦ, καὶ κατὰ τῶν ἐναντίων. peaceful life, and against the adversaries.
Ĵ (3:1) πρόῤῥησις περὶ κακίας ἀνθρώπων VI (3:1) Prediction about men of utter
πλεοναζούσης, ἀπατηλῆς, ἐλεγχομένης. wickedness, which will deceive and then
be refuted.
ζ (3:10) προτροπὴ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ μιμήσεως ἐξ VII (3:10) Encouragement to imitate him
ἐναντίου τοῖς φαύλοις, ἐν ὑπακοῇ θεοῦ. rather than evil persons, in obedience to
God.
η (4:3) περὶ τῶν καινοτομησάντων, οἷς VIII (4:3) About the innovators, with
ἀντιτάττει τὸν Τιμόθεον. whom they oppose Timothy.
θ (4:6) περὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ μελλούσης IX (4:6) About his coming death to eternal
ἀναλύσεως ἐπὶ δόξῃ αἰωνίᾳ. glory.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Τίτον Chapters of the

ἐπιστολῆς (785BC) Letter to Titus
α (1:5) περὶ διδασκάλων ἐπιτηδείων εἰς I (1:5) About teachers who are suitable for
διακονίαν, καὶ ἔλεγχον ἀπειθῶν. service and for refuting the disobedient.
β (1:10) κατὰ τῶν σαρκικὰς καθάρσεις II (1:10) Against those who esteem purifi-
πρεσβευόντων, καὶ ὑπὲρ πνευματικῆς cations of the flesh, even more than spiri-
ἀρετῆς. tual virtue.
III (2:1) Exhortations that he should give

γ (2:1) παραινέσεις, ἃς δεῖ παραινεῖν καθ᾽ to everybody according to their age.
ἡλικίαν ἑκάστοις.
IV (2:9) On servants, how also they can
δ (2:9) περὶ δούλων, ὡς ἂν καὶ αὐτοὶ τῆς serve in a way worthy of the grace of
Χριστοῦ χάριτος ἀξίως δουλεύοιεν. Christ.
V (3:1) On obedience to rulers, as befits the

ε (3:1) περὶ ἀρχόντων ὑπακοῆς πρεπούσης mildness of Christ.
τῇ ἐπιεικείᾳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ,
VI (3:10) Exhortation to evade seditious
Ĵ (3:10) παραίνεσις περὶ τoῦ ἐκκλίνειν τοὺς inquirers.
ἐριστικοὺς ζητητάς.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Φιλήμονα Chapters of the

ἐπιστολῆς (789A) Letter to Philemon
α (1:4) ἔπαινος Φιλήμονος καὶ εὐχαριστία I (1:4) Praise of Philemon, and thanksgiv-
ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ. ing for him.
β (1:10) σύστασις Ὀνησίμου φυγάδος II (1:10) Commendment of Onesimus,

οἰκέτου, καὶ παράκλησις ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ a runaway slave, and an appeal for him,
σωθέντος διὰ πίστεως. since he has been saved by faith.
Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Ἑβραίους Chapters of the Letter

ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ "o$ to the Hebrews
α (1:1) θεολογία Χριστοῦ ἐν δόξῃ πατρὸς I (1:1) Doctrine of Christ, in the glory of
καὶ ἐξουσίᾳ τῶν πάντων, μετὰ τῆς the Father and in power over all things,
καθάρσεως τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς, ἀφ᾽ ἧς ἀνέβη εἰς with power to cleanse those on earth, from
τὴν ἐπουράνιον δόξαν. where he ascended to heavenly glory.
β (1:5) ὅτι οὐ λειτουργικὴ ἡ δόξα Χριστοῦ, II (1:5) That the glory of Christ is not that
ἀλλὰ θεικὴ καὶ ποιητική· διὸ οὐκ ἐπὶ τοῦ of ministers, but divine and creating. For
παρόντος αἰῶνος, ἐν ᾧ οἱ λειτουργοὶ, ἀλλ᾽ that reason it is not in the present age, in
ἐπὶ τῆς μελλούσης οἰκουμένης. which there are ministers, but in the world
to come.
γ (2:9) ὅτι ἐσαρκώθη κατὰ διάθεσιν, καὶ III (2:9) That he became flesh as regards
συμπάθειαν, καὶ οἰκειότητα, τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς, his state, in sympathy and in kinship with
ἐπὶ σωτηρίᾳ ἀνθρώπων, τῇ ἐκ θανάτου, διὰ us, to save men from death, to make us his
τῆς πρὸς αὐτὸν οἰκειώσεως. own.
δ (3:1) ὅτι πιστευτέον Χριστῷ, ὡς Μωυσεῖ IV (3:1) That our belief in Christ should be
ἐπίστευσαν, καθ᾽ ὑπερoχὴν δὲ, τὴν θεοῦ as their belief in Moses, but overwhelm-
πρὸς ἄνθρωπον, ἐν ᾧ ingly greater, just as God is greater than
man. In this:
(3:12) ὅτι φοβητέον τῶν πάλαι τὴν (3:12) That we should fear the fall of the
ἔκπτωσιν. people in the old days.
ε (4:1) προτροπὴ σπουδάσαι εἰς τὴν V (4:1) Encouragement to strive for the re-
προδηλουμένην κατάπαυσιν. lief that has been foretold.
Ĵ (4:11) τὸ φοβερὸν τῆς κρίσεως παρὰ VI (4:11) The horror of judgment by the
τοῦ λόγου, διὰ πάντων, καὶ τὸ χρηστὸν Word that [cuts] through everything, and
τῆς χάριτος τῆς ἱερατικῆς παρὰ τῷ the goodness of the priestly grace of Him
ὁμοιοπαθήσαντι ἡμῖν ἀνθρωπίνως. who, in a human way, suffered like us.
ζ (5:11) ἐπιτίμησις ὡς ἔτι δεομένοις VII (5:11) Rebuke for still being in need of
εἰσαγωγῆς, ἐν ᾧ basic instruction. In this:
(6:4) προτροπὴ εἰς ἐπίδοσιν, ὡς οὐκ οὔσης (6:4) Encouragement to progress, as there
δευτέρας ἀρχῆς, is no second beginning.
(6:9) παράκλησις σὺν ἐπαίνῳ. (6:9) Admonition with praise.
η (6:13) ὅτι βεβαία ἡ ἐπαγγελία τοῦ θεοῦ, VIII (6:13) That the promise of God is safe,
καὶ ταῦτα σὺν ὅρκῳ. and this through an oath.
θ (7:1) περὶ Μελχισέδεκ τοῦ εἰς Χριστὸν IX (7:1) About Melchisedek, the type of
τύπου κατὰ τὸ ὄνομα, καὶ τὴν πόλιν, καὶ Christ, according to his name, his city, his
τὴν ζωὴν, καὶ τὴν ἱερωσύνην, ἐν ᾧ life and his priesthood. In this:
(7:6) ὅτι καὶ τοῦ Αβραὰμ προετιμήθη. (7:6) That he was more honored than even
Abraham.
ι (7:11) ὅτι παύσεται ἡ τοῦ Ἀαρὼν X (7:11) That the earthly priesthood of
ἱερωσύνη, ἡ ἐπὶ γῆς οὖσα· ἵσταται δὲ ἡ Aaron comes to an end, but the heavenly
οὐράνιος ἡ Χριστοῦ ἐξ ἑτέρου γένους, οὐ priesthood of Christ is established of an-
κατὰ σάρκα, οὐ διὰ νόμου σαρκίνου. other kind, not according to the flesh, and
not through the law of the flesh.
ια (8:7) ὑπεροχὴ τῆς δευτέρας διαθήκης XI (8:7) The supremacy of the second cov-
παρὰ τὴν προτέραν ἐν ἱλασμῷ καὶ ἁγιασμῷ. enant over the first, because of forgiveness
and sanctification.
ιβ (9:11) περὶ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, XII (9:11) About the blood of Christ,
ἐν ᾧ ἡ νέα διαθήκη. ὅτι τοῦτο ἀληθὲς through which the new covenant [was es-
καθάρσιον εἰς ἀεὶ, οὐ τὰ ἐν αἵμασι ζώων tablished], because this is the true cleans-
τοῖς πολλάκις προσαγομένοις. ing for all time, not the blood of animals,
which is frequently repeated.
ιγ (10:5) μαρτυρία περὶ τῆς μόνης XIII (10:5) Testimony about the only
καθάρσεως, καὶ προσαγωγῆς πρὸς θεὸν, cleansing and access to God. In this:
ἐν ᾧ (10:19) Encouragement to progress in
(10:19) προτροπὴ τῆς ἐν πίστει προσόδου. faith.
XIV (10:24) Encouragement to be zealous,

ιδ (10:24) προτροπὴ σπουδῆς κατὰ φόβον in fear of the coming judgment.
τῆς ἐγγιζούσης κρίσεως.
XV (10:32) About moving from a good be-
ιε (10:32) περὶ τοῦ καλὴν ἀρχὴν εἰς καλὸν ginning to a good end.
τέλος προαγαγεῖν.
XVI (11:1) About faith, which also has glo-
ιĴ (11:1) περὶ πίστεως τῆς καὶ τοὺς rified the elders.
παλαιοὺς δοξασάσης.
XVII (12:1) About endurance, following
ιζ (12:1) περὶ ὑπομονῆς τῆς ἐν ἀκολουθήσει Christ.
Χριστοῦ.
XVIII (12:12) About temperance until the
ιη (12:12) περὶ σωφροσύνης ἕως καιρὸς new order is established, that we may not
κατορθώσεως, μὴ ἀποτύχωμεν αὐτῆς, ὡς lose it, like Esau, who found no place of re-
Ἠσαῦ, μὴ εὑρὼν τόπον μετανοίας. pentance.
ιθ (12:18) ὅτι φοβερώτερα τῶν ἐπὶ XIX (12:18) That the things to come are
Μωυσέως τὰ μέλλοντα, καὶ πλείονος ἄξια more terrifying than what happened at the
σπουδῆς τὰ νῦν. time of Moses, and that the present time
demands greater zeal.
κ (13:1) περὶ φιλαδελφίας καὶ φιλοξενίας, XX (13:1) About brotherly love and hospi-
ἐν ᾧ tality. In this:
(13:4) περὶ σωφροσύνης, (13:4) About temperance.
(13:5) περὶ αὐταρκείας, (13:5) About sufficiency.
(13:7) περὶ μιμήσεως πατέρων. (13:7) About imitation of the fathers.
κα (13:9) περὶ τοῦ μὴ σωματικῶς ζῇν κατὰ XXI (13:9) About not living bodily accord-
νόμον, ἀλλὰ πνευματικῶς κατὰ Χριστὸν ἐν ing to the Law, but spiritually, according to
ἀρετῇ. Christ in virtue.
κβ (13:20) εὐχὴ πρὸς θεὸν περὶ τῆς εἰς XXII (13:20) Prayer to God for his rule and
ἀρετὴν ἀγωγῆς καὶ οἰκονομίας. guidance to virtue.
Κεφάλαια τῆς Ἰακώβου

ἐπιστολῆς (677AD) Chapters of the Letter of James
α (1:1) περὶ ὑπομονῆς καὶ πίστεως I (1:1) About steadfastness and firm faith.
ἀδιακρίτου, καὶ περὶ ταπεινοφροσύνης To the rich: About humility.
πρὸς τοὺς πλουσίους, ἐν ᾧ In this:
(1:13) περὶ τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν πυρώσεως καὶ τῶν (1:13) About the desire in us and the pas-
ἐξ αὐτῆς παθῶν, ὅτι οὐ παρὰ θεοῦ τὸ αἴτιον· sions [that arise] from it, that they are not
εἴ τι γὰρ ἀγαθὸν ἡμῖν, παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ. caused by God. If something good [befalls
us, it is] from Him.
β (1:19) περὶ πραΰτητος καὶ ἁγνείας II (1:19) About mildness, chastity and good
καὶ πράξεως ἀγαθῆς μεταδοτικῆς ἐπὶ behavior, giving us a share in the blessing.
μακαρισμῷ, καὶ περὶ ἐπιστήμης καὶ And about wise and suitable speech.
συμμετρίας λόγου.
γ (2:1) περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἕκαστον ἀγάπης III (2:1) About love toward everyone, re-
ἀπροσωπολήμπτου κατὰ τὸν νόμον. gardless of persons, according to the Law.
δ (2:14) ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως μόνον, ἀλλὰ IV (2:14) That one not by faith alone, but
καὶ ἐξ ἔργων· καὶ οὐκ ἐκ θατέρου ἰδικῶς, also by works, not by one of them separate-
ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἀμφοῖν ἅμα δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος. ly, but by both together, is justified.
ε (3:1) ὅτι ἡ προπετὴς καὶ ἄτακτος γλῶσσα V (3:1) That the reckless and unruly tongue
θανατοῖ τὸν κεκτημένον, destroys its master, and that it must be con-
trolled for praise and glory to God.
ἧς κρατεῖν ἀνάγκη εἰς εὐφημίαν καὶ δόξαν
τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐν ᾧ In this:
(3:13) περὶ ἀναστροφῆς καὶ ἀγαθῆς καὶ (3:13) About good and peaceful behavior
ἀμάχου πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἐκ φιλοδοξίας τῆς toward each other, far from love of glory
ἐπὶ σοφίᾳ ἀνθρωπίνῃ, which is based on human wisdom.
(3:17) περὶ θείας σοφίας, (3:17) About divine wisdom.
(4:1) ὅτι ἐκ ῥᾳθυμίας καὶ φιληδονίας ἔρις, (4:1) That strife, confusion and enmity
καὶ ἀκαταστασία, καὶ ἡ πρὸς θεὸν ἔχθρα with God come from carelessness and love
γίνεται, of pleasure.
(4:8) περὶ μετανοίας πρὸς σωτηρίαν, καὶ (4:8) About repentance for salvation, and
περὶ τοῦ μὴ κρίνειν τὸν πλησίον. about not judging your neighbor.
Ĵ (4:13) ὅτι οὐκ ἐν ἀνθρώπῳ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν τῷ VI (4:13) That the steps of man are ordered
θεῷ τὰ διαβήματα ἀνδρὸς κατευθύνεται, by God, not by man. In this:
ἐν ᾧ
(5:1) περὶ πλεονεξίας πλουσίων καὶ (5:1) About the avarice of the rich, their
τῆς ἐν κόσμῳ τρυφῆς αὐτῶν, καὶ περὶ luxury in the world and the righteous
δικαιοκρισίας θεοῦ, judgment of God.
(5:7) περὶ μακροθυμίας καὶ ὑπομονῆς (5:7) About steadfastness, endurance of
παθημάτων, καὶ περὶ ἀληθείας, sufferings, and truth.
(5:13) παραινέσεις ἰδικαὶ ἑκάστῳ (5:13) Specific exhortations to various in-
προσήκουσαι μετὰ πίστεως, dividuals, with faith.
(5:19) ὅτι διακονητέον τῇ τοῦ πλησίον (5:19) That we should be concerned about
σωτηρίᾳ. the salvation of our neighbor.
Κεφάλαια Πέτρου ἐπιστολῆς Chapters of the

ɀϮьϰϥ϶ $o# First Letter of Peter
α (1:1) περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ἀναγεννήσεως, I (1:1) About regeneration in Christ, about
καὶ περὶ ὑπομονῆς πειρασμῶν, καὶ περὶ steadfastness against temptations, and
σωτηριώδους πίστεως προκατηγγελμένης about the saving faith that was announced
ὑπὸ τῶν προφητῶν. earlier by the prophets.
β (1:13) περὶ ἐλπίδος, καὶ ἁγιασμοῦ τῆς II (1:13) About hope and sanctification,
τε ὀφειλομένης ἐπὶ τῇ υἱοθεσίᾳ ἀσφαλοῦς and about the unfailing behavior owed be-
ἀναστροφῆς. cause of the adoption.
γ (2:1) περὶ τοῦ ἐπαξίως τῆς υἱοθεσίας ζῇν III (2:1) About living in Christ in a man-
ἐν Χριστῷ πρὸς ὠφέλειαν καὶ τῶν ἔξωθεν, ner worthy of the adoption, to the benefit
εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ. of those outside, to the glory of God.
δ (2:13) περὶ τῆς πρὸς τοὺς ἄρχοντας IV (2:13) About obedience to rulers, broth-
ὑποταγῆς, καὶ φιλαδελφίας καὶ θεοσεβείας, erly love and reverence toward God.
ἐν ᾧ In this:
(2:18) περὶ δούλων ὑποταγῆς καὶ (2:18) About obedience of slaves and for-
ἀνεξικάκου ὑπομονῆς διὰ Χριστὸν, bearing endurance because of Christ.
(3:1) περὶ ὑπακοῆς γυναικῶν, καὶ ὁμονοίας (3:1) About obedience of wives and con-
τῆς πρὸς τοὺς ἄνδρας καὶ σωτηρίας τῆς ἐν cord with their husbands, and about salva-
πνευματι, εἰς τύπον Σάῤῥας, tion in the spirit, after the model of Sara.
(3:7) περὶ τῆς ἀνδρῶν πρὸς γυναῖκας (3:7) About the kindness of men to their
συμπεριφορᾶς, wives.
(3:8) περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἅπαντας ἐπιεικοῦς (3:8) About mild endurance toward all.
ἀνεξικακίας, ἧς τύπος ἦν ἡ ἐπὶ Νῶε τοῦ The model of this is the benevolence of
θεοῦ φιλανθρωπία· ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς δὲ ἡ διὰ τοῦ God toward Noah and the compassion for
βαπτίσματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ συμπάθεια. us through the baptism of Christ.
ε (4:1) περὶ ἀποθέσεως φαύλων πράξεων, V (4:1) About laying off evil works and re-
καὶ ἐπαναλήψεως τῶν ἐν πνεύματι καρπῶν suming the fruits of the Spirit according to
κατὰ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν χαρισμάτων. the diversity of the gifts.
Ĵ (4:12) ὅτι κοινωνίᾳ τῇ πρὸς Χριστὸν VI (4:12) That in fellowship with Christ it
κρατεῖν χρὴ τῶν φυσικῶν παθῶν, ἐλπίδι τε is necessary to control the natural passions
τῇ εἰς αὐτὸν φέρειν τὰς παρ᾽ ἑτέρων πάθας. and to bear the injuries inflicted by others,
with hope in Him.
ζ (5:1) παραίνεσις πρεσβυτέρων περὶ VII (5:1) Advice to elders about care for
ἐπισκοπῆς τοῦ ποιμνίου, ἐν ᾧ the flock. In this:
(5:5) περὶ κoινῆς πάντων πρὸς ἕκαστον (5:5) About the common humility of all
ταπεινοφροσύνης εἰς νίκην τὴν κατὰ τοῦ toward one another in order to vanquish
διαβόλου. the devil.
η (5:10) εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ τελειώσεως τῶν VIII (5:10) Prayer for the perfection of the
πιστευόντων. believers.
Κεφάλαια Πέτρου ἐπιστολῆς Chapters of the Second

δευτέρας (684AB) Letter of Peter
α (1:1) περὶ κλήσεως τῆς ἐν πίστει, ἔργοις I (1:1) About the call to faith, the call that
βεβαιουμένης τοῖς τῆς ἀρετῆς, καὶ ἐλπίδι is made firm by the deeds of virtue and by
τῶν μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν. hope of good things to come.
β (1:10) παραγγελία εἰς ὑπόμνησιν τῆς II (1:10) Command to remember the

διδασκαλίας μετὰ τὴν ἀνάλυσιν αὐτοῦ, καὶ teaching after his death. How he heard the
ὅπως ἐν ὄρει Θαβὼρ τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ περὶ τοῦ voice of God about the Son on Mount Ta-
υἱοῦ ἐπήκουσε φωνῆς. bor.
γ (2:1) πρόῤῥησις ἀπατηλῆς ἐπαναστάσεως III (2:1) Prediction of the deceitful rise of
αἱρετικῶν, ἀσεβείας τε αὐτῶν, καὶ the heretics, their impiety and their pun-
μελλούσης κολάσεως. ishment in the future.
δ (3:1) ἐπανάληψις περὶ κακίας ἀνθρώπων IV (3:1) Repetition about the wickedness
αἱρετικῶν, ἐν ᾧ of the heretics. In this:
(3:10) ὅτι αἰφνιδίως ἥξει Χριστὸς ἐπὶ (3:10) That Christ will come suddenly
συντελείᾳ τοῦδε τοῦ αἰῶνος, ὥστε δεῖν toward the end of this world, hence one
εὐτρεπίζεσθαι πάσῃ ἀρετῇ. should prepare oneself in every virtue.
Κεφάλαια Ἰωάννου ἐπιστολῆς Chapters of the

ɀϮьϰϥ϶ #o" First Letter of John
α (1:1) ἐπαγγελικὴ θεολογία περὶ Χριστοῦ, I (1:1) Teaching according to the promise
ἐν ᾧ on the divine, about Christ. In this:
(1:6) περὶ ἐξομολογήσεως, καὶ προσοχῆς (1:6) About confession and taking care not
εἰς τὸ μὴ ἁμαρτάνειν, to sin.
(2:3) ὅτι ἡ τήρησις ἐντολῶν θεοῦ, τὴν (2:3) That adherence to the precepts of
γνῶσιν βεβαιοῖ. God strengthens knowledge.
β (2:7) περὶ ἀγάπης, ἧς ἄνευ ἀσέβεια, II (2:7) About love, without which impiety
ἐν ᾧ prevails. In this:
(2:12) παραίνεσις περὶ χάριτος ἑκάστου (2:12) Exhortation about the grace of ev-
καθ᾽ ἡλικίαν, καὶ περὶ ἀποτροπῆς τῆς πρὸς eryone according to his age and to avert
τὸν κόσμον ἀγάπης. loving of the world.
γ (2:18) περὶ ψευδαδέλφων ἀρνησιθέων, III (2:18) About false brethren who deny
καὶ ὅτι ἡ εἰς Χριστὸν εὐσέβεια, πατρὸς God. That piety toward Christ is to confess
ὁμολογία· ἡ γὰρ τοῦ πατρὸς δοξολογία, the Father, for praise of the father is to rec-
τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐστι θεολογία, ἐν ᾧ ognize the divinity of Christ. In this:
(2:26) περὶ θείου καὶ πνευματικοῦ (2:26) About the divine and spiritual gift in
χαρίσματος ἐν ἁγιασμῷ ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι εἰς sanctification, with hope of knowledge of
γνῶσιν θεοῦ, God.
(3:2) ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ἐν Χριστῷ ἐκτὸς ἁμαρτίας· (3:2) That everyone who is in Christ is
ὁ γὰρ ἁμαρτάνων ἐστὶν ἐκ τοῦ διαβόλου. without sin. For the sinner is of the devil.
δ (3:9 or 10b) περὶ ἀγάπης τῆς εἰς τὸν IV (3:9 or 10b) About love of our neighbor
πλησίον, καὶ διαθέσεως μεταδοτικῆς, ἐν ᾧ and a sharing disposition. In this:
(3:19) περὶ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς, τῆς ἐν (3:19) About good conscience, with faith
πίστει Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, in Jesus Christ.
(4:1) περὶ διακρίσεως πνευμάτων ἐφ᾽ (4:1) About testing the spirits by the con-
ὁμολογίᾳ τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐνανθρωπήσεως. fession of the incarnated Christ.
ε (4:7) περὶ φιλαδελφίας εἰς θεοσέβειαν. V (4:7) About brotherly love in piety.
Ĵ (4:15 or 5:1) περὶ θεολογίας υἱοῦ ἐν VI (4:15 or 5:1) About divine teaching on
δόξῃ πατρὸς, καὶ περὶ νίκης τῆς κατὰ τοῦ the Son in the glory of the Father. About
πονηροῦ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς victory over the evil one through faith in
ζωήν. Jesus Christ unto life.
ζ (5:16) περὶ ἀντιλήψεως τοῦ ἁμαρτάνοντος VII (5:16) About helping the brother who
ἀδελφοῦ διὰ προσευχῆς, καὶ περὶ τοῦ μὴ sins, through prayer. About abstaining
ἁμαρτάνειν, ἐν ᾧ from sin. In this:
(5:18) περὶ ἀποχῆς δαιμονικοῦ σεβάσματος. (5:18) About staying away from the wor-
ship of demons.
Kεφάλαια Ἰωάννου ἐπιστολῆς Chapters of the

δευτέρας (688B) Second Letter of John
α (1:4) μετὰ τὸ προοίμιoν, περὶ ὀρθοῦ βίου I (1:4) After the prooemium, on a righ-
ἐν ἀγάπῃ θεοῦ διὰ πίστεως teous life in the love of God through pious,
εὐσεβοῦς ἀμεταθέτου, ἐν ᾧ unchangeable faith. In this:
(1:10) ὅτι οὐ δεῖ αἱρετικὸν εἰσοικίζειν, ἢ (1:10) That one should not let heretics live
χαιρετίζειν ἐφ᾽ ἁμαρτίᾳ. in the house or greet them, because of sin.
β (1:12) ἐπαγγελία παρουσίας αὐτοῦ ἐπ᾽ II (1:12) Announcement of his arrival, in

ἐλπίδι πρὸς ὠφέλειαν. hope that it will be beneficial.
Κεφάλαια Ἰωάννου ἐπιστολῆς Chapters of the

ϰϮцϰϥ϶ %o" Third Letter of John
α (1:2) εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ τελειώσεως, καὶ I (1:2) Prayer for perfection, and thanks-
εὐχαριστίας ἐφ᾽ ὁμολογίᾳ φιλοξενίας τῶν giving for the testimony of the brethren to
ἀδελφῶν διὰ Xριστὸν, ἐν ᾧ [his] hospitality for the sake of Christ. In
this:
(1:9) περὶ τῆς Διοτρέφους φαυλότητος καὶ (1:9) About the wickedness of Diotrephes
μισαδελφίας. and his hate for the brethren.
β (1:12) περὶ Δημητρίου, ᾧ μαρτυρεῖ τὰ II (1:12) About Demetrius, to whom he

κάλλιστα. gives the best testimony.
γ (1:13) περὶ ἀφίξεως αὐτοῦ πρὸς αὐτοὺς III (1:13) About his imminent arrival to
ἐπ᾽ ὠφελείᾳ ἐν τάχει. them, for their benefit.
Κεφάλαια τῆς Ἰoύδα

ἐπιστολῆς (689CD) Chapters of the Letter of Jude
α (1:3) περὶ προσοχῆς τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν I (1:3) About devotion to faith in Christ,
πίστεως διὰ τὴν ἐπανάστασιν τῶν ἀσεβῶν because of the rise of impious and immor-
καὶ ἀσελγῶν ἀνδρῶν, ἐν ᾧ al men. In this:
(1:5) περὶ μελλούσης αὐτῶν κολάσεως (1:5) About their coming punishment, in
καθ᾽ ὁμοίωσιν τῶν πάλαι ἁμαρτωλῶν τε likeness to the sins and evil deeds of the
καὶ πονηρῶν. old days.
β (1:11) ταλανισμὸς αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τῇ II (1:11) Rebuke for error, impiety, immo-
πλάνῃ, καὶ δυσσεβείᾳ, καὶ ἀσελγείᾳ, καὶ rality, mockery, and their false and decep-
βλασφημίᾳ, καὶ ἐπιπλάστῳ ὑποκρίσει τῆς tive acts to obtain gifts.
εἰς ἀπάτην δωροδοκίας.
γ (1:17 or 20) περὶ ἀσφαλείας αὐτῶν ἐπὶ III (1:17 or 20) About their firmness in
τῇ πίστει, συμπαθείας τε καὶ φειδοῦς τοῦ faith, their compassion, and their mild-
πλησίον, ἐπὶ σωτηρίᾳ ἐν ἁγιασμῷ. ness toward their neighbor, for salvation in
sanctification.
δ (1:24) εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εἰς ἁγιασμὸν, καὶ IV (1:24) Prayer for their sanctification
παῤῥησίαν καθαρὰν σὺν δοξολογίᾳ θεοῦ. and pure assurance, with praise of God.
Ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων τῶν

ɀϮрϬϣϵϫ #o# Survey of the Chapters of the Acts
Ἐκ πατέρων ἡμεῖς καὶ διδασκάλων Benefiting from the style and model of fa-
τὸν τρόπον καὶ τὸν τύπον ὠφελημένοι, thers and teachers, we present this medio-
ἐγχειροῦμεν μετρίως τῇδε τῶν κεφαλαίων cre survey of the chapters. We, the young
ἐκθέσει, αἰτοῦντες συγγνώμην προπετείας in age and in learning, ask every reader
ἡμεῖς, οἱ νέοι χρόνων τε, καὶ μαθημάτων for forgiveness for our rashness, receiv-
παρ᾽ ὑμῶν ἑκάστου τῶν ἀναγινωσκόντων, ing kindness through your prayers for our
εὐχῇ τῇ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, τὴν συμπεριφορὰν sake. We now present this survey of the
κομιζόμενοι. ἐκτιθέμεθα γοῦν αὐτὴν story of Luke, the evangelist and historian.
καθ᾽ ἱστορίαν Λουκᾶ τοῦ εὐαγγελιστοῦ We indicated the complete chapters in
καὶ συγγραφέως, τοιγαροῦν διὰ μὲν τοῦ black ink, and the subdivisions contained
μέλανος αὐτοτελῆ τὰ κεφάλαια· διὰ δὲ τοῦ in them in red ink.
κινναβάρεως τὰς ἐν μέρει τούτων ἐχομένας
ὑποδιαιρέσεις ἐσημειωσάμεθα.
α (1:1) περὶ τῆς ἐξ ἀναστάσεως διδασκαλίας I (1:1) About the teaching of Christ after
Χριστοῦ καὶ ὀπτασίας πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς, the resurrection, the vision the disciples
καὶ περὶ ἐπαγγελίας τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου saw, the promise of the gift of the Holy
πνεύματος δωρεᾶς, θέας τε καὶ τρόπου
τῆς ἀναλήψεως τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ περὶ τῆς Spirit, how they saw the ascension of
ἐνδόξου δευτέρας αὐτοῦ παρουσίας. Christ, and his glorious second coming.
β (1:15) Πέτρου διάλογος πρὸς τοὺς II (1:15) Peter’s speech to the disciples
μαθητευθέντας περὶ θανάτου καὶ about the death and rejection of Judas the
ἀποβολῆς Ἰούδα τοῦ προδότου, ἐν ᾧ traitor. In this:
(1:23) περὶ ἀντεισαγωγῆς Ματθίου (1:23) about the substitution by Matthias,
κληρωθέντος χάριτι θεοῦ διὰ προσευχῆς. who was chosen through prayer by the
grace of God.
γ (2:1) περὶ θείας τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος III (2:1) About the coming of the divine
ἐπιφοιτήσεως ἐν ἡμέρᾳ πεντεκοστῆς, Holy Spirit to the believers on the day of
γενομένης εἰς τοὺς πιστεύσαντας, ἐν ᾧ Pentecost. In this:
(2:14) Πέτρου κατήχησις περὶ τούτου ἐκ (2:14) The teaching of Peter from the
τῶν προφητῶν, prophets about Him.
(2:22) περὶ πάθους, καὶ ἀναστάσεως καὶ (2:22) About the passion, resurrection and
ἀναλήψεως Χριστοῦ, δωρεᾶς τε τοῦ ἁγίου ascension of Christ and the gift of the Holy
πνεύματος, Spirit.
(2:37) περὶ πίστεως τῶν παρόντων, καὶ τῆς (2:37) About the faith of those who were
διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος αὐτῶν σωτηρίας, present and their salvation through bap-
tism.
(2:42) περὶ ὁμονοίας κοινωφελοῦς, καὶ (2:42) About concord for common benefit,
προσθήκης τῶν πιστευόντων. and the growth of the faithful.
δ (3:1) περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ θεραπείας IV (3:1) About the healing in Christ of the
τοῦ ἐκ γεννητῆς χωλοῦ, Πέτρου τε man who was lame from birth, and about
κατηχήσεως ἐλεγκτικῆς, συμπαθητικῆς, the reproaching, compassionate and per-
συμβουλευτικῆς πρὸς σωτηρίαν αὐτῶν, suasive teaching of Peter for their salvation.
ἐν ᾧ In this:
(4:5) ἐπιστασία τῶν ἀρχιερέων, ζήλῳ (4:5) Investigation of the high priests as
τοῦ γεγονότος, καὶ κρίσις τοῦ θαύματος, they were concerned about the event, their
Πέτρου τε ὁμολογία τῆς Χριστοῦ decision about the miracle, and Peter’s con-
δυνάμεως τε καὶ χάριτος, fession of the power and grace of Christ.
(4:15) περὶ ἀπειλῆς τῶν ἀρχιερέων, ὡς οὐ (4:15) About the threat from the high
δεῖ παρρησιάζεσθαι ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ priests, that they ordered them not to
Χριστοῦ, καὶ ἀνέσεως τῶν ἀποστόλων, speak openly in the name of Christ, and
their dismissal of the apostles.
(4:24) εὐχαριστία ἀπὸ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ὑπὲρ (4:24) Thanksgiving from the Church for
τῆς τῶν ἀποστόλων πίστης καρτερίας. the faithful strength of the apostles.
ε (4:32) περὶ ὁμοψύχου, καὶ καθολικῆς V (4:32) About the believers being of one
κοινωνίας τῶν πιστευσάντων, soul and sharing everything with one an-
ἐν ᾧ other. In this:
(5:1) περὶ Ἀνανίου καὶ Σαπφείρας, καὶ (5:1) About Ananias and Sapphira and
πικρᾶς αὐτῶν τελευτῆς. their cruel end.
Ĵ (5:12) ὅτι τοὺς ἀποστόλους ἐμβληθέντας VI (5:12) That the imprisoned apostles
ἐν τῷ δεσμωτηρίῳ ὁ ἄγγελος κυρίου were saved at night by the angel of the Lord,
ϫъϨϰϵϮГϬтϯϵϯϣϫ1, ἐπιτρέψας ἀκωλύτως who let them preach Jesus unhindered. In
κηρύσσειν τὸν Ἰησοῦν, ἐν ᾧ this:
(5:27) ὅτι τῇ ἑξῆς αὐτοὺς οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς πάλιν (5:27) That the high priests caught them
συλλαβόμενοι, ἐφ᾽ ᾧ μηκέτι διδάσκειν, again the next day, had them beaten and
μαστίξαντες ἀπέλυσαν. dismissed them, having ordered them no
longer to teach.
(5:34) Γαμαλιήλου γνώμη πιστὴ περὶ τῶν (5:34) The trustworthy opinion of Gamaliel
ἀποστόλων μετὰ παραδειγμάτων τινῶν about the apostles, with some examples
καὶ ἀποδείξεων. and proofs.
ζ (6:1) περὶ χειροτονίας τῶν ἑπτὰ διακόνων. VII (6:1) The election of the seven dea-
cons.
η (6:8) Ἰουδαίων ἐπανάστασις καὶ VIII (6:8) The insurrection and false ac-
συκοφαντία κατὰ Στεφάνου, αὐτοῦ τε cusation by the Jews against Stephen, and
δημηγορία περὶ τῆς πρὸς Ἀβραὰμ διαθήκης his speech about the covenant of God with
τοῦ θεoῦ, καὶ περὶ τῶν δώδεκα πατριαρχῶν, Abraham and about the twelve patriarchs.
ἐν ᾧ In this:
(7:11) τὰ περὶ τοῦ λιμοῦ καὶ πυρωνίας καὶ (7:11) The events of the famine, the buying
1
ἀναγνωρισμοῦ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰακὼβ, καὶ περὶ of wheat and the recognition [of Joseph]
γενέσεως Μωυσέως καὶ τῆς πρὸς αὐτὸν by the sons of Jacob, about the birth of
θεοφανείας ἐν ὄρει Σινᾷ γενομένης, Moses and the revelation of God on Mount
Sinai.
(7:35) περὶ τῆς ἐξόδου καὶ μοσχοποιΐας τοῦ (7:35) About the exodus of Israel and the
Ἰσραὴλ ἄχρι χρόνων Σολομῶντος, καὶ τῆς making of the calf, up to the time of Solo-
τοῦ ναοῦ κατασκευῆς, mon and the building of the temple.
(7:55) ὁμολογία τῆς ὑπερουρανίου δόξης (7:55) Confession of the heavenly glory of
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἀποκαλυφθείσης αὐτῷ, Jesus Christ that was revealed to Stephen.
ἐφ᾽ ᾗ λιθόλευστος γενόμενος Στέφανος Because of this, he was stoned and died a
εὐσεβῶς ἐκοιμήθη. pious death.
Ϧ C Гϡтϫϣϰϭ Ϣс ɀϣϮх ϢϧϵϡϪϭѼ ϰѮ϶ IX (8:1b) About the persecution of the
ἐκκλησίας καὶ ταφῆς Στεφάνου, ἐν ᾧ Church and the burial of Stephen. In this:
(8:5) περὶ Φιλίππου τοῦ ἀποστόλου (8:5) About Philip the apostle who healed
πολλοὺς ἰασαμένου ἐπὶ τῆς Σαμαρείας. many in Samaria.
ι (8:9) περὶ Σίμωνος τοῦ μάγου X (8:9) About Simon Magus, who believed
πιστεύσαντος, καὶ βαπτισθέντος σὺν and was baptized with many others. In
ἑτέροις πλείοσιν, ἐν ᾧ this:
(8:14) περὶ τῆς Πέτρου καὶ Ἰωάννου πρὸς (8:14) About the sending of Peter and John
αὐτοὺς ἀποστολῆς, καὶ ἐπίκλησις τοῦ to them, and the invocation of the Holy
ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐπὶ τοὺς βαπτισθέντας. Spirit upon those who were baptized.
1 Emendation suggested by Jerker Blomqvist. 1 Jerker Blomqvist explained this word to me.
ια (8:18) ὅτι οὐ δι᾽ ἀργυρίου, οὐδὲ XI (8:18) That communion with the Holy
ὑποκριταῖς, ἀλλ᾽ ἁγίοις διὰ πίστεως ἡ Spirit is not given through money and not
μετοχὴ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος δίδοται, to hypocrites, but to saints, through faith.
ἐν ᾧ In this:
(8:20) τὰ περὶ ὑποκρίσεως, καὶ ἐπιπλήξεως (8:20) About the hypocrisy of Simon, and
Σίμωνος. about the rebuke of him.
ιβ (8:26) ὅτι τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς καὶ πιστοῖς XII (8:26) That God prepares salvation for
εὐοδοῖ ὁ θεὸς τὴν σωτηρίαν, δῆλον ἐκ τῆς the good and faithful, shown by the exam-
κατὰ τὸν εὐνοῦχον ὑποθέσεως. ple of the eunuch.
ιγ (9:1) περὶ τῆς οὐρανόθεν θείας κλήσεως XIII (9:1) About the divine and heavenly
Παύλου εἰς ἀποστολὴν Χριστοῦ, call of Paul to the apostleship of Christ.
ἐν ᾧ In this:
(9:17) περὶ ἰάσεως καὶ βαπτίσματος (9:17) About the healing and baptism of
Παύλου διὰ Ἀνανίου κατ᾽ ἀποκάλυψιν Paul by Ananias, according to a revela-
θεοῦ, παῤῥησίας τε αὐτοῦ, καὶ συντυχίας, tion from God, his bold preaching, and his
τῆς διὰ Βαρναβᾶ πρὸς τοὺς ἀποστόλους. meeting with the apostles through Barna-
bas.
ιδ (9:32) περὶ Αἰνέα παραλυτικοῦ ἰαθέντος XIV (9:32) About the lame Aeneas who was
ἐν Λύδδῃ διὰ Πέτρου, ἐν ᾧ healed through Peter in Lydda. In this:
(9:35) τὰ περὶ Ταβιθὰ τῆς φιλοχήρου, ἣν (9:35) [The story of] Tabitha, the friend of
ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν ὁ Πέτρος διὰ προσευχῆς the widows, whom Peter raised from the
ἐν Ἰόππῃ. dead in Joppa through prayer.
ιε (10:1) περὶ Kορνηλίου, ὅσα τε πρὸς XV (10:1) About Cornelius, both what the
αὐτὸν ὁ ἄγγελος εἶπεν, καὶ ὅσα πάλιν πρὸς angel said to him and what was again said
Πέτρον οὐρανόθεν περὶ κλήσεως ἐθνῶν from heaven to Peter about the call to the
ἐρρέθη, ἐν ᾧ Gentiles. In this:
(10:10) ὅτι μετασταλεὶς ὁ Πέτρος ἦλθεν (10:10) Peter comes to Cornelius after he
πρὸς Κορνήλιον, has sent for him.
(10:30) ἐπανάληψις ὧν ἐμαρτύρησε, καὶ (10:30) Repetition of what the angel de-
ὑφηγήσατο ὁ ἄγγελος αὐτῷ Κορνηλίῳ, clared and what he instructed Cornelius.
(10:34) Πέτρου κατήχησις εἰς Χριστὸν, τοῦ (10:34) The teaching of Peter about Christ.
τε ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀκούοντας The gift of the Holy Spirit upon the listen-
δωρεὰ, καὶ ὅπως ἐβαπτίσθησαν τότε οἱ ἐξ ers, and how the believers among the Gen-
ἐθνῶν πιστεύσαντες. tiles then were baptized.
ιĴ (11:4) ὡς Πέτρος τὰ καθεξῆς, καὶ τὰ XVI (11:4) How Peter relates all that had
ἕκαστα τῶν γεγονότων διηγεῖται τοῖς happened from the beginning to the apos-
ἀποστόλοις, διακριθεῖσι πρὸς αὐτὸν, tles, since they had doubted him.
(11:19) τὸ τηνικάδε τὸν Βαρναβᾶν (11:19) About the sending of Barnabas at
ἐκπέμψασι πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ that time to the brethren in Antioch.
ἀδελφούς.
ιζ (11:27) προφητεία Ἀγάβου περὶ λιμοῦ XVII (11:27) Prophecy of Agabos about
οἰκουμενικῆς, καὶ καρποφορίας πρὸς τοὺς hunger all over the world, and about alms
ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ ἀδελφούς. to the brethren in Antioch.
ιη (12:1) Ἰακώβου τοῦ ἀποστόλου XVIII (12:1) The slaughter of James the
κατασφαγὴ, ἐν ᾧ apostle. In this:
(12:3) Πέτρου σύλληψις πρὸς Ἡρώδου, (12:3) About the capture of Peter by Herod,
ὅπως τε αὐτὸν ὁ ἄγγελος θείῳ κελεύσματι how an angel at the Lord’s behest lead him
ἐξείλετο τῶν δεσμῶν, καὶ ὁ Πέτρος out of prison, and how Peter departed after
ἐμφανὴς γενόμενος νύκτωρ τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς he had appeared to the disciples at night.
ὑπανεχώρησεν, ἐν ᾧ In this:
(12:12) περὶ τῆς τῶν φυλάκων κολάσεως, (12:12) About the punishment of the
καὶ μετέπειτα περὶ τῆς τοῦ ἀσεβοῦς Ἡρώδου guards, and then about the cruel and dead-
πικρᾶς τε καὶ ὀλεθρίου καταστροφῆς. ly overthrow of the impious Herod.
ιθ (13:1) Ἀποστολὴ Βαρναβᾶ καὶ Παύλου XIX (13:1) About the mission to Cyprus by
πρὸς τοῦ θείου πνεύματος εἰς Κύπρον, Barnabas and Paul, [guided] by the Holy
ὅσα τε εἰργάσαντο ἐν ὀνόματι Χριστοῦ εἰς Spirit, and what they did in the name of
Ἐλύμαν τὸν μάγον. Jesus Christ to Elymas the sorcerer.
κ (13:16) Παύλου εὐθαλὴς διδασκαλία εἰς XX (13:16) About the flourishing teaching
Χριστὸν ἔκ τε τοῦ νόμου καὶ καθεξῆς τῶν of Paul about Christ, historical and from
προφητῶν, ἱστορικὴ καὶ εὐαγγελικὴ, the gospel, both from the Law and after-
ἐν ᾧ wards from the prophets. In this:
(13:33) ὅτι ἐλεγκτικὴ καὶ συλλογιστική. (13:33) Refuting and syllogistic [argu-
ments].
(13:44) (13:46?) περὶ μεταθέσεως τοῦ (13:44) (13:46?) About the preaching be-
κηρύγματος εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, διωγμοῦ τε αὐτῶν ing turned to the Gentiles, and about their
ἐκεῖ καὶ ἀφίξεως εἰς Ἰκόνιον. being persecuted there, and their arrival in
Iconium.
κα (14:1) ὅπως ἐν Ἰκονίῳ κηρύξαντες XXI (14:1) How the apostles were perse-
τὸν Χριστὸν, πολλῶν τε πιστευσάντων, cuted in Iconium after they had preached
ἐδιώχθησαν οἱ ἀπόστολοι. Christ and converted many.
κβ (14:7) περὶ τοῦ ἐν Λύστροις ἐκ γεννητῆς XXII (14:7) About the lame from birth
χωλοῦ ἰαθέντος διὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων, who was healed by the apostles in Lystra.
διόπερ εἶναί τε θεοὶ καὶ παρεῖναι ἔδοξαν For that reason, the inhabitants considered
τοῖς εγχωρίοις· ἔνθα δὴ καὶ μετέπειτα them to be gods who had come to them.
λιθάζεται ὁ Παῦλος παρὰ τῶν Ἰουδαίων Then, afterwards, Paul was stoned by the
τῶν ἀστυγειτόνων. Jews from the neighboring towns.
κγ (15:1) ὅτι οὐ δεῖ περιτέμνεσθαι τοὺς XXIII (15:1) That believers of the Gentiles
ἐξ ἐθνῶν πιστεύοντας, δόγματι καὶ κρίσει do not have to be circumcised, according
τῶν ἀποστόλων, to the decision and the decree of the apos-
ἐν ᾧ tles. In this:
(15:13) ἐπιστολὴ αὐτῶν πρὸς τοὺς ἐξ (15:13) Their letter about observances to
ἐθνῶν, περὶ τῶν φυλακτέων, those of the Gentiles.
(15:36) ἀντίῤῥησις Παύλου πρὸς Βαρναβᾶν (15:36) Paul’s discussion with Barnabas
διὰ Μάρκον. about of Mark.
κδ (15:40 or 16:1) περὶ τῆς κατηχήσεως XXIV (15:40 or 16:1) About the teach-
Τιμοθέου, καὶ τῆς κατ᾽ ἀποκάλυψιν ing of Timothy and the arrival of Paul to
ἀφίξεως Παύλου εἰς Μακεδονίαν, ἐν ᾧ Macedonia, after a revelation. In this:
(16:14) περὶ πίστεως καὶ σωτηρίας τινὸς (16:14) About the faith and salvation of a
γυναικὸς Λυδίας, certain woman, Lydia.
(16:16) περὶ ἰάσεως τῆς πνεῦμα Πύθωνος (16:16) About the healing of the woman
ἐχούσης παιδίσκης, δι᾽ ἣν τὸν Παῦλον servant who had a spirit of divination. On
καθεῖρξαν οἱ δεσπόται, account of her, her masters had Paul put
in prison.
(16:25) περὶ τοῦ συμβάντος ἐκεῖσε σεισμοῦ, (16:25) About the earthquake that occured
καὶ θαύματος· καὶ ὅπως πιστεύσας ὁ there and the miracle. And how the keeper
εἱρκτοφύλαξ, ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ νυκτὶ ἐβαπτίσθη of the prison believed and straightaway, in
πανέστιος, the same night, was baptized with his en-
tire household.
(16:38) ὅτι παρακληθέντες ἐξῆλθον τότε (16:38) That the apostles then left the pris-
ἐκ τοῦ δεσμωτηρίου οἱ ἀπόστολοι. on, having been asked to do so.
κε (17:1) περὶ στάσεως γενομένης ἐν XXV (17:1) About the uprising that took
Θεσσαλονίκῃ τοῦ κηρύγματος ἕνεκεν, place in Thessalonica because of the
φυγῆς τε Παύλου εἰς Βεροίαν, κἀκεῖθεν εἰς preaching, and Paul’s escape to Beroea and
Ἀθήνας. from there to Athens.
κĴ (17:22) περὶ τῆς ἐν Ἀθήναις ἐπιβωμίου XXVI (17:22) About the inscription on the
γραφῆς, φιλοσόφου τε κηρύγματος καὶ altar in Athens and the learned preaching
εὐσεβείας τοῦ Παύλου. and piety of Paul.
κζ (18:1) περὶ Ἀκύλα καὶ Πρισκίλλης, καὶ XXVII (18:1) About Aquila and Priscilla,
τῆς Κορινθίων ἀπειθείας, καὶ τῆς κατὰ the disobedience of the Corinthians, and
πρόγνωσιν ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς εὐδοκίας τοῦ θεοῦ God’s approval of them that was revealed
ἀποκαλυφθείσης τῷ Παύλῳ, ἐν ᾧ to Paul in advance. In which:
(18:8) περὶ Κρίσπου ἀρχισυναγώγου (18:8) About Crispus, the head of the syna-
πιστεύσαντος σὺν ἑτέροις τισὶ καὶ gogue, who believed and was baptized
βαπτισθέντος, along with others.
(18:12) ὅτι στάσεως κινηθείσης ἐν (18:12) That Paul withdrew when an up-
Κορίνθῳ, ὁ Παῦλος ὑπανεχώρησεν, ἐλθών rising was provoked in Corinth. Having
τε εἰς Ἔφεσον καὶ διαλεχθεὶς ἐξῆλθεν,
reached Ephesus, he taught there, and then
left.
(18:24) περὶ Ἀπολλῶ ἀνδρὸς λογίου τε καὶ (18:24) About Apollo, a man both eloquent
πιστοῦ. and faithful.
κη (19:1) περὶ βαπτίσματος, καὶ τῆς XXVIII (19:1) About baptism and the gift
τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος δωρεᾶς δοθείσης of the Holy Spirit through prayer to the
διὰ προσευχῆς Παύλου τοῖς ἐν Ἐφέσῳ believers in Ephesus, and about healing of
πιστεύσασι, καὶ περὶ ἰάσεως τοῦ λαοῦ, ἐν ᾧ the people. In this:
(19:13) περὶ τῶν υἱῶν Σκευᾶ, ὅτιπερ οὐ δεῖ (19:13) About the sons of Sceva. And that
ἐγχειρεῖν ἀπίστοις, καὶ ἀναξίοις τῆς πίστεως one should not approach unbelievers and
γινομένοις καὶ περὶ ἐξομολογήσεως τῶν those who are unworthy of faith. And
πιστευόντων, about the confession of the believers.
(19:23) περὶ τῆς ἐν Ἐφέσῳ κινηθείσης (19:23) About the uproar against the apos-
στάσεως ὑπὸ Δημητρίου τοῦ ἀργυροκόπου tles that was provoked in Ephesus by Dem-
κατὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων. etrius the silversmith.
κθ (20:2) περίοδος Παύλου, ἐν ᾗ τὰ περὶ XXIX (20:2) The travel of Paul. In this [is
θανάτου, καὶ ἀνακλήσεως Εὐτύχου διὰ the story of] the death of Eutychus in Troas
προσευχῆς ἐν Τρωάδι· παραινέσεις τε and his being called back through prayer.
αὐτοῦ ποιμαντικαὶ πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Ἐφέσῳ And his pastoral exhortations to the elders
πρεσβυτέρους, ἐν ᾧ in Ephesus. In this:
(21:1) παράπλους Παύλου ἀπὸ Ἐφέσου (21:1) About the passage of Paul from
ἄχρι Καισαρείας τῆς Παλαιστίνης. Ephesus to Caesarea in Palestine.
λ (21:10) Ἀγάβου προφητεία περὶ τῶν XXX (21:10) The prophecy of Agabus con-
συμβησομένων τῷ Παύλῳ ἐν Ἰερουσαλήμ. cerning what would happen to Paul in Je-
rusalem.
λα (21:20) παραίνεσις Ἰακώβου πρὸς XXXI (21:20) The appeal of James to Paul
Παῦλον περὶ τοῦ μὴ δοκεῖν κωλύειν that he should not appear as one who for-
Ἑβραίους περιτέμνεσθαι. bids circumcision among the Hebrews.
λβ (21:27) περὶ τῆς ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ κατὰ XXXII (21:27) About the uproar against
τοῦ Παύλου κινηθείσης ἀταξίας, ὅπως τε Paul that was provoked in Jerusalem, and
αὐτὸν ὁ χιλίαρχος τοῦ πλήθους ἐξαιρεῖται, how the chief captain took him away from
ἐν ᾧ the crowd. In this:
(22:1) Παύλου κατάστασις περὶ ἑαυτοῦ, (22:1) Paul’s account about himself and his
καὶ τῆς εἰς ἀπόστολον αὐτοῦ κλήσεως, call to apostleship.
(22:12) περὶ ὧν ὁ Ἀνανίας εἶπεν πρὸς τὸν (22:12) About what Ananias said to Paul
Παῦλον ἐν Δαμασκῷ, ὀπτασίας τε καὶ in Damascus, the vision, and the voice of
φωνῆς θεοῦ γενομένης ποτὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐν God that once came to him in the temple.
τῷ ἱερῷ,
(22:25) ὅτι μέλλων ἐπὶ τούτοις ὁ Παῦλος (22:25) That when they were going to beat
τύπτεσθαι, εἰπὼν ὅτι Ῥωμαῖός ἐστιν, ἀνείθη.
Paul for this, they released him after he

said he was a Roman.
λγ (22:30) ὅσα Παῦλος καταβὰς εἰς τὸ XXXIII (22:30) What Paul suffered and
συνέδριον ἔπαθε τε καὶ εἶπε, καὶ εὐθυβόλως spoke about when he had gone down to
ἔπραξε. the Sanhedrin, and what he achieved by
his cunning.
λδ (23:12) περὶ ἐπιβουλῆς μελετωμένης XXXIV (23:12) About the treachery which
ὑπὸ Ἰουδαίων κατὰ Παύλου, καὶ μηνύσεως the Jews planned against Paul, and its be-
αὐτῆς πρὸς Λυσίαν, ἐν ᾧ ing revealed to Lysias. In this:
(23:22) ὅτι παρεπέμφθη ὁ Παῦλος (23:22) That Paul was sent to the governor
τῷ ἡγεμόνι εἰς τὴν Καισαρείαν μετὰ in Caesarea, accompanied by soldiers with
στρατιωτῶν καὶ γραμμάτων. a letter.
λε (24:1) Τερτύλλου περὶ Παύλου XXXV (24:1) The accusation of Tertullus

κατηγορία, καὶ αὐτοῦ ἀπολογία ἐπὶ τοῦ against Paul, and his defense before the
ἡγεμόνος. governor.
λĴ (24:27) περὶ τῆς Φήλικος διαδοχῆς, καὶ XXXVI (24:27) About Felix being suc-
τῆς Φήστου προαγωγῆς, τῆς τε ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ceeded by the promotion of Festus, and
ἀνακρίσεως Παύλου καὶ ἀφέσεως. the examination of Paul before him, and
his [Paul’s] dismissal.
λζ (25:13) Ἀγρίππα καὶ Βερνίκης παρουσία, XXXVII (25:13) The arrival of Agrippa and
καὶ πεῦσις τῶν κατὰ Παῦλον, Bernice, and their investigation of Paul’s
ἐν ᾧ case. In this:
(26:1) ἀπολογία Παύλου ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶν, περὶ (26:1) Paul’s defense before them, about his
τῆς ἐν νόμῳ θρησκείας αὐτοῦ καὶ κλήσεως observance of the Law and his call to the
εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, Gospel.
(26:31) (24?) ὡς οὐδὲν ἀδικεῖ Ἰουδαίους ὁ (26:31) (24?) That Agrippa said to Festus
Παῦλος, Ἀγρίππας ἔφη τῷ Φήστῳ. that Paul had not harmed the Jews at all.
λη (27:1) πλοῦς Παύλου ἐπὶ Ῥώμην XXXVIII (27:1) The sea voyage of Paul to
κινδύνων πλείστων τε καὶ μεγίστων Rome, full of many and great dangers. In
ἔμπλεως, ἐν ᾧ this:
(27:21 or 25) παραίνεσις Παύλου πρὸς (27:21 or 25) Exhortation of Paul to those
τοὺς σὺν αὐτῷ περὶ ἐλπίδος σωτηρίας, who were with him about hope for salva-
tion.
(27:41) ναυάγιον Παύλου, ὅπως τε (27:41) The shipwreck of Paul. How they
διεσώθησαν εἰς Μελίτην νῆσον, καὶ ὅσα ἐν were saved on the island of Malta, and the
αὐτῃ ὁ Παῦλος ἐθαυματούργησεν. miracles Paul worked there.
λθ (28:11) ὅπως ἀπὸ Μελίτης εἰς Ῥώμην XXXIX (28:11) How Paul came from Malta
κατήντησεν ὁ Παῦλος. to Rome.
νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶o"SHVNFOUB 73
μ (28:17) περὶ διαλέξεως Παύλου τῆς πρὸς XL (28:17) About Paul’s discussion with
τοὺς ἐν Ῥώμῃ Ἰουδαίους. the Jews in Rome.
Ὑποθέσεις Argumenta
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Ῥωμαίους Argument of the

ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ "o$ Letter to the Romans
[Introductory Notice] [Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Κορίνθου, μήπω He sends this letter from Corinth, while he
μὲν ἑωρακὼς Ῥωμαίους, ἀκούων δὲ περὶ has not yet seen the Romans, but has heard
αὐτῶν καὶ ἐπιποθῶν αὐτοὺς ἰδεῖν. about them and longs to see them.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται τὴν πίστιν And first, he praises their faith, which he
αὐτῶν καταγγελλομένην ὁρῶν πανταχοῦ· sees announced everywhere. Then he in-
ἔπειτα σημαίνει πολλάκις ἑαυτὸν forms [them] that he often had planned to
προθέμενον ἐλθεῖν διὰ τὸν εἰς αὐτοὺς come because of his longing for them, but
πόθον, καὶ τέως μὴ δεδυνῆσθαι. καὶ λοιπὸν that he has not been able to come earlier.
διδασκαλικὴν τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ποιεῖται περὶ And now, he composes the letter as a di-
κλήσεως ἐθνῶν· καὶ ὅτι ἡ περιτομὴ ἕως dactic letter about the call to the Gentiles.
καιροῦ ἦν, καὶ νῦν πέπαυται· καὶ ὅτι διὰ τοῦ And [he says] that circumcision lasted
Χριστοῦ λέλυται τὸ παράπτωμα τοῦ Ἀδὰμ, until a certain time, but now it has been
καὶ ἡ σκιὰ τοῦ νόμου παρῆλθε. τὴν μὲν οὖν abolished. And [he says] that the fall of
κλῆσιν τῶν ἐθνῶν ἀκολούθως γεγενῆσθαι Adam was atoned through Christ, and that
κατασκευάζει, οὕτως ἀποδεικνὺς πᾶσιν the shadow of the Law passed away. He
ἀνθρώποις ἔμφυτον εἶναι τὸν νόμον, καὶ confirms that the call to the Gentiles has
πάντας ἀδιδάκτῳ τε τῇ φύσει, καὶ ἀπ᾽ come according to this, showing that the
αὐτῆς τῆς κτίσεως δύνασθαι γινώσκειν Law is implanted in all men, and that ev-
τὸν θεόν. διὸ καὶ εἰκότως αἰτιᾶται πρῶτον erybody can know God through their un-
Ἕλληνας, ὡς μὲν τοῦ θεοῦ φανερώσαντος taught natural faculties and from creation
αὐτοῖς ἐκ τῶν ποιημάτων τοῦ κόσμου itself. Therefore, he also reasonably makes
τὴν περὶ ἑαυτοῦ γνῶσιν καὶ τῆς ἀϊδίου accusations, first against the Greeks. Al-
δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, ἥτις ἐστὶν ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ, though God revealed to them through the
ἐν ᾧ καὶ δι᾽ οὗ τὰ πάντα πεποίηκεν· αὐτοὺς created things of the cosmos knowledge
δὲ μὴ ἐγνωκέναι μὲν ἐκ τῶν κτισμάτων of Himself and His eternal power, which
εἶναι θεὸν τὸν τούτων δημιουργόν· τὰ δὲ is His word by whom and through whom
ποιήματα θεοποιήσαντας, καὶ τῇ κτίσει He made everything, they have not known
μᾶλλον ἢ αὐτῷ λατρεύσαντας. αἰτιᾶται on the basis of the created things that God
δὲ καὶ Ἰουδαίους, ὡς μὴ φυλάξαντας τὸν is their Maker, but they made the created
νόμον, ἀλλὰ καὶ μᾶλλον διὰ τῆς παραβα- things gods and worshipped the creation
σεως τοῦ νόμου τὸν θεὸν ἀτιμάσαντας· more than Him. And he also accuses the
καὶ οὕτως ἀμφότερα τὰ μέγιστα Ἰουδαίους Jews for not keeping the Law, but disgrac-
τε καὶ Ἕλληνας συγκλείει καὶ ἐλέγχει ἐπὶ ing God by transgressing it. And in this
παρανομίᾳ, ἵνα δείξῃ, ὅτι ἴσοι γενόμενοι manner, with both these extremely serious
οἱ πάντες, ἐπίσης οἱ πάντες, ὡς ὑπεύθυνοι, matters, he shuts up both Jews and Greeks,
τοῦ λυτρουμένου δέονται· τῆς δὲ χάριτος accusing them for transgression of the
καὶ λυτρώσεως ἐπίσης τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις Law, in order to show that when they all
γενoμένης καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ ἔθνη, εἰκότως have become equal, they all equally need
καὶ ἡ κλῆσις γέγονε τῶν ἐθνῶν· τῆς redemption as guilty. And as the grace and
δὲ κλήσεως τῶν ἐθνῶν γενομένης, ἐξ redemption came equally to both Jews
ἀνάγκης πέπαυται ἡ περιτομὴ καὶ ἡ ἐν and Gentiles, reasonably the call has also
τῷ νόμῳ σκιά. ὁ γὰρ Ἀβρὰμ, φησὶν, οὐκ come to the Gentiles. And the circumci-
ἐν περιτομῇ, ἀλλὰ πρὸ τῆς περιτομῆς sion and the shadow of the Law have come
δικαιωθεὶς, μετωνομάσθη μὲν Ἀβραὰμ, ὅτι to an end because the call has come to all
πατὴρ πολλῶν ἐθνῶν ἔμελλεν εἶναι κατὰ Gentiles. For Abram, he says, after being
τὴν ἐν τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ πίστιν· ἔλαβεν δὲ justified not in circumcision, but before
μετὰ τὸ δικαιωθῆναι καὶ τὴν περιτoμὴν circumcision, was called by the new name
ἐν σαρκὶ, ἵνα σημεῖον ᾖ τοῖς κατὰ σάρκα of Abraham, because he should be a father
γεννωμένοις ἐξ αὐτοῦ, παύσεσθαί ποτε of many nations according to the faith he
τὴν περιτομὴν, ὅταν τὰ ἔθνη γένηται τέκνα had as uncircumcised. After he was justi-
τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ ἀρξάμενα πολιτεύεσθαι κατὰ fied, he received also the circumcision in
τὴν πίστιν τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ, ἐν ᾗ ἐδικαιώθη, the flesh, so that it should be a sign to his
ὅτε ἦν ἐν ἀκροβυστίᾳ· τούτων γὰρ χάριν descendants according to the flesh. Cir-
καὶ μετωνομάσθη Ἀβραάμ. ἀνάγκη δὲ cumcision will once come to an end when
ἐλθόντων τῶν σημαινομένων, παύεσθαι τὸ the Gentiles become children of Abraham
σημαίνον. εἰ μὲν οὖν τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζουσι and start to live according to the faith of
περιτέμνεσθαι, παυέτωσαν καὶ τὸ ὄνομα Abraham, by which he was justified when
τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ καὶ καλείσθω Ἀβράμ· εἰ δὲ he was uncircumcised. And because of
Ἀβραὰμ παρὰ θεοῦ μετωνομάσθη, οὐ δεῖ these things, Abraham received his new
περιτέμνεσθαι τὰ ἔθνη· ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ αὐτοὺς name. And it is necessary that the sign
ἔτι τοὺς κατὰ σάρκα Ἰουδαίους, ἵνα ᾖ τὸ comes to an end when what it signifies
ὄνομα βέβαιον, καὶ πατὴρ πολλῶν ἐθνῶν becomes reality. If thus they compel the
καλῆται. καὶ γὰρ οὐ χρείαν ἔχει λοιπόν τις Gentiles to be circumcised, let them also
περιτέμνεσθαι, ἀρκούμενος τῇ πίστει τοῦ give up the name Abraham, and let him
Ἀβραὰμ, οὐδὲ τῆς ἄλλης δὲ τῆς ἐν τῷ νόμῳ be called Abram! But if Abram received a
σκιᾶς· οὐ γὰρ ἐκ τούτων, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ πίστεως new name from God, the Gentiles do not
δικαιοῦταί τις, καθάπερ καὶ ὁ Ἀβραάμ. have to be circumcised, and not even they
ταῦτα οὕτως κατασκευάσας, ἀποδείκνυσι who are Jews according to the flesh, so that
πάλιν, ὅτι ἄλλως οὐκ ἂν γένοιτο λύτρωσις the name should stand firm and he should
καὶ χάρις τῷ Ἰσραὴλ καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, εἰ be called the father of many nations. For
μὴ λυθείη ἡ ἀρχαία ἁμαρτία τοῦ Αδὰμ, ἡ nobody needs circumcision from now on,
εἰς πάντας γενομένη. δι᾽ ἄλλου δὲ ταύτην as it is sufficient with the faith of Abraham,
μὴ δύνασθαι ἐξαλειφθῆναι, φησὶν, ἢ διὰ not some other faith that is of the shadow
Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ, δι᾽ οὗ καὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς κατάρα of the Law. For one is justified not from
γέγονεν· οὐ γὰρ δυνατὸν ἦν ἄλλον λῦσαι these things, but from faith, as also was
τὸ παράπτωμα. εἶτα γράφει ὅτι ἄλλως Abraham. After he has elaborated on this,
τοῦτο οὐ μὴ γένηται, εἰ μὴ σῶμα φορέσῃ he again shows that redemption and grace
ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ γένηται ἄνθρωπος, ἵνα to Israel and the Gentiles could not have
τοῦτο προσενέγκας ὑπὲρ πάντων, τοὺς come in any other way, if not the old sin of
πάντας ἐλευθερώσῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ θανάτου· καὶ Adam was atoned, the one that came to all.
ὥσπερ δι᾽ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς Through no other could this be erased, he
τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν, οὕτως καὶ δι᾽ ἑνὸς says, than through Christ Jesus, through
ἀνθρώπου ἡ χάρις γένηται. καὶ λοιπὸν whom also the curse came from the begin-
ὡς καλὸς οἰκονόμος τοὺς μὲν Ἰουδαίους ning. For it was not possible for another
παραμυθεῖται, ὅτι οὐ παραβάται γίνεσθε to atone the sin. Then he writes that this
τοῦ νόμου, ἐὰν εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν πιστεύσητε· could not happen in any other way, than
τοῖς δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν παρεγγυᾷ μὴ the Son of God possessing a body and be-
ἐπαίρεσθαι κατὰ τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ, ἀλλὰ coming a man so that He, by offering it for
γινώσκειν, ὅτι ὡς κλάδοι ἐπὶ τὴν ῥίζαν, all, could free everyone from death. And
οὕτως ἐπ᾽ ἐκείνους ἐνεκεντρίσθησαν. μετὰ as by one man sin entered into the world,
δὲ ταῦτα παραινετικοὺς λόγους εἰς τὰ ἤθη so also through one man grace shall come.
διδάξας, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. And now, as a good house-steward, he
comforts on the one hand the Jews: ‘you do
not become transgressors of the Law if you
believe in Christ.’ On the other hand, he
commands those from the Gentiles not to
boast against Israel, but to understand that
as branches upon the root, they were graft-
ed onto them. After that, having taught ex-
hortative words in order to strengthen the
morals, he ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρώτης ἐπιστολῆς Argument of the First Letter

ɀϮч϶͋ϭϮϧϫϦцϭϱ϶ %o$ to the Corinthians.

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ἐφέσου τῆς He sends this letter from Ephesus in
Ἀσίας, ἑωρακὼς αὐτοὺς ἤδη καὶ διδάξας, Asia, after having seen and taught them.
ὑπομιμνήσκων δὲ ὅμως διὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς Still, he reminds them through this letter.
ταύτης.
[Prophasis] [Prophasis]
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: In their
Κορίνθιοι ἐκ φιλονεικίας συναγόμενoι, love of strife, the Corinthians were op-
ἐπεσχίζοντο ταῖς γνώμαις, καὶ λοιπὸν ἦν posed to each other, they differed in opin-
ἐν αὐτοῖς σχίσματα, καὶ ὄντων σχισμάτων ions, and there were now divisions among
παρεβλέποντο τὸν λαβόντα τὴν μητρυιάν· them. As there were divisions, they did not
ἄλλοι δὲ ἤθελον καταλιμπάνειν τὰς ἰδίας act against the man living with his step-
γυναῖκας προφάσει τῆς ἐγκρατείας· τινὲς mother. Others wished to leave their wives,
δὲ καὶ ἐν εἰδωλείοις ἤσθιον, ὡς ἀδιαφόρων apparently for the sake of continence. Oth-
ὄντων τῶν εἰδωλοθύτων· ἄλλοι δὲ τοὺς μὲν ers even used to eat in the temples of the
ἀλάλους ἐξουθένουν, τοὺς δὲ λαλοῦντας idols, since they regarded the offerings
γλώσσαις ἐθαύμαζον· καὶ τέλος, ἠπάτηντο as an indifferent matter. Others despised
καὶ εἰς τὸ περὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως μυστήριον, those who did not speak with tongues, but
λέγοντες μὴ ἐγείρεσθαι τὴν σάρκα ταύτην. admired those who did. And finally, they
τούτων πάντων ἐν Κορίνθῳ κινουμένων, were deceived also concerning the mystery
γράφουσιν οἱ λαοὶ τῷ ἀποστόλῳ, καὶ of resurrection, saying that this body is not
λοιπὸν πρὸς πάντα ἀντιγράφει. raised. When all this was set in motion at
Corinth, the people wrote to the Apostle,
and now he replies to everything.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν μαρτυρεῖ αὐτοῖς ἐν And first, he bears witness to their pru-
φρονήσει καὶ γνώσει· οὐκ ἀποδέχεται dence and wisdom, but he does not praise
δὲ αὐτοὺς ποιοῦντας τὰ σχίσματα· ἀλλὰ them for making schisms. And he also ad-
καὶ συμβουλεύει μὴ ἐν λόγῳ τὴν ἀρετὴν, vises them not to esteem virtue according
ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἔργῳ καὶ δυνάμει ἡγεῖσθαι. ἔπειτα to word, but according to deed and power.
ἐπιτιμήσας τῷ τὴν μητρυιὰν λαβόντι, καὶ Now, having rebuked the man who was
παραινέσας μὴ ἔχειν κρίματα πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς, living with his stepmother and exhorted
λοιπὸν περὶ ὧν ἔγραψαν ἀποκρίνεται· περὶ them not to go to law against one another,
μὲν τοῦ γάμου διδάσκων ἄῤῥηκτον εἶναι he replies to what they wrote. About mar-
τὴν συζυγίαν, καὶ ἐν καιρῷ μόνῳ σχολάζειν riage, he teaches that the union is not to be
διὰ τὴν εὐχήν· διὰ δὲ τὸ ἀγαπᾶν αὐτοὺς broken, and that abstinence should be for
τὴν ἐγκράτειαν, γράφει περὶ παρθενίας, a certain time only, for the sake of prayer.
ὅτι οὐ κατ᾽ ἀνάγκην, ἀλλὰ πειθοῖ τοῦτο Because they love chastity, he writes to
γινέσθω. εἶτα περὶ τῶν εἰδωλοθύτων, ἵνα them on virginity, that it should be not by
μὴ καταχρῶνται τῇ γνώσει, ἀλλὰ τῇ ἀγάπῃ force, but by conviction. Then he writes
πολιτεύωνται. κωλύει οὖν τὰ ἐν εἰδωλείῳ about food offered to idols in order that
συμπόσια, ἵνα μὴ σκανδαλίζωνται οἱ μικροί. they should not misuse their knowledge,
εἶτα περὶ τῶν πνευματικῶν χαρισμάτων but be governed by love. He forbids there-
γράφει, ἵνα μὴ διαφέρωνται ἐν τοῖς fore the feasts in the temples so that the
χαρίσμασιν, μηδὲ προκρίνωσι τὸν ἔχοντα weak will not be offended. Then he writes
χάρισμα τόδε τοῦ ἔχοντος τόδε· πάντα about spiritual gifts, that they may not con-
γὰρ τοῦ αὐτοῦ πνεύματος εἶναι λέγει. καὶ tend for them or prefer someone who has a
λοιπὸν περὶ ἀναστάσεως διδάσκει, ὅτι particular gift to someone who has another.
ἡ σὰρξ ἐγείρεται, ἀποθνήσκουσα μὲν For everything comes from the same Spirit,
φθαρτὴ, ἐγειρομένη δὲ ἄφθαρτος κατὰ τὴν he says. And now he teaches about resur-
χάριν τοῦ Χριστοῦ· τὴν δὲ ἀνάστασιν ἀπὸ rection, that the body is raised, corruptible
τοῦ ἐγηγέρθαι τὸν Χριστὸν συνίστησιν. when it dies but incorruptible when it rises
καὶ τέλος παραινετικοὺς λόγους εἰς τὰ through the grace of Christ. But resurrec-
ἤθη γράφει, καὶ περὶ λογίας, τῆς εἰς τοὺς tion he derives from the raising of Christ.
ἁγίους, παραγγέλλει· καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ And in the end he writes exhortative words
τὴν ἐπιστολήν. in order to strengthen the morals, and he
gives instructions about the collection for
the saints. And thus he ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς Argument of the the Second

ɀϮч϶͋ϭϮϧϫϦцϭϱ϶ $o# Letter to the Corinthians

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Μακεδονιας· He sends this one from Macedonia.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: The Cor-
δεξάμενοι Κορίνθιοι τὴν προτέραν inthians were distressed after they had re-
ἐπιστολὴν κατενύγησαν ἐπὶ τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ τοῦ ceived the previous letter, because of the sin
λαβόντος τὴν μητρυιὰν, καὶ ἐλυπήθησαν of him who had lived with his stepmother,
δὲ, ὡς παριδόντες τὸ τοιοῦτον ἁμάρτημα. and they were grieved because they had
εἶτα ὑφηρπάζοντο παρά τινων, καὶ τὰς overlooked such an error. Then, they were
προφάσεις τῶν σχισμάτων ποιούντων, also carried away by those who had caused
ὥστε παρακαθέζεσθαι τῷ γράμματι τοῦ the divisions, to sit down beside the letter
νόμου, καὶ ἀδιάφορον ἡγεῖσθαι τὴν παρὰ of the Law, consider the grace from Christ
τοῦ Χριστοῦ χάριν, καὶ μᾶλλον προσέχειν unimportant, and rather attend people
τοῖς ἐν προσώπῳ καυχωμένοις· ἦσαν δὲ who boast of their appearance. There were
καὶ περὶ τῆς λογίας τῆς εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους also some who were concerned about the
φροντίζοντες καλῶς. πρὸς ταῦτα οὖν collection to the saints. To these things, the
ἀντιγράφει ὁ ἀπόστολος. Apostle answers in writing.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται τοὺς And first, he praises them for expelling the
ἐκβαλόντας τὸν παρανομήσαντα. ἔπειτα transgressor. Then he beseeches them to
ἀξιώσασιν αὐτοῖς καθικετεύει, καὶ deem him worthy, and he orders them to
μετανοήσαντα ἐκεῖνον κελεύει δεχθῆναι. ἐν receive him when he has repented. In this
αὐτῇ δὲ διδάσκει περὶ τοῦ νόμου διαιρῶν τὸ letter he teaches them about the Law by
γράμμα, καὶ δείκνυσιν, ὅτι οὐ δεῖ λαμβάνειν interpreting the letter. And he shows that
τὰ γράμματα μόνον τοῦ νόμου, ἀλλὰ ἐν one should not only understand the letters
αὐτῷ τῷ γράμματι τὴν διάνοιαν ἐρευνᾶν· of the Law, but also search after the mean-
οὐ γὰρ μόνον ῥῆμά ἐστιν ὁ νόμος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ing by use of the letter. For the Law is not
τοῖς ῥητοῖς ἐστι καὶ ὁ νοῦς τοῦ πνεύματος. only words, but in the words is the purpose
ἔπειτα ὅτι τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐλθόντος καινὴ of the Spirit. Then, [he says] that because
κτίσις γέγονε, καὶ οὐ δεῖ κατὰ τὸ παλαιὸν Christ has come, there is a new creation,
ζῇν, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἐν καινῇ κτίσει ἐν πᾶσιν and one should not live after the old order,
ἀνανεοῦσθαι, καὶ ἀργὴν εἶναι λοιπὸν τὴν but be renewed in everything as in a new
περιτομήν. ἀποδέχεται δὲ αὐτοὺς καὶ περὶ creation, and that circumcision from now
τῆς διακονίας, καὶ προτρέπεται μᾶλλον on is useless. He praises them also for the
αὐτὴν πλεονάζειν. αἰτιώμενος δὲ τοὺς ἐν collection and exhorts them to increase it
πρωσώπῳ καυχωμένους καταλέγει πάντα, even more. Accusing those who boast of
ἅπερ πέπονθε διὰ τὸν κύριον· καὶ τὰς their appearance, he recounts everything
ὀπτασίας διηγεῖται ἅσπερ ἑώρακεν εἴς τε he has suffered for the sake of the Lord. He
τὸν παράδεισον, καὶ εἰς τὸν τρίτον οὐρανὸν also describes the visions he saw, when he
ἁρπαγείς. εἶτα παραγγείλας μὴ ἁμαρτάνειν· was caught up to Paradise and the third
ἀλλὰ μετανοεῖν τοὺς ἁμαρτάνoντας, ἐν heaven. Then, having ordered that they
εὐχαριστίᾳ τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. should not sin and that sinners should re-
pent, he ends the letter with thanksgiving.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Γαλάτας Argument of the

ἐπιστολῆς (760BD) Letter to the Galatians

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης ἑωρακὼς He sends this letter from Rome, after he
αὐτοὺς ἤδη καὶ διδάξας· has seen and taught them.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: The Gala-
διδαχθέντες καλῶς οἱ Γαλάται παρὰ τοῦ tians were well taught by the Apostle, and
ἀποστόλου, καὶ πιστεύσαντες γνησίως they truly believed in Christ. After the
εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν, ἀποδημήσαντος τοῦ Apostle had left, they were led by some
ἀποστόλου, ὑφηρπάσθησαν παρά τινων people to be circumcised. When the Apos-
ὥστε περιτέμνεσθαι. ταῦτα τοίνυν μαθὼν tle now learns this, he writes to them.
ὁ ἀπόστολος γράφει πρὸς αὐτούς.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν μαρτυρεῖ αὐτοῖς, περὶ And first, he bears witness to their faith
ἧς εἶχον πίστεως, καὶ γνησίας ἐν Χριστῷ and their true conviction of Christ. But he
διαθέσεως· μέμφεται δὲ ὡς ἀνοήτως rebukes them for acting unwisely and for
πράξαντας, καὶ μεταβαλλομένους αὐτούς. changing their minds. Then he interprets
ἔπειτα διαλαμβάνει περὶ τοῦ νόμου, the Law and the faith of Abraham, and
καὶ τῆς κατὰ τὸν Ἀβραὰμ πίστεως, καὶ he shows on the basis of the Law and the
ἀποδείκνυσιν ἔκ τε τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῶν wives of Abraham, interpreting them alle-
γυναικῶν τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ, ἀλληγορήσας gorically, that the shadow and the circum-
αὐτὰς, μέχρι καιροῦ δεδόσθαι τὴν σκιὰν cision were given until a certain time, and
καὶ τὴν περιτομὴν, καὶ ἀργεῖν αὐτὰ λοιπὸν that they since the coming of Christ are
τῇ τοῦ Χριστοῦ παρουσίᾳ. καὶ οὕτως useless. And having shown this, he orders
ἀποδείξας, παραγγέλλει λοιπὸν αὐτοῖς, them from now on no longer to listen to
μηκέτι προσέχειν τοῖς ἀπαντήσασιν, ἀλλὰ those who have come to them, but rather
μᾶλλον ἔχεσθαι τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ πίστεως, to have faith in Christ, and to know that
καὶ γιγνώσκειν, ὅτι ἡ ἐν Χριστῷ χάρις the grace in Christ makes circumcision ac-
καταργεῖ τὴν κατὰ σάρκα περιτομήν. καὶ cording to the flesh useless. Having again
οὕτως πάλιν εἰς τὰ ἤθη παραινέσας, καὶ exhorted and taught in order to strenghten
διδάξας, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. the morals, he thus ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Argument of the

ͽϲϣϯцϭϱ϶ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ $o" Letter to the Ephesians

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης, οὔπω μὲν He sends this letter from Rome, while he
ἑωρακὼς αὐτοὺς, ἀκούσας δὲ περὶ αὐτῶν. has not yet seen them, but heard about
them.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: The
Ἐφέσιοι πιστεύσαντες εἰς τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ephesians had come to believe in our Lord
Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν, γνησίαν ἔσχον εἰς αὐτὸν Jesus Christ. They truly had faith in Him
τὴν πίστιν καὶ εἰς πάντας τοὺς ἁγίους τὴν and love for all the saints, and they want-
ἀγάπην, καὶ ἠβούλοντο παρὰ τοῦ Παύλου ed to be strengthened by Paul. When the
βεβαιωθῆναι. μαθὼν τοίνυν ὁ ἀπόστολος, Apostle now learns this, he writes this letter
γράφει πρὸς αὐτοὺς ταύτην τὴν ἐπιστολὴν to them as a catechetical letter.
ὥσπερ κατηχητικήν.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν δείκνυσι μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι And first, he demonstrates that the mystery
τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον· ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἀρχῆς [that came] to us is not new, but existed
καὶ πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου εἶναι ταύτην from the beginning. And before the foun-
εὐδοκίαν τοῦ θεοῦ, ὥστε τὸν Χριστὸν ὑπὲρ dation of the world, it was the decision of
ἡμῶν παθεῖν καὶ ἡμᾶς σωθῆναι. ἔπειτα God that Christ should suffer for us, and
περὶ κλήσεως τῶν ἐθνῶν διαλέγεται, ἵνα that we should be saved. Then he discusses
δείξῃ ἀξίως αὐτοὺς πεπιστευκέναι. καὶ the call to the Gentiles to show that they are
ἀποδείκνυσιν, ὅτι ἡ κλῆσις ἡμῶν γέγονεν worthy of becoming believers. And he de-
οὐ δι᾽ ἀνθρώπου, ἀλλὰ διὰ Χριστοῦ, ὅς clares that our call has not come through a
ἐστιν υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ· ἵνα καὶ ἐκ τούτου man, but through Christ, who is the Son of
μάθωσιν, ὅτι οὐκ ἀνθρωπολάτραι God, so that they also from this may learn
γεγόνασιν, πιστεύσαντες τῷ Χριστῷ, that they as believers in Christ do not pay
ἀλλὰ ἀληθινοὶ θεοσεβεῖς. σημαίνει δὲ καὶ homage to a man, but that they truly wor-
ἑαυτὸν διὰ τοῦτο ἀπεστάλθαι, κηρύσσειν ship God. He informs them that for this
τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, καὶ ὅτι καὶ περὶ αὐτῶν reason, he has also been sent to preach the
ἐφρόντιζεν. ἔπειτα παραινετικοὺς λόγους gospel, and that he was concerned about
ἀνδράσι καὶ γυναιξὶ, πατράσι καὶ τέκνοις, them as well. Then, he places exhortative
κυρίοις καὶ δούλοις τίθησιν ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ, words in the letter, to husbands and wives,
καὶ καθόλου πάντας παρασκευάζει κατὰ to fathers and children, and to masters and
τοῦ διαβόλου καὶ τῶν δαιμόνων αὐτοῦ, slaves. And in general, he provides every-
λέγων πρὸς ἐκείνους ἡμῖν εἶναι τὴν πάλην· thing against the devil and his demons,
καὶ ὥσπερ ἀγαθὸς ἀλείπτης ἀλείψας stating that the fight is against them. And
τοῖς λόγοις πάντας κατὰ τῆς διαβολικῆς thus he ends the letter, as a good anointer,
ἐνεργείας, οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. having anointed everybody with his words
against the devilish power.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Φιλιππησίους Argument of the

ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ %o" Letter to the Philippians

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης ἑωρακὼς He sends this from Rome, after he has seen
αὐτοὺς ἅμα καὶ διδάξας· and also taught them.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: When the
πεμψάντων Φιλιππησίων διακονίαν τῷ Philippians had sent a collection to Paul,
Παύλῳ, καί τινων περιερχομένων καὶ some people were deceiving them and cor-
διαφθειρόντων τὰς ἀκοὰς τῶν ἀκεραίων, rupting the ears of the pure because of the
προφάσει τῆς σκιᾶς τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῆς shadow of the Law and circumcision, say-
περιτομῆς, καὶ λεγόντων χωρὶς ταύτης ing that they could not be justified without
μὴ δύνασθαι δικαιωθῆναι· μαθὼν ὁ them. When the Apostle learns this, he
ἀπόστολος γράφει Φιλιππησίοις. writes to the Philippians.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται αὐτῶν τὴν And first, he praises their faith and an-
πίστιν, καὶ σημαίνει μνημονεύειν αὐτῶν. nounces that he remembers them. Then
ἔπειτα διηγεῖται, ὡς ἀπελογήσατο ἐν he describes how he defended himself in
Ῥώμῃ, καὶ ὅτι τινὲς αὐτῷ βαρεῖς γεγόνασιν Rome and that some people became bur-
ἐν τοῖς δεσμοῖς, φθόνoν αὐτῷ κινοῦντες. densome in prison, provoking envy of him.
ἔπειτα αὐτοὺς προτρέπεται ἀλλήλους Then he exhorts them to love one another,
ἀγαπᾶν, ἐξηγούμενος τὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος explaining the Savior’s love for mankind,
φιλανθρωπίαν, ὅτι θεὸς ὢν ἄνθρωπος because, being God, He became a man for
γέγονεν δι᾽ ἡμᾶς. εἶτα περὶ τῆς περιτομῆς, our sake. Then, interpreting circumcision
καὶ τοῦ παλαιοῦ νόμου διαλαβὼν, and the old Law, he shows that circumci-
ἀποδείκνυσιν ἀργὴν γεγενῆσθαι λοιπὸν sion from now on is useless, using an ex-
τὴν περιτομὴν, λαμβάνων ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ ample from his own life, saying: ‘All these
παράδειγμα, καὶ λέγων· ὅτι ταῦτα πάντα things I counted as a loss for the sake of
ἥγημαι διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν ζημίαν. διὸ καὶ Christ.’ Therefore, having rebuked those
τοὺς μὲν διδάσκοντας ἔτι περιτομὴν καὶ who still teach about circumcision and
θέλοντας αὐτοὺς ἀπατῆσαι, μεμψάμενος, want to deceive them, saying that they are
καὶ εἰπὼν, ἐχθροὺς αὐτοὺς εἶναι τοῦ enemies of Christ, he praises the Philippi-
Χριστοῦ, ἀποδέχεται Φιλιππησίους διὰ ans for their gift of fellowship. And having
τὴν πρὸς αὐτὸν τῆς κοινωνίας δόσιν, καὶ again exhorted them in order to strength-
προτρεψάμενος πάλιν εἰς τὰ ἤθη αὐτοὺς, en the morals, he thus ends the letter.
τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Κολοσσαεῖς Argument of the Letter of

ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶͑ϟъϩϭϱ $o# Paul to the Colossians

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης, οὐχ He sends this letter from Rome, while he
ἑωρακὼς μὲν αὐτοὺς, ἀκούσας δὲ περὶ has not seen them, but heard about them.
αὐτῶν.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· τοὺς The occasion for the letter is this: Some
Κολοσσαεῖς ἠβούλοντό τινες ἠπατῆσαι people wanted to deceive the Colossians
σοφίσμασιν ἑλληνικοῖς κατὰ τῆς εἰς with Greek sophisms, directed against the
Χριστὸν πίστεως, καὶ περὶ τῶν ἐν νόμῳ faith in Christ, concerning food permitted
βρωμάτων καὶ περιτομῆς· ταῦτα τοίνυν in the Law and circumcision. When the
μαθὼν ὁ ἀπόστολος, γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολὴν Apostle now learns this, he writes this let-
ὥσπερ κατηχητικὴν αὐτοῖς ταύτην. ter to them as a catechetical letter.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν εὐχαριστῶν τῷ θεῷ, And first, as he gives thanks to God, he
σημαίνει ἀπὸ τοῦ σκότους αὐτοὺς announces that they have been translated
μεταβεβηκέναι εἰς τὸ φῶς τῆς ἀληθείας, from darkness to the light of truth, and
καὶ ὅτι ὁ Χριστὸς, εἰς ὃν ἐπίστευσαν, εἰκών that Christ, in whom they believe, is the
ἐστι τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ λόγος, δι᾽ οὗ τὰ πάντα image of God and His Word, through
ἐγένετο· καὶ ὅτι ἔπρεπεν αὐτὸν δημιουργὸν whom everything came into being. And
ὄντα, γενέσθαι αὐτὸν καὶ πρωτότοκον τῆς that it is fitting that He, being the Creator,
κτίσεως, καὶ πρωτότοκον ἐκ τῶν νεκρων, should become the first-born of the crea-
ἵνα τὰ ἀμφότερα συνάψῃ καὶ ζωοποιήσῃ tures and the first-born from the dead, so
τὰ πάντα. προέτρεπεν δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐμμένειν that He should unite both and give life to
τῇ πίστει, σημαίνων, ὅτι αὐτὸς ὁ Παῦλος everything. He exhorts them to remain in
διάκονός ἐστι τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, ἐν ᾧ the faith, announcing that he, Paul, is a
κατηχήθησαν. εἶτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ νόμου, καὶ servant of the Gospel, in which they were
τῶν ἐν αὐτῷ βρωμάτων, καὶ περὶ ἡμερῶν, instructed. Then he teaches about the
καὶ ἐνιαυτῶν ἐξηγεῖται, καὶ ἀποδείκνυσιν Law, and the foods it permits, and about
ἠργηκέναι λοιπὸν τὰ παλαιὰ καὶ τὴν days and years, and he shows that the old
περιτομὴν· συμβουλεύει τε αὐτοῖς μὴ things and the circumcision from now on
πλανᾶσθαι ἀπὸ τῶν σοφιζομένων, καὶ are useless. And he advises them not to be
πλανᾶν αὐτοὺς θελόντων. καὶ λοιπὸν deceived by the impostors and those who
παραινέσας, καὶ ὧδε γονεῦσι καὶ τέκνοις, wish to lead them astray. He exhorts and
ἀνδράσι καὶ γυναιξὶ, δούλοις καὶ κυρίοις, gives advice to parents and children, hus-
καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τὰ πρὸς τὰ ἤθη συμβουλεύσας, bands and wives, and slaves and masters,
τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. παραγγέλλει μέντοι and other things in order to strengthen
αὐτοῖς, ἵνα, ὅταν ἀναγνωσθῇ παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς UIFNPSBMTćVTIFFOETUIFMFUUFS:FU IF
ἡ ἐπιστολὴ, ποιήσωσι καὶ ἐν τῇ Λαοδικέων orders them that when this letter has been
ἐκκλησίᾳ αὐτὴν ἀναγνωσθῆναι, καὶ τὴν ἐκ read to them, they shall arrange that it also
Λαοδικείας καὶ αὐτοὺς ἀναγνῶναι. be read in the church of Laodicea, and that
they shall read the letter from Laodicea.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Argument of the First Letter of

Θεσσαλονικεῖς πρώτης Paul to the Thessalonians
ἐπιστολῆς Παύλου (769AC)

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ἀθηνῶν ἑωρακὼς He sends this from Athens, after he has
πρότερον αὐτοὺς, καὶ διατρίψας παρ᾽ seen them earlier and spent time with
αὐτοῖς· them.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· ὁ The occasion for the letter is this: The
ἀπόστολος πολλὰς θλίψεις παθὼν ἐν Apostle had suffered much affliction in
Βεροίᾳ καὶ ἐν Φιλίπποις τῆς Μακεδονίας Beroea, Philippi of Macedonia, and in
καὶ ἐν Κορίνθῳ, γινώσκων τε, ὅσα πέπονθεν Corinth, and knowing how much he suf-
καὶ ἐν Θεσσαλονίκῃ, φοβούμενος μὴ fered in Thessalonice, he fears that the
ἀκούσαντες Θεσσαλονικεῖς, ἃ πέπονθεν ἐν Thessalonians, when they hear about his
ταῖς προειρημέναις πόλεσιν, πειρασθῶσιν sufferings in the cities mentioned above,
ὑπὸ τοῦ πειράζοντος καὶ σκανδαλισθῶσιν· will be tempted by the tempter and take of-
μαθὼν δὲ ὅτι καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀποθνήσκουσι fence. And when he gets to know that they
κατώδυνοι ἐγίνοντο, ἀποστέλλει Τιμόθεον are mourning the dead, he sends Timothy
πρὸς αὐτοὺς μετὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς ταύτης. to them with this letter.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἐπιστηρίζει αὐτοὺς ἐν τῇ And first, he strengthens them in their
πίστει, ὥστε μὴ σαλεύεσθαι διὰ τὰς θλίψεις, faith so that they should not be shaken
καὶ μηδὲν ξένον αὐτοὺς πεπονθέναι because of persecutions, and he says that
ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων, τῶν καὶ τὸν κύριον it is not strange that they have suffered by
ἀποκτεινάντων· Χριστιανῶν γὰρ ἴδιον the hands of the Jews, who also killed the
τὸ θλίβεσθαι ἐν τῷ βίῳ τούτῳ, ἔλεγεν. Lord. For suffering persecution in this life
πολλὰ δὲ παραινέσας αὐτοὺς, οὕτως, ὡς is the hallmark of the Christians, he said.
παρέλαβον ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ, ἀναστρέφεσθαι, After he has exhorted them in many things
γράφει περὶ τῶν τελευτώντων, to behave as he instructed them, he writes
παραμυθοῦμενος αὐτοὺς καὶ διδάσκων μὴ about the dead, comforting them and
βαρέως φέρειν· οὐ γὰρ εἶναι τὸν θάνατον teaching them not to feel grief, as death
ἀπώλειαν, ἀλλ᾽ ὁδὸν ἀναστάσεως. ἔπειτα is not destruction, but the way to resur-
καὶ περὶ τῶν χρόνων αὐτοὺς διδάσκει, rection. Then he teaches them about the
ἵνα ἄδηλον τὴν ἡμέραν γινώσκοντες, ἀεὶ times, that they should understand that
ἕτοιμοι γίνωνται, καὶ μηδενὶ προσέχωσιν the day is unknown, and that they should
ἐπαγγελλομένῳ περὶ αὐτῆς· ἔσεσθαι γὰρ, always be prepared and never listen to
φησὶ, τὴν παρουσίαν οὕτως, ὥστε τοὺς anyone making promises about it. For the
περιλειπομένους καὶ εὑρισκομένους ἐν τῇ coming, he says, will happen so that those
ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, μὴ φθάνειν τοὺς ἐκ νεκρῶν who are alive and remain that day will not
ἐγειρομένους· ἅμα γὰρ γίνεσθαι τὴν come before those who are raised from the
πάντων ἀλλαγὴν διδάσκει. πρὸς τούτοις dead, because the transformation of all oc-
προτρέπων αὐτοὺς βελτιοῦσθαι ἐν τοῖς curs at the same time. In addition to this,
ἤθεσι προτρέπει αὐτοὺς καὶ ἀεὶ χαίρειν τῇ he exhorts them to improve morally and
ἐλπίδι καὶ προσεύχεσθαι καὶ εὐχαριστεῖν to always rejoice in hope, to pray and give
αὐτοὺς ἀεὶ τῷ κυρίῳ· ἐνορκίζων αὐτοὺς thanks to the Lord. He gives orders that
ἀναγνῶναι τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ταύτην πᾶσι τοῖς this letter should be read to all the breth-
ἀδελφοῖς· καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. ren. And thus he ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς Argument of the Second

δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς (772BD) Letter to the Thessalonians

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης· This he sends from Rome.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· τινὲς The occasion for the letter is this: Some idle
ἀπὸ Θεσσαλoνίκης ἀργοὶ καὶ ἄτακτοι, and unruly impostors from Thessalonice
περιερχόμενοι, τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς ὑφήρπαζον, were seducing them, saying that the com-
ὡς ἤδη τῆς παρουσίας τοῦ κυρίου ing was already imminent. They tried to
ἐνστάσης. ἠπάτων δὲ τοὺς ἀκούοντας, deceive the listeners, telling them that the
ὡς τοῦ ἀποστόλου τοῦτο δηλοῦντος καὶ Apostle had made this known, and that
ὑπὸ πνεύματος ἀκούσαντες. ταῦτα τοίνυν they had heard it from the Spirit. When
μαθὼν ὁ ἀπόστολος γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολήν. now the Apostle learns this, he writes the
letter.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται τὴν πίστιν And first, he praises their faith for progress-
αὐτῶν αὐξανουσαν, καὶ ὅτι ἐν αὐτoῖς ing and says that he glories in them, since
ἐκαυχᾶτο, τὰς θλίψεις γενναίως they in a worthy manner endure persecu-
ὑποφέρουσιν διὰ τὸν Χριστόν· tions for Christ’s sake. And he comforts
παραμυθεῖται δὲ αὐτοὺς, ὡς ἑπομένης them, saying that punishment from God
ἐκδικίας παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ κατὰ τῶν αὐτοὺς will follow upon those who harm them.
ἀδικούντων. ἔπειτα περὶ τῆς παρουσίας Then he teaches about the coming of the
τοῦ σωτῆρος διδάσκει μηδενὶ αὐτοὺς Savior, that they should not believe any-
πείθεσθαι, μηδὲ θροεῖσθαι αὐτοὺς, μήτε one, nor be frightened, neither by a spirit,
διὰ πνεύματος, μήτε ὡς αὐτοῦ γράψαντος, nor by a writing said to come from him;
μηδὲ ὅλως νομίζειν ἤδη παρεῖναι αὐτήν· they should not at all believe it is already
μὴ γὰρ πρότερον ἔσεσθαι αὐτὴν, ἐὰν μὴ ἡ at hand. For it will not happen unless the
ἀποστασία πρῶτον ἐλθῃ, καὶ μετὰ ταύτην defection has come first. And after that, he
ὁ ἀντίχριστος ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας, οὗ τὴν announces, Antichrist will come, the Son
παρουσίαν ἐν σημείοις καὶ τέρασι ψεύδους, of perdition, whose coming is with signs
κατ᾽ ἐνέργειαν2 τοῦ Σατανᾶ ἔσεσθαι and false wonders, wrought by the power
σημαίνει. εἶτα παραινέσας αὐτοῖς στήκειν of Satan. Then, having exhorted them to
γενναίως, καὶ κρατεῖν τὰς παραδόσεις ἃς stand in a worthy manner and to keep the
ἐδιδάχθησαν παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ, παραγγέλλει traditions, which they were taught from
μηδεμίαν κοινωνίαν ἔχειν μετὰ τῶν him, he orders them not to have any fel-
ἀτάκτων, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀποβάλλειν αὐτούς· lowship with the unruly, and even to expel
εἶναι γὰρ καὶ περιέργους καὶ πλάνους them. For he has shown that such people
ἐδήλωσε τοὺς τοιούτους· καὶ καθόλου are meddlesome and seductive. And in
δὲ παρήγγειλεν τὸν μὴ ὑπακούοντα τοῖς general, he ordered that he who did not
λόγοις αὐτοῦ, τοῦτον ἀποσυνάγωγον obey his words should be expelled from
γίνεσθαι. καὶ λοιπὸν ἐπευξάμενος αὐτοῖς the community. And now, having prayed
εἰρήνην, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολὴν, τὸν for peace on their behalf, he ends the letter,
ἀσπασμὸν τῇ ἰδίᾳ χειρὶ γράψας, ὅπερ having written the greeting with his own
σημεῖον εἶναι πάσης ἐπιστολῆς δεδήλωκεν. hand, which he declares to be a sign in ev-
ery letter.
2 Zacagni. καὶ ἐνέργειαν, von Soden.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Ἑβραίους Argument of the Letter of

ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶͑ϟъϩϭϱ $o" Paul to the Hebrews

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ἰταλίας· He sends this from Italy.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· ἐπειδὴ The occasion for the letter is this: Since the
οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἐνίσταντο τῷ νόμῳ, καὶ ταῖς Jews adhered to the Law and the shadows,
σκιαῖς, διὰ τοῦτο ὁ ἀπόστολος Παῦλος for this reason Paul the Apostle proclaimed
διδάσκαλος ἐθνῶν γενόμενος, καὶ εἰς τὰ the Gospel, having become the teacher of
ἔθνη ἀποσταλεὶς, κηρύττει τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, the Gentiles and having been sent to the
γράψας τε πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι, γράφει λοιπὸν Gentiles. Having written to all the Gentiles,
καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ἐκ περιτομῆς πιστεύσασιν now he writes also to all Hebrew believers
Ἑβραίοις ἀποδεικτικὴν ταύτην τὴν of the circumcision this letter as a demon-
ἐπιστολὴν περὶ τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ παρουσίας, strative letter about the coming of Christ
καὶ τοῦ πέπαυσθαι τὴν σκιὰν τοῦ νόμου. and the abolishment of the shadow of the
Law.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδείκνυσι τοὺς And first, he shows that the prophets were
προφήτας διὰ τοῦτο ἀπεστάλθαι, ἵνα sent to proclaim the Savior, and after them
περὶ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἀπαγγείλωσιν· καὶ He would come Himself. The prophets
μετ᾽ αὐτοὺς αὐτὸς ἔλθῃ. δούλους τε εἶναι were servants and harbingers of His com-
τοὺς προφήτας καὶ μηνυτὰς τῆς αὐτοῦ ing. And he shows that Christ himself is
παρουσίας· αὐτὸν δὲ τὸν Χριστὸν υἱὸν the Son of God, through whom everything
εἶναι τοῦ θεοῦ, δι᾽ οὗ τὰ πάντα γέγονε, came into being, and that He, the Son, had
καὶ ὅτι τοῦτον τὸν υἱὸν ἔδει ἄνθρωπον to become a man so that He could destroy
γενέσθαι, ἵνα διὰ τῆς τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ death through the sacrifice of his own body,
θυσίας καταργήσῃ τὸν θάνατον. οὐ γὰρ because salvation for men will not come
δι᾽ αἵματος μόσχου ἢ τράγου, ἀλλὰ δι᾽ through the blood of a calf or a goat, but
αἵματος Xριστοῦ ἔσεσθαι τὴν σωτηρίαν through the blood of Christ. And he shows
τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. ἀποδείκνυσι δὲ, ὅτι ὁ that the Law has not made anyone perfect,
νόμος οὐδένα ἐτελείωσεν, ἀλλὰ σκιὰν but contained a shadow of the good things
εἶχεν τῶν μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν· καὶ οὐ to come. The Jewish people did not find
κατέπαυσεν ὁ λαὸς, ἀλλὰ κοινὴ πᾶσιν ἡμῖν rest, but the day of rest, common to all of
ἀπολείπεται ἡ ἡμέρα τῆς καταπαύσεως. us, remains. Again, he shows that the office
πάλιν δὲ ἀποδείκνυσιν, ὅτι ἡ ἀρχιερατικὴ of the High Priest was translated from Aar-
λειτουργία μετετέθη ἀπὸ Ἀαρὼν εἰς τὸν on to Christ, whose type was Melchisedec,
Χριστὸν, οὗ τύπος ἦν ὁ Μελχισέδεκ, οὐκ ὢν who was not of the tribe of Levi. The fa-
ἐκ τοῦ Λευΐ. πίστει τε δεδικαιῶσθαι τοὺς thers were justified by faith, he announces,
πατέρας σημαίνει, καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου. not by the deeds of the Law. Then, again,
εἶτα πάλιν εἰς τὰ ἤθη προτρεψάμενος καὶ having exhorted also them for the sake of
τούτους, καὶ ἀποδεξάμενος αὐτῶν τὴν διὰ morals, praised their endurance because of
τὸν Xριστὸν ὑπομονὴν, καὶ πείσας τιμᾶν Christ, and persuaded them to honor the
τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. elders, he ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον Argument of the First

ɀϮьϰϥ϶ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ $o# Letter to Timothy

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Λαοδικείας· He sends this from Laodicea.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· ἐν τῇ The occasion for the letter is this: In Ephe-
Ἐφέσῳ τινὲς ἰουδαΐζοντες ἐπεχείρουν sus some Judaists tried to teach errors and
ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν, καὶ ἀπατᾶν τοὺς to deceive the pure, using the Law as a
ἀκεραίους προφάσει τοῦ νόμου· τοῦτο pretext. When the Apostle learns this, he
δὲ μαθὼν ὁ ἀπόστολος, προτρέπει τὸν persuades Timothy to stay there to correct
Τιμόθεον ἐκεῖ προσμεῖναι, πρὸς διόρθωσιν them, and he writes this letter.
αὐτῶν γράφει τε τὴν ἐπιστολήν.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ὑπομιμνήσκει Τιμόθεον, And first, he reminds Timothy, as he knows
εἰδότα τὴν ἐν Χριστῷ πίστιν, διδάσκων his faith in Christ, teaching him about the
αὐτὸν περὶ τοῦ νόμου, κωλύειν τοὺς Law, so that he should stop those who
παρὰ τὴν ὀρθὴν διδασκαλίαν λαλοῦντας, speak against the true teaching, and rebuke
ἐπιτιμᾶν τε αὐτοῖς. καὶ γὰρ καὶ αὐτὸς them. For he has himself delivered unto
Ὑμέναιον καὶ Ἀλέξανδρον ναυαγήσαντας Satan Hymenaeus and Alexander, since
περὶ τὴν πίστιν παραδέδωκε τῷ they suffered shipwreck concerning faith,
Σατανᾷ, ἵνα παιδευθῶσι μὴ βλασφημεῖν. that they may be chastened not to blas-
ταῦτα ὑπομνήσας, λοιπὸν διατάσσει pheme. Having reminded him of this, he
αὐτῷ κανόνας ἐκκλησιαστικοὺς περὶ then draws up church rules about prayer;
προσευχῆς, πῶς καὶ ποῦ καὶ περὶ τίνων δεῖ how, where and for whom one should
προσεύχεσθαι. περὶ τοῦ σιγᾶν ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ pray. About women, that they should be
τὰς γυναῖκας, καὶ μᾶλλον μανθάνειν, καὶ silent in the church, and rather learn than
μὴ διδάσκειν αὐτὰς. περὶ ἐπισκόπων teach. About the ordaining of bishops,
καὶ πρεσβυτέρων καὶ διακόνων, πῶς καὶ presbyters and deacons, and about the be-
ὁποίους εἶναι δεῖ τοὺς καθισταμένους. havior and qualities required of those who
περὶ τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ χηρῶν, ἀπὸ are appointed. About the widows in the
πόσων ἐτῶν χρὴ ταύτας καταλέγεσθαι, church, from what age they can be chosen,
καὶ ὁποίας αὐτὰς εἶναι δεῖ καὶ πῶς αὐταῖς which qualities are required of them, and
δεῖ προσέχειν. περὶ τοῦ σωφρονεῖν τοὺς how one should take care of them. About
νεωτέρους, καὶ γαμεῖν μᾶλλον, καὶ μὴ the younger men, that they should curb
αἰσχρῶς ζῇν, περὶ τοῦ παραγγέλλειν τοῖς their passions, rather marry, and not live
πλουσίοις μὴ ὑψηλοφρονεῖν, μηδὲ ἐλπίζειν shamefully. About charging the rich not to
ἐπὶ τῷ πλούτῳ. περὶ τούτων διαταξάμενος be high-minded and not to trust in riches.
προτρέπεται αὐτὸν ταῦτα διδάσκειν, Having drawn up these rules, he exhorted
καὶ μηκέτι μὲν ὑδροποτεῖν, προσέχειν him to teach according to them and to no
δὲ ἑαυτῷ, καὶ τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ, εἰδότα longer drink water, but to take care of him-
ἔσεσθαι καιροὺς, ἐν οἷς ἀποστήσονταί τι- self and the teaching, as he should know
νες τῆς πίστεως. διδάξας δὲ καθαρὰ εἶναι that there will be times when some will re-
καὶ τὰ βρώματα, καὶ παραγγείλας αὐτῷ nounce the faith. And, having taught that
ἐκτρέπεσθαι τὰς ἐμφιλονείκους ζητήσεις, all foods are pure, he ordered him to avoid
ὡς βεβήλους οὔσας, ἐφ᾽ αἷς καί τινες the unholy, seditious inquiries. In their
καυχώμενοι παρέβησαν τὴν πίστιν, τελειοῖ boasting of these, some people trespassed
τὴν ἐπιστολήν. against faith. Thus he ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον Argument of the

δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς (784BD) Second Letter to Timothy

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει πάλιν ἀπὸ Ῥώμης· Once again from Rome, he sends this letter.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: Because
τῶν συναποδημησάντων τῷ Παύλῳ Paul’s fellow travellers had left him and the
καταλειψάντων αὐτὸν, βουλόμενος αὐτὸς Apostle himself wanted Timothy to come
ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐλθεῖν Τιμόθεον πρὸς αὐτὸν, to him, he writes the letter.
γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολήν.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν σημαίνει ἑαυτὸν And first, he announces that he remem-
μνημονεύειν αὐτοῦ τε τῆς εὐλαβείας, καὶ bers his devotion and the faith of his an-
τῆς τῶν προγόνων αὐτοῦ πίστεως. ἔπειτα cestors. Then he makes known that those
δηλοῖ, ὅτι οἱ ἀπὸ τῆς Ἀσίας, ὧν ἐστι from Asia, among others Phygellus and
Φύγελλος καὶ Ἑρμογένης, ἀπεστράφησαν Hermogenes, turned away from him when
αὐτὸν, ὁρῶντες αὐτοῦ τὰς ἁλύσεις· they saw his chains. Only to the great zeal
μόνῳ δὲ Ὀνησιφόρῳ μαρτυρεῖ σπουδὴν of Onesiphorus does he bear witness. And
πλείστην, καὶ τοῦτον ἀπεδέξατο ἐλθόντα when he [Onesiphorus] came to Rome, he
εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην καὶ προσμείναντα αὐτῷ. received Onesiphorus, and he had stayed
παραγγέλλει δὲ αὐτῷ παραιτεῖσθαι with him. And he commands him to dis-
τὰς μωρὰς ζητήσεις, διὰ τὸ ἐξ αὐτῶν approve foolish inquiries, as they cause
γεννᾶσθαι μάχας. καὶ γὰρ Ὑμέναιος καὶ strife. For Hymenaeus and Philetus were
Φίλητος, οὕτως ἐκτραπέντες, παρέβησαν thus diverted and offended against truth,
τὴν ἀλήθειαν, λέγοντες ἀνάστασιν ἤδη saying that the resurrection had already
γεγονέναι, καί τινας ἀνατρέπουσι. μᾶλλον taken place. And they are subverting some.
οὖν παραινεῖ αὐτῷ προσέχειν ἑαυτῷ Therefore, he advises him rather to take
καὶ τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ, καὶ εἰδέναι μὲν, ὅτι care of himself and the teaching, and to
ἐν ἐσχάτοις καιροῖς ἔσονται ἄνθρωποι know that in the last days men will be self-
φίλαυτοι, καὶ φιλήδονοι μᾶλλον ἢ φιλόθεοι· loving, lovers of pleasure more than lovers
προβλέποντα δὲ ταῦτα, ἀσφαλίζεσθαι of God. And he advises him to foresee this
τοὺς λαοὺς, μή τις ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀπατηθῇ. καὶ and to strengthen the people, so that not
εἰς τὰ ἤθη δὲ, καὶ εἰς τὴν τῆς διδασκαλίας one of them will be deceived. And having
ἀκρίβειαν πολλὰ προτρεψάμενος αὐτὸν, exhorted extensively in order to strength-
καὶ σημάνας τὸν καιρὸν τῆς ἀναλύσεως en the morals and to make the teaching
αὐτοῦ ἐνστῆναι, καὶ μέλλειν σπένδεσθαι perfect, and announced that the time of
καὶ μαρτυρεῖν, ἐνετείλατο αὐτῷ ἐλθεῖν his death is close at hand and that he will
πρὸς αὐτὸν ταχέως, κομίζοντα τὴν be offered and die as a martyr, he ordered
φελόνην καὶ τὰ βιβλία. παρῄνεσε δὲ αὐτῷ him to come promptly to him, bringing the
Ἀλέξανδρον τὸν χαλκέα φυλάττεσθαι, ὡς cloak and the books. And he advised him
πολλὰ κακὰ ἐνδειξάμενον αὐτῷ· καὶ οὕτως to be on his guard against Alexandros the
τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. coppersmith, as he is shown to have done
him much evil. And thus he ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Τίτον Argument of the

ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ $o" Letter to Titus

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Νικοπόλεως, ἐκεῖ He sends this from Nicopolis, since he
γὰρ παρεχείμαζεν· spent the winter there.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· εἰς The occasion for the letter is this: He left
μὲν τὴν Κρήτην ἀπέλιπεν τὸν Τίτον, Titus in Crete, to ordain clerics in every
ἵνα καταστήσῃ κατὰ πόλεις κληρικούς. city. But there, many tried to deceive the
πολλῶν δὲ ὄντων ἐκεῖ τῶν ἐπιχειρούντων people, using the Law as a pretext. When
προφάσει τοῦ νόμου ἀπατᾶν τοὺς λαοὺς, the Apostle learns this, he writes.
μαθὼν ὁ ἀπόστολος, γράφει·
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν εὐχαριστῶν τῷ θεῷ διὰ And first, giving thanks to God for his de-
τὴν αὐτοῦ εὐλάβειαν, σημαίνει τὴν ἐν votion, he announces that faith in Christ is
Χριστῷ πίστιν μὴ νεωτέραν εἶναι, ἀλλ᾽ not something new, but was prepared and
ἐξ αἰῶνος ἡτοιμάσθαι, καὶ ἐπηγγέλθαι promised by God before the world began.
παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ταύτην. ἔπειτα περὶ τῆς Then [he writes] about the ordaining of
καταστάσεως τῶν κληρικῶν, καὶ τοῦτον clerics, and he teaches him about the be-
διδάσκει, πῶς, καὶ ὁποίους αὐτοὺς εἶναι havior and qualities required of them. And
δεῖ· καὶ ἐπιτιμᾶν δὲ ἐντέλλεται αὐτῷ τοῖς he orders him to rebuke those who speak
ἀντιλέγουσι τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ πίστει, μάλιστα against the sound faith, especially those
τοῖς ἐκ περιτομῆς· εἰδέναι τε τοὺς Κρῆτας, of the circumcision, and he [wants him]
ὅτι ἀργοί εἰσιν, καὶ χρῄζουσιν ἐπιτιμίας. to know the Cretians, that they are idle
διδάξας δὲ πάντα τὰ βρώματα καθαρὰ and need rebuke. Having taught that all
εἶναι τοῖς καθαροῖς, καὶ ὁποίας εἶναι δεῖ τὰς foods are pure to the pure, and about the
πρεσβύτιδας, τὰς ὀφειλούσας σωφρονίζειν qualities required of the aged women, who
τὰς νέας, παραινεῖ, πῶς δεῖ τοὺς δούλους should correct the younger, he gives ex-
τοῖς ἰδίοις δεσπόταις ὑπηρετεῖν. καὶ τέλος hortations on how slaves should serve their
ὑπομνήσας, ὅτι ἡ τοῦ σωτῆρος χάρις οὐκ masters. And finally, having reminded him
ἐξ ἔργων ἡμᾶς ἐδικαίωσεν, ἀλλὰ τῇ ἰδίᾳ that the grace of the Savior has not justified
φιλανθρωπίᾳ, καὶ παραγγείλας τὰς νομικὰς us by deeds, but by His own love of man-
μάχας ἐκτρέπεσθαι, ὡς ἀναισχύντους kind, and having commanded him to turn
οὔσας, δηλοῖ αὐτῷ, μετὰ τὸ πέμψαι πρὸς away from contentions about the Law, as
αὐτὸν Ἀρτεμᾶν, ἵνα ἔλθῃ πρὸς αὐτὸν· they are shameless, he orders him to come
ἐνετείλατο τε αὐτῷ, ὥστε διδάσκειν καὶ after he has sent Artemas to him. And he
τοὺς αὐτοῦ καλῶν ἔργων προΐστασθαι· καὶ also commanded him that he should teach
οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. his co-workers as well to maintain good
works. And thus he ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Argument of the

Φιλήμονα ἐπιστολῆς (788CD) Letter to Philemon

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης· He sends this letter from Rome.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: Onesi-
Ὀνήσιμος ὁ οἰκέτης Φιλήμονος ἔφυγε, καὶ mus, the slave of Philemon, had escaped,
ἀπελθὼν πρὸς τὸν ἀπόστολον, κατηχήθη and he went to the Apostle, was instructed
παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ, καὶ γέγονεν αὐτῷ χρήσιμος by him and became useful to him for ser-
εἰς διακονίαν. vice.
[Summary] [Summary]
περὶ τούτου τοίνυν γράφει Φιλήμονι, About this man he now writes to Phile-
παρατιθέμενος αὐτῷ τὸν Ὀνήσιμον, ἵνα mon, commending Onesimus to him, that
προσέχῃ αὐτῷ γνησίως, καὶ μηκέτι ἔχῃ he should receive him in a noble manner
αὐτὸν ὡς δοῦλον, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἀδελφόν. and no longer as a slave, but as a brother.

πρoετρέψατo δὲ αὐτὸν καὶ ξενίαν αὐτῷ And [Paul] requests him to prepare lodg-
ἑτοιμάσαι, ἵνα, ἐὰν ἔλθῃ, εὕρῃ πoυ μείνῃ· ing for him, so that if he comes, he will find
καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. a place to stay. And thus he ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς καθολικῆς Argument of the

ΚϟϨьϠϭϱГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ #o" Catholic Letter of James

ἐπειδὴ αὐτὸς Ἰάκωβος ταύτην γράφει τοῖς Because James himself writes this to those
ἀπὸ τῶν δώδεκα φυλῶν διασπαρεῖσι, καὶ of the scattered twelve tribes who believed
πιστεύσασιν εἰς τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν in our Lord Jesus Christ. And he writes it
Χριστόν. γράφει δὲ διδασκαλικὴν τὴν as a didactic letter.
ἐπιστολὴν,
[Summary] [Summary]
διδάσκων περὶ διαφορᾶς πειρασμῶν, Teaching about different temptations, what
ποῖος μέν ἐστιν ἀπὸ θεοῦ, ποῖος δὲ ἀπὸ kind of temptation comes from God, and
τῆς ἰδίας καρδίας τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἐστίν. what kind comes from the heart of men.
καὶ οὐ λόγῳ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔργῳ δεῖ And that one should show faith not only
δεικνύναι τὴν πίστιν· καὶ οὐχ οἱ ἀκροαταὶ in word, but also in deed, and that the do-
τοῦ νόμου, ἀλλ᾽ οἱ ποιηταὶ δικαιοῦνται. ers of the Law are justified, not the hearers.
περί τε τῶν πλουσίων παραγγέλλει, About the rich he orders that they should
ἵνα μὴ προκρίνωνται τῶν πτωχῶν not be preferred in the churches to the
ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις, ἀλλὰ καὶ μᾶλλον poor. Rather, they should be rebuked for
ἐπιπλήττωνται, ὡς ὑπερήφανοι· καὶ τέλος being arrogant. And finally, having com-
παραμυθησάμενος τοὺς ἀδικουμένους καὶ forted those who are treated unjustly and
προτρεψάμενος αὐτοὺς μακροθυμεῖν ἕως exhorted them to be patient until the com-
τῆς παρουσίας τοῦ κριτοῦ, καὶ διδάξας ing of the Judge, and having taught about
περὶ ὑπομονῆς καὶ δείξας ἐκ τοῦ Ἰὼβ τὸ endurance and illustrated the virtue of en-
χρηστὸν τῆς ὑπομονῆς, παραγγέλλει durance, using Job as an example, he com-
προσκαλεῖσθαι τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους mands them to call the elders to the sick,
ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας, καὶ σπεύδειν and to be eager to convert those who have
ἐπιστρέφειν τοὺς πλανηθέντας ἐπὶ τὴν erred from the truth, because the reward
ἀλήθειαν· εἶναι γὰρ τούτου μισθὸν παρὰ from the Lord for this is forgiveness of sins.
τοῦ κυρίου ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν· καὶ οὕτως And thus he ends the letter.
τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Πέτρου Argument of the

πρώτης ἐπιστολῆς (680AB) First Letter of Peter

ἐπειδὴ ὁ Πέτρος αὐτὸς τοῖς ἐν τῇ Because Peter himself writes this as a di-
διασπορᾷ οὖσιν Ἰουδαίοις καὶ γενομένοις dactic letter to Jews in the Diaspora who
Χριστιανοῖς γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολὴν have become Christians. He strengthens
διδασκαλικήν. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ Ἰουδαίων them, since they are believers of Jewish
ἐπίστευσαν, ἐπιστηρίζει αὐτοὺς. origin.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἐξηγεῖται καὶ ἀποδείκνυσιν, And first, he explains and shows that faith
ὅτι ἡ εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν πίστις ἀπὸ τῶν in Christ was announced by the prophets,
προφητῶν κατηγγέλη, καὶ δι᾽ αὐτῶν that the redemption through his blood
ἐμηνύθη ἡ διὰ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ was revealed through them, and that all
λύτρωσις, καὶ ὅτι αὐτοῖς καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν things that the angels desire to look into
εὐηγγελίσθη τὰ πάντα, εἰς ἃ ἐπιθυμοῦσιν have been proclaimed to them and to the
ἄγγελοι παρακύψαι. εἶτα συμβουλεύσας Gentiles. Then, having advised them to
ἀξίως τοῦ καλέσαντος ἀναστρέφεσθαι, behave in a manner worthy of Him who
προτρέπει καὶ βασιλέας τιμᾶν· γυναιξί τε called them, he exhorts them also to honor
καὶ ἀνδράσιν ὁμοφροσύνην παραγγέλλει, kings. He commands both wives and hus-
καὶ εἰς τὰ ἤθη παραινέσας ὀλίγα, σημαίνει bands to be in agreement. And having
ὅτι καὶ εἰς ᾅδην γέγονε παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου given some exhortations for the sake of
τὸ κήρυγμα τῆς σωτηρίας καὶ ἀναστάσεως, morals, he announces that the message of
ἵνα καὶ οἱ προαποθανόντες ἀναστῶσι καὶ salvation and resurrection from the Lord
κριθῶσι μὲν ἐν τῷ σώματι, τῇ δὲ χάριτι τῆς has reached even the nether world, so that
ἀναστάσεως διαμένωσι. καὶ ὅτι τὸ τέλος also they who have died before will rise
πάντων λοιπὸν ἤγγισε, καὶ ὀφείλουσιν and be judged with their bodies, and they
ἅπαντες ἕτοιμοι γίνεσθαι, ὡς λόγον will last through the grace of resurrection.
ἀποδιδόντες τῷ κριτῇ· καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ [And he says] that the end of all things has
τὴν ἐπιστολήν. now drawn close, and everybody must be
ready to account to the Judge. And thus he
ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Πέτρου Argument of the

ϢϣϱϰтϮϟ϶ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ #o" Second Letter of Peter

ἐπειδὴ καὶ ταύτην πάλιν ὁ αὐτὸς Πέτρος Because again the same Peter sends this to
ἐπιστέλλει τοῖς ἤδη πιστεύσασιν· ἔστι those who already were believers. The let-
δὲ ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ὑπόμνησις τῶν πρώτων. ter is a reminder of primary subjects. He
εἰδὼς γὰρ ταχεῖαν αὐτοῦ ἔσεσθαι τὴν was eager to remind them of the teaching
ἀνάλυσιν τοῦ σώματος, ἐσπούδασε πάντας in which they had been instructed, be-
ὑπομνῆσαι, περὶ ὧν κατηχήθησαν τὴν cause he knew that his body would soon
διδασκαλίαν. be destroyed.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν περὶ τῆς πίστεως ἐξηγεῖται, And first, he explains about faith, showing
δεικνὺς ἀπὸ τῶν προφητῶν αὐτὴν that it was announced beforehand by the
εὐηγγελίσθαι, καὶ ὅτι αἱ προφητεῖαι αἱ prophets, and that the prophecies about
περὶ τοῦ σωτῆρος, οὐκ εἰσὶν ἀνθρώπιναι, the Savior were not human, but spoken by
ἀλλὰ παρὰ θεοῦ ἐλαλήθησαν. ἔπειτα God. Then he orders [them] not to listen to
παραγγέλλει μὴ προσέχειν τοῖς ἀπατῶσι, the impostors, saying that they will perish,
λέγων ἔσεσθαι αὐτῶν ἀπώλειαν, ὥσπερ as also happened to the trespassing angels.
καὶ τῶν παραβάντων ἀγγέλων γέγονε. And he predicts in the letter that days will
προμηνύει δὲ ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ ἡμέρας come when mockers shall walk around
ἔσεσθαι, ἐν αἷς ἐμπαῖκται περιπατήσουσι and wish to deceive some by saying that
καὶ θελήσουσιν ἀπατᾶν τινας λέγοντες, our prediction of the coming of the Savior
μάτην λέγεσθαι παρ᾽ ἡμῶν τὴν παρουσίαν is in vain, because ‘it is always predicted,
τοῦ σωτῆρος, διὰ τὸ ἀεὶ λέγεσθαι, καὶ but it has not yet happened.’ Therefore, he
μήπω παραγεγενῆσθαι. ἀπὸ τούτων οὖν orders them to stay away from such people
καὶ μάλιστα ἀπέχεσθαι παραγγέλλει, in particular, teaching them not to reckon
διδάσκων μὴ ὀλιγωρεῖν ἐν τοῖς χρόνοις· with a short amount of time, since all time
πάντα γὰρ τὸν χρόνον μηδὲν εἶναι ἐνώπιον is nothing before the Lord, one day being
κυρίου, διὰ τὸ καὶ μίαν ἡμέραν ὡς χίλια as a thousand years, and a thousand years
ἔτη· εἶναι καὶ τὰ χίλια ἔτη ὡς ἡμέραν being as one day. But he confirms and
μίαν. ἔσεσθαι δὲ καὶ ταχέως τὴν ἡμέραν shows that the day of the Lord will come
κυρίου διαβεβαιοῦται, καὶ ἀποδείκνυσιν, soon, and he commands everybody to be
καὶ ἐντέλλεται ἑτοίμους τε εἶναι εἰς αὐτὴν ready for it with good works, and to love
ἔργοις ἀγαθοῖς, καὶ ἀγαπᾶν τὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ the writings of the Apostle, not paying
ἀποστόλου γραφέντα, καὶ μὴ προσέχειν heed to those who slander them, because
τοῖς διαβάλλουσιν αὐτὰ, διὰ τὸ καὶ πάσας they slander all divine scriptures as well.
τὰς θείας γραφὰς διαβάλλειν αὐτούς. Having then reminded and taught every-
ὑπομνήσας οὖν καὶ διατάξας πάντας one to have foreknowledge of the things
προειδέναι τὰ πράγματα, παραινεῖ μὴ to come, he exhorts them not to lose the
ἐκπίπτειν τοῦ σκοποῦ τῆς πίστεως. καὶ mark of faith. And thus he ends the letter.
οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Ἰωάννου πρώτης Argument of

ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ #o# First Letter of John

ἐπειδὴ αὐτὸς ὁ Ἰωάννης, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον Because John himself, the author of the
γράψας, αὐτὸς καὶ ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει, gospel, sends this, reminding those who
ὑπομιμνήσκων τοὺς ἤδη πιστεύσαντας εἰς were already believers in the Lord.
τὸν κύριον.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ, And first, as in the gospel, so also in this
οὕτως καὶ ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ ἐπιστολῇ θεολογεῖ letter, he describes the Word as divine,
περὶ τοῦ λόγου, ἀποδεικνὺς αὐτὸν ἀεὶ showing that it was always in God and
εἶναι ἐν τῷ θεῷ, καὶ διδάσκων τὸν πατέρα teaching that the Father is light, so that
φῶς εἶναι, ἵνα καὶ οὕτως γνῶμεν, τὸν we also in this way should know that the
λόγον, ὡς ἀπαύγασμα, ἐξ αὐτοῦ εἶναι. Word, like a reflection, is from Him. And
θεολογῶν δὲ ἐξηγεῖται μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι describing the Word as divine, he explains
τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον· ἀλλ᾽ εξ ἀρχῆς that the mystery that [has come] to us is
μὲν καὶ ἀεὶ τυγχάνειν αὐτὸν· νῦν δὲ not something new, but that He was from
πεφανερῶσθαι ἐν τῷ κυρίῳ, ὅστις ἐστὶ ζωὴ the beginning and will always be. And now
αἰώνιος καὶ θεὸς ἀληθινός. καὶ τὸ αἴτιον he has been revealed in the Lord, who is
δὲ τῆς αὐτοῦ παρουσίας καὶ ἐπιφανείας eternal life and true God. And he gives
αὐτοῦ τίθησι, λέγων εἶναι τοῦτο ἐπὶ τῷ the reason for his coming and manifesta-
καταλῦσαι τὰ ἔργα τοῦ διαβόλου, καὶ tion, saying that it happened to destroy the
ἡμᾶς ἐλευθερῶσαι ἀπὸ τοῦ θανάτου, καὶ works of the devil, to free us from death
γινώσκειν ἡμᾶς τὸν πατέρα, καὶ τὸν υἱὸν and make us know the Father and Himself,
αὐτοῦ τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν. the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. He writes,
γράφει γοῦν πρὸς πᾶσαν ἡλικίαν, πρὸς therefore, to men of every age, to children,
παιδία, πρὸς νεανίσκους, πρὸς γέροντας, to young and old men, that God has be-
ὅτι ὁ μὲν θεὸς ἐγνώσθη, ἡ δὲ διαβολικὴ come known, and that the devilish power
ἐνέργεια λοιπὸν νενίκηται, καταργηθέντος is vanquished, since death has been abol-
τoῦ θανάτου. εἶτα λοιπὸν δι᾽ ὅλης τῆς ished. Then, for the whole of the remain-
ἐπιστολῆς περὶ ἀγάπης διδάσκει, θέλων ing letter, he teaches about love, wanting us
ἡμᾶς ἀλλήλους ἀγαπᾶν, καὶ ἀποδεικνὺς, to love one another, and showing that we
ὅτι δεῖ ἀλλήλους ἀγαπᾶν, ἐπειδὴ καὶ ὁ ought to love one another because Christ
Χριστὸς ἠγάπησεν ἡμᾶς. ἐξηγεῖται οὖν also has loved us. Further, he explains the
περὶ διαφορᾶς φόβου καὶ ἀγάπης, καὶ difference between love and fear, the chil-
τέκνων θεοῦ καὶ τέκνων διαβόλου, καὶ περὶ dren of God and the children of the devil,
ἁμαρτίας θανατικῆς καὶ μὴ θανατικῆς, καὶ about deadly sins and those that are not
διαφορᾶς πνευμάτων· καὶ λοιπὸν διαιρεῖ, deadly, and about the difference between
ποῖον μὲν πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστι, ποῖον the spirits. And now he makes distinc-
δὲ τῆς πλάνης· καὶ ποτὲ μὲν γινωσκόμεθα tions: between the kind of spirit that is
τέκνα θεοῦ, ποτὲ δὲ διαβόλου· καὶ περὶ from God and the kind of spirit that comes
ποίας ἁμαρτίας ὀφείλομεν εὔχεσθαι ὑπὲρ from deception, between the times we are
τῶν ἁμαρτανόντων, καὶ περὶ ποίας οὐ δεῖ known as children of God and the times
εὔχεσθαι· καὶ ὅτι ὁ μὴ ἀγαπῶν τὸν πλησίον we are known as children of the devil, and
οὐκ ἔστιν ἄξιος τῆς κλήσεως, οὐδὲ δύναται between different kinds of sin; when we
λέγεσθαι τοῦ Χριστοῦ. καὶ τὴν ἑνότητα δὲ should pray for the sinner, and when we
τοῦ υἱοῦ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα δείκνυσι, καὶ ὅτι should not. And [he says] that he who does
ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν υἱὸν, οὐδὲ τὸν πατέρα not love his neighbor is not worthy of the
ἔχει. διακρίνει δὲ ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ ταύτῃ, call, and he cannot be said to be of Christ.
λέγων καὶ τὸ ἴδιον τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου εἶναι, And he demonstrates the unity of the Son
τὸ λέγειν μὴ εἶναι τὸν Ἰησοῦν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ with his Father, and that he who denies
τὸν Χριστὸν, ἵνα μὴ ᾖ δῆλον, ὅτι ὡς μὴ the Son does not have the Father. And
ὄντος ἐκείνου, ἑαυτὸν εἴπῃ εἶναι ὁ ψεύστης. he makes a distinction in this letter, say-
παραινεῖ δὲ δι᾽ ὅλης τῆς ἐπιστολῆς μὴ ing that the hallmark of Antichrist is the
ἀθυμεῖν τοὺς πιστεύοντας τῷ κυρίῳ, εἰ claim that Jesus was not the Son, Christ, so
μισοῦνται ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ· ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον that it would not be clear. For, in making
χαίρειν, ὅτι τὸ μῖσος τοῦ κόσμου δείκνυσι out as if it were not Him, the liar will say
τοὺς πιστεύσαντας μεταβεβηκέναι ἀπ᾽ it is himself. But throughout the letter, he
αὐτοῦ τοῦ κόσμου, καὶ εἶναι λοιπὸν τῆς exhorts the believers in the Lord not to be
οὐρανίου πολιτείας. καὶ ἐν τῷ τέλει δὲ τῆς disheartened if they are hated in the world,
ἐπιστολῆς πάλιν ὑπομιμνήσκει λέγων, ὅτι but rather to rejoice, because the hatred
ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ υἱὸς ζωὴ οὐράνιός ἐστι, καὶ of the world shows that the believers have
θεὸς ἀληθινὸς, καὶ ἵνα τούτῳ δουλεύωμεν passed over from this world and from now
καὶ φυλάττωμεν ἑαυτοὺς ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων. on belong to the heavenly kingdom. And
at the end of the letter, he again reminds
them, saying that the Son of God is heav-
enly life and true God, and that we should
serve Him and guard ourselves against the
idols.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Ἰωάννου Argument of the

δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς (688AB) Second Letter of John

ταύτην ὡς πρεσβύτερoς γράφει Κυρίᾳ τε This he writes as an old man to Cyria and
καὶ τοῖς τέκνοις αὐτῆς· her children.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· ὁρῶν The occasion for the letter is this: Seeing
τὰ τέκνα αὐτῆς καλῶς ἀναστρεφόμενα that her children were living honestly in
ἐν τῇ πίστει, καὶ πολλοὺς πλάνους faith and that many deceivers were walk-
περιερχομένους, καὶ λέγοντας μὴ εἶναι τὴν ing about and saying that the coming of
παρουσίαν τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐν σαρκὶ, γράφει Christ had not been in the flesh, he writes
τὴν ἐπιστολήν· the letter.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται αὐτῆς τὰ And first, he praises her children for walk-
τέκνα καλῶς περιπατοῦντα· εἶτα διδάσκων ing honestly. Then, teaching them that the
μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον, mystery that [has come] to us is not some-
παραινεῖ πάλιν περὶ ἀγάπης, καὶ ἵνα thing new, he exhorts them again about
μείνωσιν ἐν τῇ διδαχῇ τῇ παραδοθείσῃ love; that they should abide by the teaching
αὐτοῖς· καὶ λοιπὸν διδάσκει ἀντίχριστον that was handed down to them. And now,
εἶναι τὸν λέγοντα μὴ ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθέναι he teaches that he who says that Christ has
τὸν Χριστόν. παραγγέλλει δὲ, ὥστε τῶν not come in the flesh is Antichrist. And he
τοιούτων μὴ δέχεσθαί τινα εἰς οἰκίαν μηδὲ gives orders that they should not receive
λέγειν τοῖς τοιούτοις χαίρειν. καὶ οὕτως such people into the house, and not greet
τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. them. And thus he ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Argument of the

Ἰωάννου τρίτης ἐπιστολῆς (688C) Third Letter of John

ἔστιν ἡ ἐπιστολὴ περὶ φιλοξενίας. The letter is about hospitality.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται τὸν Γάϊον And first, he praises Gaius, as everybody
μαρτυρούμενον παρὰ πάντων ἐπὶ bears witness to his hospitality, and he ex-
φιλοξενίᾳ, καὶ προτρέπει τῇ αὐτῇ προθέσει horts him to abide by the same purpose, to
ἐμμένειν, καὶ προπέμπειν, καὶ δεξιοῦσθαι welcome and bring forward the brethren.
τοὺς ἀδελφούς· πάλιν δὲ αὐτοῦ μὲν τὴν And again he praises his kindness. But he
προσφορὰν ἀποδέχεται. αἰτιᾶται δὲ accuses Diotrephes of not giving to the
Διοτρέφη, ὡς μήτε αὐτὸν παρέχοντα τοῖς poor, of preventing others and of speaking
πτωχοῖς, ἀλλὰ καὶ κωλύοντα τοὺς ἄλλους, much foolishness. And he says that such
καὶ πολλὰ φλυαροῦντα. τοὺς δὲ τοιούτους people are strangers to truth and do not
λέγει ἀλλοτρίους εἶναι τῆς ἀληθείας, καὶ μὴ know God. But he commends Demetrius.
εἰδέναι τὸν θεόν. Δημήτριον δὲ συνίστησι, To him he gives the best testimony.
μαρτυρῶν αὐτῷ τὰ κάλλιστα.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Ἰούδα Argument of the

ἐπιστολῆς (689AB) Letter of Jude

ταύτην τὴν ἐπιστολὴν γράφει τοῖς ἤδη This letter he writes to those who already
πιστεύσασιν. were believers.
ἡ δὲ πρόφασις αὕτη· παρεισελθόντων The occasion is this: When some people in-
τινῶν, καὶ διδασκόντων ἀδιάφορον εἶναι truded and taught that sin was something
τὴν ἁμαρτίαν, καὶ ἀρνουμένων τὸν κύριον, indifferent and denied the Lord, he had to
ἀνάγκην ἔσχεν γράψαι, καὶ ἀσφαλίσασθαι write and strengthen the brethren.
τοὺς ἀδελφούς.
[Summary] [Summary]
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν παρακαλεῖ αὐτοὺς And first, he exhorts them to fight and to
ἀγωνίζεσθαι, καὶ ἐμμένειν τῇ παραδοθείσῃ abide by the faith, which was handed down
αὐτοῖς πίστει. ἔπειτα ἀποκηρύσσει τοὺς to them. Then he declares such people to
τοιούτους ὡς πλάνους, καὶ παραγγέλλει be deceivers, and orders them not to have
μηδεμίαν ἔχειν αὐτοὺς κοινωνίαν any communion with such people, since
πρὸς τοὺς τοιούτους, εἰδότας ὅτι οὐκ they know that it is not sufficient to be
ἀρκεῖ τὸ κληθῆναι μόνον, ἐὰν μὴ ἀξίως called if we do not walk in a manner wor-
περιπατήσωμεν τῆς κλήσεως. καὶ γὰρ καὶ thy of the call. For the Lord destroyed even
τὸν πρότερον λαὸν ἐξαγαγὼν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου his former people when He had led them
ὁ κύριος, μὴ ἐμμείναντα τῇ πίστει, ἀπώλεσε· out of Egypt and they did not abide by the
καὶ ἀγγέλων τε τῶν μὴ τηρησάντων τὴν faith. And He did not even spare angels
ἰδίαν τάξιν, οὐκ ἐφείσατο. δεῖ οὖν ἀπὸ τῶν when they were not keeping their own po-
τοιούτων ἀναχωρεῖν· καὶ γὰρ καὶ Μιχαὴλ sition. It is therefore necessary to withdraw
ὁ ἀρχάγγελος οὐχ ὑπήνεγκε βλασφημίαν from such people. For even Michael the
τοῦ διαβόλου· ἔσεσθαι γοῦν τὴν ἀπώλειαν Archangel could not bear the blasphemy of
αὐτῶν ὡς Σοδόμων διδάσκει. εἶτα παραινεῖ the devil. He teaches that they will truly be
εἰς τὰ ἤθη, καὶ ἐπευξάμενoς αὐτοῖς destroyed like the people of Sodom. Then
βεβαιότητα τῆς πίστεως παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου, he exhorts them for the sake of morals,
τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. and, having prayed for the confirmation of
their faith by the Lord, he ends the letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τοῦ βιβλίου Argument of the Book

ϰҀϫɀϮϟϬϣϵϫ "o" of the Acts
Ἐστὶν ὁ διηγούμενος τὰς πράξεις τῶν The narrator is Luke the evangelist. For he
ἀποστόλων Λουκᾶς ὁ ευαγγελιστής. was an Antiochene by birth and a physi-
Ἀντιοχεὺς γὰρ οὗτος ὑπάρχων τὸ γένος cian by profession. For he was traveling
ἰατρός τε τὴν ἐπιστήμην συναπεδημεῖ γὰρ with the other apostles, and with Paul in
τοῖς τε ἄλλοις ἀποστόλοις καὶ μάλιστα particular, and wrote accurately what he
τῷ Παύλῳ καὶ εἰδὼς ἀκριβῶς γράφει. knows. He narrates in the book how the
διηγεῖται δὲ ἐν αὐτῷ, πῶς ὑπ᾽ ἀγγέλων Lord was taken up by angels who lifted
ὑπολαβόντων ἀνελήφθη ὁ κύριος, καὶ τὴν Him, and how the Holy Spirit was poured
τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἔκχυσιν γενομένην out at Pentecost upon the apostles and all
ἐν τῇ πεντηκοστῇ ἐπί τε τοὺς ἀποστόλους those present, the appointing of Matthias
καὶ πάντας τοὺς τότε παρόντας τήν τε in place of Judas the traitor, the appointing
κατάστασιν τοῦ Ματθία ἀντὶ Ἰούδα τοῦ of the seven deacons, the electing of Paul
προδότου καὶ τὴν κατάστασιν τῶν ἑπτὰ and what he went through, and, finally, his
διακόνων καὶ τὴν ἐκλογὴν τοῦ Παύλου voyage to Rome.
καὶ ὅσα ἔπαθε καὶ τέλος τὴν εἰς Ῥώμην
ἀποδημίαν αὐτοῦ.
[List of Apostles and Deacons] [List of Apostles and Deacons]

τῶν μὲν οὖν δώδεκα ἀποστόλων τὰ These are the names of the twelve apostles:
ὀνόματά ἐστι ταῦτα· πρῶτoς Σίμων, ὁ First Simon who was called Peter, Andrew
λεγόμενος Πέτρος, καὶ Ἀνδρέας ὁ his brother, James the son of Zebedee,
ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ, Ἰάκωβος ὁ τοῦ Ζεβεδαίου, John his brother, Philippus, Bartholomew,
καὶ Ἰωάννης ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ· Φίλιππος, Thomas, Matthew the publican, James
καὶ Βαρθολωμαῖος, Θωμᾶς καὶ Ματθαῖος son of Alphaeus, Thaddeus, Simon the
ὁ τελώνης· Ἰάκωβος ὁ τοῦ Ἀλφαίου, καὶ Canaanite and Judas Iscariot who also be-
Θαδδαῖος· Σιμων ὁ Καναναῖος, καὶ Ἰoύδας trayed Him. But after Judas had become a
Ἰσκαριώτης, ὁ καὶ παραδοὺς αὐτόν· traitor and died, Matthias was appointed
ἀλλὰ τοῦ Ἰούδα προδότου γενομένου, by the apostles, and he was counted to-
καὶ ἀπολωμένου, κατεστάθη ὑπὸ τῶν gether with the eleven apostles as the
ἀποστόλων Ματθίας, καὶ συγκατηριθμήθη twelfth. The names of the deacons appoint-
τοῖς ἕνδεκα ἀποστόλοις δωδέκατος. τῶν ed by the apostles are these: First Stephen,
δὲ κατασταθέντων διακόνων παρὰ τῶν then Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon,
ἀποστόλων ὀνόματά ἐστι ταῦτα· πρῶτος Parmenas and Nicolas. After this, Paul also
Στέφανος, εἶτα Φίλιππος καὶ Πρόχωρος, was called to be a chosen vessel, and he
καὶ Νικάνωρ, καὶ Τίμων, καὶ Παρμενᾶς, himself was sent with Barnabas to preach
καὶ Νικόλαος. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα ἐκλήθη καὶ the Lord to the Gentiles everywhere.
ὁ Παῦλος σκεῦος ἐκλoγῆς, καὶ ἀπεστάλη
καὶ αὐτὸς μετὰ Βαρναβᾶ εὐαγγελίζεσθαι
τὸν κύριον τοῖς ἔθνεσιν πανταχῆ.
[List of Wonders] [List of Wonders]

τούτων τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ διακόνων Luke relates the acts of these apostles and
τὰς πράξεις διηγεῖται ὁ Λουκᾶς, καὶ deacons and the signs they did. These are
σημεῖα παρ᾽ αὐτῶν γενόμενα· καὶ ἔστιν, the signs that he relates: Peter and John
ἃ ἐξηγεῖται σημεῖα, ταῦτα· Πέτρος καὶ healed in the name of the Lord the man
Ἰωάννης ἐθεράπευσαν ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι who was lame from birth, who used to sit
τοῦ κυρίου τὸν ἐκ γενετῆς χωλὸν, τὸν at the Beautiful Gate. Peter reproved Ana-
ἐν τῇ ὡραίᾳ πύλῃ καθήμενον. Πέτρος nias and Sapphira, his wife, for keeping
Ἀνανίαν καὶ Σάπφειραν τὴν γυναῖκα back what they had promised to God, and
αὐτοῦ ἤλεγξε νοσφισαμένους ἀπὸ τῆς they died suddenly. Peter raised Aeneas
ἐπαγγελίας τῆς εἰς τὸν θεὸν, καὶ γεγόνασι the paralytic. Peter, having prayed for the
παραχρῆμα νεκροί. Πέτρος τὸν παράλυτον deceased Dorcas, raised her up from the
Ἀινέαν ἀνέστησε. Πέτρος ἐν Ἰόππῃ τὴν dead. Peter saw a vessel being sent down
ἀποθανοῦσαν Δορκάδα εὐξάμενος ἤγειρεν from the sky, full of all kinds of animals.
ἐκ νεκρῶν. Πέτρoς τὸ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ The shadow of Peter healed the sick when
σκεῦος καθιέμενον πλῆρες παντὸς ζώου it fell upon them. Though Peter was guard-
ἑώρακεν. Πέτρου ἡ σκιὰ, ἐρχομένη ἐπὶ ed and bound in prison, he was set free by
τοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας ἐθεράπευσεν αὐτούς. an angel without the soldiers’ knowledge.
Πέτρος τηρούμενος καὶ δεδεμένος ἐν And Herod expired, eaten by worms. Ste-
τῇ φυλακῇ ὑπ᾽ ἀγγέλου ἀπελύθη, μὴ phen did wonders and signs. Philip attend-
εἰδότων τῶν στρατιωτῶν, καὶ ὁ Ἡρώδης ed the eunuch when he was reading Isaiah,
σκωληκόβρωτoς ἐξέψυξε. Στέφανος ἐποίει and he baptized him. The same Philip cast
τέρατα καὶ σημεῖα. Φίλιππος τὸν εὐνοῦχον out many spirits in Samaria, and lame and
ἐπέστησεν ἀναγινώσκοντα τὸν Ἠσαΐαν, paralytic were healed by him. When Paul
καὶ ἐβάπτισεν αὐτόν. ὁ αὐτὸς Φίλιππος ἐν was near Damascus, he saw a vision, and at
Σαμαρείᾳ πολλὰ πνεύματα ἐξέβαλεν, καὶ once he became a preacher of the gospel. In
χωλοὶ καὶ παραλελυμένοι ἐθεραπεύθησαν Lystra, in the name of the Lord, Paul cured
ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ. Παῦλος ἐγγίζων τῇ Δαμασκῷ, a man who was lame from birth. Paul was
εἶδεν ὀπτασίαν, καὶ εὐθὺς γέγονεν called to Macedonia through a vision. In
εὐαγγελιστής. Παῦλος ἐν Λύστροις, χωλὸν Philippi, Paul cleansed a woman who had
ἐκ γενετῆς ὄντα ἰάσατο ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι a spirit of divination. Paul and Silas were
τοῦ κυρίου. Παῦλος ἀπὸ ὀπτασίας εἰς put in prison and had their feet fastened
Μακεδονίαν ἐκλήθη. Παῦλος γυναῖκα, τὴν in the stocks. But at midnight, there was
ἔχουσαν πνεῦμα πύθωνος, ἐκαθάρισεν ἐν an earthquake, and they were set free from
Φιλίπποις. Παῦλος καὶ Σίλας εἰς φυλακὴν their chains. And people carried pieces of
ἐβλήθησαν, καὶ ἐσφαλισμένους εἶχον τοὺς cloth from his skin to the sick, and they
πόδας ἐν τῷ ξύλῳ· ἐν δὲ τῷ μεσονυκτίῳ were healed. In Troas, Paul raised up Eu-
σεισμὸς γέγονεν καὶ λέλυται αὐτῶν τὰ tychus, who had fallen from the window
δεσμά. ἀπὸ τοῦ χρωτὸς Παύλου ἀπέφερον and died, by saying: ‘His life is in him.’ In
σουδάρια ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας καὶ Cyprus, Paul rebuked the sorcerer Elymas,
ἐθεραπεύοντο. Παῦλος ἐν Τρωάδι πεσόντα and the sorcerer became blind. When Paul
Εὔτυχον ἀπὸ τῆς θυρίδος καὶ ἀποθανόντα was sailing to Rome, he and all those with
ἤγειρε λέγων· ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ ἐστιν. him in the ship were driven by a storm for
ὁ Παῦλος ἐπετίμησεν ἐν Κύπρῳ τῷ μάγῳ fourteen days and nights. When everyone
Ἐλύμᾳ, καὶ ἐγένετο τυφλὸς αὐτὸς ὁ μάγος. expected to die, the Lord was close and said
Παῦλος ὡς ἔπλεεν ἐν Ῥώμῃ, ἐχειμάσθησαν to Paul: ‘For your sake I have given them
αὐτός τε καὶ πάντες οἱ ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ ἐπὶ life.’ And they were saved. After Paul had
νυχθήμερα ιδ´·, πάντων τε προσδοκώντων left the ship, he was bitten by a snake, and
ἀποθανεῖν, ἐπιστὰς ὁ κύριος, εἶπεν αὐτῷ everybody thought he would die. When he
τῷ Παύλῳ, ὅτι διὰ σὲ κεχάρισμαι τούτοις τὸ remained unharmed, they held him to be a
͑Ϯшϩϭϡϭϧo1SPMPHVFT 99
ζῇν, καὶ ἐσώθησαν. ἐξελθόντα τὸν Παῦλον god. On the island, Paul healed the father
ἀπὸ τοῦ πλοίου ἔχιδνα ἔδακεν, καὶ οἱ μὲν of Publius, who suffered from dysentery,
πάντες ἐνόμιζον αὐτὸν γίνεσθαι νεκρόν· by laying his hand on him. Paul also healed
ὡς δὲ ἀπαθὴς ἔμεινεν, ἐνόμισαν αὐτὸν εἶναι on the island many others who were sick.
θεόν. τὸν πατέρα τοῦ Πουπλίου ἐν τῇ νήσῳ
δυσεντερίᾳ συνεχόμενον χειροθετήσας
ἰάσατο ὁ Παῦλος. καὶ ἄλλους πολλοὺς
ἀσθενοῦντας ἐν τῇ νήσῳ ἐθεράπευσεν ὁ
Παῦλος.
Πρόλογοι Prologues
Πρόλογος Ἐυθαλίου διακόνου Prologue by the Deacon Euthalius,

προτασσόμενος τῆς βίβλου τῶν prefixed to the Book of the
ἐπιστολῶν Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου Letters of Paul the Apostle
[Prologus praeter rem] [Prologus praeter rem]

[Prooemium: 693A] [Prooemium]
τὸ φιλομαθὲς καὶ σπουδαῖον ἀγάμενος τῆς Admiring your zealous love of learning,
σῆς ἀγάπης, πάτερ τιμιώτατε, αἰδοῖ τε καὶ most honored father, I have obeyed your
πειθοῖ εἴκων, στενωπῷ τινι καὶ παρεισδύσει authority and your persuasive powers, and
τῆς ἱστορίας ἐμαυτὸν ἐπαφῆκα τόνδε set out through a certain narrow strait and
τὸν πρόλογον τῆς Παύλου πραγματείας passage, that of scholarship, to write this
συγγράψαι· καὶ πολὺ μεῖζον ἢ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς prologue about the deeds of Paul. In fear of
ἔργον ἀνεδεξάμην, δέει τῆς παρακοῆς· being disobedient, I promised a work far
ἔγνων γὰρ ἐν παροιμίαις τὸ λαλούμενον, beyond my faculties, because I knew what
ὅτι δὴ »υἱὸς ἀνήκοος ἐν ἀπωλείᾳ ἔσται«· is said in the Proverbs, that ‘the disobedi-
ὁ δὲ ὑπήκοος ἔσται ταύτης ἐκτός. ἀλλ᾽ ent son shall perish’, while the obedient will
ἄγε δὴ τὰς εὐχάς μοι τὰς σὰς ἐπίδος, καὶ be exempted. But come, offer your prayers
πηδαλίων τρόπον πτερώσας τῇδε κἀκεῖσε, for me, and, as though you were furnish-
ἔκτεινον πρὸς τὸν θεόν· καθάπερ τότε ing me with steering oars on both sides,
Μωυσῆς ὁ μέγας ἐκεῖνος τὰς ἑαυτοῦ χεῖρας stretch out your hands to God, just like
ἐξεπέτασεν ἐπαρήγων ποτὲ τῷ Ἰσραὴλ ἐν the great Moses himself once extended his
τῇ παρεμβολῇ· ἵνα δὴ κἀγὼ τὰς τῶν ἀερίων hands when he gave aid to Israel, drawn
πνευμάτων ἐπαναστάσεις ἐκκλίνω, καὶ up for battle. Pray that even I may escape
κατιθὺ λέγων τὸ σκάφος σοι τοῦ λόγου εἰς the rising winds of the air, and that keep-
εὔδιον καθορμίσω λιμένα. ing the course straight till the end, I may
bring for you the vessel of my work into a
calm harbor.
[Prologus ante rem] [Prologus ante rem]

[Life of Paul: 696A–701A] [Life of Paul]
[The Background [The Background of Paul]
of Paul: 696A]
ἀρχόμενος τοίνυν τῆς λέξεως ὥδέ πως Beginning now this speech, I will describe
ἀληθείας ἔχει διηγήσομαι· Παῦλος ὁ what contains the truth. Paul the Apostle
ἀπόστολος Ἑβραῖος μὲν ἦν τὸ γένος, ἐκ was a Hebrew by race, of the tribe of Ben-
φυλῆς Βενιαμὶν, φαρισαῖος δὲ τὴν αἵρεσιν· jamin, belonging to the party of the Phari-
ὑπὸ διδασκάλῳ δὲ πιστῷ τῷ Γαμαλιὴλ τὸν sees, educated in the Law of Moses by Ga-
Μωυσέως νόμον ἐκπεπαιδευμένος· maliel, the faithful teacher.
[Saul the Persecutor: 696AC] [Saul the Persecutor]

πρὸς δὲ τούτοις τὸν τῆς Κιλικίας Further, he lived in Tarsus, the eye-stone
ὀφθαλμὸν τὴν Ταρσὸν οἰκῶν, διώκων of Cilicia, persecuting and seeking to de-
δὲ καὶ πορθούμενος τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ stroy the Church of God. For this very
θεοῦ. διὸ δὴ καὶ συμπαρῆν τῇ ἀναιρέσει reason, he was present at the slaughter of
Στεφάνoυ τοῦ ἀποστόλου καὶ μάρτυρος, Stephen, the apostle and the martyr, and
κοινωνός τε ἦν τότε τοῦ φόνου τὰ he was also then taking part in the killing,
πάντων ἱμάτια τῶν λιθοβολοῦντων αὐτὸν as he received the mantles of all those who
καταδεξάμενος φυλάττειν, ἵνα ταῖς πάντων stoned him, to watch over them so that he
χερσὶν χρήσηται πρὸς τὸν φόνον. καὶ could use the hands of all to kill. And he
πρῶτος δὲ μετὰ τῶν στασιαζόντων ἑωρᾶτο was seen everywhere as the most promi-
πανταχῆ, σπουδάζων καθαιρεῖν τοὺς nent among the rioters, eager to destroy
τῆς ἐκκλησίας λογάδας· πολλά τε ἦν καὶ the elect of the Church. Many and grave
μεγάλα τὰ παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ κατὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας were the deeds that he committed against
γινόμενα, καὶ οὐδὲν εἰς ὑπερβολὴν μανίας the Church, and he left nothing behind in
ἐνέλιπεν· ἐν τούτῳ γὰρ εὐσεβεῖν καὶ τὰ excessive fury, because in this he believed
μέγιστα κατορθοῦν ἐνόμιζεν, καθὼς he was acting piously and that he was set-
αὐτός τε ἐν ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς ὁμολογεῖ, ting the greatest things right, as both he
καὶ Λουκᾶς ἱστορεῖ ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ βίβλῳ himself confesses in his letters, and as Luke
ἑαυτοῦ. οὐ μόνον γὰρ οὗτος πάλαι κατὰ tells us in his second book. For not only
τοὺς πολλοὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἐμίσει τε καὶ did he in the beginning hate and turn away
ἀπεστρέφετο τὸ τῆς ἀληθείας κήρυγμα, from the message of truth, like most Jews
ἀλλ᾽ ἤδη καὶ μείζονα παντὸς τοῦ ἔθνους did, but he now nourished in himself an
ὀργὴν ἐποιεῖτο. ὡς γὰρ εἶδε τὸ κήρυγμα anger even greater than that of the whole
διαλάμψαν, καὶ τὸν τῆς ἀληθείας εὐθαλῆ people. For when he saw the radiance of
λόγον ἐπικρατέστερον τῆς Ἰουδαϊκῆς the message and the blossoming word of
διδασκαλίας γενόμενον, παθὼν πρὸς truth growing stronger than the Jewish
τοῦτο, καὶ νομίσας ἀδικεῖσθαι τὰ μέγιστα teaching, suffering because of this, and
τῆς διδασκαλίας αὐτῶν ἀνατρεπομένης, considering the greatest things offended
πᾶσαν προθυμίαν καὶ σπουδὴν κατὰ τῶν as their teaching was being overthrown,
τῆς ἐκκλησίας θρεμμάτων, ἐποιεῖτο, ὅπως he created in himself great zeal and eager-
ἂν αὐτοὺς ἢ τῆς ἀληθοῦς διδασκαλίας ness directed against the nurslings of the
ἀποστήσειεν, ἢ δίκην ἀξίαν τῆς εἰς τὸν Church, that they either should renounce
Χριστὸν πίστεως εἰσπράξειεν. the true teaching or suffer just punishment
for their faith in Christ.
[Paul’s Conversion: [Paul’s Conversion]

$o#>
κομισάμενος δὲ ὁ Παῦλος παρὰ τῶν And when Paul at that time had received
ἱερέων καὶ διδασκάλων ἐπιστολὰς κατ᾽ letters from the priests and the teachers to
ἐκεῖνο καιροῦ πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Δαμασκῷ the Jews in Damascus, he set out, roaring
Ἰουδαίους, ὥρμησε μορμύρων, ὥσπερ τις like a violent river, thinking he would dash
χείμαῤῥος λάβρος, περικλύσειν δοκῶν against the disciples in Damascus from all
τοὺς ἐν Δαμασκῷ μαθητὰς, καὶ εἰς τὸ τῆς sides and send them into the pit of per-
ἀπωλείας αὐτοὺς βάραθρον ἐκπέμψειν. dition. Since the Lord knew that he had
γνοὺς δὲ ὁ κύριος, ὅτι ἄδικον μανίαν ἐν somehow acquired his unjust fury from a
δικαίᾳ δῆθεν προαιρέσει ἐκέκτητο, ἐν μέσῃ just intention, He appeared to him in the
τῇ ὁδῷ ἐπιφανεὶς, ἀπεστέρησε μὲν αὐτὸν middle of the road, and with the intensity
τῆς ὄψεως τῷ μεγέθει τοῦ φωτὸς, καὶ εἰς of the light, He took away his sight. And
τοσοῦτον δὲ μέτεισιν, ὥστε τὸν πάλαι he changed to such a degree that he who
οὐδὲν ὅ τι τῶν δεινῶν κατὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας used to contrive all terrible things against
οὐκ ἐπινοοῦντα, καὶ πάντας τοὺς μαθητὰς the Church and planned to wipe out all
ἀπολέσειν ἄρδην προσδοκῶντα, αὐτίκα the disciples, suddenly, right there, was
δὴ τοῦτον καὶ παραχρῆμα ἀγαπητὸν considered His beloved and a most faith-
ἑαυτοῦ καὶ πιστότατον ἡγήσασθαι. ἱκέτης ful man. For the enemy became straight-
γὰρ εὐθὺς τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, ὁ πολέμιος γίνεται, away a follower of Jesus, and having cast
καὶ παραυτίκα τὸ σύνταγμα τῆς μανίας off his furious condition, he advanced to
ἀποῤῥιψάμενος, εἰς πρεσβείαν ἐχώρει, become an entrusted delegate, he con-
καὶ τὴν εἰς Χριστὸν εὐσέβειαν ὁμολογεῖ, fessed his faith in Christ and was sent to
καὶ πέμπεται πρὸς Ἀνανίαν τινὰ μαθητὴν a certain Ananias, a disciple in Damascus.
ἐν Δαμασκῷ. ἰδὼν δὲ ὁ τῆς ἀληθείας When God, the examiner of truth, saw that
ἐξεταστὴς θεὸς σωφρονισθέντα τὸν ἄνδρα, he was acting prudently and had become
καὶ βελτίω ἐκ τῶν κακῶν γεγονότα, οὐχ a better man who had left the evil ones
ἑτέρως αὐτὸν ἢ οὕτως ἀπαλλαγήσεσθαι behind, He declared that he should be ex-
τῆς τιμωρίας ὁ κύριος ἔφη. βαπτίζεται γοῦν empted from punishment in no other way
ἀπελθὼν, καὶ τῶν ἀποῤῥήτων μυστηρίων than this. So he went to Ananias and was
γίνεται κοινωνὸς καὶ ὑπερασπιστὴς καὶ baptised, he shared in unspeakable myster-
σύμμαχος ἀξιόχρεως τοῦ κηρύγματος· ies and became a remarkable defender and
champion of the message.
[The Beginnings of [The Beginnings

His Work: 697BC] of His Work]
καὶ καινὸν κήρυγμα ἐμπιστευθεὶς παρὰ And entrusted with a new message from
τοῦ θεοῦ καινοτέραν ἔσχε τῆς σωτηρίας God, he received a newer way to salva-
τὴν ἀφορμήν. τοσαύτην οὖν μεταβολὴν tion. The blessed Paul changed so much
ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος ἐσχηκὼς, ἔτι δὲ καὶ that he even changed his name, having
τοὔνομα μεταβαλὼν, καὶ καθ᾽ ἑτέραν CFDPNF USVF UP IJT OFX OBNF o GPS 4BVM
ГɀϟϩϥϦϣъϯϟ϶ ϟЯϰϭѼ ɀϮϭϯϥϡϭϮцϟϫ o indeed used to shake the entire church,
Σαῦλος γὰρ ἐσάλευε καθόλου τὸ πρὶν but Paul had now ceased to persecute and
τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, Παῦλος δέ τοι πέπαυται destroy the disciples of Christ. Thus he
τοῦ διώκειν λοιπὸν, καὶ λυμαίνεσθαι τοῖς transformed his zeal into the utmost pi-
͗ϮϧϯϰϭѼ ϪϟϦϥϰϟѴ϶ o Ϩϟх ϭдϰϵ϶ ϣС϶ ЏϨϮϭϫ ety, strengthening the pious disciples with
εὐσεβείας ζῆλον μετατεθεὶς, ὥστε τοὺς τῆς letters if he sometimes happened to be ab-
εὐσεβείας μαθητὰς, εἴ ποτε συνέβη αὐτὸν sent, in order that they for the future might
ἀπολειφθῆναι, διὰ γραμμάτων ἐβεβαίου, acquire the teaching not only through his
ἵνα μὴ μόνον τὴν διὰ τῶν ἔργων, ἀλλὰ deeds, but also through his words, and, be-
καὶ τὴν ἐκ τῶν λόγων εἰς τὸ μετέπειτα ing strengthened by both, they might carry
κτήσωνται διδασκαλίαν, καὶ ἀμφοτέρωθεν an unshakeable stronghold of piety within
ὀχυρωθέντες, ἄσειστον τῆς εὐσεβείας their souls.
ἔρυμα ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ περιφέροιεν.
[His Great Missionary [His Great Mission Travels

Travels Among the Among the Gentiles]
(FOUJMFT$o">
μετὰ δὲ χρόνον τινὰ εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ πάλιν After some time, Paul again went up to
ὁ Παῦλος ἐκτρέχει, ὀψόμενος τὸν Πέτρον· Jerusalem, to see Peter. Then they also di-
ἔνθα δὴ καὶ διαιροῦνται πρὸς ἀλλήλους vided the whole world between them, and
ἅπασαν τὴν οἰκουμένην, καὶ τὴν τῶν after Paul received the part of the Gentiles,
ἐθνῶν μερίδα Παῦλος λαβὼν, ὡς δὴ τοῦ as it befell Peter to teach the Jewish people,
Πέτρου τὸ Ἰουδαϊκὸν διδάσκειν λαχόντος, he traversed many cities and many lands,
πολλὰς μὲν πόλεις, πολλὰς δὲ χώρας and he almost filled all of Illyricum with
περιενόστησεν, μικροῦ δὲ τὸ Ἰλλυρικὸν the teachings of faith in Christ. Truly, he
ἅπαν τῶν τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν εὐσεβείας suffered and endured countless horrors for
δογμάτων ἐνέπλησε. μυρία γοῦν πάνδεινα the sake of his belief in Christ, and he went
παθὼν καὶ ὑποστὰς ὑπὲρ τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν through many and various dangers for the
πίστεως, τλὰς δὲ πολλοὺς καὶ διαφόρους sake of the Gospel, as he himself recounts,
κινδύνους, ὅσους αὐτὸς ἀναγράφεται, but, having struggled hard for faith, he
ὑπὲρ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, καὶ τοὺς ὅλους vanquished them all. For at that time, God
αὐτὸς νικήσας, καὶ ἐξαγωνισάμενος τῇ still wanted Paul, and the unspeakable plan
πίστει. εἰς ἔτι γὰρ τότε ἤθελε Παῦλον ὁ and decision of the Lord kept him living
θεὸς, καὶ ἡ ἄῤῥητος τοῦ κυρίου βουλὴ, καὶ among men until he had proclaimed the
ἡ προθεσμία αὐτοῦ, τοῦτον κατεῖχε μετὰ Gospel to all nations.
ἀνθρώπων διάγειν, εἰς ὅτε τὸ εὐαγγέλιον
ἅπασι τοῖς ἔθνεσι κηρύξει.
[The Death of Paul: [The Death of Paul]

"o">
ὀψὲ δέ που τῆς ὥρας, αὖθις ὁ Παῦλος And in the late hour, Paul again goes up to
ἐπάνεισιν εἰς Ἰεροσόλυμα, τοὺς ἐκεῖσε Jerusalem to visit the saints there and to
ἁγίους ἐπισκεψόμενος, καὶ τοῖς πτωχοῖς help the poor. In the meantime, sedition
ἐπικουρήσων. ἐν δὲ τῷ μεταξὺ στάσις took hold of the city, and the people were
κατειλήφει τις τὴν πόλιν, καὶ ὁ δῆμος ἦν in a great uproar, as the Jews were rous-
ἐν θορύβῳ πολλῷ, Ἰουδαίων ταραττόντων ing the crowd, because they considered it
τὸ κοινόν. δεινὸν γὰρ καὶ βαρὺ ἡγήσαντο a terrible and heavy burden to be accused
κατήγορον ἔχειν τὸν πάλαι προστάτην by the man who once protected them and
καὶ κοινωνὸν αὐτῶν τῆς μανίας, καὶ shared their fury, and they were eager to
ἀποκτείνειν αὐτὸν ἔσπευδον. ἀλλ᾽ εὐθὺς kill him. But soon the chief captain Lysias
ὁ χιλίαρχος Λυσίας τοῦτον ἐξαιρεῖται, took him away and sent him with military
καὶ μετὰ στρατιωτικῆς βοηθείας εἰς τὴν escort to the ruler in Caesarea. They arrest-
Καισάρειαν εἰς τὸν ἡγούμενον ἐκπέμπει. ed him and brought him to the governor.
συνελάμβανον οὖν αὐτὸν καὶ πρὸς τὸν Felix was his name. When Paul realized
ἐθνάρχην ἦγον· Φῆλιξ ἦν ὄνομα αὐτῷ. that the Jews were plotting against him, he
αἰσθόμενος δὲ συσκευήν τινα κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ soon appealed to the emperor before the
γινομένην ὑπὸ Ἰουδαίων ὁ Παῦλος, εὐθὺς tribunal. His case was suspended, and the
ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος ἐπιβοᾶται τὸν καίσαρα, plot that the Jews had prepared against
καὶ ἀνεῖται μὲν τέως τοῦ κριτηρίου, ἀργεῖ him came to nothing. And now the au-
δὲ ἡ κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις μελετωμένη thorities sent him to the emperor in Rome,
ἐπιβουλή. καὶ λοιπὸν εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην ὑπὸ and there he proved himself worthy in the
τῶν ἀρχόντων ἐκπέμπεται πρὸς καίσαρα, same struggles and he worked hard for
κἀκεῖσε τοὺς αὐτοὺς ἀγῶνας ἐπιδειξάμενος, the same prizes. Finally, he even departed
καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν αὐτῶν ἄθλων πονήσας, from life for the sake of the doctrines of
τέλος καὶ αὐτῆς τῆς ζωῆς ὑπὲρ τῶν τῆς truth, as he considered life with Christ bet-
ἀληθείας δογμάτων ἐξέστη, βελτίονα εἶναι ter than this life, which leads to death. For
κρίνας τὴν μετὰ Χριστοῦ διαγωγὴν, τῆς when the emperor Nero shortly afterwards
θνητῆς ταύτης καὶ ἐπικήρου ζωῆς. μικρὸν wanted to lead him out of this life, he in
γὰρ ὕστερον καῖσαρ ὁ Νέρων βουληθεὶς fact bestowed true and genuine life upon
αὐτὸν τῆς ζωῆς ταύτης ἐξαγαγεῖν, τὴν him, and he made the man he took from
ἀληθινὴν αὐτῷ καὶ ὄντως ζωὴν ἐχαρίσατο, earth a citizen of the heavens. So there the
καὶ καθιστᾷ οὐρανῶν πολίτην, ὃν τῆς γῆς blessed Paul, having fought the good fight,
ἀπεστέρει. αὐτόθι οὖν ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος as he says himself, received the crown of
τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα ἠγωνισμένος, ὥς φη- the holy and victorious martyrs of Christ.
σιν αὐτὸς, τῷ τῶν ἱερονίκων Χριστοῦ
μαρτύρων στεφάνῳ κατεκοσμίσθη.
[The Celebration of his [The Celebration of

Martyrdom: 701A] his Martyrdom]
Ῥωμαῖοι δὲ περικαλλέσιν οἴκοις καὶ The Romans, having enclosed his remains
βασιλείοις τούτου λείψανα καθείρξαντες, in the most beautiful kingly buildings, at-
ἐπέτειον αὐτῷ μνήμης ἡμέραν tend a festival to his memory once a year,
πανηγυρίζουσι, τῇ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν on the third day before the calends of July,
Ἰουλίων, πέμπτῃ Πανέμου μηνὸς, τούτου on the fifth day of the month Panemos, cel-
τὸ μαρτύριον ἑορτάζοντες. ebrating his martyrdom.
[Epitome of the Pauline [Epitome of the Pauline Letters]

Letters: 701A–708A]
[Introduction: 701A] [Introduction]
πολλὰς δὲ καὶ πρὸ τούτου ἤδη παραινέσεις Before this, the blessed one had already
ὑπέρ τε βίου καὶ ἀρετῆς ὁ μακάριος written many exhortations on both life and
ἐποιήσατο, καὶ πολλὰ περὶ τῶν πρακτέων virtue, and Paul the Apostle had explained
τοῖς ἀνθρώποις εἰσηγήσατο Παῦλος ὁ much regarding what people ought to do.
ἀπόστολος. ἔτι δὲ καὶ ὅλως διὰ τῆς ὑφῆς And not only that, but throughout the text
τῶν δεκατεσσάρων ἐπιστολῶν τούτων, τὴν of the fourteen letters he described all pat-
ὅλην ἀνθρώποις διέγραψε πολιτείαν. terns of proper social conduct.
<1BVM‫ڍ‬TMFUUFST"o$> [Paul’s letters]

[Paul’s Letters to the [Paul’s Letters to
$IVSDIFT"o"> the Churches]
περιέχει οὖν ἡ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους ἐπιστολὴ Thus, the letter to the Romans contains a
κατήχησιν εἰς Χριστὸν, καὶ μάλιστα διὰ catechism of Christ, in particular through
τῆς ἐκ φυσικῶν λογισμῶν ἀποδείξεως, an argument based on natural reasoning.
διὸ πρώτη τέτακται, οἷα δὴ πρὸς ἀρχὴν This is why it is placed first, as a letter writ-
ἔχοντας εἰς θεοσέβειαν γραφεῖσα. δευτέρα ten to people whose devotion was new. Af-
δὲ ταύτης ἡ πρὸς Κορινθίους ἐστίν· ter this, the letter to the Corinthians comes
ἀνθρώπους πιστεύσαντας μὲν ἤδη, τῆς as the second. They were already believers,
δὲ πίστεως ἀναστρέφοντας οὐκ ἀξίως· but did not behave in a manner worthy
ἐφ᾽ ᾧ καὶ μάλιστα τούτοις ἐπιμέμφεται· of their faith. Because of this, he rebukes
καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἐπίπληξιν μεταβαλλόμενοις them exceedingly. When they change after
αὖθις ἑτέραν ἐπιστέλλει τοῦτο αὐτὸ his rebuke, he writes again, another letter,
σημαίνουσαν, δι ἧς ἐπιστηρίζει τούτους expressing the same. With this, he gives
πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν, τὴν ἰδίαν αὐτοῦ them strength for further improvement, as
παρουσίαν ἐπαγγελλόμενος, καὶ ἀπειλῶν. he promises and threatens to turn up. After
ἐπὶ ταύταις ἡ πρὸς Γαλάτας τετάρτη these, the letter to the Galatians is placed
τέτακται, κατὰ τῶν εἰς Ἰουδαϊσμὸν as the fourth, written against those who
ἀποκλινάντων γραφεῖσα· οἷς μετὰ had defected to Judaism. After he has re-
ἀπόδειξιν ὥσπερ ἀποτάσσεται, λέγων futed them, he says, as if he bids them fare-
»τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω· well: ‘Henceforth let no man trouble me;
ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησoῦ ἐν τῷ for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus.’
σώματί μου βαστάζω«. πέμπτη ἡ πρὸς Placed as fifth is the one to the Ephesians,
Ἐφεσίους κεῖται, πιστοὺς ἀνθρώπους who were faithful and enduring. In its ex-
καὶ παραμένοντας, ἧς ἐν τῇ προγραφῇ ordium the mystery is described in a way
τὸ μυστήριον ἐκτίθεται, παραπλησίως similar to Romans. He knew both [com-
τῇ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους· ἀμφοτέροις δὲ ἐξ munities] from what he had heard. These
ἀκοῆς γνωρίμοις. καὶ εἰσὶν αὗται πρὸς letters differ from others, as they are pri-
ἀντιδιαστολὴν ἀρχαὶ κατηχουμένων, mary principles for catechumens and in-
καὶ πιστῶν εἰσαγωγαί. ἕκτη τέτακται ἡ troductions for believers. Placed as sixth is,
πρὸς Φιλιππησίους κατὰ προσαύξησιν according to their progress, the one to the
πιστοῖς ὁμοῦ καὶ καρποφόροις, οἷς καὶ Philippians. They were both faithful and
μαρτυρῶν τὰ κάλλιστα παρὼν ἐγνωκέναι, fruit-bearing. Although he gives them an
προτρέπεται καὶ ἀπόντος μάλιστα excellent testimony from what he had per-
προσθεῖναι. ἀντιδιαστέλλεται δὲ ἡ ceived when he was present, he strongly
ἐπιστολὴ αὕτη τοῖς Κορινθίοις· τοῖς μὲν exhorts them to add more still, even in his
γὰρ ἔλεγε· »μιμηταί μου γίνεσθε«. τοῖς δὲ absence. This letter differs from Corinthi-
Φιλιππησίοις· »συμμιμηταί μου γίνεσθε«· ans, because to them he said: ‘Be followers
ἀλλὰ καὶ στέφανον αὐτοὺς καὶ χαρὰν of me’, but to the Philippians: ‘Be followers
ὀνομάζει· τοσοῦτον οὗτοι διαλάττουσι together with me’. But he also calls them
Κορινθίων. ἑξῆς δέ ἐστιν ἡ πρὸς Κολασσαεῖς his crown and his joy. To such a degree do
γραφεῖσα, πρὸς οὐχ ἐγνωσμένους κατὰ they differ from the Corinthians. The one
σάρκα, πιστοὺς δὲ καὶ βεβαίους· οὓς καὶ to the Colossians now follows, written to
προκόπτοντας παρατηρεῖν κελεύει τὰς ἐκ those he had not met in person, but who
φιλοσοφίας ἀπάτας, καὶ ταῖς Ἰουδαϊκαῖς were faithful and steadfast. Although they
παρατηρήσεσι μὴ προσέχειν· εἶναι γὰρ are making progress, he orders them to
οὐ καθαρὰν θρησκείαν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀφειδίαν be on their guard against the deceptions
σώματος· οὓς καὶ τὰς δυνάμεις τῶν of philosophy and not to pay attention
ἐπιστολῶν κρίνειν κελεύει. γράφει δὲ to Jewish observances, since these things
καὶ Ἀρχίππῳ παραγγεῖλαι τούτων αὐτοῖς are not pure worship, but only severity to
τὴν προσοχήν. μετὰ δὲ τὰς εἰρημένας αἱ the body. He orders them to examine the
πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς εἰκότως ἐγράφησαν meaning of the letters, and he writes to
ἐπιστολαὶ δύο, ὧν ἡ μὲν ἔπαινον περιέχει Archippus that he should encourage them
αὐτῶν εὐπειθείας ἐκ προσαυξήσεως, to pay attention to these matters. After the
ἄχρι καὶ θλίψεων πεῖραν ἐσχηκότων. letters mentioned above, the two letters to
οὓς καὶ παραβάλλει τοῖς ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ the Thessalonians were written, and not
πεπιστευκόσι, τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον ὑπὸ without reason, one of them containing
τῶν ἰδίων συμφυλετῶν πεπονθέναι praise for their obedience on account of
λέγων, καθάπερ κἀκείνους. τούτους δὲ their progress, even unto the test of per-
καὶ στέφανον τῆς αὐτοῦ καυχήσεως καὶ secution. He also compares them to the
χαρὰν ὀνομάζει, καὶ μάλιστα ἐπὶ τοῖς believers in Judea, saying that the Thessa-
πάθεσι παρακαλεῖ. καὶ μετὰ ταύτην ἑτέραν lonians have suffered at the hands of their
πρὸς τοὺς αὐτοὺς γράφει, ἣ περιέχει own tribesmen, just like them. But he also
τῆς τούτων προσαυξήσεως μαρτυρίαν, calls them the crown of his glory and his
καὶ τῆς ὑπομονῆς, ἧς ἔχουσι περὶ τὰς joy, and in particular he comforts them in
θλίψεις· καὶ περὶ τῆς συντελείας τοῦδε τοῦ their sufferings. And after this he writes
αἰῶνος διδασκαλίαν, καὶ περὶ προσοχῆς them another, which contains testimony
εἰς ἀναστροφήν. ἡ δὲ πρὸς Ἑβραίους of their progress and of their endurance
μετὰ ταύτας, ὧν ἔφησεν εἶναι μιμητὰς in face of persecutions, teaching about the
τοὺς προειρημένους. ἣ περιέχει περί τε end of this world, and about paying atten-
Ἰουδαϊκῶν μυστηρίων, καὶ τὴν ἐκ τούτων tion to their behavior. Placed after these is
μετάθεσιν εἰς Χριστὸν, προκατηγγελμένην the letter to the Hebrews, whose followers
ὑπὸ τῶν προφητῶν. ἐνταῦθα περικλείουσι were the aforementioned. This contains
τὴν κατὰ τὸν λαὸν ἰδιωτικὴν αὔξησιν αἱ a treatment of Jewish mysteries and the
ἐπιστολαί. translation of these as pertaining to Christ,
which was announced beforehand by the
prophets. Up to this point, the letters deal
with the progress that is characteristic of
each community.
[Paul’s Letters to [Paul’s Letters to

*OEJWJEVBMT"o$> Individuals]
μετὰ ταύτας αἱ πρὸς Τιμόθεον ἐτάχθησαν The two letters to Timothy are placed after
ἐπιστολαὶ δύο. ὧν ἡ μὲν πρώτη περιέχει these; the first contains treatment of teach-
διδασκάλων προσοχὴν, καὶ ἐκκλησίας ers, the organization of the Church and on
τάξιν, καὶ ὃν χρὴ τρόπον ἄρχειν τε καὶ how to rule and on how to receive com-
διατάσσεσθαι. καὶ ἡ δευτέρα δὲ ἡ πρὸς mandments. The second letter, written to
τὸν αὐτὸν γραφεῖσα, περιέχει κατὰ the same man, contains according to his
προσαύξησιν ἔπαινον τῆς ἐν αὐτῷ πίστεως progress praise of his ancestral faith, as it
προγονικῆς, ὥσπερ ἐκ μάμμης καὶ μητρὸς came to him from his grandmother and
εἰς αὐτὸν ἐλθούσης· ἐν ταυτῷ δὲ ἑξῆς καὶ his mother. But soon after he accuses those
τῶν συνόντων αὐτῷ ἐν Ἀσίᾳ κατηγορεῖ, who are with him in Asia for being of little
διακρίνων ὥσπερ τοὺς ὀλιγοπίστους, faith. Only to the great zeal of Onesipho-
μόνῳ τε Ὀνησιφόρῳ σπουδὴν πλείστην rus does he bear witness. As for Timothy
μαρτυρεῖ. αὐτόν τε Τιμόθεον προτρέπεται himself, he exhorts him to turn away from
τῶν βιωτικῶν πραγμάτων ἑαυτὸν the affairs of this life, and he reminds him
ἀλλοτριοῦν, καὶ ὑπομιμνήσκει δὲ, καὶ and calls him to witness for the sake of
μαρτύρεται τοῦ κηρύγματος χάριν· the message. When he has given him ap-
προεπαινέσας δὲ τὰ δέοντα, ὕστερον proval in advance, as is needed, he later
καὶ περὶ τοῦ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν διεξοδικοῦ writes also about his final journey, after he
τέλους ἐπιστέλλει, προειπὼν περὶ τῆς has foretold the rising of the heretics say-
τῶν αἱρεσιωτῶν ἐπαναστάσεως, καὶ ὡς ing that he should not be surprised. When
οὐ δεῖ ξενίζεσθαι. πολλῶν δὲ τὸν τρόπον he has explained the ways of the many, he
ἐκθέμενος, πρὸς αὐτὸν ἥκειν κελεύει. orders him to come. Perhaps he might see
τάχα δ᾽ ἂν δύναιτο τοῦτον3 καὶ πρὸς τὸ
τέλος ὁρᾶν τῆς αὐτοῦ συμπληρώσεως,
3 In the printed editions: κελεύει τάχα δι᾽ ἂν
δύναιτο τοῦτον, which does not make any sense.
ὅπερ ἔδειξεν εἰπών· »σπένδομαι ἤδη, καὶ him close to the end of his completion, as
ὁ καιρὸς τῆς ἀναλύσεώς μου ἐφεστηκεν«. he pointed out by saying: ‘I am already
ἡ δὲ πρὸς Τίτον, ὁποίους τινὰς εἶναι on the point of being sacrificed; the time
κληρικοὺς διαγράφει, καὶ διάταξιν of my departure has drawn near.’ In the
ἐκκλησίας. ἡ δὲ πρὸς Φιλήμονα ἐπιστολὴ letter to Titus, he describes what kind of
γέγραπται περὶ πιστοῦ οἰκέτου Ὀνησίμου, men clerics are, and the organization of
ὃς τὸ πρῶτον ἀχρεῖος ὢν, μεταβαλλόμενός the Church. The letter to Philemon is writ-
τε, ἐλευθερίας ἀξιοῦται πρεσβεύσαντος ten about the faithful slave Onesimus, who
τοῦ ἀποστόλου· ἀλλὰ δὴ καὶ μάρτυς was previously useless, who changed, and,
Χριστοῦ γεγένηται ἐν τῇ Ῥωμαίων πόλει with the intercession of the Apostle, was
ἐπὶ Τερτύλλου τὸ τηνικαῦτα τὴν ἔπαρχον deemed worthy of freedom. But he became
ἐξουσίαν διέποντος, τῇ τῶν σκελῶν κλάσει a martyr for the sake of Christ in the city
τὴν ψῆφoν ὑπομείνας τοῦ μαρτυρίου. of the Romans, when Tertullus was prefect.
By the shattering of his legs he suffered the
lot of martyrdom.
[Conclusion: 708A] [Conclusion]

οὕτως ἡ πᾶσα βίβλος περιέχει παντοῖον Thus, the book as a whole includes every
εἶδος πολιτειῶν κατὰ προσαύξησιν· aspect of proper social conduct arranged
according to progress.
[Editorial Notice: 708A] [Editorial Notice]

καὶ τὰ μὲν κατ᾽ ἐπιτομὴν παρ᾽ ἡμῶν So far, let this be said about them as de-
εἰρήσθω περὶ αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον· καθ᾽ scribed in our epitome. But in the follow-
ἑκάστην δὲ συντόμως ἐπιστολὴν ἐν τοῖς ing, we will prefix to each letter a short
ἑξῆς προτάξομεν τὴν τῶν κεφαλαίων exposition of the chapters, worked out by
ἔκθεσιν, ἑνὶ τῶν σοφωτάτων τινὶ καὶ one of the wisest of our fathers, a Christ
φιλοχρίστῳ πατέρων ἡμῶν πεπονημένην. lover. Not only that, but by going over the
οὐ μὴν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν τῶν ἀναγνώσεων reading of the text we have with scholarly
ἀκριβεστάτην τομὴν, τήν τε τῶν θείων method indicated briefly the accepted list
μαρτυριῶν εὐαπόδεκτον εὕρεσιν ἡμεῖς of the divine testimonies, and the most ac-
τεχνολογήσαντες ἀνεκεφαλαιωσάμεθα, curate division of the readings. This we will
ἐπιπορευόμενοι τῇ τῆς ὑφῆς ἀναγνώσει· present just after this prologue.
ἐκθησόμεθα δὲ οὖν ταύτην εὐθὺς μετὰ
τόνδε τὸν πρόλογον.
Jerker Blomqvist suggested the emendation ad-

opted above.
[Chronicle of the Preaching [Chronicle of the

of Paul: 708B] Preaching of Paul]
[Introduction: 708B] [Introduction]
ἀναγκαῖον δὲ ἡγησάμην ἐν βράχει I also considered it necessary to indicate
καὶ τὸν χρόνον ἐπισημειώσασθαι τοῦ briefly the period of time covered by the
κηρύγματος Παύλου, ἐκ τῶν χρονικῶν preaching of Paul, by making a summary
κανόνων Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου τὴν based on the chronological tables of Euse-
ἀνακεφαλαίωσιν ποιούμενος. bius, the disciple of Pamphilus.
[From the Passion [From the Passion

of Christ to Paul’s of Christ to Paul’s
Imprisonment in Imprisonment in Rome]
3PNF#o#>
ἔνθα δὴ τὴν βίβλον μετὰ χεῖρας εἰληφὼς, When I get the book in my hand and
καὶ ταύτην ἀναπτύξας, εὑρίσκω τὸ παθος open it, I find that the passion of our Sav-
τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν, ἐν ὀκτωκαιδεκάτῳ ἔτει ior, His resurrection on the third day, and
Τιβερίου καίσαρος γεγενημένον, καὶ τὴν the assumption of Christ back to heaven
τριήμερον δὲ εὐθὺς ἀνάστασιν, καὶ πάλιν happened in the eighteenth year of the
τὴν εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀνάληψιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ· emperor Tiberius. And I saw there that
καὶ μεθ᾽ ἡμέρας τινὰς ὀλίγας εἶδον ἐκεῖ the apostles after a few days elected the
προχειριζομένους τοὺς ἀποστόλους εἰς well-named Stephen and his companions
διακονίαν τὸν αὐτοφερώνυμον Στέφανον to serve as deacons. I learn that after this
καὶ τοὺς ἀμφ᾽ αὐτόν. καὶ μετέπειτα there was a huge insurrection among the
στάσιν Ἰουδαίων πλείστην καταλαμβάνω, Jews, as we have already stated, and that
καθὼς ἤδη προείπαμεν, καὶ τὸν Στέφανον Stephen then fought his fight, while Paul
ἀγωνιζόμενον ἐκεῖσε, καὶ τὸν Παῦλον indeed approved of the murder. Soon he
συνευδοκοῦντα πάνυ τῷ φόνῳ, ὃς μικρὸν met the leaders of the Jews and received
ὕστερον τοῖς ἄρχουσι τῶν Ἰουδαίων letters to the Jews in Damascus against the
παραστὰς, ἐπιστολὰς ἐκομίζετο πρὸς disciples. But in the middle of his journey
τοὺς ἐν Δαμασκῷ Ἰουδαίους κατὰ τῶν the call came to him from God. This was
μαθητῶν. κατὰ μέσην δὲ τὴν ὁδὸν ἡ a short time before the end of the year.
κλῆσις αὐτῷ γεγένηται παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ, ὡς When the nineteenth year of the emperor
μικρῷ προσαναλωθῆναι τὸ ἔτος ἐκεῖνο. Tiberius began, Paul began to preach the
ἐπιλαβομένου δῆτα τοῦ ἐννεακαιδεκάτου message, the story tells, and he traversed
ἔτους Τιβερίου καίσαρος κατάρξασθαι τὸν the whole world preaching faith in Christ,
Παῦλον τοῦ κηρύγματός φησιν ἡ ἱστορία, until the thirteenth year of the emperor
καὶ τὴν ἅπασαν οἰκουμένην διαδραμεῖν, Claudius, when Felix was governor in
εὐαγγελιζόμενον τὴν εἰς Χριστὸν Judaea. When Paul was accused by the
εὐσέβειαν, μέχρι τρισκαιδεκάτου ἔτους Jews, he defended himself before him. But
Κλαυδίου καίσαρος, ἡγεμονεύοντος τότε he kept the Apostle for two years in the
τῆς Ἰουδαίας Φήλικος, ἐφ᾽ οὗ κατηγορηθεὶς prison of Caesarea. When Porcius Festus
ὑπὸ Ἰουδαίων τὴν ἀπολογίαν ἐποιήσατο succeeded him in office, he soon wanted
Παῦλος· ὃς δὴ τὸν ἀπόστολον εἰς τὸ κατὰ to reopen his case, thus presenting a great
Καισάρειαν δεσμωτήριον καθεῖρξεν ἐπὶ favor to the Jews. Then, as the blessed one
δυσὶν ἔτεσι· μεθ᾽ ὃν διαδεξάμενος τὴν understood that he could not escape the
ἀρχὴν Πόρκιος Φῆστος εὐθὺς ὥρμησεν treachery unless he appealed to the emper-
ἀνακρίνειν τὸν ἀπόστολον, τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις or, he did so before the tribunal and was
μεγίστην ἐν τούτῳ χάριν κατατιθέμενος. sent to emperor Nero in Rome. With him
τότε οὖν ὁ μακάριος νομίσας οὐκ ἄλλως he had Aristarchus, whom he rightly called
ἀπαλλαγήσεσθαι τῆς ἐπιβουλῆς, ἢ his fellow prisoner somewhere in the let-
καίσαρα ἐπικαλεσάμενος, ἑστὼς ἐπὶ τοῦ ters, and Luke, who consigned the acts of
βήματος ἐπεκαλέσατο καίσαρα, καὶ εἰς the apostles to writing. So there, in the city
Ῥώμην ἐκπέμπεται πρὸς Νέρωνα τὸν of the Romans, Paul was again kept under
καίσαρα· συνῆν δὲ αὐτῷ καὶ Ἀρίσταρχος, guard for two whole years.
ὃν καὶ εἰκότως συναιχμαλωτόν που τῶν
ἐπιστολῶν ἀποκαλεῖ, καὶ Λουκᾶς ὁ τὰς
πράξεις τῶν ἀποστόλων γραφῇ παραδούς.
κἀκεῖσε οὖν ἐπὶ τῆς Ῥωμαίων ὁ Παῦλος
διετίαν ὅλην αὖθις ἐφυλάττετο·
[On the Use of [On the Use of Sources]

Sources: 709B]
ταῦτα γὰρ καὶ μέχρι τούτων ἱστορεῖ Λουκᾶς Luke tells the story up to this point in the
ἐν ταῖς πράξεσι τῶν ἀποστόλων, κατ᾽ Acts of the Apostles, as this was the time
ἐκεῖνο καιροῦ τὸ βιβλίον συγγραψάμενος, when he finished his book. Since he had
καὶ τὰ καθεξῆς ἥκιστα τότε γινώσκων, οὐδὲ no knowledge then of what happened later,
τὸ μαρτύριον τούτου ἐγκατέθετο τῇ βίβλῳ. he did not include his martyrdom, as Luke
καταλιπόντες γὰρ αὐτὸν ἐκεῖσε Λουκᾶς and Aristarchus then left him and went
τε καὶ Ἀρίσταρχος ἐξῆλθoν. Εὐσέβιος away. But Eusebius, who has accurately
δὲ, τοὺς μετέπειτα χρόνους ἀκριβῶς described the following period, has told
περιεργασάμενος, ἱστόρησεν ἡμῖν καὶ us also the story of his martyrdom in the
ἐν τῷ δευτέρῳ τόμῳ τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς second book of his History of the Church.
ἱστορίας τούτου καὶ τὸ μαρτύριον.
[From Paul’s First Defense to [From Paul’s First Defense

IJT.BSUZSEPN#o"> to his Martyrdom]
καί φησι τὸν Παῦλον ἄνετον διατρίψαι, He says that Paul lived as a free man, and
καὶ τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον ἀκωλύτως κηρύξαι he confirms that he preached the word
ἐπισημηνάμενος. τότε μὲν οὖν ἐπὶ Νέρωνος of God, no one preventing him. It is said
ἀπολογησάμενον τὸν Παῦλον αὖθις ἐπὶ that Paul, having defended himself be-
τὴν τοῦ κηρύγματος διακονίαν λόγος ἔχει fore Nero, was sent from the emperor as
στείλασθαι πρὸς καίσαρος ἀπολυθέντα, καὶ a free man to serve the message, and that
εὐαγγελίσασθαι ἐφ᾽ ἑτέροις δέκα ἔτεσιν. he preached the gospel for ten more years.
εἰς ἄκρον δὲ μανίας ὁ Νέρων ἀφικόμενος, When Nero reached the height of his mad-
ἀνεῖλεν μὲν Ἀγριππίναν πρῶτα τὴν ἰδίαν ness, he killed Agrippina, his own mother,
μητέρα, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν ἀδελφὴν τοῦ πατρὸς, and also his father’s sister, his own wife
καὶ Ὀκταουΐαν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα, καὶ Octavia and countless other relatives. After
ἄλλους μυρίους τῷ γένει προσήκοντας· that, he instigated a general persecution of
μετέπειτα δὲ καθολικὸν ἐκίνησε διωγμὸν the Christians. And thus, he was roused to
κατὰ τῶν Χριστιανῶν, καὶ οὕτως ἐπὶ τὰς bring slaughter upon the apostles. Then,
κατὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων ἐπήρθη σφαγάς. having called Paul to him, he once again
μεταστειλάμενoς γὰρ τὸν Παῦλον, αὖθις placed him before the tribunal. Luke was
τῷ βήματι παριστᾷ. συνῆλθε δὲ πάλιν ὁ with him also this time. Then it happened,
Λουκᾶς αὐτῷ. ἔνθα δὴ συνέβη τὸν Παῦλον in the thirty-sixth year after the passion of
τριακοστῷ ἕκτῳ ἔτει τοῦ σωτηρίου πάθους, our Savior, in the thirteenth year of Nero,
τρισκαιδεκάτῳ δὲ Νέρωνος, μαρτυρῆσαι, that Paul died as a martyr by having his
ξίφει τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀποτμηθέντα. head cut off by the sword.
[Chronological [Chronological Summary]

Summary: 712AB]
ἔστι τοίνυν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐννεακαιδεκάτου From the nineteenth year of the emperor
ἔτους Τιβερίου καίσαρος, ἐξ οὗ κηρύσσειν Tiberius, when he began to preach the gos-
τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἤρξατο, ἕως τοῦ εἰκοστοῦ pel, till his twenty-second year, there are
δευτέρου, ἔτη τέσσαρα, καὶ τὰ Γαΐ- four years, and the years of Gaius are also
ου δὲ ὡσαύτως ἔτη τέσσαρα, αὖθις δὲ four, but the years of Claudius are a little
καὶ τὰ Κλαυδίου ἔτη μικρὸν ἐλάττω less than fourteen. His successor, Nero,
δεκατέσσαρα· ὃν διαδεξάμενος Νέρων killed the Apostle in the thirteenth year of
τρισκαιδεκάτω ἔτει τῆς ἑαυτοῦ ἀρχῆς τὸν his reign. Paul the Apostle says this about
ἀπόστολον ἀνεῖλε. γράφει δὲ οὖν ὁ αὐτὸς his first defense, writing to Timothy: ‘At
ἀπόστολος Παῦλος Τιμοθέῳ, περὶ μὲν τῆς my first defense no one stood by my side;
πρώτης αὐτοῦ ἀπολογίας φάσκων τάδε· all deserted me. May it not be charged
»ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ μου ἀπολογίᾳ οὐδείς μοι against them! But the Lord stood by me
παρεγένετο, ἀλλὰ πάντες με ἐγκατέλιπον, and gave me strength to proclaim the word
μὴ αὐτοῖς λογισθείη. ὁ δὲ κύριός μου fully, that all the Gentiles might hear it. So
παρέστη, καὶ ἐνεδυνάμωσέ με, ἵνα δι᾽ ἐμοῦ I was rescued from the lion’s mouth.’ By
τὸ κήρυγμα πληροφορηθῇ, καὶ ἀκούσωσι this he means Nero. He says this about his
πάντα τὰ ἔθνη· καὶ ἐῤῥύσθην ἐκ στόματος second defense, in which his martyrdom
λέοντος«· τοῦτον τὸν Νέρωνα εἶναι λέγων· was completed: ‘Fulfill your good minis-
περὶ δὲ τῆς δευτέρας, ἐν ᾗ καὶ τελειοῦται try. For I am already on the point of being
τῷ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν μαρτυρίῳ, φησίν· »τὴν sacrificed; the time of my departure has
καλὴν διακονίαν σου πληροφόρησον· drawn near.’ Shortly after this, he writes
ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπένδομαι, καὶ ὁ καιρὸς that Luke is with him again: ‘Luke, who is
τῆς ἀναλύσεώς μου ἐφέστηκε«. καὶ ὅτι with me, greets you’. The entire period of
Λουκᾶς ἦν πάλιν σὺν αὐτῷ, μετ᾽ ὀλίγα Paul’s preaching is twenty-one years, an-
τῆς ἐπιστολῆς, »ἀσπάζεταί σε«, γράφει, other two years he spent in prison in Cae-
»Λουκᾶς, ὁ σὺν ἐμοί«. ἔστιν οὖν ὁ πᾶς sarea. In addition, he was again two years
χρόνος τοῦ κηρύγματος Παύλου εἴκοσι καὶ in Rome, and the last years amount to ten.
ἓν ἔτος, καὶ ἕτερα δύο ἔτη, ἃ διετέλεσεν ἐν
τῷ κατὰ Καισάρειαν δεσμωτηρίῳ. πρὸς δὲ Thus, all the years from his calling until his
τούτοις πάλιν τὰ ἐν Ῥώμῃ ἕτερα δύο ἔτη, perfection number thirty-five.
καὶ τὰ τελευταῖα δὲ ἔτη δέκα· ὥστε εἶναι τὰ
πάντα ἔτη ἀπὸ τῆς κλήσεως αὐτοῦ μέχρι
τῆς τελειώσεως, τριάκοντα καὶ πέντε.
[Appeal to the Reader: [Appeal to the Reader]

$o">
ἀλλὰ μήτις ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐμοὶ καταμεμφέσθω, But let no one rebuke me for this and re-
καὶ παραγραφέσθω τὰ καθεξῆς τῶν ject the events following Acts, saying that
πράξεων, λέγων τὸν Λουκᾶν ταῦτα μὴ Luke does not confirm them. To this a pru-
φάσκειν· ὃν ἐρήσεταί τις ἐχέφρων ἀνὴρ, dent man would respond: ‘My good friend,
εἰ τοὺς χρόνους, ὦ τὰν, οὐκ εἰσδέχῃ τοὺς if you do not accept the period following
μετέπειτα τῶν πράξεων, δός μοι, φησὶ, Acts, show me,’ he would say, ‘where Luke
τὸν Λουκᾶν ἱστοροῦντα τοῦ Παύλου τὸ tells the story of the martyrdom of Paul!’
μαρτύριον. εἰ μὲν γὰρ τοῖς δυσὶ τούτοις For if Luke had told us about the martyr-
μόνοις ἔτεσιν ὁ Λουκᾶς ἐμέτρησε Παύλου dom and estimated Paul’s stay in Rome to
τὴν ἐν Ῥώμῃ ζωὴν, τὸ μαρτύριον ἡμῖν be only these two years, there would be
ὑφηγησάμενος, οὐδεμιᾶς τινος ἡμῖν ἐδεῖτο no need for us to elaborate the chronol-
περιεργίας τῶν χρόνων. ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειδὴ τὸ ogy. But since he does not tell us about
μαρτύριον ἡμῖν οὗτος οὐ γράφει, ἔξωρον the martyrdom, as it happened much later
γὰρ καὶ μετὰ πολὺ τῆς βίβλου γεγένηται, than the time he covers in his book, trust
πείθου λοιπὸν Εὐσεβίῳ τῷ χρονογράφῳ, for the remainder the chronicler Eusebius,
καὶ τὴν ἱστορίαν εὐγνωμόνως, ὡς φίλος and accept his history with benevolence, as
εἰσδέχου. οἱ γὰρ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μαθηταὶ a friend. For the disciples of Christ, receiv-
πειθοῖ καὶ πίστει τὰς τῶν πατέρων ing for their edification the teachings and
διδασκαλίας τε καὶ παραδόσεις πρὸς traditions of the fathers with obedience
οἰκοδομὴν παραδεχόμενοι, τῆς οὐρανίου and faith, are made heirs of the heavenly
βασιλείας κληρονόμοι καθίστανται. kingdom.
Πρόλογος τῶν Prologue

καθολικῶν ἐπιστολῶν to the Catholic Letters
[Prologus praeter rem: 665A–668B] [Prologus praeter rem]

[Prooemium: 665A–668B] [Prooemium]
μικροῖς μὲν καὶ μικρὰ τολμῶσιν οὐκ ἀδεές· For a small man to undertake even a small
ὁ δὲ ἐλάχιστος ἐγὼ τοῖς ὑπὲρ ἐμὲ πόνοις task is not without perils. And I, the small-
ἐγχειρῶν, οὐχ ἥκιστά γέ πως πέφυκα est one, in trying to do something beyond
ἀκινδύνως γε, ὥσπερ ἂν εἴ τις σχεδίᾳ τινὶ my powers, have certainly not escaped
σμικροτάτῃ μέσον οἰόμενος ἐκτέμνειν τὸ danger, like someone who believes he can
πέλαγος, καὶ τὴν ἄτακτον τῶν πνευμάτων cleave the waves in the middle of the sea
ζάλην ὑποίσειν εὖ μάλα φανταζόμενος, on the most tiny raft and fancies he well
βραχεῖαν δέ τινα κυμάτων ἐπανάστασιν can bear the unruly blow of the winds.
μὴ φέρει, μικρὸν ὑποσυρίζοντος τότε τοῦ Then, as the north wind whistles gently
βοῤῥεα, ἀλλ᾽ ἄλλοθεν ἄλλῃ μυρίοις τὸ for a little while, he cannot endure even a
λοιπὸν ἐγκλήμασιν ὁ δείλαιος ῥιπίζεται. small rising of the waves, but the wretched
τὸν αὐτὸν δὴ τρόπον ἀρτίως εὖ οἶδ᾽ ὅτι man is now tossed hither and thither by
κἀγὼ ταυτησὶ τῆς αὐτὸς αὐτοῦ προπετείας a thousand charges. In exactly the same
ἀξιόπιστον εἰς ἀπολογίαν ἅπασιν ἀεὶ way, I also know well that I should always
προφέρω τὴν ὑπακοήν. ἐφ᾽ οἷς οὖν ἔγωγε display obedience to all, as a sincere apol-
τολμῶ, συγγνώμην αἰτῶ νέμειν ἀγάπης ogy for this impudence. Therefore, I ask
νόμῳ βεβιασμένος ὑπὸ σοῦ, ἀδελφὲ for forgiveness for what I dare to do, hav-
Ἀθανάσιε τιμιώτατε· οἷα γάρ τις ἡμιθνητῶν ing been forced by the law of love, by you,
ἀναλκὴς ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἔργον ἐκδιδοὺς, καὶ most reverend brother Athanasius. For as a
τῶν οἰκείων καμάτων ὥρας ἑκάστης τὸν half-dead man without strength I am sur-
μισθὸν πρὸς σωτηρίαν ἀπεκδεχόμενος rendering myself to the work, expecting a
οὐκοῦν, ὦ φίλη μοι κεφαλὴ, τὸ χρέος reward unto salvation for every hour of my
ἑκάστοτε τῆς ὑπακοῆς εὐγνωμόνει, καὶ own labors. Therefore, O my dear leader,
πρὸς συμπάθειαν τῶν ἡμετέρων κακῶν accept now with gentleness always the debt
ἄρτι γε νεύσας, τὸ πᾶν ἀγάπης ἡμῖν of obedience, and in compassion with our
κρατίστης ἔργον ἀντιδίδου, τὸν θεὸν wretched condition, give us in return the
ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ποτνιώμενος, ὅλον τε τὸν ἐν perfect work of the mightiest love, invok-
Χριστῷ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἄνθρωπον τὸν τῶν ing God for our sake and entreating every
ἁγίων σύλλογον καθικετεύων ἀλήκτως man in the Church of Christ, the congrega-
πρεσβεύειν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν· εὐεργετήσουσιν tion of the saints, to pray for us incessantly.
γὰρ, ὥσπερ δὴ ἐκεῖνοι, οἱ τὸ πρὶν τὸν For they will confer a benefit upon us, like
ὄροφον ἀφελόμενοι τοῦ οἴκου, καὶ τὸν those in the past who uncovered the roof
χωλὸν καταχαλάσαντες πρὸς Ἰησοῦν, of the house and let the lame man down
οἰκείᾳ τε πίστει τῶν ἀκουσίων παθῶν τῷ to Jesus. Then, by their own faith, they
κάμνοντι τότε τὴν ἴασιν πορισάμενοι. δέξαι provided cure for the sick man from his
τοιγαροῦν, δέξαι παρ᾽ ἡμῶν ἀσμένως τῶν unwanted sufferings. Receive therefore, re-
σῶν ἐπὶταγμάτων τὴν πραγματείαν, εὐχῇ ceive from me with pleasure, the work car-
τῇ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἡμᾶς τῆς πειθοῦς διηνεκῶς ried out at your orders, and in return for
ἀμειβόμενος. our obedience, pray for us till the end.
[Prologus ante rem: 668B] [Prologus ante rem]

[Editorial Notice: 668B] [Editorial Notice]
ἐγὼ δέ τοι στιχηδὸν τὰς καθολικὰς I will read the Catholic Letters one after
καθεξῆς ἐπιστολὰς ἀναγνώσομαι, τὴν another, in verses, and at the same time
τῶν κεφαλαίων ἔκθεσιν ἅμα, καὶ θείων make a mediocre exposition from this of
μαρτυριῶν μετρίως ἐνθένδε ποιούμενος. their chapters and divine testimonies.
Πρόλογος τῶν πράξεων Prologue to Acts
[Prologus praeter rem: 628A–633B] [Prologus praeter rem]

[Prooemium: 628A–632A] [Prooemium]
ὅσοι τῆς ὄντως πάνυ πως ἀγχιθέoυ καὶ They who truly yearn for immortality in
θεοφιλοῦς ἀθανασίας εἰσὶν ἐρασταὶ, τῆς the loving presence of God and have be-
τε ἐπουρανίου καὶ θεοπρεποῦς πολιτείας come ministers of the heavenly and godly
λειτουργοὶ τυγχάνουσιν, οὗτοι σκοπὸν community, as they have chosen the first
ἄριστον ἑαυτοῖς ὁρισάμενοι τὸν πρῶτόν beatitude of David, the holy psalmist, as
γε τοῦ ἱεροψάλτου Δαυῒδ μακαρισμὸν, their excellent guideline, they meditate day
τοὺς περὶ τοῦ θείου λόγου λόγους and night in their own souls on the words
ἐμμελέτημα νύκτωρ τε καὶ μεθ᾽ ἡμέραν τῇ about the divine Word. […] and tasted its
σφῶν αὐτῶν τέθεινται ψυχῇ, ἀληθῶς τὸ virtuous and divine fruits, they withdraw
τῆς ἀγλαοφεγγοῦς καὶ μακαρίας ταύτης their minds from everything else, and now,
ἡμεροτρωθέντες, καὶ τῶν ἐναρέτων rejoicing, they turn their eyes upwards to
αὐτῆς καὶ θείων καρπῶν ἀπογευσάμενοι, immortality itself. It is necessary to obey
τὴν ἅπασαν αὐτῶν ἔννοιαν πάντοθεν their orders at all times, to serve them to
συνάγοντες, ἄνω που τὸ λοιπὸν εὐθύμως their benefit. For it is right that we, hav-
εἰς αὐτὴν τὴν ἀθανασίαν βλέπουσιν. ing received benefits from others, always
ἐπιτάττουσι τοίνυν αὐτοῖς χρὴ πειθαρχεῖν, are helpful to those who ask and that we
διακονεῖν τε τούτοις ἑκάστοτε τὰ πρὸς fairly can escape the curse of envy found
ὠφέλειαν· θέμις γὰρ ἡμᾶς, τοὺς παρ᾽ in the Gospels. First, I read and wrote the
ἑτέρων ὠφελημένους, χρησίμους ἀεὶ Apostolic Book in verses and sent it not
γίνεσθαι τοῖς δεομένοις, ἀποφεύγειν τε long ago to one of our fathers in Christ,
εἰκότως τὴν ἐν εὐαγγελίοις τοῦ φθόνου this mediocre work that I made, like a foal
καταγραφήν. πρῶτον δὴ οὖν ἔγωγε τὴν that has not learned to walk, or an unedu-
ἀποστολικὴν βίβλον στιχηδὸν ἀναγνούς cated youth ordered to take a desolate and
τε καὶ γράψας, πρώην διεπεμψάμην untrodden road. For I have no knowledge
πρός τινα τῶν ἐν Χριστῷ πατέρων ἡμῶν, that any servant of the word previously
μετρίως πεποιημένην ἐμοὶ, οἷά τις πῶλος with zeal has worked out the shape of this
ἀβαδὴς, ἢ νέος ἀμαθὴς ἐρήμην ὁδὸν καὶ writing. For there was never a man so
ἀτριβῆ ἰέναι προστεταγμένος· οὐδένα γάρ stubborn and audacious that he himself
που τῶν, ὅσοι τὸν θεῖον ἐπρεσβεύσαντο would cruelly molest the painstaking work
λόγον, εἰς δεῦρο διέγνων περὶ τοῦτο τῆς of others with mediocre divisions of our
γραφῆς ταύτης εἰς σπουδὴν πεποιημένον unlearned reading. Having recently read
τὸ σχῆμα. οὐδὲ γὰρ ἀνὴρ αὐθάδης οὕτως through, as I said, the Book of Paul, and
οὐδὲ τολμηρὸς ἦν, ὡς τοὺς ἑτέρους soon toiled also with this one, the Book
εὖ μάλα πεποιημένους πόνους αὐτὸς of Apostolic Acts, along with the seven
ἀφειδῶς καθυβρίζειν μετρίαις ταῖς τῆς Catholic Letters, I send them now to you.
ὀλιγομαθοῦς ἡμῶν ἀναγνώσεως τομαῖς. On account of both works, I am asking for
ἔναγχος τοίνυν, ὡς ἔφην, τὴν Παύλου the greatest forgiveness for my audacity as
βίβλον ἀνεγνωκὼς, αὐτίκα δῆτα καὶ τήνδε well as for my impudence, fairly entreat-
τὴν τῶν ἀποστολικῶν πράξεων, ἅμα τῇ ing all together, brothers as well as fathers,
τῶν καθολικῶν ἐπιστολῶν ἑβδομάδι, to read them with love and to forget both
πονήσας ἀρτίως σοι πέπομφα, συγγνώμην my sins and my errors, caused by inexperi-
γε πλείστην αἰτῶν ἐπ᾽ ἀμφοῖν, τόλμης ence. Rather, correct for me every one of
ὁμοῦ καὶ προπετείας τῆς ἐμῆς, ἅπαντάς them in a brotherly manner, with friendli-
τε εἰκότως κοινῇ καθικετεύων ἀδελφούς ness. For the fatherly command forced us
τε καὶ πατέρας, μετ᾽ ἀγάπης αὐταῖς to this point, to dare what is beyond our
ἐντυγχάνειν, τῶν τε ἐμῶν ἁμαρτημάτων powers. Having now obeyed some broth-
τε καὶ σφαλμάτων, τῶν ἐξ ἀπειρίας, erly and friendly wish, we try again to do
ἀμνημονεύειν· διορθοῦσθαι δέ μοι something greater than what befits us, and
μᾶλλον ἀδελφικῶς κατὰ συμπεριφορὰν we say so openly. But among brothers and
τούτων τὰ ἕκαστα. ἐκεῖσε μὲν γὰρ ἡμᾶς fathers love makes room for everything,
πατρικὸν νεῦμα τολμᾶν τὰ ὑπὲρ ἡμᾶς showing no disdain for itself, toward its
κατέδησεν· ἐνθάδε δὲ ἀδελφικῇ τινι καὶ own body. For we have a divine law, which
γνησίᾳ διαθέσει πειθαρχήσαντες, αὖθις is holy indeed, the law of brotherly love, al-
ἐγχειροῦμεν μείζοσιν ἢ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς, καὶ ways wishing for love and expressly saying
παρρησιαζόμεθα. ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἀδελφοῖς καὶ it can cover a multitude of sins.
πατράσιν ἡ ἀγάπη τὰ πάντα χωρεῖ, οὐδὲν
ὑπεροπτικὸν αὐτῇ καθ᾽ ἑαυτῆς εἰς τὸ
οἰκεῖον σῶμα ἐπιδεικνυμένη· νόμος γὰρ
θεῖος ἡμῖν ἐστιν ὡς ἀληθῶς ὁ ἱερὸς, ὁ
φιλάδελφος, τὴν ἀγάπην ἐθέλων ἀεὶ, καὶ
διαῤῥήδην λέγων καλύπτειν πλῆθος
ἁμαρτιῶν.
[Encomium of Melete: [Encomium of Melete]

632A–633B]
ἐγὼ δὲ δικαιώτατα καὶ μάλα γε ὀρθῶς But I will justly and rightly, indeed, recom-
σύντροφόν τε καὶ φίλην ἐπιφημίσαιμ᾽ ἄν mend to you a familiar and beloved one. I
σοι, καὶ καταλέξω τὴν εὐπροσήγορον, will choose the aptly and rightly named; I
τὴν πάνυ φερώνυμον, τὴν τῶν θείων speak of wisdom-bringing meditation on
λογίων ἐμφιλόσοφόν φημι μελέτην, the divine words, in whose power and in
ὑφ᾽ ἣν γεγονὼς, φιλόχριστε, καὶ εἴσω whose nets you are, Christ lover, being
γέ τοι τῶν δικτύων αὐτῆς ὑπάρχων, heard through long and sleepless exercises,
καὶ τὴν ἐράσμιον αὐτῆς προσηγορίαν busy with her beloved name, as you are
ἐγκαταπραγματευόμενος, συχναῖς τε ἀεὶ making her bloom exceedingly. As also
καὶ ἀκοιμήτοις γυμνασίαις ἀκουόμενος one of the poets has truly said, recom-
εὐθαλεστάτην κατέστησας. ὡς ἄρα γέ που mending the most wonderful benefits that
καὶ ποιητῶν τις εἴρηκε τὴν ἀλήθειαν, καὶ come to us from her. He almost cries out
παρεγγυᾷ τὴν καλλίστην ἡμῖν ἐξ αὐτῆς and says that ‘Melete benefits the work’.
ὠφέλειαν, μονονουχὶ βοῶν, καὶ φάσκων And again, the most noble of the wise has,
ὧδε· »μελέτη δέ τοι ἔργον ὠφελεῖ«. καὶ αὖ in his advice on how to live, attributed ev-
πάλιν σοφῶν γε ὁ πανάριστος βιωφελῶς erything to Melete. If anyone once showed
τῇ μελέτῃ τὸ πᾶν ἀνέθηκεν· εἰ γάρ τις ἄττα her contempt, he set for himself with his
ταύτης ὀλιγωροίη ποτὲ, αὐτὸς ἑαυτοῦ τὴν carelessness the penalty imposed by the
θωὴν τοῦ μακαρισμοῦ ἐξ οἰκείας ῥαθυμίας beatitude. For, ‘blessed’, he says, ‘is he who
κατεψηφίσατο. »μακάριος« γὰρ, φησὶν, meditates on the law of the Lord day and
»ἀνὴρ, ὃς ἐν νόμῳ κυρίου μελετήσει night’. As God from the beginning wanted
ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτός«. τοὺς γὰρ ἅπαντας everybody to be good and pious, he urged
ἄνωθεν εὔνους τε καὶ θεοσεβεῖς ἐθέλων everyone to pay heed to the meditation on
ὁ θεὸς εἶναι, πρὸς μελέτην δ ἑκάστου his commandments, saying: ‘Hear, O Isra-
τὸν νοῦν παροτρύνων τῶν ἰδίων ἐντολῶν, el, the Lord our God is one Lord. And you
ἔφασκεν· »ἄκουε, Ἰσραὴλ, κύριος ὁ θεός shall love the Lord your God with all your
σου, κύριος εἷς ἐστιν· καὶ ἀγαπήσεις κύριον heart, and with all your might. And these
τὸν θεόν σου ἐξ ὅλης τῆς καρδίας σου, καὶ words, which I command you this day,
ἐξ ὅλης τῆς δυνάμεως σου· καὶ ἔσται τὰ shall be upon your heart and in your soul.
ῥήματα ταῦτα, ὅσα ἐγὼ ἐντέλλομαί σοι And you shall teach them diligently to your
σήμερον, ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου καὶ ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ children, and shall talk of them when you
σου· καὶ προβιβάσεις αὐτὰ τοῖς υἱοῖς σου, sit in your house, and when you walk by
καὶ λαλήσεις ἐν αὐτοῖς, καθήμενος ἐν οἴκῳ, the way, and when you lie down and when
καὶ πορευόμενος ἐν ὁδῷ, καὶ κοιταζόμενος you rise.’ Thus, God wants us always to
καὶ διανιστάμενος«. οὕτως ἄϋπνόν τε καὶ have this restless attitude toward Melete.
ἀΐδιον πρὸς τὴν μελέτην ταύτην ἔχειν Indeed, already the holy singer David had
ἡμᾶς τὴν διάθεσιν ὁ θεὸς βούλεται. ἤδη confidence in this observance of the divine
γοῦν τὴν ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ φυλακῇ τῆς θείας precept and spoke to God: ‘The meditation
διατάξεως παῤῥησίαν ἔχων ὁ ἱεροψάλτης of my heart is always in thy sight, O Lord,
Δαυῒδ ἔλεγε τῷ θεῷ, ὅτι »ἡ μελέτη my helper and my redeemer.’ The beatitude
τῆς καρδίας μου ἐνώπιόν σου ἐστὶ διὰ is now our certain and undisputed reward
παντὸς, κύριε βοηθέ μου καὶ λυτρωτά for the passion that makes us meditate on
μου«. ἔπαθλον τοίνυν ἀναμφήριστον καὶ the divine teachings. If we neglect it, un-
ἀναμφίλεκτον τῆς πρὸς τὴν μελέτην τῶν avoidable punishment from God will cer-
θείων μαθημάτων στοργῆς ἡμῖν ἐστιν ὁ tainly follow. For if some do not care about
μακαρισμὸς, ὅτι καὶ ῥᾳθυμοῦσι ταύτης it, they will get to know what later will
ἀναφανδὸν ἀπαραίτητος ἕπεται θεόθεν be the conviction of even the wretched:
ὁ ταλανισμός. εἰ γὰρ ἂν ταύτης τινὲς ‘Cursed be he who does not confirm all the
ἀμελήσειεν, πεύσονται, ἃ καὶ μετέπειτα οἱ words in this book of law by doing them.’
δείλαιοι πείσονται, ὅτι »ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς, Therefore, may we never end or abandon
ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς γεγραμμένοις our most pious and noble conversation
ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι with her! For she is both sociable and af-
αὐτά«. Οὐκ οὖν ἀπολῆξαί ποτε εἴη, μηδ᾽ fectionate, and charitable indeed, as she al-
ἀπονεῦσαι τῆς πρὸς αὐτὴν εὐσεβοῦς τε ways gives back delight to everyone for his
καὶ βελτίστης ὁμιλίας· φιλοσυνήθης τε toils in more than due measure. Because,
γάρ ἐστιν αὕτη, καὶ φιλόστοργος, καὶ λίαν as a man makes progress and gets to know
εὐγνώμων, ἐργωδέστερον ἑκάστῳ τὴν more subjects, it is his nature to strive for
ὄνησιν ἀεὶ τῶν πόνων ἀντιμετρουμένη. thrice as much of greater and more impor-
ὅσῳ γὰρ ἄν τις ἐν ἕξει, καὶ γνώσει, tant things. For, as a clever artist who has
πλειόνων γίγνεται μαθημάτων, τρὶς τόσον come upon the most beautiful work of his
μειζόνων, καὶ σπουδαιοτέρων ὀρέγεσθαι art, for the remainder he works over again
πέφυκεν. καθάπερ γὰρ ἄν τις ἀγχίνους its tiniest parts, adjusting them and bring-
χειροτέχνης τὸ κάλλιστον τῆς τέχνης ing them into harmony, he searches always,
εὑρόμενος, τὸ λεπτώτερον δ᾽ αὖθις ἐξ using a thousand devices, to bring his own

αὐτῆς περιεργάζηται λοιπὸν, καὶ ζητῇ, design to still greater perfection. In the
μυρίαις ἀεὶ μηχαναῖς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ αὐτὸς same way, the task of reading is instructive
ἔννοιαν πρὸς τὸ τελειότερον συνεκτείνων for us, as it every day, in small steps, trains
τε καὶ ἁρμοζόμενος· τὸν αὐτὸν δὴ τρόπον and lifts up the soul to contemplate knowl-
ἡμῖν καὶ ἡ τῆς ἀναγνώσεως τυγχάνει edge of beautiful things.
χρηστομαθὴς πραγματεία, ὁσημέραι
πρὸς θεωρίαν τῆς τῶν καλῶν γνώσεως
κατὰ μικρὸν τὴν ψυχὴν ἐξασκοῦσά τε καὶ
ἀναβιβάζουσα.
[Prologus ante rem: 633B–636A] [Prologus ante rem]

[Editorial Notice: 633BC] [Editorial Notice]
τοῖος τοιγαροῦν φιλόλογος ἄγαν ὑπάρχων Being such an eminent lover of the word,
τὸν τρόπον, ἀλίκτως τε ταύτην, ὡς φίλος, and incessantly honoring this task, as a
γεραίρων, οὐχ ἥκιστα δὲ ἂν εὐφημῶν friend, and praising it always, you just or-
ἑκάστοτε, ἔναγχος ἐμοί γε τήν τε τῶν dered me, my best friend, brother Atha-
πράξεων βίβλον ἅμα, καὶ καθολικῶν nasius, to read the Book of Acts and the
ἐπιστολῶν ἀναγνῶναί τε κατὰ προσῳδίαν, Catholic Letters with a correct pronuncia-
καί πως ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι, καὶ διελεῖν tion, make some summaries, and divide
τούτων ἑκάστης τὸν νοῦν λεπτομερῶς, the contents of both of them into smaller
προσέταξας, ἀδελφὲ Ἀθανάσιε parts. And this I have done with zeal, with-
προσφιλέστατε, καὶ τοῦτο ἀόκνως ἐγὼ, out hesitation. Having organized the texts
καὶ προθύμως πεποιηκὼς, στιχηδόν τε into verses according to my own design,
συνθεὶς τούτων τὸ ὕφος, κατὰ τὴν ἐμαυτοῦ aiming at a clear reading, I sent them both
συμμετρίαν, πρὸς εὔσημον ἀνάγνωσιν, promptly to you.
διεπεμψάμην ἐν βράχει τὰ ἕκαστά σοι,
[Epitome of Acts: 633C–636A] [Epitome of Acts]

καὶ κατ᾽ ἀκολουθίαν ἐκθέμενος In the following I have prefixed a short
ὀλιγοστὴν ἀνακεφαλαίωσιν, πρῶτον, περὶ summary of the work of Luke the Evan-
ὧν Λουκᾶς ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς συνέταξε, gelist. He was of Antiochene ancestry and
προοιμιασάμενος· Ἀντιοχεὺς γὰρ οὗτος learned in medicine. After he had become
ὑπάρχων τὸ γένος, ἰατρός τε τὴν ἐπιστήμην, a disciple of Paul, he composed two books.
πρὸς Παύλου μαθητευθεὶς, δύο βίβλους The first of them was the Gospel, the sec-
συνεγράψατο, μίαν μὲν καὶ προτέραν τὴν ond the book about the apostolic acts. So,
τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, δευτέραν δὲ ταύτην τὴν the entire content of this volume is about
περὶ τῶν ἀποστολικῶν πράξεων. ἔστιν οὖν the ascension of Christ to the heavens
ὁ πᾶς λόγος τοῦδε τοῦ τεύχους περί τε τῆς after the resurrection, the coming of the
μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν εἰς τοὺς οὐρανοὺς Holy Spirit to the holy apostles, and how
ἀνόδου τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ περὶ τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου and where the disciples proclaimed pi-
πνεύματος εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους ἀποστόλους ety toward Christ, and the miracles they
ἐπιφοιτήσεως· ὅπως τε καὶ ὅποι τὴν worked through prayer and faith in Him.
εἰς Χριστὸν εὐσέβειαν κατήγγειλαν οἱ And about the divine calling of Paul that
μαθηταὶ· καὶ ὅσα διὰ προσευχῆς καὶ τῆς εἰς came from heaven, his apostleship and the
αὐτὸν πίστεως ἐθαυματούργησαν· καὶ περὶ flowering message, and, to put it briefly,
τῆς οὐρανόθεν θείας κλήσεως τοῦ Παύλου, about the many and great dangers that the
ἀποστολῆς τε αὐτοῦ, καὶ κηρύγματος apostles endured for the sake of Christ.
εὐθαλοῦς· καὶ, συλλήβδην εἰπεῖν, περὶ 150 lines.
ὧν ἤθλησαν οἱ ἀπόστολοι διὰ Χριστὸν
πολλῶν τε καὶ μεγίστων κινδύνων. στίχοι
ρν.
Part Three
Commentary
III. Commentary
1. Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

1.1. The Genre κεφάλαιον-τίτλος
The term κεφάλαιον may refer to a main point or idea in the pre-text, as does the Latin
caput. This use may be derived from κεφάλαιον in the meaning ‘sum’. The κεφάλαιον may
thus be described as the ‘sum of a text’.1 The term may also refer to the pre-text itself, as
does the Latin capitulum. The ambiguity of the Greek term can easily cause confusion.
von Soden attempted to clarify the terminology by using κεφάλαιον with reference to the
pre-text, and κεφάλαιον-τίτλος to describe the summary of it.2 This terminology is pre-
cise, even if it makes use of a compound expression that was unknown in antiquity. In the
present commentary, the term κεφάλαιον-τίτλος has been adopted for the sake of clarity.3
From the perspective of textual linguistics, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι may function as sub-
stitutions on meta-level. The ‘meta-level’ may be expressed visually by separating the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι from the original pre-text, placing them in the margins or as headings
above the pre-text. The possibility exists, however, that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι in the history
of transmission are treated as a more organic part of the original work.4
Although κεφάλαιον-τίτλος can mean the sum of a text, it is not used of any kind of
summary. Zuntz describes the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος as a mere catchword or a short clause,
often introduced by περί, πῶς or ὅτι.5 This style can be observed in the samples below
from the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos that are transmitted as part of his work:
1 See Raible 1995: 58. The term κεφάλαιον may also be used of a saying that is not dependent on another
text. For an example of this popular genre, see, e.g., the Praktikos of Evagrius Ponticus (A. Guillaumont
and C. Guillaumont 1971). This genre has been described as the literary successor of the apophthegm
(A. M. Casiday 2006: 163). The κεφάλαια of Evagrius Ponticus are interesting also because the name
‘Evagrius’ occurs in some Euthalian manuscripts (see the History of Research). However, I have not been
able to discover anything in the Euthalian material that points to Evagrius as the author. There seems in
the Euthalian apparatus to be no special interest in the biblical text as allegory or an interest in asceticism
in general. This does of course not exclude any possibilities, but I would have expected these interests in
an ‘Evagrian’ apparatus. For samples of the exegetical work of Evagrius, see Casidayo
3 I prefer to use this terminology also when referring to the works of other scholars, who do not use it. In
this way, I hope to avoid confusion between the pre-text and the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος.
4 A curious example is mentioned by C. Tischendorf (1891: v), who points out that a fragment of a Eu-
thalian κεφάλαιον-τίτλος (ἐν ᾧ, ὅτι καὶ τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ προετιμήθη) appeared as a part of Heb 7:3 in the
Complutensian Polyglot.
5 See Zuntz 1945: 80, cf. the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι from the Tetrabiblos of Ptolemy below.
122 Commentary
Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos, κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Book I, chapters ii–vi, excerpt from F. E. Robbins,

pp. 4–41.
Ὅτι καταληπτικὴ ἡ δι᾽ ἀστρονομίας γνῶσις, That knowledge by astronomical means is at-
καὶ μέχρι τίνος tainable, and how far.
Ὅτι καὶ ὠφέλιμος That it is also beneficial.
Περὶ τῆς τῶν πλανωμένων ἀστέρων δυνάμεως Of the power of the planets.
Περὶ ἀγαθοποιῶν καὶ κακοποιῶν Of beneficent and maleficent planets.
Περὶ ἀρρηνικῶν καὶ θηλυκῶν ἀστέρων Of masculine and feminine planets.
When stringed together, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι form an asyndetic list. The first of the forms
mentioned by Zuntz, the περί-phrase, corresponds to a common form of Greek book
titles such as Περὶ φύσεως (Heraclitus). This type of book title was common in works of
scientific prose. Zuntz has emphasized that the genre κεφάλαιον-τίτλος in antiquity was
particularly associated with scientific literature, where a list of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι could be
prefixed to the entire work. The technical terms for such a list are ἔκθεσις, προέκθεσις
or πίναξ.6 Zuntz uses the examples of a reader who is searching for a quotation in an
anthology, for a prescription in a medical book or for some advice on farming in an
agricultural handbook. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι will guide the reader to the relevant pas-
sage in the book, as they are repeated in the margins of the pre-text.7 A consequence of
this is that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι normally have little value without the pre-text. A mere
indication of theme, such as Περὶ ἀρετῶν, could be a description of many texts, and the
reader who wants to know what the pre-text actually says must consult it. Thus it may be
said that κεφάλαια-τίτλοι normally are not intended as substitutes for the pre-text. The
intention of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is thus to help the reader. It should be kept in mind that
the amount of help offered obviously depends on the skill of their author. In his edition
of Cato’s De agricultura, Andrew Dalby remarks that the titles in the manuscripts often
are poorly chosen and poorly placed. Scraps from Cato’s text have been recirculated as
headings that may easily confuse the reader; sometimes they even break up a sentence in
the original work.8
Gerard Genette has in his study of ‘paratexts’ given a sketch of the development of ti-
tles.9 He uses the term ‘inter-title’ for the internal titles of a work, such as κεφάλαια-τίτλοι,
and argues that thematic inter-titles of epic, historical and didactic works in antiquity
normally were quite simple. Thus, the first four books of the Odyssey were labeled the
‘Telemachy’. The two Homeric epics were each divided into twenty-four books. These
were first only numbered, in Greek by using the letters of the alphabet. At some later stage
the books were given individual titles, such as the ‘Nekyia’ for the eleventh book of the
Odyssey. Genette observes a similar preference for simplicity in historical and didactic
works from antiquity. Genette suggests that there emerged during the Middle Ages a
new type of intertitle, the descriptive type beginning with ‘How…’, ‘Wherein is seen…’,
6 See Zuntz 1945: 82. Such a list is found e.g. in Plotin, Enneads ed. H.-R. Schwyzero XIFSF
it is labeled προέκθεσις in some manuscripts. Willard (1970: 64/2009: 47), on the other hand, uses the
term ἔκθεσις also for the exposition of a single chapter. This use seems not to be found in ancient authors.
7 This is often found in Euthalian manuscripts, see Willard 1970: 65/2009: 47. Also in Robbins’s edition of
the Tetrabiblos of Ptolemy (F. E. Robbins 1940/2001), the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are spread throughout the text.
8 See A. Dalby 1998: 28.
9 The survey of the development of inter-titles is found in Genetteo
Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι 123
‘Which tells…’, or ‘About…’.10 This type of indirect synopsis is then found in works of the
three branches of literature (epic, historical and didactic) that he discusses. According to
Genette, medieval editors also added inter-titles of this type to works from antiquity. The
general history of chapter titles in European literature needs to be examined in future
studies. In this commentary, the relevance of the Euthalian material for this general his-
tory should be pointed out: An important question is the origin of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
of works from antiquity that we find in medieval manuscripts. It should be noted that
some of the types Genette considers medieval (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι beginning with ‘how’ or
‘about’), are attested in the Euthalian apparatus. As the earliest witness to the Euthalian
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is Codex H of the 6th century, the beginning of this tradition may be
earlier than Genette has suggested.
1.2. The Structure of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

On the other hand, within the Euthalian tradition there is a particular development that
may confirm the view that κεφάλαια-τίτλοι tended to become more complex. This is the
introduction of subdivisions (ὑποδιαιρέσεις). The subdivisions are also given titles (in
von Soden’s terminology ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι). The ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι are regularly
introduced with the formula ἐν ᾧ. In Zacagni’s edition of the Euthalian apparatus, the
ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι that occur under each κεφάλαιον-τίτλος are numbered. Accord-
ing to the introduction to the chapter list of Acts, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι were written in
black ink, while the ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι were written in red.11 All scholars ascribe the
ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι to the original editions of Euthalius. At an earlier stage, however,
the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι may have existed without them. Thus von Soden argued that the
ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι had been added to make the picture of the text more complete. He
10 See Genette 1997: 311.

11 The use of red and black ink to indicate different levels in the text is known from medieval liturgical books,
see A. Menne 1980: 64; Hellholm 1995: 17. On the other hand, Robinson o BSHVFEUIBU
the original system of Euthalius did not use red ink, and that the ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι were indicated
only by asterisks. He quotes a 10th century Greek catena manuscript (Coislin. XXV) where the heading
to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts has an interesting textual variant. Here the last sentence about the use of
black and red ink is lacking. Instead, there is a reference to the use of asterisks to indicate the subdivi-
sions. These asterisks have unfortunately disappeared from the codex. According to Robinson, the later
development of the system is easily explained if we presuppose that the use of asterisks is original. When
the asterisks were replaced by letters, some scribes made the first subdivision coincide with the beginning
of the κεφάλαιον (as in Codex H). Thus the seventh (Ζ) κεφάλαιον of Heb has in Codex H three numbers
on the second level (Α, Β, Γ), the number Α being placed immediately underneath the number Ζ (see the
facsimile in Omont 1890: 169). But in Zacagni’s edition another system is used: Here the beginning of
the κεφάλαιον is not numbered twice, and there are only two numbers on the second level (Α, Β) which
correspond to the subdivisions Β and Γ in Codex H respectively. This is the system that is described as
the most common in Euthalian manuscripts by Jülicher/Fascher (1931: 575), who note an interesting
correspondence with the ancient κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Gospels. In the Gospel manuscripts, the begin-
ning of the first κεφάλαιον is normally after the beginning of the book: ‘z. B. Kap 1 in Joh beginnt Joh
2,1 […].’ Thus, the first κεφάλαιον in the Gospel of John is the Wedding at Cana. There is a great variety
in the Euthalian manuscripts. Robinson lists all five different systems, including one manuscript where
there is a consecutive numbering of both κεφάλαια and ὑποδιαιρέσεις (the list for Romans in Paris B. N.
Arm 9). Thus, in this manuscript, the distinction between the two levels is completely ignored. Robinson’s
hypothesis has clearly explanatory value but a new edition of Euthalius is needed in order to examine the
evidence in greater detail. On this problem, see also Willardoo
124 Commentary
reproduced the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts without the ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι, and found

that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι by themselves gave an excellent survey of the book, while the
ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι were less compact and tended towards paraphrasing the biblical
text.12
1.3. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the Division of the Pre-text

As a κεφάλαιον-τίτλος is a summary of a specific section, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι presup-
pose a division of the pre-text. It is important to note that the division of the pre-text
in some cases may belong to an earlier stage than the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. Thus, divisions
corresponding to the Euthalian ones are found in manuscripts that are not necessarily
Euthalian.13 In the present study, the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are given Roman numer-
als, e.g. Rom I = the first κεφάλαιον-τίτλος of Romans.
The division of the biblical text into κεφάλαια differs from the chapter division found in
modern editions of the New Testament. The Euthalian division seems in general to rep-
resent an analysis of the biblical texts that deserves attention. In some instances, however,
we may prefer the clarity of the Euthalian list without the ὑποδιαιρέσεις, which may be
secondary. The following three examples may serve as an illustration:
Acts V. About the believers being of one soul and sharing everything with one another (Acts
o In this: About Ananias and Sapphira and their cruel end ("DUTo
The κεφάλαιον begins with the summary about the members of the church in Jerusa-
MFNTIBSJOHBMMQPTTFTTJPOT o BOEJTGPMMPXFECZUXPFYBNQMFT UIFĕSTUQPTJUJWF
#BSOBCBT o UIFTFDPOEOFHBUJWF "OBOJBTBOE4BQQIJSB o ćF&VUIBMJBO
MJTUIBTUSBOTGPSNFEUIFTVNNBSZJOoJOUPBϨϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫϰцϰϩϭ϶ćJTTFFNTUPCF
based on the observation that the summary and the following two examples form a unity.
von Soden notes that the Euthalian division here is superior to that of Langton, where the
story of Ananias and Sapphira opens the fifth chapter of Acts.14 In the Euthalian list, on
the other hand, this story is a subdivision (ὑποδιαίρεσις). When viewing the story in its
full context, the list is revealed to be leaving much out of the κεφάλαιον. A complete anal-
ZTJTPGUIFϨϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫTIPVMEIBWFQBJEBUUFOUJPOBMTPUPUIFTUPSZPG#BSOBCBT o
and listed this as the first of two sub-divisions.
This may support the view of von Soden that the ὑποδιαιρέσεις are secondary, and that
they are not designed to reproduce the structure of the pre-text.
3 John II. About Demetrius, to whom he gives the best testimony. (1 John 1:12)
3 John is divided into three κεφάλαια. The second κεφάλαιον corresponds to a single
verse in our editions (v. 12). One may ask why the list describes this verse as a κεφάλαιον.
In the pre-text, the name Demetrius appears abruptly. This has led some commentators
12 See von Soden o ćF Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϟϰцϰϩϭϧ PG "DUT BQQFBS XJUIPVU UIF аɀϭϢϧϟϧϮтϯϣϧ϶ϰцϰϩϭϧ
prefixed to the commentary to Acts attributed to Theophylact (PGo ćJTQSPCBCMZSFĘFDUT
an older layer in the tradition than the Euthalian version.
13 E.g. in Gothic manuscripts of the Pauline letters. These have divisions that are close to Euthalius, but do
not have the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, see Marchand 1956.
14 See von Soden 1902: 479
to assume that Demetrius was the letter carrier and that 3 John is a letter of recommenda-
tion written for him.15 A similar idea is presupposed in the Euthalian division, where the
testimony to Demetrius is one of the main points of the letter, preceded by a prayer and
followed by the announcement of the author’s arrival. The words against his opponent,
Diotrephes, are treated as a ὑποδιαίρεσις of the first κεφάλαιον.
Jude II. Rebuke for error, impiety, immorality, mockery, and their false and deceptive acts to
obtain gifts. (+VEo
It is not clear exactly where this κεφάλαιον ends. von Soden notes in his edition that
the third κεφάλαιον may begin either with v. 17 or with v. 20. Regardless of this, the
beginning of the second κεφάλαιον is marked in the pre-text with the words οὐαὶ αὐτοῖς
(1:11). An interesting feature of this division is that some of the accusations against the
opponents are also present in the preceding section (Jude I = +VEFo *UJTUIFDSZPG
woe that marks the division at 1:11, while the pronoun (αὐτοῖς) creates coherence with
the preceding section. The openings of the Euthalian κεφάλαια are often marked with
related linguistic phenomena16.
1.4. The meta-terminology of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

1.4.1. ΠΑΡΑΙΝΕΣΙΣ
a) Rom XVII Exhortation (παραίνεσις) about virtue before God and men.
Pre-text (3PNo ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩҀϭеϫаϪѩ϶ ЋϢϣϩϲϭц
b) Eph VI: Exhortation about unifying love, even if the gifts of grace are distributed to
common benefit.
Pre-text (&QIo ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩҀϭеϫаϪѩ϶ГϡыЪϢтϯϪϧϭ϶ГϫϨϱϮцѾ
c) 1 Thess IV: Exhortation to temperance, justice as if before the judgment, brotherly
love and work with one’s own business.
Pre-text (ćFTTo ϩϭϧɀчϫϭеϫ ЋϢϣϩϲϭц ГϮϵϰҀϪϣϫаϪѩ϶ϨϟхɀϟϮϟϨϟϩϭѼϪϣϫ
ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ
d) 1 Pet VII, Advice (παραίνεσις) to elders about care for the flock.
Pre-text (1FUo ɀϮϣϯϠϱϰтϮϭϱ϶ϭеϫГϫаϪѴϫɀϟϮϟϨϟϩҀЪϯϱϪɀϮϣϯϠъϰϣϮϭ϶
καὶ μάρτυς τῶν τοῦ Χριστοῦ παθημάτων
e) Phil III: Exhortation to concord according to God and to a life in God.
Pre-text (1IJMo ϪшϫϭϫЋϬцϵ϶ϰϭѼϣЯϟϡϡϣϩцϭϱϰϭѼ͗ϮϧϯϰϭѼɀϭϩϧϰϣъϣϯϦϣ
f) Phil VI: Exhortations, specific ones (ἴδιαι) for some and common ones (κοιναί) for
all.
15 See Bultmann 1967: 101; Klauck 1992: 119; and Schnelle 2010: 48
16 These phenomena are not the same in all the apostolic books. We may note the questions that mark the
beginning of Romans III, IV, VII, VIII, IX and XV, and the vocatives that open James II, III, IV and V. In
general, it is also interesting that meta-communicative sentences open many of the κεφάλαια of the letters,
e. g., Rom XVII (12:1), 2 Cor X (10:1), Gal I (1:11), Eph I (1:15). I will return to the Euthalian division of
the biblical texts in a future study.
126 Commentary
Pre-text (1IJM o мϯϰϣ ЋϢϣϩϲϭц Ϫϭϱ Ћϡϟɀϥϰϭх Ϩϟх ГɀϧɀшϦϥϰϭϧ ϳϟϮп Ϩϟх
στέφανός μου, οὕτως στήκετε ἐν κυρίῳ
g) Col IX: Exhortation to cleansing, sanctification, love of men, love of God, love of
learning, singing of psalms, life in praise of God and thanksgiving.
Pre-text ($PM o ϫϣϨϮьϯϟϰϣϭеϫϰпϪтϩϥϰпГɀхϰѮ϶ϡѮ϶
h) Tit VI: Exhortation to evade seditious inquirers
Pre-text (5JUo ϟТϮϣϰϧϨчϫЏϫϦϮϵɀϭϫϪϣϰпϪцϟϫϨϟхϢϣϱϰтϮϟϫϫϭϱϦϣϯцϟϫ
παραιτοῦ
i) Tit III: Exhortations that he should give to everybody according to their age.
Pre-text (5JUo ϯщϢсϩрϩϣϧЎɀϮтɀϣϧϰѯаϡϧϟϧϫϭъϯѬϢϧϢϟϯϨϟϩцѨɀϮϣϯϠъϰϟ϶
νηφαλίους εἶναι…
j) Jas VI, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος III: Specific exhortations (παραινέσεις ἰδικαί) to vari-
ous individuals, with faith.
Pre-text (+BT o ϨϟϨϭɀϟϦϣѴ ϰϧ϶ Гϫ аϪѴϫ ɀϮϭϯϣϱϳтϯϦϵr ϣЯϦϱϪϣѴ ϰϧ϶
ψαλλέτω·
k) 1 Joh II, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος I: Exhortation about the grace of everyone according
to his age and to avert loving of the world.
Pre-text (+PIo ̈́ϮрϲϵаϪѴϫ ϰϣϨϫцϟ ЮϰϧЋϲтϵϫϰϟϧаϪѴϫϟТЌϪϟϮϰцϟϧϢϧп
τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ
l) Acts XXIX (excerpt): And his pastoral exhortations (παραινέσεις ποιμαντικαί) to
the elders in Ephesus.
Pre-text ("DUTo ͳɀчϢсϰѮ϶͍ϧϩфϰϭϱɀтϪϴϟ϶ϣС϶;ϲϣϯϭϫϪϣϰϣϨϟϩтϯϟϰϭ
τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους τῆς ἐκκλησίας
m) Acts ΧΧΧΙ: The appeal (παραινεσις) of James to Paul that he should not appear as
one who forbids circumcision among the Hebrews.
Pre-text ("DUTo ϭТϢсЋϨϭъϯϟϫϰϣ϶ГϢшϬϟϤϭϫϰчϫϦϣшϫ ϣЧɀшϫϰϣϟЯϰҁ
n) Acts ΧΧΧVIII, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος I: Exhortation of Paul to those who were with
him about hope for salvation.
Pre-text ("DUTo ͑ϭϩϩѮ϶ϰϣЋϯϧϰцϟ϶аɀϟϮϳϭъϯϥ϶ϰшϰϣϯϰϟϦϣх϶Ъ͑ϟѼϩϭ϶
ἐν μέσῳ αὐτῶν … (22) καὶ τὰ νῦν παραινῶ ὑμᾶς
The use of the term παραίνεσις in the Euthalian apparatus has been examined in a previ-
ous study by Hellholm and myself and the following comments are largely based on that
study.17
Annotations
BoE " ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩҀ TFOUFODF NBSLT UIF CFHJOOJOH PG UIF QBSBFOFTJT POMZ JO Rom 12:1,
Eph 4:1, 1 Thess 4:1 and 1 Pet 5:1. The designation παρακαλῶ sentence (παρακαλῶ-Satz)
is found in the work of Bjerkelund which is the classical study of this form. Bjerkelund
17 See Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004 (App. II).

divides the sentences into three groups:18 (1) Sentences beginning with παρακαλῶ/
παρακαλοῦμεν followed by οὖν/δέ, the object ὑμᾶς and often expanded with a prepo-
sitional phrase. (2) Sentences that do not begin with the verb παρακαλῶ but have the
typical structure of the παρακαλῶ sentence. (3) Sentences that do not have the typical
structure but still should be included in this group because of their function. His study
is most useful for understanding the structure of the Pauline letters, even if some aspects
of his work are subject to debate.19 In the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, sentences of type
1 open the sections in Rom and Eph. The opening of the section in 1 Thess belongs to
type 2, while the section in 1 Pet is opened by a παρακαλῶ sentence that lacks the typi-
cal structure, type 3. Ιt may be observed from the Euthalian material listed above that
the παρακαλῶ sentence is not a necessary element of the paraenesis: It is absent in the
majority of examples. This corresponds to Bjerkelund’s view that this kind of sentence
does not belong to the genre of paraenesis, but is a separate epistolary formula that may
introduce texts that belong to other genres as well.20 One should also note that the term
παράκλησις scarcely occurs with reference to the paraenetic section of the letters.21 It is
in any case clear that the meta-communicative sentence (i.e. the παρακαλῶ sentence) is
not what motivates the meta-term παραίνεσις in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. The motivation
may primarily be found in the exhortations themselves (i.e. the imperatival sentences
and their equivalents).
(e) The paraenetic sections in 1IJMoPQFOXJUIBOJNQFSBUJWBMTFOUFODF22
(f) Κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Phil VI distinguishes between specific and common exhorta-
tions. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι may also refer to exhortations to named individuals (Euodia
and Syntyche, 4:2) in a particular situation as παραινέσεις. The beginning of this section
is probably the imperatival sentence in 4:1.23
(g) As for $PMo von Soden was uncertain whether the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι made a
new κεφάλαιον begin at Col 3:5.24 The words παραίνεσις καθάρσεως in the κεφάλαιον-
τίτλος seems, however, to reflect νεκρώσατε οὖν τὰ μέλη τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς (Col 3:5).
(h) In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Tit VI, the meta-term παραινεσις reflects an imperatival sen-
tence. Here it refers to a single exhortation and not to a more extensive section of the text.
(i) A special case is κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Tit III. Here, παραίνεσις does not refer to the
imperative λάλει (2:1) but to the exhortations Titus should give to the community. In the
pre-text, these are expressed by infinitives (2:2.4.6.9).
18 See C. J. Bjerkelundo
19 For a criticism of his method, see B. C. Johansono
20 Bjerkelund (1967: 189): ‘[παρακαλῶ-] Sätze mit präpositionalem Ausdruck nehmen eine zentrale Stel-
lung innerhalb der Briefdisposition ein und bezeichnen den Übergang zu einem neuen Abschnitt, der
nicht unbedingt paränetischer Art sein muss.’
21 See below on the use of the term παράκλησις in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Philem II.
22 E. Lohmeyer o DPOTJEFSTUIFCFHJOOJOHPGUIFTFDUJPOA.BIOVOH[VS&JOIFJU o
‘Es ist charakteristisch genug, das Pls. mit einer ganz allgemeinen Mahnung beginnt. U. B. Müller (2002:
o SFGFSTUPBTUIFCFHJOOJOHPGUIFA%FSQBSÊOFUJTDIF)BVQUUFJM o ćJTEFMJNJUBUJPO
corresponds exactly to the Euthalian κεφάλαιον.
23 Lohmeyer (1964: 163) describes 4:1 as ‘Überleitung’, cf. J. Holmstrand 1997: 122 and the comments in
Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: 484 (App. II, page 313).
128 Commentary
(j) In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Jas VI, the third ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος, the exhortations are de-
scribed as ‘specific’ (ἰδικαί), a term that corresponds to ἴδιαι in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Phil VI.
(k) In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 1 Joh II, the first ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος, we find a paraenetic
section whose opening is not marked with a imperatival sentence but instead with six
more general meta-communicative clauses (γράφω ὑμῖν/ἔγραψα ὑμῖν) addressing vari-
ous groups in the community. In this feature it is possible to see a connection with the
paraenetic genre of the household code.25 The only imperatival sentence in the passage
is 2:15, μὴ ἀγαπᾶτε τὸν κόσμον, μηδὲ τὰ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ. Still, the passage may possibly be
described as paraenetic.26
(l) The description of Paul’s speech to the elders in Ephesus27 is referred to as
ποιμαντικαὶ παραινέσεις. This focuses on the section o XIFSF1BVMXBSOTBHBJOTU
‘wolves’ who will not spare the flock (ποίμνιον). This warning against heretics is conclud-
ed by the imperatival clause διὸ γρηγορεῖτε (20:31). Thus the paraenesis in the pre-text is
close to that in 5JUo TFF I BCPWFćFϨϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫϰцϰϩϭ϶TIPXTBTUSPOHJOUFSFTU
in the paraenetic content of the speech and does not mention other important aspects of
it, such as its concluding prayer (20:36) or its focus on the imminent martyrdom of Paul.28
(m) A different use of the term παραίνεσις is found in this κεφάλαιον-τίτλος of Acts.
The term is here used with reference to a particular problem, viz. that Paul could appear
as one who objected to circumcision among the Hebrews. For this reason, my translation
uses ‘appeal’ for παραίνεσις in this sense.
(n) Also the speech of Paul to his fellow passengers is referred to as παραίνεσις.29 The
motivation for its use here is clearly the occurrence of the cognate verb in the pre-text:
καὶ τὰ νῦν παραινῶ ὑμᾶς εὐθυμεῖν (27:22). In the pre-text, this meta-communicative
25 The affinity with the household code is discussed by H.-J. Klauck (1991: 136) who finds that the text can-
not be identified with this genre. G. Strecker (1989: 115) points out the difference between the address
of the various groups in 1 Joh and the household code, pointing out that the motive of reciprocal duties
CFUXFFOUIFHSPVQTPGUIFIPVTFIPMEJTMBDLJOHJO+PIo
26 See Strecker (1989: 113), who treats +PIoBTBQBSBFOFUJDQBTTBHFA%BTTEJF4àOEFOWFSHFCVOH
schon vollzogen ist und die Glaubenden auf sie wie auf das Christusereignis zurückblicken können, wird
durch das Perfekt ἀφέωνται in Erinnerung gerufen. Dies unterstreicht die Verpflichtung zum ethischen
5VO;XFJGFMMPTMJFHUBVGEJFTFNMFU[UFSFOEFS"L[FOUVOTFSFT"CTDIOJUUFT<o> 7ϪуЋϡϟɀѩϰϣ 7
17 θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ); er ist daher der mit 1:5 beginnenden Paränese zuzuordnen.’ (p. 113).
27 According to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, Paul held the speech to the Ephesian elders in Ephesus (cf. the fol-
lowing κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts ΧΧΙΧ, first ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος: παράπλους Παύλου ἀπὸ Ἐφέσου ἄχρι
Καισαρείας τῆς Παλαιστίνης). This error could easily arise, because when the speech is ended, Acts 21:1
says only that Paul and his companions left them and the last reference to Miletus occurs before the speech
(20:17). It is worth noting that the Ἀποδημίαι Παύλου (‘The Travels of Paul’), which is also associated with
the Euthalian apparatus, is more accurate regarding this: εἶτα εἰς Σάμον κἀκεῖθεν εἰς Μίλητον. Ἐκεῖθεν
μεταπεμψάμενος τοὺς ἐν Ἐφέσῳ, ὡμίλησεν αὐτοῖς. ‘Then to Samos, and from there to Miletus. From there
he sent for those in Ephesus, and he spoke to them.’ Text in von Soden 1902: 368.
28 ćJTUIFNFJTDFOUSBMUPUIFTQFFDI DGo BOEJTFNQIBTJ[FEBMTPJOUIFEFTDSJQUJPOPGUIFGBSFXFMM
TDFOF o J. Jervell (1998: 509) emphasizes that this speech is the only ‘farewell address’ (Ab-
schiedsrede) in Acts. Similarly, Pervo (2009: 518) points out that analyses of the form and structure of the
speech show the dominance of the Jewish ‘testament’, referring to the speech as mainly deliberative but
with apologetic and epideictic elements.
29 This description is used also by Jervell (1998: 607), paraphrasing the pre-text: ‘Er ermahnt sie jetzt, καὶ
τὰ νῦν, guten Mutes zu sein.’ Pervo (2009: 661) notes that the core of the speech is formed by a (Jewish)
PSBDMFPGBTTVSBODF WWo UIBUIBTCFFO)FMMFOJ[FEGPSUIFTBLFPGUIFSFBEFST
sentence has a counterpart in διὸ εὐθυμεῖτε, ἄνδρες (27:25). The use of the term in this
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος is the only instance where it reflects the cognate verb in the pre-text.
Summation
One may observe from the list above that παραίνεσις in the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι in
most instances refer to sections of the letters that biblical scholars also would refer to as
‘paraenetic’. This observation was made by Dahl in his study of the apparatus and devel-
oped further in the study of the meta-term by Hellholm and myself.30 A corresponding
use of the term for general moral exhortation is found in the commentaries of Theodo-
ret on the Pauline letters.31 The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι describe the exhortations in the letters
mostly as general and unrelated to any particular situation.32 This is clear from the de-
scription of their content: ‘about virtue’, ‘about unifying love’ etc. One possible exception
may be found in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Phil VI. The use of the term in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
of Acts is restricted. In the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts, the term is used twice for speeches
XJUIBDPOUFOUUIBUJTWFSZNVDIDPOEJUJPOFECZUIFQBSUJDVMBS DPOUFYU NoO ćJTJT
not unexpected in a narrative text. One should therefore note that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
of Acts is evidence that the use of the term in the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is diverse.
1.4.2. ΠΑΡΑΚΛΗΣΙΣ
a) 2 Thess IV: Exhortation (παράκλησις) to pray for him and his work. In this: Prayer
for them to obtain the love of God.
Pre-text (ćFTTo ϰчϩϭϧɀчϫɀϮϭϯϣъϳϣϯϦϣ ЋϢϣϩϲϭц ɀϣϮхКϪҀϫ
b) Philem II: Commendment (σύστασις) of Onesimus, a runaway slave, and an appeal
(παρακλησις) for him, since he has been saved by faith.
Pre-text (1IJMFNo ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩҀϯϣɀϣϮхϰϭѼГϪϭѼϰтϨϫϭϱ
c) Heb VII, second ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος: Admonition (παράκλησις) with praise.
Pre-text ()FCo ɀϣɀϣцϯϪϣϦϟϢсɀϣϮхаϪҀϫ Ћϡϟɀϥϰϭц
Annotations
In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Thess IV, the term παράκλησις represents an imperatival sentence.
Thus, the use of the term here seems close to the use of the related term παραίνεσις above:
In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Col IX, παραίνεσις καθάρσεως apparently reflects the imperatival
sentence νεκρώσατε οὖν τὰ μέλη κτλ in the pre-text (Col 3:5). Κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Philem
II is a special case. This is the only instance in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι where the meta-
communicative verb παρακαλῶ (Philem 1:10) is reflected by the corresponding noun
30 See Dahl 2000d: 265. Cf. the texts referred to by %JCFMJVTJOIJTDPNNFOUBSZPO+BNFTćFTTo

Č(BMČ3PNo$PMo 4FFM. Dibelius/H. Greeven 1964: 15). It should be noted that his
description of ćFTToDPSSFTQPOETFYBDUMZUPUIF&VUIBMJBOϨϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫϰцϰϩϭ϶4FFBMTPUIFNBUFSJBM
from a great number of modern commentators in Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004, passim.
31 See Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG 82: 508D): Τῆς δὲ Ἐπιστολῆς τὰ μὲν πρῶτα περιέχει διδασκαλίαν τοῦ
θείου κηρύγματος, τὰ δὲ τελευταῖα παραίνεσιν ἠθικήν. ‘The first part of the letter contains teaching of the
divine message; the second part, ethical paraenesis.’ See Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: 479 (App. II, page
309).
32 The difficult question whether or not this description of the pre-texts is valid is outside the scope of the
present commentary.
130 Commentary
παράκλησις. One could argue on the basis on the first two instances that the κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι use παράκλησις when there is no moral exhortation. But the use of the term in
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Heb VII represents a problem for this explanation. The exhortations
in this passage could with the same right be labeled παραίνεσις.33 For some reason, the
ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος avoids the term here, and uses παράκλησις instead. Two explana-
tions may be considered: (1) The reason for the choice of the term παράκλησις may be
that the exhortation in this passage was perceived to differ from the paraenetic genre.34
The exhortation is expressed through the verb ἐπιθυμέω: ἐπιθυμοῦμεν … ἕκαστον ὑμῶν
τὴν αὐτὴν ἐνδείκνυσθαι σπουδήν, a verb that is not used in indirect exhortation in oth-
er paraenetic texts in the NT. (2) Another possible explanation is the use of the term
παράκλησις in the passage that immediately follows (o ćJT QBTTBHF JT DMPTFMZ
linked to the preceding through the particle γάρ (6:13) and contains the final clause ἵνα
… παράκλησιν ἔχωμεν (6:18). According to Weiss, this final clause expresses the purpose
of the entire context from 6:13 onward.35 The final clause in 6:18 makes clear that the
παράκλησις has a secure foundation in δύο πράγματα, the promise and oath of God. The
author of the ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος has apparently perceived the close connection between
UIFFYIPSUBUJPOJOoBOEJUTNPUJWBUJPOJOoBOEVTFEUIFNFUBUFSNGSPNUIF
pre-text in the ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος.36
Summation
The use of the term παράκλησις in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is related to the imperatival pas-
sages. The term seems however to have been replaced by the term παραίνεσις in most in-
stances to describe moral exhortation. The use of παράκλησις in the second ὑποδιαίρεσις-
τίτλος of Heb VII seems to be derived from the genre-designation used in the pre-text
itself.
1.4.3. ΕΥΧΑΡΙΣΤΙΑ
a) Phil I: Thanksgiving for the virtue of the Philippians, and prayer for their perfection.
Pre-text (1IJMo ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀϰҁϦϣҁϪϭϱ
33 See e.g. O. Michel (1966: 247), who describes the text beginning in 6:9 and ending in 6:20 as paraenesis.
34 H.-F. Weiss o IBTNBEFBTJNJMBSDIPJDFBTUIBUNBEFJOUIFаɀϭϢϧϟцϮϣϯϧ϶ϰцϰϩϭ϶Weiss
SFGFSTUPUIFJNNFEJBUFMZQSFDFEJOHWFSTFT o BTA(FSJDIUTQBSÊOFTFCVUEPFTOPUVTFUIFUFSNAQBS-
BFOFTJTGPSo UIF&VUIBMJBOаɀϭϢϧϟцϮϣϯϧ϶ )FQPJOUTPVUUIBUoEJČFSTGSPNUIFQSFDFEJOH
passage both in form and content. The author of Heb turns from ‘Gerichtsparänese’ to a ‘seelsorgerlich
wirkendes Zureden’ (p. 353). See also the comments of W. Übelacker (2004: 338) quoted below.
35 Weiss (1991: 363): ‘[D]er Finalsatz V.18 [ist] Zielaussage des ganzen Zusammenhangs von V.13 an’.
36 Cf. the designation λόγος τῆς παρακλήσεως in Heb 13:22, which probably refers to the entire letter. It
has been noted that it is no coincidence that this term occurs also in 6:18, see Weiss (1991: 363). On
Heb as λόγος τῆς παρακλήσεως, see Übelacker o 3FHBSEJOH UIF DIPJDF CFUXFFO UIF
terms παράκλησις and παραίνεσις, Übelacker (2004: 338) seems to be in agreement with the Euthalian
ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος: ‘Here [in 6:18] the author [of Heb] uses the word παράκλησις (and not παραίνεσις),
which I think has connotations of both comfort and encouragement here; a double connotation that
παραίνεσις just does not have.’ Even if there is an agreement as far as the use of the term is concerned,
this does of course not imply that the term has the same meaning for the ancient and the modern scholar.
Whether παράκλησις has the connotation of comfort or not in this ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος is uncertain. The
use of the term in the two other instances (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι 2 Thess IV; Philem II) does however not sup-
port this assumption.
b) Col I: Thanksgiving for the Colossians, who have been made God’s own in hope.
Pre-text ($PMo ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϭѼϪϣϫϰҁϦϣҁ
c) Philem I: Praise of Philemon, and thanksgiving for him.
Pre-text (1IJMFNo ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀϰҁϦϣҁϪϭϱ
d) 2 Thess I: Thanksgiving for the faith of the Thessalonians, their love and their stead-
fastness, for the sake of their honor and the punishment of their persecutors. And
prayer for their glorious perfection, to the glory of Christ.
Pre-text (ćFTTo ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϣѴϫЩϲϣцϩϭϪϣϫϰҁϦϣҁɀрϫϰϭϰϣɀϣϮхаϪҀϫ
e) 2 Thess III: Thanksgiving for the call.
Pre-text (ćFTTo КϪϣѴ϶ϢсЩϲϣцϩϭϪϣϫϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϣѴϫϰҁϦϣҁɀрϫϰϭϰϣɀϣϮх
ὑμῶν
f) 2 Cor I: Thanksgiving (εὐχαριστία) for the aid of God, in which he says he has con-
fided.
Pre text ($PSo ͆Яϩϭϡϥϰч϶ЪϦϣч϶
g) 3 Joh I: Prayer for perfection, and thanksgiving for the testimony of the brethren to
[his] hospitality through Christ.
Pre-text (+PIo ͳϡϟɀϥϰт <y> ГϳрϮϥϫϡпϮϩцϟϫГϮϳϭϪтϫϵϫЋϢϣϩϲҀϫ
καὶ μαρτυρούντων σου τῇ ἀληθείᾳ, καθὼς σὺ ἐν ἀληθείᾳ περιπατεῖς.
h) Col II: Prayer on their behalf for prudent behavior, for strength to endure, with
thanksgiving for being made God’s own in purification.
Pre-text ($PMo ϢϧпϰϭѼϰϭϨϟхКϪϣѴ϶ <y> ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϭѼϫϰϣ϶ϰҁɀϟϰϮхϰҁ
ἱκανώσαντι ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν μερίδα τοῦ κλήρου τῶν ἁγίων ἐν τῷ φωτί
i) Acts IV, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος III: Thanksgiving from the Church for the faithful
strength of the apostles.
Pre-text ("DUTo ϭТϢсЋϨϭъϯϟϫϰϣ϶ЪϪϭϦϱϪϟϢчϫПϮϟϫϲϵϫуϫɀϮч϶ϰчϫ
θεὸν καὶ εἶπαν
The verb εὐχαριστέω is not found in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. This probably reflects the style
of a genre that prefers nominal meta-terms, as opposed to the style of the genre ὑπόθεσις.
Another possible reason for the verb being avoided is the influence of Atticism.37 The
ancient handbooks are divided: Phrynichus condemns the verb εὐχαριστέω as non-Attic,
while Pollux lists it as an alternative way of saying χάριν οἶδα ‘I am grateful’.38 The verb
regularly marks the opening of the thanksgiving sections in the Pauline letters.39 This is
37 Note that Theodoret does not seem to be influenced by the Atticists at this point, since he uses the verb
εὐχαριστεῖν, see note 35 below.
38 Phrynichus (Ecloga, 10): Εὐχαριστεῖν οὐδεὶς τῶν δοκίμων εἶπεν, ἀλλὰ χάριν εἰδέναι. ‘No one of the
approved authors said εὐχαριστεῖν, but [they said] χάριν εἰδέναι’. But cf. Pollux (Onomasticon V, 141):
Καὶ τὸ εὐχαριστεῖν ἐπὶ τοῦ διδόναι χάριν, οὐκ ἐπὶ τοῦ εἰδέναι. ‘And εὐχαριστεῖν for διδόναι χάριν [= to
give thanks] not for εἰδέναι [= to be thankful]’. There seems here to be two different understandings of
εὐχαριστῶ. Without explicitly saying it, Pollux seems to be correcting the opinion that is found in Phryni-
chus regarding the meaning of the word.
39 On the thanksgivings in the Pauline letters, see below in the comments on the ὑπόθεσις of Rom.
132 Commentary
clearly reflected in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, where most of the occurrences are found in the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of these letters. There are only two other instances (3 Joh and Acts).
Annotations
BoE *OUIFTFJOTUBODFT ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰцϟJTVTFEGPSUIFUIBOLTHJWJOHTFDUJPOJOUIFCFHJOOJOH
of the letter. The noun replaces the verb εὐχαριστέω, which is used in the pre-text. The
shift from verb to noun leads to the omission of adverbial particles: The verb is regularly
modified with πάντοτε in the pre-texts (Phil 1:4; Col 1:3; Philem 1:4; 2 Thess 1:3) and
this is not reflected in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. Thus, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι use the meta-term
εὐχαριστία as a pure text-deicticon.40 The thanksgiving is identified with the pre-text.41 It
should be noted that the εὐχαριστία in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Philem I is used together with
another meta-term, ‘praise’ (ἔπαινος).42
F ćJTϨϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫϰцϰϩϭ϶JTDMPTFMZSFMBUFEUPUIFĕSTUHSPVQ BoE ćFVTFPGUIF
meta-term again reflects the verb εὐχαριστέω in the pre-text. What separates this in-
stance from those in the former group, is that this κεφάλαιον is not in the beginning of
the letter. It has been noted by modern commentators that 2 Thess has two thanksgiving
sections43 and this observation was also made in the Euthalian list.
(f) 2 Cor is a special case, since in this letter we find an opening benediction
(εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεός 1:3) with a reference to thanksgiving (εὐχαριστήθη) placed near the
end of the section (εὐχαριστήθη 1:11).44 If we ask which of the two the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος
here depends on, we find that the question is difficult to answer. The following may clarify
the problem: (a) The contents of the thanksgiving in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος is clearly a
reworking of oćFWFSCTГϮъϯϟϰϭBOEѻъϯϣϰϟϧJOUIFQSFUFYU JTUSBOTGPSNFE
into the noun βοήθεια. The verb ἠλπίκαμεν in the pre-text is paraphrased by πεποιθέναι
ϲϥϯϧϫ VTJOH UIF TBNF WFSC BT UIF QSFUFYU JO C &WFO JG o JT QSFDFEJOH UIF
verb εὐχαριστήθη in 1:11, εὐχαριστήθη can hardly be paraphrased with εὐχαριστία in the
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος: The agent of εὐχαριστήθη is not Paul, but other believers.45 Therefore,
this act of thanksgiving (referred to in a purpose clause) cannot be considered as being
40 An obvious exception is κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Col IX: παραίνεσις … εὐχαριστίας.
41 The designation εὐχαριστία is of course not restricted to the Euthalian apparatus. See e.g. Theodoret (Com-
mentary, PG 82: 658C) on 2 Thess 1:3. In his comment on 1 Thess 1:2, he points out that Paul here follows
a universal pattern of behavior (Commentary, PG 82: 629B): Διδασκόμεθα πρῶτον εὐχαριστεῖν ὑπὲρ τῶν
προϋπηργμένων ἡμῖν ἀγαθῶν, εἶθ᾽ οὕτως αἰτεῖν τὰ ἐλλείποντα. Τοῦτο γὰρ ἔστιν εὑρεῖν πανταχοῦ τὸν
θεῖον Ἀπόστολον. ‘We are taught first to give thanks for the benefits that have already come to us, then to
ask for those things which we do not have. And you will find that the divine Apostle does this everywhere.’
42 The association between thanksgiving and praise is also reflected in the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις (cf. their use
of the verb ἀποδέχομαι to describe the thanksgiving sections). There is thus a related idea in these sec-
tions of the apparatus although the terminology is different. That the thanksgivings could be perceived as
praise was also observed by Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 658C) commenting on 2 Thess: Πάλιν τῇ
εὐχαριστίᾳ σχηματίζει τὴν εὐφημίαν. ‘Again, he gives his praise the form of the thanksgiving.’
43 So W. Trilling (1980: 118): ‘Zunächst ist die Tatsache einer zweiten Danksagung im gleichen Brief zu er-
wähnen. Dies ist nur noch in 1Thess 2,13 der Fall und stellt eine Besonderheit dieses Briefes dar.’ A second
thanksgiving occurs both in 1 Thess 2:13 and in 2 Thess 2:13.
44 W. G. Doty (1973: 33) says that the opening statement of 2 Cor is framed by blessing and thanksgiving at
the beginning and the end, cf. V. Furnish (1984: 116), quoted in the note below.
45 See the comments in H. Windisch (1924: 49), who is inclined to consider εὐχαριστήθη a thanksgiving for
the salvation from dangers in the past. He argues that 1:11a, on the other hand, may refer to intercession
(δέησις) for Paul in his present situation.
performed by Paul as he writes the letter.46 If we believe the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος to be accu-
rate, the most satisfactory solution is to consider the benediction εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεός (1:3)
the equivalent of the verb εὐχαριστέω. The benediction may be considered as marking
the entire section as a thanksgiving.
(g) In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 3 Joh I, εὐχαριστία occurs together with εὐχή (see below).
From the paraphrase, it is clear that the term εὐχαριστία in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος re-
places the sentence beginning ἐχάρην γὰρ λίαν ‘I was extremely happy’ (1:3). The reason
for his happiness is the report of the hospitality of Gaius. The words ἐχάρην γὰρ λίαν do
not represent a thanksgiving in a strict sense, but is rather a (conventional) expression of
joy.47 This expression of joy is, however, not far from a more explicit thanksgiving. Both
have the function of a captatio benevolentiae.48 This may be the motivation for the use of
ευχαριστια in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος.
(h) In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Col II, the term εὐχαριστία occurs again together with εὐχή.
Here the term εὐχαριστία reflects the participle εὐχαριστοῦντες in the pre-text. The
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος apparently understands Paul and his co-writers as the subject of the
participle.49 The edition of von Soden makes a new κεφάλαιον (III) begin at 1:14. It seems
however that κεφάλαιον II also included Col 1:14, as the phrase ἐν καθάρσει seems to
paraphrase ἐν ᾧ ἔχομεν τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν, τὴν ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν (1:14).50
(i) The only instance in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts seems to be quite different. In
the pre-text, the verb εὐχαριστέω does not occur. There are two possible motivations for
the use of the term εὐχαριστία in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts IV: (1) The pre-text contains a
meta-communicative phrase in the form δεηθέντων αὐτῶν, thus referring to the preced-
ing as ‘petition’ or ‘prayer’. Commentators have also referred to this text as a prayer51 and
the term εὐχαριστία may be used in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts in a sense that is close to
εὐχή. (2) The term εὐχαριστία is used with reference to a thanksgiving for the release of
the apostles from the Jewish authorities. In that case, the ‘faithful strength of the apostles’
is not the object of a prayer, but the object of a thanksgiving, referring to the strength they
showed before the Council.52
46 See Furnish (1984: 116): ‘The eucharisto-clause concludes rather than opens the paragraph, and it has
reference to the hoped-for thanksgiving of the addressees rather than the present thanksgiving of Paul
himself.’
47 See R. Bultmann (1967: 97): ‘Auch das jetzt V. 3 mit dem Ausdruck der Freude beginnt (wie 2 Joh 4),
entspricht der Tradition des Briefstils’ with a reference to Bauer, s. v. χαίρω 2.
48 This is pointed out by Klauck (1992: 44), who also notes that the linguistic expressions are quite similar:
‘εὐ-χαριστ-εῖν [ist] mit χάρις wurzelverwandt (vgl auch die Freudenäusserungen in Phil 4,10; Phlm 7).
Jedenfalls hat V. 4 [= 2 Joh 1:4] ähnlich den Danksagungen bei Paulus auch die Aufgabe einer captatio
benevolentiae.’ Klauck DPNNFOUTPO+PIoJOBTJNJMBSGBTIJPO
49 On different interpretations of this passage in the pre-text, see the comments below on the ὑπόθεσις of Col.
50 Zacagni (1698: 650 = PG 85: 767C) following the codices Palatinus and Cryptoferratensis, makes the third
κεφαλοιον of Col begin with 1:14 but notes that in another codex, the κεφάλαιον begins with 1:16.
51 On this interpretation of the pre-text, see E. Haenchen XIPSFGFSTUPoBTA%BT(FCFU
der Gemeinde und seine Erhöhrung’, cf. Jervell (1998: 183) ‘Das Gebet der Gemeinde’.
52 Cf. Pervo (2009: 120), who refers to the text as ‘Prayerful Celebration’. The interpretation of Pervo is close
to the Euthalian κεφάλαιον-τίτλος.
134 Commentary
Summation
The general impression is that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is evidence of an analysis of the let-
ters that anticipates modern form-critical analysis. This is based on the fact that the list
reserves the term mostly for the opening thanksgiving section of the letter. The termi-
nology is, however, not consistent. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι do not mention explicitly the
thanksgiving sections in Rom and 1 Cor, but apparently include them in the προοίμιον.
The contents of the προοίμιον has no particular interest in itself, only what comes ‘after
the prooemium’ (μετὰ τὸ προοίμιον) is referred to. Thus, the thanksgiving section of
the letter is actually omitted from the analysis of Rom and 1 Cor, while it is included
elsewhere. It is also worth noting that the thanksgivings in 1 Thess are referred to with
the term ἔπαινος. Here content rather than form is emphasized. The term εὐχαριστία is
used only once in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Catholic letters (3 Joh) but this reflects the
fact that the Catholic letters in general do not have this feature. The use of the term in the
list for Acts is a special case. This may be explained on the basis of the different genre of
the pre-text (Acts), and it does not necessarily imply that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts are
based on a different type of analysis.
1.4.4. ΕΥΧΗ
a) 1 Thess III: Prayer to God and Christ for his own arrival and for progress and
strengthening of the Thessalonians until the coming of Christ.
Pre-text (ćFTTo ϟЯϰч϶ϢсЪϦϣч϶ϨϟхɀϟϰуϮКϪҀϫϨϟхЪϨъϮϧϭ϶КϪҀϫ
Ἰησοῦς κατευθύναι τὴν ὁδὸν ἡμῶν πρὸς ὑμᾶς· […] (12) ὁ κύριος πλεονάσαι καὶ
περισσεύσαι […] (13) εἰς τὸ στηρίξαι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας
b) 1 Thess VII: Prayer for sanctification of spirit, soul and body.
Pre-text (ćFTT ϟЯϰч϶ϢсЪϦϣч϶ϰѮ϶ϣСϮфϫϥ϶ЌϡϧрϯϟϧаϪѩ϶ЪϩϭϰϣϩϣѴ϶ Ϩϟх
ὁλόκληρον ὑμῶν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ τὸ σῶμα ἀμέμπτως ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ τοῦ
κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τηρηθείη
c) 2 Thess III, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος II: Prayer to God and Christ for their sustenance.
Pre-text (ćFTTo ϟЯϰч϶ϢсЪϨъϮϧϭ϶КϪҀϫΚϥϯϭѼ϶͗Ϯϧϯϰч϶ϨϟхϦϣч϶Ъ
πατὴρ ἡμῶν, […] (17) παρακαλέσαι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας καὶ στηρίξαι ἐν παντὶ ἔργῳ
καὶ λόγῳ ἀγαθῷ
d) 2 Thess IV, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος Ι: Prayer for them to obtain the love of God.
Pre-text (ćFTT ЪϢсϨъϮϧϭ϶ϨϟϰϣϱϦъϫϟϧаϪҀϫϰп϶ϨϟϮϢцϟ϶ϣС϶ϰуϫЋϡрɀϥϫ
τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ εἰς τὴν ὑπομονὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ
e) 2 Thess VI: Prayer for peace from God.
Pre-text (2 Thess 3:16): αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ κύριος τῆς εἰρήνης δῴη ὑμῖν τὴν εἰρήνην διὰ
παντὸς ἐν παντὶ τρόπῳ. ὁ κύριος μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν
f) Heb XXII: Prayer to God for his rule and guidance to virtue.
Pre-text ()FCo ЪϢсϦϣч϶ϰѮ϶ϣСϮфϫϥ϶ <y> ϨϟϰϟϮϰцϯϟϧаϪѩ϶Гϫ
παντὶ ἀγαθῷ εἰς τὸ ποιῆσαι τὸ θέλημα […] ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν
g) 1 Pet VIII: Prayer for the perfection of the believers.
Pre-text (1FUo ЪϢсϦϣч϶ɀрϯϥ϶ϳрϮϧϰϭ϶ <y>ϨϟϰϟϮϰцϯϣϧ ϨϟϰϟϮϰцϯϟϧ
Byz), στηρίξει, σθενώσει, θεμελιώσει (11) αὐτῷ τὸ κράτος (δόξα Byz) εἰς τοὺς
αἰῶνας ἀμήν
h) Eph II: Prayer for understanding of the benefits brought to us in Christ.
Pre-text (&QIo ϢϧпϰϭѼϰϭ<y> ϭЯɀϟъϭϪϟϧϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀϫаɀсϮаϪҀϫ
μνείαν ποιούμενος ἐπὶ τῶν προσευχῶν μου (17) ἵνα ὁ θεὸς […] δώῃ ὑμῖν πνεῦμα
σοφίας καὶ ἀποκαλύψεως ἐν ἐπιγνώσει αὐτοῦ
i) Eph V: Prayer on behalf of the Church for the power and love of God.
Pre-text (&QIo ϰϭъϰϭϱϳрϮϧϫϨрϪɀϰϵϰпϡшϫϟϰрϪϭϱɀϮч϶ϰчϫɀϟϰтϮϟ
[…] (16) ἵνα δῷ ὑμῖν κατὰ τὸ πλοῦτος τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ δυνάμει κραταιωθῆναι
j) Phil I: Thanksgiving for the virtue of the Philippians, and prayer for their perfection.
Pre-text (1IJMo ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀϰҁϦϣҁϪϭϱ<y> ϨϟхϰϭѼϰϭɀϮϭϯϣъϳϭϪϟϧ
k) Col II: Prayer on their behalf for prudent behavior, for strength to endure, with
thanksgiving for being made God’s own in purification.
Pre-text ($PM o Ϣϧп ϰϭѼϰϭ Ϩϟх КϪϣѴ϶ Ћϲ‫ ڍ‬Р϶ КϪтϮϟ϶ ЙϨϭъϯϟϪϣϫ ϭЯ
παυόμεθα ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν προσευχόμενοι καὶ αἰτούμενοι ἵνα πληρωθῆτε τὴν ἐπίγνωσιν
τοῦ θελήματος αὐτοῦ
l) 2 Thess I: Thanksgiving for the faith of the Thessalonians, their love and their stead-
fastness, for the sake of their honor and the punishment of their persecutors. And
prayer for their glorious perfection, to the glory of Christ.
Pre-text ( ćFTT o ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϣѴϫ ЩϲϣцϩϭϪϣϫ ϰҁ Ϧϣҁ ɀрϫϰϭϰϣ ɀϣϮх аϪҀϫ
(11) εἰς ὃ καὶ προσευχόμεθα πάντοτε περὶ ὑμῶν, ἵνα ὑμᾶς ἀξιώσῃ τῆς κλήσεως ὁ
θεὸς ἡμῶν […] (12) ὅπως ἐνδοξασθῇ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν,
καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν αὐτῷ
m) 3 Joh I Prayer for perfection, and thanksgiving for the testimony of the brethren to
[his] hospitality through Christ.
Pre-text ( +PI o Ћϡϟɀϥϰт ɀϣϮх ɀрϫϰϵϫ ϣгϳϭϪϟц ϯϣ ϣЯϭϢϭѼϯϦϟϧ Ϩϟх
ὑγιαίνειν, καθὼς εὐοδοῦταί σου ἡ ψυχή
n) Jude IV: Prayer for their sanctification and pure assurance, with praise (δοξολογία)
of God.
Pre-text (+VEFo ϰҁϢсϢϱϫϟϪтϫѾϲϱϩрϬϟϧаϪѩ϶Ћɀϰϟцϯϰϭϱ϶ϨϟхϯϰѮϯϟϧ
κατενώπιον τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ ἀμώμους ἐν ἀγαλλιάσει μόνῳ θεῷ σωτῆρι ἡμῶν
διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν δόξα μεγαλωσύνη κράτος καὶ ἐξουσία πρὸ
παντὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος καὶ νῦν καὶ εἰς πάντας τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν
On the lexical level, one should note that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι always use the form εὐχή
and not προσευχή, which is the regular form in the NT.53 This may be considered a sty-
listic change.54 When all the pre-texts are examined, two main types emerge. The first is
NBSLFEBTBQSBZFSJOUIFQSFUFYUUISPVHIUIFVTFPGUIFPQUBUJWFNPPE BoH UIFTFDPOE
53 In the NT, the term εὐχή is used only once with the meaning ‘prayer’ (Jas 5:15, see Bauer, s. v.)
54 Pollux (Onomasticon V, 130) does not include προσευχή/προσεύχομαι. He includes ἐπεύχεσθαι and
συνεύχεσθαι but gives εὐχή as the corresponding noun.
136 Commentary
does as a rule not use the optative, but has the meta-communicative verb προσεύχομαι
or its equivalent.
Annotations
BoH *OBMMUIFTFJOTUBODFT UIFQSBZFSIBT(PE PS(PEBOE$ISJTU BTUIFTVCKFDUPGUIF
optative. In 1 Pet 5:10 (g), both the indicative and the optative is found in the manuscripts.
The designation εὐχή in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος suggests, however, that the list was made
on the basis of a pre-text with the optative.55 It is here worth noting the connection be-
tween the analysis of the apparatus and the Greek terminology. The Greek grammarians
referred to the optative as ἔγκλισις εὐκτική (‘wishing mood’). One should note that the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι never use the designation εὐχή for an optative that has to be supplied,
e.g. for the benediction at the letter endings.
IoM *OUIFTFDPOEHSPVQ UIFWFSCɀϮϭϯϣъϳϭϪϟϧPDDVSTJOUIFQSFTFOUUFOTFCVUXJUI-
out any special reference to the time of writing. The prayer itself is referred to with a
purpose clause.
(m) The use of εὐχή in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 3 Joh I seems to be suggested by the verb
εὔχομαι in the pre-text (1:2).
(n) The use of εὐχή for the concluding verses of Jude is a special case. The modern
form-critical analysis would refer to this text primarily as a doxology.56 The Euthalian
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος also uses the term δοξολογία but apparently considers the text primar-
ily a prayer (εὐχή…σὺν δοξολογίᾳ). Reasonably, the praise of God as the one who has
the power to sanctify (δυναμένῳ … στῆσαι κτλ) is interpreted as an implicit prayer to
God for the use of this power.57 Another possibility is that the language of the pre-text
has been misunderstood and that the infinitives φυλάξαι and στῆσαι have been taken as
optatives. This would place this κεφάλαιον-τίτλος in the first group referred to above.
Summation
The general impression is that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι with regard to the meta-term εὐχή
are based on a consistent analysis of the pre-text: The motivation for using the term is
on the one hand the use of mood (optative) and the use of a meta-communicative verb
(προσεύχομαι) on the other.
1.4.5. ΕΠΑΝΑΛΗΨΙΣ
a) Rom VIII: Repetition (ἐπανάληψις) about life in grace.
Pre-text (3PNo ЛЋϡϫϭϣѴϰϣ ЋϢϣϩϲϭц ϡϧϫьϯϨϭϱϯϧϫϡпϮϫшϪϭϫϩϟϩҀ
b) Rom XII: Repetition about the glory that lies in store for the saints.
Pre-text (3PN o < λογίζομαι γὰρ ὅτι οὐκ ἄξια τὰ παθήματα τοῦ νῦν
καιροῦ πρὸς τὴν μέλλουσαν δόξαν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι εἰς ἡμᾶς
55 Cf. P. J. Achtemeier o AćFGVUVSFJOEJDBUJWFGPSNPGUIFWFSCTHJWFTUIFNUIFDIBSBDUFSPG

promises, rather than of intercessions by or wishes from the author; the latter would require the optative
mode.’
56 See H. Paulsen (1992: 86), who refers to the verses as the doxology of the letter.
57 A similar description of the ending of Jude is found in Theophylact (Commentary, PG 126: 104C): Ταῦτα
δὲ εἰπὼν, εὐχῇ λοιπὸν ἐπισφραγίζεται τὴν Ἐπιστολήν. ‘Having said this, he now seals the letter with a
prayer.’
c) 2 Pet IV: Repetition about the wickedness of the heretics.
Pre-text (1FUo ϰϟъϰϥϫНϢϥ Ћϡϟɀϥϰϭц ϢϣϱϰтϮϟϫаϪѴϫϡϮрϲϵГɀϧϯϰϭϩфϫ
d) Acts XV, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος II: Repetition of what the angel declared and what he
instructed Cornelius. Pre text ("DUTo ϨϟхЪ͋ϭϮϫфϩϧϭ϶Зϲϥ
The use of the term ἐπανάληψις was identified by Robinson as a characteristic feature in
the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι as it occurs in the lists of all three sections (Acts, Catholic letters,
Pauline letters). According to Robinson, the presence of this term shows that all sections
are close in style and probably the work of one author.58 It remains to examine how the
term is used in the different sections. As a name of a rhetorical figure, ἐπανάληψις usu-
ally refers to the repetition of a word or word group. The term is often reserved for the
repetition of several words at the beginning of a sentence.59 This kind of repetition is not
found in the present pre-text.
Annotations
(a) The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom VIII use the term at another level, designating the repeti-
tion or resumption of a theme. The theme of ‘life in grace’ is treated in the immediately
preceding text, although it is impossible to say exactly what the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος refers
to. Since the list treats oBTPOFϨϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫ JUJTQPTTJCMFUIBUUIFBVUIPSIBEUIJT
text in mind.60 The composition of the pre-text may throw light on the use of the term
ἐπανάληψις. In his rhetorical analysis of Rom, Johannes Weiss observed that the end of
oJTDMFBSMZNBSLFECZBOBOUJUIFUJDBMDPODMVTJPOXJUIBĕOBMclausula (6:23):61
Τὰ γὰρ ὀψώνια τῆς ἁμαρτίας θάνατος
Τὸ δὲ χάρισμα τοῦ θεοῦ ζωὴ αἰώνιος
Ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν
This emphatic ending may explain the use of the term ἐπανάληψις in the κεφάλαιον-
τίτλος Rom VIII: It refers to the resumption of a theme that has seemingly been con-
cluded.
(b) A similar use of the term ἐπανάληψις is found here. The opening verse of the
pre-text (8:18) refers back to 8:17 (cf. the particle γάρ). There are also an affinity in lan-
guage between v. 18 and 17: (1) The phrase παθήματα τοῦ νῦν καιροῦ (8:18) resumes
συμπάσχομεν (8:17) and (2) the phrase τὴν μέλλουσαν δόξαν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι εἰς ἡμᾶς
(8:18) resumes ἵνα καὶ συνδοξασθῶμεν (8:17). At the same time, there is also a strong-
ly marked division between the two verses since v. 17 is clearly the end of the section.
58 Robinson (1895: 25) quotes the following κεφάλαια-τίτλοι: Rom VIII and XII; Acts XV, second
ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος and 2 Pet IV.
59 See the material in H. Lausbergffo
60 Cf. Hellholm o XIPEJWJEFToJOUPUXPQFSJDPQFT oo ćJTEJWJTJPOJT
adopted by Lohse o BOER. Jewett o Jewett referring to them as ‘Diatribe
BOE&OUIZNFNFT$PODFSOJOHUIF%FBUIPGUIF4JOGVM4FMGBOEUIF/FX-JGFJO$ISJTU o BOEA%JB-
USJCF$PODFSOJOH-JWJOHUP(PEVOEFSUIF(SBDFBOE-PSETIJQPG$ISJTU o
61 For the arrangement of the text, see J. Weiss 1897: 189, n. 1. Cf. the analysis in Hellholm (1997: 389) and
the commentary in Jewett o
138 Commentary
The end is marked with the climax:62 εἰ δὲ τέκνα, καὶ κληρονόμοι· κληρονόμοι μὲν θεοῦ,
συνκληρονόμοι δὲ Χριστοῦ, εἴπερ συμπάσχομεν ἵνα καὶ συνδοξασθῶμεν.
(c) Again, in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Pet IV, the term ἐπανάληψις refers to the repeti-
tion of a theme. The preceding κεφάλαιον-τίτλος (2 Pet III) has πρόῤῥησις ἀπατηλῆς
ἐπαναστάσεως αἱρετικῶν, ἀσεβείας τε αὐτῶν, καὶ μελλούσης κολάσεως, ‘prediction of
the deceitful rise of the heretics, their impiety and their punishment in the future.’ Ac-
cording to κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Pet IV, the letter now returns to this theme, the difference
being that κακία is substituted for ἀσέβεια (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Pet ΙΙΙ). In the pre-text,
the opening of κεφάλαιον IV (3:1) is clearly marked with a meta-communicative clause
(δευτέραν ὑμῖν γράφω) and a vocative (ἀγαπητοί). The reader thus gets the impression
that a new section begins, and thus the resumption of the preceding theme is unexpect-
ed.63
(d) The use of the term in the ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος of Acts differs from the instances
EJTDVTTFEBCPWF BoD TJODFJUIFSFSFGFSTUPUIFSFQFUJUJPOPGBOBOOPVODFNFOUNBEFCZ
BOPUIFSDIBSBDUFS1FUFSSFQFBUTJOoUIFXPSETPGBOHFMJOCo
Summation
The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the letters use the term ἐπανάληψις for the resumption of a theme
in a new section of the text. The use in the list for Acts is quite different, since it here refers
to the repetition of a statement already made by another character. This difference may
reflect the different text-types involved. In a narrative text this kind of repetition may oc-
cur more frequently than in an argumentative text. It is, however, worth noting that the
κεφαλαι-τιτλοι of Acts do not use the term for the repetition of larger units within the
text such as the repetition of the story in Acts 9 within the speeches in Acts 22 and 26.
1.5. The meta-terminology of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι: Concluding Remarks

The meta-terminology seems to be drawn from several sources. An obvious source is rhet-
oric, where we may find προοίμιον (Rom, 1 Cor) διήγησις (Gal, 2 Cor) and ἐπανάληψις
(Acts, Rom, 2 Peter). But there are also other terms that are not usually associated with
rhetoric but rather belong to the religious sphere, such as εὐχαριστία and εὐχή. The exam-
ination of the use of the meta-terms above has shown that the method of the κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι is quite consistent: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι choose their terminology on the basis of
the language of the pre-text and its meta-communicative terms. An interesting feature
of their analysis of the letters is that they take the meta-communicative verbs εὐχαριστῶ
and προσεύχομαι as references to speech acts within the pre-texts and not as statements
about what the letter writer does as a habit: Thus, these verbs are transformed in the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι into εὐχαριστία and εὐχή: Paul is regularly depicted as a man who prays
62 This term is used with reference to this verse by Weiss 1897: 235, cf. Jewett 2007: 501.
63 That 2 Pet 3 (= κεφάλαιον ΙV) resumes the theme 2 Pet 2 (= κεφάλαιον III) is observed also by Paulsen
(1992: 148): ‘Der Vf. setzt mit 3,1 neu ein; während 2,1ff sich dem Problem der Häresie zuwandte und dies
vor allem in der Aufnahme des Jud geschah, wird jetzt die Auseinandersetzung auf die Frage nach der
Parusie und ihrer Leugnung durch die Gegner zugespitzt’. That the letter now turns to the theme of the
coming of Christ is expressed in the ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος: ὅτι αἰφνιδίως ἥξει Χριστὸς κτλ, ‘that Christ will
come suddenly…’.
and one who gives thanks to God through his letters. The largest cluster of meta-terms
seems, however, to be all those related to exhortation (παραίνεσις, παράκλησις).
1.6. Transformations and Additions to the Pre-text

2 Thess II: About the end, that it is after Antichrist, who is sent to convict (ἐπὶ ἐλέγχῳ) the
Jews who did not believe in Christ.
Pre-text (ćFTTo ГϮϵϰҀϪϣϫϢсаϪѩ϶ ЋϢϣϩϲϭц аɀсϮϰѮ϶ɀϟϮϭϱϯцϟ϶ϰϭѼϨϱϮцϭϱ
ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ […] (12) ἵνα κριθῶσιν πάντες οἱ μὴ πιστεύσαντες τῇ ἀληθείᾳ ἀλλὰ
εὐδοκήσαντες τῇ ἀδικίᾳ
The identification of ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἁμαρτίας (v. l. ἀνομίας, 2:3) with ‘Antichrist’ is com-
mon although the term ἀντίχριστος in the NT appears only the Johannine letters.64 A
more remarkable transformation of the pre-text is the idea that Antichrist is sent to con-
vict the unbelieving Jews. (1) In the pre-text, God is the one who sends strong delusion
(πέμπει αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς ἐνέργειαν πλάνης, 2:11) to them who perish. This difficult idea
has been connected to the Old Testament motive of God as the cause behind everything,
even temptations and calamities.65 The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος presents this in a modified
form by changing the active to the passive: God is no longer explicitly described as the
sender of the delusion. (2) Also the replacement of κριθῶσιν with ἐπὶ ἐλέγχῳ appears to
modify the pre-text. Although the corresponding verb ἐλέγχω may have the sense ‘con-
vict, pronounce as guilty’, it can also be employed in a weaker sense as ‘to expose the guilt
of someone’. (3) The identification of the unbelievers with the Jews is one of the relatively
few anti-Jewish statements in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. The identification is not made explic-
itly in the pre-text but it is found in later commentaries on the passage. These commenta-
tors sometimes read the words τὴν ἀγάπην τῆς ἀληθείας οὐκ ἐδέξαντο (2 Thess 2:10) in
the light of Jesus’ words to the Jews, καὶ οὐ λαμβάνετέ με (Joh 5:43).66
2 Peter II Command to remember the teaching after his death. How he heard the voice of
God about the Son on Mount Tabor.
64 See 1 Joh 2:18.22; 4:3 and 2 Joh 1:7. The designation ‘antichrist’ may also be used with reference to the
figure in 2 Thess. This identification is made also by Priscillian (Can. LXXXVII, G. Schepss 1889: 146):
Quia ante iudicii diem veniet filius peccati qui intellegitur antichristus. ‘That before the day of judgment,
the son of sin will come, who is known as antichrist.’ Thus also Theophylact on 2 Thess 2:3 (Commentary,
PG 124: 1340BC): Οὐ γενήσεται, φησὶν, ἡ παρουσία τοῦ Κυρίου, ἐὰν μὴ ἔλθῃ ἡ ἀποστασία, τουτέστιν
ὁ Ἀντίχριστος. ‘The coming of the Lord will not happen, he says, unless the defection has come, this is
Antichrist.’ Cf. Trilling (1980: 83): ‘Eng mit dem Abfall-Geschehen verbunden ist das Hervortreten des
Antichrist vorzustellen.’
65 This is pointed out by Trilling (1980: 112) on this passage: ‘Offenbar verlangt eine so streng theozentri-
sche, alttestamentliche geprägte Denkweise des Verfassers (vgl. 1Kön 22,23; Ez 14,9), alle Ursächlichkeit
radikal in Gott zu verankern.’
66 Theodoret (Commentary, PG͂ IBWJOHRVPUFE+PIJOPSEFSUPUISPXMJHIUPOćFTTo
says: Ἰουδαίοις τοίνυν μάλιστα πρόφασις συγγνώμης οὐδεμία καταλειφθήσεται. ‘Therefore, least of all,
there will be left a reason to forgive the Jews.’ Cf. J. A. Bengel (1742: 843) commenting upon οὐκ ἐδέξαντο
(2:10): Hoc vel maxime fecerunt Iudæi, Ioh. V. 43. Iudæisque inprimis damnosus erit Nefarius ille. ‘This [i.e.
the rejection of Jesus] the Jews did more than anyone, Joh 5: 43. And it is against the Jews that the Abomi-
nable one will be most harmful.’ The fact that these two commentators, separated by several centuries, here
refers to the same saying from the Gospel of John is not necessarily evidence of literary dependence.
140 Commentary
Pre-text (1FUo ϢϧчϪѩϩϩϭϫ ЋϢϣϩϲϭц ϯɀϭϱϢрϯϟϰϣϠϣϠϟцϟϫаϪҀϫϰуϫϨϩѮϯϧϫ

καὶ ἐκλογὴν ποιεῖσθαι
In the pre-text, there is a reference to the story of the Transfiguration (1FUFSo
According to the pre-text, it happened ‘on the Holy Mountain’ (ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ ὄρει). The
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος has added that this took place on Mount Tabor. This name is not found
in the NT but belongs to a later tradition. The event was probably assigned to this moun-
tain because of its mention in the Psalms.67
Acts IX, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος I: About Philip the apostle who healed many in Samaria.
Pre-text ("DUTo ͖цϩϧɀɀϭ϶ϢсϨϟϰϣϩϦыϫϣС϶ϰуϫɀшϩϧϫϰѮ϶͓ϟϪϟϮϣцϟ϶
In the pre-text, Philip is not the apostle but the deacon with the same name.68 A possible
explanation is that the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος uses the title ‘apostle’ in a loose sense applying
it to anyone who proclaims the word. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts may use this title for
others, such as Paul and his companions.69 The sequence ‘Philip the apostle’ makes the
impression, however, that Philip, one of the twelve, is intended (cf. ‘James the apostle, Acts
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος XVIII). It has been suggested that the distinction in the NT between
Philip the apostle and the deacon is secondary.70 If this is the case, the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος
has unknowingly returned to an earlier stage of the tradition.
1.7. The ‘Paulusbild’ of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters differ from the pre-texts as they do not empha-
size that Paul is an apostle. The phrase ‘Paul the apostle’ occurs only once: In the general
heading of all κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters.71 This may be no coincidence. It
is remarkable that the general heading uses the title ‘apostle’ when it is not used in the
following κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. One could argue that this neglect is due to the fact that the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters do not include the prescripts of the letter where
the title is generally found in the pre-texts. But Paul’s apostleship is also a prominent
theme in several letters (1 Cor 9; $PSo(BMo BOEUIJTJTOPUSFĘFDUFEJOUIF
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. According to κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Gal I, the revelation (ἀποκάλυψις)
led to his renunciation of Judaism (μεταστάσεως ἀπὸ Ἰουδαϊσμοῦ) and is not described
as a call to apostleship. Κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 1 Tim II refers to Paul as being an ‘preacher’
(εὐαγγελιστής) from being a persecutor, while κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom XIX mentions
his ‘service’ (λειτουργία, cf. λειτουργὸς Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ, Rom 15:16). Paul has according
to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι a special mission although it is not referred to as his ‘apostleship’.
67 Probably, the words in Ps 88:13 LXX Θαβωρ καὶ Ερμων ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου ἀγαλλιάσονται, ‘Tabor and
Hermon will rejoice in Thy name’ were interpreted as a prophecy, see Dahl 1998: 288, n. 474.
68 This Philip is included in the list of deacons in Acts 6:5. The main reason for identifying Philip in Acts 8
with Philip the deacon is that Luke says that the apostles remained in Jerusalem during the persecution
(Acts 8:1) see Haenchen 1965: 252 and Jervell 1998: 259.
69 See κεφάλαια-τίτλοι Acts XXI and XXII. See also below on the ‘Paulusbild’ of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι.
70 Haenchen (1965: 252) quotes Wellhausen on Philip: ‘Er führt nach Joa 12 die Hellenisten zu Jesus; dass
er als Apostel zu einem der Zwölf geworden ist, …nimmt nicht Wunder.’
71 ‘Survey of the general chapters of every letter of the Apostle Paul, some of them also having subdivisions
written in red ink.’
His mission involves the proclamation that sanctification is through faith in Christ and
not through the Law (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι Gal IV; Rom IV). But although it is said that there
is no sanctification through the Law, there is still a positive evaluation of the faithful
Israel, which is not to be identified with the Christian church: In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom
XVI, the rejected Israel will return ‘in zeal of the Gentiles who had the privilege of being
joined to the faithful Israel.’ The fact that this idea is included in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
is worth noting. Related to this is the tendency in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι to pass over the
polemics in Paul’s letters. The opponents of Paul are seldom mentioned and they are
never identified as the ‘Jews’ or the ‘Judaizers’. In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Gal XII, Paul is said
to warn against ‘those who drag men to circumcision’ but these people are not described
further. The controversial theme of circumcision is mentioned only twice (Gal X and
XII). In addition, there is a tendency to avoid the term ‘Jew’. Thus, in its paraphrase of
Rom 3:1, κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom III transforms τί τὸ περισσὸν τοῦ Ἰουδαίου into περὶ
ὑπεροχῆς Ἰσραήλ. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι do not have much to say on the possible non-
Jewish opponent of Paul either: In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Col VI, there is a reference to the
‘deceitful human philosophy’, but this appears to be a general warning and no real polemic
is reflected. The reference to heresies are found mainly in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pas-
toral epistles (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι 1 Tim VII, first ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος; 2 Tim VI; VIII; Tit
II; VI). These are described as ‘innovators’ (καινοτομήσαντες, 2 Tim VIII) and ‘seditious
inquirers’ (οἱ ἐριστικοὶ ζητηταί, Tit VI, cf. the μωραὶ ζητήσεις in Tit 3:10). It is however
significant that the heretics referred to in some instances belong to the future. This is the
case in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Tim VI, where the reference to the heretics is explicitly said
to be a ‘prediction’ (πρόῤῥησις), which reflects the pre-text (5JNo ćFHFOFSBM
impression is thus that the polemic against Paul’s opponents does not appear as a center
of interest in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. This may reflect the interest of the author(s) of the list.
Another factor that should also be considered is the effect of the genre κεφάλαιον-τίτλος.
The focus of the genre is thematic. Primarily, it gives the reader information on the theme
of the pre-text. The frequent use of the περί-phrase is evidence of this. This may be the
reason why the opponents often recede into the background. If the opponents themselves
are not explicitly referred to in the pre-text, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι tend to focus on the
theme that is treated.
The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts are not in complete agreement with the pre-text regard-
ing Paul’s apostleship. In its paraphrase of "DUTo Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫϰцϰϩϭ϶"DUT9***EF-
scribes the Damascus event as the ‘divine and heavenly call of Paul to the apostleship of
Christ’ (ἀποστολὴ Χριστοῦ). This is not derived from the pre-text, but seems to echo
the phrase from the Pauline letters (e.g. δι᾽ οὗ ἐλάβομεν χάριν καὶ ἀποστολήν Rom 1:5).
The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts do not, however, refer to Paul as ‘the Apostle’ but do so
only in the plural (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXI; XXII; XXIV, fourth ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος;
XXVIII, second ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος). This agrees with the pre-text, where Paul and
Barnabas are referred to as ‘the apostles’ twice (14:4.14). The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts
refers to the ‘Jews’ in different contexts: It is the Jews who brings false accusations against
Stephen (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts VIII) and the more precise reference in the pre-text
to members of certain named synagogues (Acts 6:9) is omitted. It is also the Jews who
stone Paul at Lystra (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXII) and who plan treachery against him
(κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXXIV). The final κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XL does not highlight
142 Commentary
Paul’s preaching and teaching to all his visitors during his imprisonment in Rome (as
does the final verse in the pre-text). Instead, the final κεφάλαιον-τίτλος speaks of ‘Paul’s
discussion (διάλεξις) with the Jews in Rome’, with reference to "DUTo$JSDVN-
cision is mentioned twice: First as one of the decisions of the Apostolic Council, ‘that
believers of the Gentiles do not have to be circumcised’ (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXIII).
The second reference balances this statement by referring to the appeal of James that Paul
should not ‘appear as one who forbids circumcision among the Hebrews’ (κεφάλαιον-
τίτλος Acts XXXI). In the the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts, Paul also appears as one who can
heal the sick (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXII; XXVIII), and in general as a wonder-worker
(ἐθαυματούργησεν, κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXXVIII, second ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος).
In general, one may find no clear inconsistencies in the ‘Paulusbild’ of the κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι. One may rather speak of a harmonizing tendency: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the
letters do not emphasize that Paul is an apostle (in contrast to the pre-texts), while those
of Acts speaks of Paul’s ‘apostleship’ in a way that is reminiscent of the letters. The differ-
ences that may be noted, e.g. the interest in the wonders worked by Paul that is found only
in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts may be related to different emphases found in the pre-
texts. The mighty deeds of Paul play a minor role in his letters but are far more important
in Acts. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι seem to reflect this difference.
2. Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

2.1. The Genre Υποθεσις
The genre ὑπόθεσις is described by Wolfgang Raible as follows: ‘Es handelt sich um eine
Situierung des Inhalts eines Dramas mit entsprechender Inhaltsangabe’.72 Raible is cer-
tainly right in establishing a link between the genre ὑπόθεσις and drama. One may say
that the link between this genre and drama corresponds to the close association between
the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and scientific literature (see above). Raible mentions two functions
of the ὑπόθεσις. 1. It assigns the dramatic action to a specific place.73 2. It gives an out-
line of the plot. This outline may be considered the most important part of the ὑπόθεσις,
and the reason why ὑποθέσεις often are referred to as ‘plot summaries’.74 In this aspect,
the ὑποθέσεις probably had a model in the prologue-speeches of ancient tragedy and
comedy. These are an organic part of the play and appear most often as their first scene,75
spoken by a ‘prologue god’ or one of the characters in the play. It is, however, important to
note that these prologue speeches had as their main focus the pre-history of the plot, i.e.
72 See Raible 1995: 58.
73 This function may easily be misunderstood as though the ὑπόθεσις referred to where the play first was
dramatically produced. The reference to the location is to the imagined place of the dramatic action. For
USBOTNJUUJOHJOGPSNBUJPOBCPVUUIFFYUFSOBMIJTUPSZPGUIFQMBZoXIFOJUĕSTUXBTTUBHFE XIPQBJEGPSUIF
production etc., the ancient scholars used the genre ‘didascalic note’ (διδασκαλίαι). But these didascalic
notes occasionally receive the heading ‘ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ’, see e.g. K. Dover 1968.
74 See e.g. the commentary of M. J. Cropp (1988: 3) on Euripides’ Electra.
75 Although some dramatists used a ‘deferred’ prologue placed after the opening scene, when the curiosity of
the audience already had been aroused and they could bear to listen to a prologue. An example of this is
Menander’s Epitrepontes, see the translation of Murray (1945: 232).
Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις 143
what has happened before the play begins. This narrative has the function of transporting
the audience (or the reader) swiftly to an ‘interesting’ dramatic situation. The audience
should not have to watch the history of an entire dynasty. Instead, they should as soon
as possible become familiar with its most interesting personalities. A chronicle of the
preceding events would be impossible to transfer to the stage, or, if possible, it would be
tedious. This pre-history is instead presented to them in a condensed form, so that they
may be well prepared to appreciate the action of the play itself. But sometimes the speaker
of the prologue reveals more, and also tells what is going to happen ‘today’.76 If this hap-
pens, the prologue speech represents the equivalent of a ὑπόθεσις.77 The genre ὑπόθεσις
in a narrow sense was, however, in antiquity always an inorganic part of the work, com-
posed by a later hand. When this inorganic ὑπόθεσις was added to the play, the play could
actually have two introductions.
The association of the genre ὑπόθεσις with drama is found also in a recent study by
Joseph Sievers, who identifies the ὑπόθεσις as the ‘front matter’ of Greek drama that
gives an outline of the plot and other information. In contrast to Raible, Sievers adds
that ὑποθέσεις may sometimes be used with rhetorical works, but hardly, if at all, with
the works of historians. Sievers thus requires another designation for similar summa-
ries of historical works, and chooses the term argumentum for this purpose. According
to Sievers, argumentum is not an ancient designation, but is in current use among pal-
aeographers, codicologists and classical scholars.78 But this division between the genres
ὑπόθεσις and argumentum is not supported by ancient sources. The term is in fact an
ancient designation and it seems to have been the standard Latin rendering of ὑπόθεσις.79
In the present study, the two terms are therefore considered as synonyms.80 Zuntz has
emphasized that there existed in antiquity ὑποθέσεις of practically all branches of litera-
ture.81 The definition of Raible that confines the ὑπόθεσις to drama should therefore be
modified: The ὑπόθεσις can reflect a work of any genre.
Regarding the stylistic characteristics of the genre, one may say that a ὑπόθεσις, in
contrast to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, forms a continuous text written in complete sentenc-
76 This may be referred to as the speaker’s ‘prediction’, see the commentary of D. Christenson 2000: 131.
77 The term ὑπόθεσις may also be used in a completely different sense, i.e. the script that the theatre troupes
used as a guideline. Such a ὑπόθεσις may be used as a basis for improvisation and expanded by the actor(s)
during the performance. An example of this may be found in the so-called ‘Oxyrhynchos Mime’; for text
and translation see Beareo
78 See J. Sievers 2007: 273.
79 It is found in the manuscripts in headings of plot summaries of the plays of Plautus, e.g. ARGVMENTVM
IN EPIDICVM PLAVTI, ‘Argument of the Epidicus of Plautus’, see Duckworth (1940/1979: 3). More-
over, it is used in meta-communicative clauses in the text of the plays to refer to the plot, see e.g. Plautus,
Amphitryo 96 and Terence, Andria 6.
80 Cf. Raible 1995: 58.
81 See Zuntz 1945: 81. For texts see e.g., Scholia Graeca in Homeri Odysseam (G. Dindorfius 1855). Among
this diverse material, there is a ‘Hypothesis of the entire Odyssey’ (Ὑπόθεσις τῆς ὅλης Ὀδυσσείας, Din-
dorfiuso BOEBMTPаɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶PGBMMTPOHTEJTUSJCVUFEUISPVHIPVUUIFXPSL'PSаɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶PG
Greek tragedy, see the Scholia Graeca in Aeschylum (O. L. Smitho BOEUIFFEJUJPOTPG4PQIPDMFT
(R. D. Dawe 1984) and Euripides (J. Diggleo 'PSаɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶PGUIFTQFFDIFTPG%FNPTUIFO-
es, see the study of C. Gibson (2003). The ὑπόθεσις that precedes Eutechnius’ paraphrase of Nicander’s
Theraica shows that the genre also could appear in the context of didactic or scientific works, see the edi-
tion of the paraphrase by I. Gualandri 1968: 21.
144 Commentary
es.82 It can therefore not be distributed throughout the pre-text (as is the case with the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι). Most often, the ὑπόθεσις appears at the beginning, as an introduction
to the work. Thus they may be closely associated with κεφάλαια-τίτλοι,83 as is the case in
the majority of Euthalian manuscripts.84
Reconstruction of the pre-history of the events is important also in the ὑποθέσεις of
argumentative texts. In the example below, the events that preceded the speech are nar-
rated in detail.
Pseudo-Libanius, Hypotheses to the Orations Transl. by $(JCTPO o

of Demosthenes, ὑπόθεσις 30 [Demosthenes
29], ed. R. Foerster.
[History of the case] [History of the case]

Κρινόμενος τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς Ἄφοβος ἐξῄτει While Aphobus was still a defendant in the
παρὰ Δημοσθένους Μιλύαν εἰς βάσανον εἰδὼς guardianship case, he demanded Milyas
οὐ δοθησόμενον. οὐ γὰρ ἐδίδου Δημοσθένης from Demosthenes for torture, knowing that
φάσκων οὐκ οἰκέτην, ἀλλ᾽ ἐλεύθερον εἶναι Demosthenes would not give him up. Demos-
τὸν Μιλύαν ἐλευθερωθέντα ὑπο τοῦ πατρός, thenes did not give him up, saying that Milyas
ὅτε ἐτελεύτα, καὶ εἰς τούτου πίστιν ἄλλα τε was not a slave, but rather was a free man who
παρεχόμενος καὶ δὴ καὶ μαρτυρίαν Φάνου, was manumitted by his father upon his death.
ὃς ἐμαρτύρησε πρὸς τοὺς δικαστὰς φάσκων As a proof of this, he offered (among other evi-
ὡμολογηκέναι Ἄφοβον ἐπὶ τοῦ διαιτητοῦ dence) the testimony of Phanus, who testified
ἐλεύθερον εἶναι Μιλύαν. ἁλοὺς δὴ τῆς before the jury, saying that Aphobus had ad-
ἐπιτροπῆς Ἄφοβος ψευδομαρτυριῶν Φάνῳ mitted before the arbitrator that Milyas was a
δικάζεται, free man. Convicted in the guardianship case,
Aphobus takes Phanus to court on a charge of
perjury.
[Summary] [Summary]
ὑπὲρ οὗ τοῦτον τὸν λόγον ὁ Δημοσθένης λέγει Demosthenes delivers this speech on behalf of
καὶ τἀληθῆ φάσκων αὐτὸν μεμαρτυρηκέναι Phanus, saying that Phanus has testified truth-
καὶ πρὸς τούτῳ δεικνὺς ὡς οὐδὲν ἐκ ταύτης τῆς fully, and he furthermore shows that Aphobus
μαρτυρίας Ἄφοβος ἐβλάβη, ἀλλὰ δι᾽ ἑτέρους was in no way harmed because of this testi-
ἥλω μάρτυρας, οἷς οὐκ ἐπισκηψάμενος δῆλός mony, but rather was convicted because of
ἐστιν ἠδικηκώς. other witnesses, and as he had not successfully
prosecuted them, it was clear that he had done
wrong.
The author of the ὑποθέσεις has read the speeches carefully and reconstructed the history
of each case. The idea is that the reader who is familiar with these matters can more easily
appreciate the speech. The ὑπόθεσις is thus divided into two main parts: (a) a narrative
section relating the history of the case; and (b) a summary of the speech. It is seen that
82 This is the rule, but there are exceptions. Some of the ὑποθέσεις of the Gospels contain series of περί-
phrases that are close to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. These are connected with καί, and may be based on lists of
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. See the ὑπόθεσις of Matthew in Pseudo-Athanasius, Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae (PG 28:
385B, translated in Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: 511; App. II, page 337).
83 Since the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι may be reproduced twice, both in the beginning of the work and in the margin.
84 According to Willard (1970: 92/2009: 69), in most manuscripts where ὑποθέσεις occur, they immedi-
ately precede the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι.
the same basic scheme is followed in many of the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. In the Euthalian
ὑποθέσεις of the letters, the communicative situation is described first by an introductory
notice on the author of the letter and the place (and time) of composition. Then follows a
section on the πρόφασις (occasion) of the letter, which gives the reason why the letter was
written. As in the Hypotheses to the Orations of Demosthenes, the communicative situa-
tion is reconstructed mainly on the basis of the pre-text. But the communicative situation
may occasionally be described as viewed from a greater distance. Thus, the ὑπόθεσις of
Eph in the medieval commentary of Theophylact includes a description of the city of
Ephesus and its once famous shrine.85 One may assume that this kind of description is
written for readers who no longer had detailed knowledge of the ancient world and that
the function of the ὑπόθεσις is to create a picture of this world in order to assist the reader.
One should, on the other hand, avoid drawing the conclusion that silence regarding ques-
tions of geography or chronology means that the readers of the ὑπόθεσις were supposed
to be acquainted with these matters.
The subjects included in a ὑπόθεσις may belong to many different areas; from detailed
paraphrases of passages to descriptions of the world in which the text originated. There
are, however, many recurrent features, and one may assume that behind many ὑποθέσεις
lies some kind of ‘search formula’ (German: Suchformel). This may be presented as a se-
ries of questions related to the work:86
Matthieu de Vendôme (12th cent.) Translated by Thomas Wilson (16th cent.)

Quis, quid, ubi, quibus auxiliis, cur, quomodo, Who, what, and where, by what help, and by
quando. whose:
Why, how, and when, do many things disclose.
In the opening of his commentary on the Aeneid, Servius shows his debt to this method:
‘In the exposition of authors, the following themes should be treated: The life of the poet,
the title of the work, the genre of the poem, the intention of its author, the number of
books, the order of books, and the explanation of the work.’87
85 Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG%o" ;ϲϣϯϭ϶ϪϥϰϮшɀϭϩϧ϶ϪтϫГϯϰϧϰѮ϶ͳϯцϟ϶rГϯтϠϣϰϭ

δὲ τὴν Ἄρτεμιν, ἧς καὶ ναὸς ἦν ἐν αὐτῇ κάλλιστος καὶ μέγιστος, τιμώμενος, καὶ παρὰ πάντων μὲν Ἑλλήνων,
μάλιστα δὲ παρὰ τῆς Ἐφέσου, ὥστε καὶ νεωκόρον τῆς Ἀρτέμιδος λέγεσθαι ταύτην, ὡς ἐν ταῖς Πράξεσι
γέγραπται. ‘Ephesus was the chief city of Asia. It honored Artemis, and her largest and most beautiful
shrine was found there, honored by all Greeks, but especially by Ephesus itself, so that the city also was
called “the worshipper of Artemis”, as it is written in the Acts.’ (cf. Acts 19:35).
86 For the text and translation of this formula, see Plett 2001: 13. The formula is also known in Greek form,
see Henneo DGH. Lausberg 1998: § 328 with reference to Quintilian, InstOr 4,2,55: persona,
causa, locus, tempus, instrumentum, occasio; Lausberg 1998: § 373. Cicero, Inv. 1,21. H. Geissner 2001:
oM. Fuhrmann 1984: 99.
87 In exponendis auctoribus haec consideranda sunt: poetae vita, titulus operis, qualitas carminis, scribentis
intentio, numerus librorum, ordo librorum, explanatio. Servius, Commentary on the Aeneid, Preface. The
use of a ‘search formula’ may be seen behind the ‘Marcionite’ prologues, or better: ὑποθέσεις (Text in
Soutero ćFTFTIPSUUFYUTBSFRVJUFNPOPUPOPVT BTUIFZBMMCSJOHUIFBOTXFSTUPUIFGPM-
lowing questions: 1. Where did the recipients live? 2. What had happened to them? 3. What does Paul do
in his letter to them? 4. From where did Paul write? These questions are not asked in the prologues, but
must have belonged to the author’s scheme, e.g.: ‘The Laodiceans are Asians. They had received the word
of truth and remained faithful. The Apostle praises them, writing from Ephesus.’ On the disposition of the
‘Marcionite’ prologues, see Dahl 1978/2000: 189.
146 Commentary
The genre ὑπόθεσις thus represents not only a summary but also a widening of the
reader’s perspective that may go beyond the mere pre-text. Raible’s definition of the genre
as both ‘Situierung’ and ‘Inhaltsangabe’ may still be considered valid, if ‘Situierung’ is
taken in a wide sense.
The apparent function of the genre ὑπόθεσις is to guide the reader before he or she is
going to read the work itself. But the genre could also be used differently: In contrast to
the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, there are examples of collections of ὑποθέσεις that are transmitted
separately, without the pre-text. Zuntz has argued that ὑποθέσεις in antiquity originally
were written as substitutes for the originals, and that their use as introductions is second-
ary. It is a common opinion that some of the ὑποθέσεις of the plays of Euripides which
precede the plays in the manuscripts once formed a separate book, Tales from Euripi-
des. This book was intended to be read independently of the plays. Later editors found
the Tales useful introductions to the plays, and used them for that purpose.88 There is a
possible parallel to this phenomenon in the transmission of the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις: In
the pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις are repro-
duced without the biblical text. The work is a collection of ὑποθέσεις of the entire Bible.89
There are no major studies devoted to this work, and the literary relations between the
Synopsis and the Euthalian apparatus have not been investigated. The question of the
original function of the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις cannot be answered at the present stage of
research. They may either have been part of an edition of the letters, or they may have
been published separately.
A related question is the role of the genre ὑπόθεσις in ancient exegetical commentar-
ies. The ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret often refer explicitly to the following commentary. These
references may function almost as an excuse for the superficial treatment of the material
in the ὑποθέσεις, and the reader is assured that everything will be clear if the reader will
study the commentary.90 It is interesting to note that no such reference is found in the
Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. The lack of such references does of course not mean that a detailed
‘Euthalian’ exposition of the biblical text never existed, but we have no evidence of such
a commentary.91
88 See Zuntz 1945: 81. On the Tales from Euripides, see the study by J. Rusten 1982.
89 On the Synopsis, see Robinsono
90 See, e.g. Theodoret in his ὑπόθεσις of 2 Thessalonians: Ἑκάστου δὲ τούτων τὴν διάνοιαν ἐκ τῆς τῶν ῥητῶν
ἑρμηνείας εἰσόμεθα (PG 82: 657B). ‘We will understand the meaning of every part of this from the exposi-
tion of the text.’
91 Already Zacagni spent great efforts to find the supposed Euthalian commentaries, as he was intrigued by
references to Euthalian commentaries on Luke and Acts in the works of scholars such as Lucas Holstenius
o BOE1FUSVT-BNCFDJVT o )JTMPOHBOEUIPSPVHITFBSDIUISPVHIUIF7BUJDBO-J-
braries was however unsuccessful, and he could not find the material anywhere. The references to Eutha-
lius in the works of these 17th century scholars deserve further investigation, although we presently may
have confidence in Zacagni’s words. On this subject, see ZacagniMYYoMYYJ
2.2. The Hypotheses of the Pauline Letters

2.2.1. Authorship
The question of authorship is complicated by the fact that ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline let-
ters are found in different works. They appear in Euthalius, in the commentary of Oecu-
menius (PGo BOEJOUIFQTFVEP"UIBOBTJBOSynopsis Scripturae Sacrae (PG 28:
o "UUIFQSFTFOUTUBHFPGSFTFBSDI UIFIJTUPSZPGUIFUFYUJTVODMFBSćFаɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
of the Pauline letters may be considered to be part of a common Greek tradition, with the
author remaining anonymous.
2.2.2. Structure
The ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters are composed according to the following arrange-
ment.92
1. An introductory notice. This notice records the place of composition and says
whether Paul at the time of writing had met the recipients or not.
2. The prophasis of the letter. This section explains the occasion or reason (προφασις)
why the letter was written. It is a reconstruction of the historical circumstances
based primarily on the pre-text. Occasionally, the text of Acts or another letter is
used.
3. A summary of the contents of the letter, beginning with καὶ πρῶτον μέν in all
ὑποθέσεις except Philemon.
4. A notice on the letter’s ending, usually in the form καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.
2.2.3. Διὰ τί: An Ancient Introduction to the Ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline Letters
The distinction between two groups of letters based on whether Paul had met the address-
ees or not is characteristic of the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. This distinction is also found in a
short paragraph referred to in the secondary literature as Διὰ τί. This paragraph was also
included in Zacagni’s edition of Euthalius. von Soden has the following text:
Διὰ τί. Text in von Soden 1902: 663. My translation

Διὰ τί Παύλου ἐπιστολαὶ δεκατέσσαρες Why are they called ‘The Fourteen Letters of
λέγονται; ἐπειδὴ ταύτας ὁ ἀπόστολος ἰδίᾳ Paul?’ Because the Apostle himself writes them
ἐπιστέλλει καὶ διὰ τούτων, οὓς μὲν ἤδη with his own hand. And through these [letters],
ἑώρακεν καὶ ἐδίδαξεν, ὑπομιμνῄσκει καὶ he reminds and corrects those he has already
διορθοῦται, οὓς δὲ μὴ ἑώρακεν, σπουδάζει seen, while he is eager to instruct and teach
κατηχεῖν καὶ διδάσκειν ὡς ἔστιν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν τὸν those he has not seen, so that it is possible for
ἐντυγχάνοντα καταμαθεῖν. the reader to learn well from them.
According to Willard, this paragraph has no fixed place in the manuscripts.93 It has been
suggested that the paragraph originally was an introduction to the series of ὑποθέσεις
92 See the remarks in Ehrhard 1891: 391.

93 See Willard 1970: 102/2009: 76.
148 Commentary
of the Pauline letters.94 The text was misunderstood by Robinson, who described Διὰ τί
Παύλου ἐπιστολαὶ δεκατέσσαρες λέγονται as an absurd heading to the following note
ГɀϣϧϢуoϨϟϰϟϪϟϦϣѴϫ "DDPSEJOHUPRobinson, the note does not even attempt to answer
the question.95 Robinson said this because he understood the question to concern the
number of the letters.96 The question does however not concern the number of the Pau-
line letters, but the name Παύλου. The question and answer reflect the concern of the
ancient commentators with the name of the book.97 The point is simply that the book of
Pauline letters is named after the author.98 This question is answered quite clearly.
The idea that the Διὰ τί served as an introduction to the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline let-
ters is appealing. Not only does the paragraph explain the name of the book, but it also
helps the reader to understand why the reading of the Pauline letters is particularly ben-
eficial: As Paul had written to different kinds of recipients, every reader of the book may
find something useful; either providing elementary instruction or reminding of things al-
ready known. The use of καταμαθεῖν in this context may point to the complete education
of the reader. The corresponding passage in the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae has an interest-
ing textual variant. Here, it is said that the learning is indirect, mediated through people
who read the Pauline letters.99 The variant reading may reflect the use of the ὑποθέσεις as
replacements for the biblical text, and not as introductions. This corresponds to the use
classical scholars have surmised for the original Tales of Euripides.100
2.2.4. Hypothesis of Romans

Hypothesis of the Letter to the Romans
This form of the heading appears in most of the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters.101
He sends this letter from Corinth (cf. 16:1), while he has not yet seen them, but has heard
about them and longs to see them (1:13).
94 See von Dobschütz 1893: 70. Dahl (2000d: 255) made the same suggestion independently of von Dob-
schütz.
95 See Robinson 1895: 20; Willard 1970: 102/2009: 76.
96 In a list of Zacagni’s materials, Robinson (1895: 14) refers to this piece as ‘a note on their number.’
97 See the list of topics in the commentary of Servius on the Aeneid quoted above.
98 In contrast to e.g. the Book of Iob, which is named after its protagonist. Cf. the remarks of von Dob-
schütz (1893: 70) on the corresponding piece in the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae. von Dobschütz under-
stands this as an explanation of the name of the book.
99 ὡς ἔστιν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν τῶν ἐντυγχανόντων καταμαθεῖν (PG 28: 412D). ‘So that it is possible to learn well
from those who read them’. In this variant, the genitive αὐτῶν has contaminated the following participle
and a completely different meaning arises. This change is probably intentional as it occurs here, in the
Synopsis, which does not include the biblical text. The meaning may be that one should learn from the
readers of the letters when they in their general teaching pass on what they have learned, since ἐντυγχάνω
refers more to the personal ‘encounter’ and ‘conversation’ with the book than it does to the act of reading
(ἀναγινώσκω, cf. Rev 1:3).
100 See above on the genre ὑπόθεσις.
101 In von Soden’s text, the ὑποθέσεις of Col, 1 Thess and Heb add Παύλου in the headings. It is difficult to see
any pattern in these variations.
That the letter is sent from Corinth is not stated explicitly in the pre-text, but is deduced
from the remark about Phoebe, the servant of the church at Cenchrea in 16:1.102 The
ὑπόθεσις does not give any information regarding the situation of the addressees, other
than the fact that Paul had not yet seen them. Thus, Paul’s reasons for writing the letter
are not explained and the ὑπόθεσις of Rom is unique among the ὑποθέσεις of the Pau-
line letters in not having a section on the occasion (prophasis) of the letter. In this, the
ὑπόθεσις of Rom resembles the majority of the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. Pos-
sibly, this feature is related to the genre of the letter. Like 1 Peter and James, Romans is
described as a didactic letter (see below), and the ὑποθέσεις of these letters do not have
a prophasis section. The idea seems to be that a didactic letter containing teaching on the
fundamentals of faith does not need to have a specific occasion.
And first (καὶ πρῶτον), he praises (ἀποδέχεται) their faith, which he sees announced eve-
rywhere
Pre-text (Rom 1:8): πρῶτον μὲν εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ περὶ πάντων
ὑμῶν, ὅτι ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν καταγγέλλεται ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ
The words καὶ πρῶτον mark the opening of the summary, as in the ὑποθέσεις of all Pau-
line letters except Philemon. The pre-text uses a meta-communicative verb (εὐχαριστῶ)
that is not reflected in the ὑπόθεσις. Instead, the ὑπόθεσις has αποδεχεται. This change
may indicate that the ὑπόθεσις does not take εὐχαριστῶ as referring to the text of the let-
ter, but rather to Paul’s habitual thanksgivings for the Romans. This interpretation may
be supported by the mentioning of Paul’s prayers in 1:10, πάντοτε ἐπὶ τῶν προσευχῶν
μου. Commentators on this passage often refer to Paul as a man who prays, and assert
that his prayers are expressed in the text of his letters.103 The replacement of the meta-
communicative verb in the ὑπόθεσις highlights another aspect of the pre-text: In the
paraphrase of 1:8, the ὑπόθεσις focuses on Paul’s praise of the Romans, not his praise of
God. The focus on Paul’s praise of the Romans is a step towards a rhetorical analysis of
the letter, since ‘praise’ is a stock element of the captatio bevenvolentiae that is associated
with the exordium.104
And now, he composes the letter as a didactic (διδασκαλική) letter about the call to the Gen-
tiles. And [he says] that (ὅτι) circumcision lasted until a certain time, but now it has been
abolished. And [he says] that (ὅτι) the fall of Adam was atoned through Christ, and that the
shadow of the Law (ἡ σκιὰ τοῦ νόμου) passed away.
102 This idea is found in Theodoret (Preface, PG 82: 42B), Ὅτι δὲ ἀπὸ Κορίνθου γέγραφε τὴν πρὸς Ῥωμαίους
ἐπιστολὴν, σαφῶς ἡμᾶς αὐτὸ διδάσκει τὸ τέλος. Πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ τὴν Φοίβην συνίστησι, διάκονον αὐτὴν
εἶναι λέγων τῆς ἐν Κεγχρεαῖς ἐκκλησίας. ‘The conclusion teaches us that he wrote the Letter to the Ro-
mans from Corinth. Because first he recommends Phoebe saying that she is a deacon in the church at
Cenchreae.’ Similarly Theophylact (Commentary, PG 124: 549B). Corinth is mentioned also in the Byz-
antine subscription (see the apparatus criticus on the letter ending in the N. A. edition). The ‘Marcionite’
prologue, on the other hand, shows Athens as the place of writing (Text in Souter 1913: 206).
103 Thus Michel (1978: 80): ‘Mit der Zuschrift tritt uns der Apostel als Beter in seinem Dank, in seiner Für-
bitte und in seinem Gebetswunsch entgegen. Stil und Ausdrucksweise stammt aus der jüdischen Gebets-
sprache.’ Similarly Jewett (2007: 119), who thinks that a prayer is being performed both in the writing of
this passage and when it is read aloud to the hearers in Rome. For a different perspective, which describes
the Pauline thanksgivings rather as ‘prayer reports’, see P. T. O’Brien 1974.
104 See Lausberg 1998: §277αβ.
150 Commentary
The letter is described as a didactic letter, a genre-designation that is also found in the
epistolographic handbook ascribed to Libanius.105 The clauses that follow the genre-
designation in the ὑπόθεσις are not part of the following continuous summary of the
pre-text, but rather a selection of main points. The style of these clauses resembles the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, and thus they differ from the rest of the ὑπόθεσις: The first clause is a
genre-designation followed by a prepositional phrase and two ὅτι-clauses. Even if this
passage of the ὑπόθεσις is not a paraphrase of the propositio of the pre-text (o B
comparison between the two is possible, since both texts are short expositions of main
points. From this it may be observed that the view of Judaism and the prerogatives of the
Jews is different in the two texts. In the pre-text, the Jew has a priority over the Greek
(Ἰουδαίῳ τε πρῶτον καὶ Ἕλληνι, 1:16). This priority may be understood in various ways.
It may refer to the historical process, or to the theological interpretation of that process,
which gives Israel a special role to play in the history of salvation.106 In the ὑπόθεσις, the
idea of priority is completely abandoned. Here, the emphasis is put on the abolishment of
Jewish practices: Circumcision is something that belongs to the past.107 Correspondingly,
the ὑπόθεσις states that ‘the shadow of the Law’ (ἡ σκιὰ τοῦ νόμου) has passed away. This
phrase is not found in the pre-text, and may be dependent on Heb 10:1 σκιὰν ἔχων ὁ
νόμος τῶν μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν.
Therefore, he also reasonably makes accusations (αἰτιᾶται), first against the Greeks.
Pre-text (Rom 3:9b): προῃτιασάμεθα γὰρ Ἰουδαίους τε καὶ Ἕλληνας
The use of the verb αἰτιάομαι in the ὑπόθεσις shows that the ὑπόθεσις may borrow and
modify a meta-communicative verb in the pre-text. In the pre-text, προῃτιασάμεθα
(ᾐτιασάμεθα D G pc) is used in 3:9 with reference to the accusations Paul has made
against the Jews and Gentiles in the preceding text (o 108 The ὑπόθεσις has prob-
105 Διδασκαλικὴ δι᾽ ἧς διδάσκομέν τινα περί τινος, Pseudo-Libanius, De forma epistolari 31, cf. 78. A descrip-
tion of Romans that is similar to the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις is found in Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Rom, PG 82:
44C), although he does not use the genre-designation for the letter: Ποικίλην μὲν καὶ παντοδαπὴν ὁ θεῖος
Ἀπόστολος διὰ τῶνδε τῶν γραμμάτων προσφέρει διδασακαλίαν, ‘through this letter the divine Apostle
brings various teaching of every kind.’
106 Michel (1978: 88) argues for the second alternative: ‘Wenn Jesus sich zunächst an Israel gesandt weiss,
wenn Paulus über die Synagoge an das Heidentum herantritt, so liegt in diesem Weg des Evangeliums
nicht nur ein zeitlicher Vorsprung Israel, sondern eine heilsgeschichtliche Notwendigkeit.’ Other perspec-
tives are also possible, such as an emphasis on Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, see Jewett 2007: 140 n. 55.
107 This is a main point of the ὑπόθεσις. This focus on the abolishment of Jewish practices is found also in
the ‘Marcionite’ prologue: Romani sunt in parte Italiae. Hi praeventi a pseudoapostolis, sub nomine domini
nostri Iesu Christi in lege et prophetis erant inducti. Hos revocat apostolus ad veram et evangelicam fidem
(Text in Souter 1913: 206). ‘The Romans are partly of Italian origin. They were reached first by the false
apostles, and under the name of Jesus Christ led by means of the Law and the prophets. The Apostle calls
them back to the true faith of the Gospel, writing to them from Athens.’ A different interpretation is
found in Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Rom, PG 82: 45BC), who says that Paul in Romans is fighting a battle at
two different fronts: […] καὶ Ἰουδαίους ᾔδει λίαν ἀντεχομένους τοῦ νόμου, καὶ τοὺς τὰ Μαρκίωνος καὶ
Βαλεντίνου νοσοῦντας, καὶ μέντοι καὶ Μανιχαίους, λίαν τούτου κατηγοροῦντας, καθάπερ ἄριστός τις
στρατηγὸς πάντοθεν ὑπὸ πολεμίων κυκλούμενος, καὶ τούτους βάλλει κἀκείνους, καὶ τὸ τρόπαιον ἵστησιν.
‘He knew both the Jews, who were very loyal to the Law, as well as those who suffered from the diseases of
Marcion and Valentinus, and the Manichees, who were strongly accusing it. Thus, being completely sur-
rounded by enemies, as an eminent general, he hits both and wins the trophy.’
108 See Jewett 2007: 258.
ably removed the preverb (προ) in order to use the verb at this earlier point, as an intro-
duction to the accusations.109
For Abram, he says, after being justified not in circumcision, but before circumcision (Rom
4:10), was called by the new name of Abraham ((FOo , because he should be a father
of many nations (Gen 17:5; 3PNo according to the faith he had as uncircumcised.
A main point in the ὑπόθεσις is the change of name from Abram to Abraham, and the
significance of this change. Oddly, the ὑπόθεσις makes Paul say this. The point has no ba-
sis in the pre-text, where the change of name is not mentioned at all. The actual pre-text
here is therefore not the text of Romans, but rather the story of Abraham as told in Gen
17, which is also a pre-text of Rom 4.
After he was justified (μετὰ τὸ δικαιωθῆναι), he received also the circumcision in the flesh
(ἐν σαρκί), so that it should be a sign to his descendants according to the flesh (κατὰ σάρκα).
Circumcision will once come to an end when the Gentiles become children of Abraham
and start to live according to the faith of Abraham, by which he was justified when he was
uncircumcised.
Pre-text (3PNo ϨϟхϯϥϪϣѴϭϫЗϩϟϠϣϫɀϣϮϧϰϭϪѮ϶ ϯϲϮϟϡѴϢϟϰѮ϶ϢϧϨϟϧϭϯъϫϥ϶ϰѮ϶
πίστεως τῆς ἐν τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ, εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν πατέρα πάντων τῶν πιστευόντων δι’
ἀκροβυστίας, εἰς τὸ λογισθῆναι αὐτοῖς τὴν δικαιοσύνην, καὶ πατέρα περιτομῆς τοῖς οὐκ
ἐκ περιτομῆς μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς στοιχοῦσιν τοῖς ἴχνεσιν τῆς ἐν ἀκροβυστίᾳ πίστεως τοῦ
πατρὸς ἡμῶν Ἀβραάμ.
The ὑπόθεσις has transformed the meaning of the pre-text: (1) In the pre-text, Abraham
received the sign of circumcision as ‘seal (σφραγῖδα) of the righteousness that he had by
faith while he was still uncircumcised’. The description of the sign as a seal of righteous-
ness is not reproduced in the ὑπόθεσις. In the ὑπόθεσις, the connection between the
righteousness of Abraham and his circumcision is not evident. The sign is given to him
after he was justified (μετὰ τὸ δικαιωθῆναι), but beyond this chronological sequence, the
relationship between the two events is not explained. The ὑπόθεσις emphasizes that the
circumcision of Abraham was ‘in the flesh’ (ἐν σαρκί) and that it was intended as a sign for
his descendants ‘according to the flesh’ (κατὰ σάρκα). By omitting the description of cir-
cumcision as a seal of righteousness and by focusing on the physical aspect, the ὑπόθεσις
has reduced the importance of the sign. (2) In the pre-text, Abraham is described as
ancestor both of all uncircumcised believers and of all the circumcised who follow the
example of the faith he had when being uncircumcised. It is commonly assumed that the
second group is Jewish Christians.110 This picture is changed in the ὑπόθεσις, where the
Jewish Christians no longer are referred to as a separate group. Instead, the sign of cir-
cumcision will come to an end when the Gentiles become children of Abraham.
But if Abram received a new name from God, the Gentiles do not have to be circumcised,
and not even they who are Jews according to the flesh (κατὰ σάρκα)
109 The other explanation, that the ὑπόθεσις here uses a text with the ‘Western’ reading ᾐτιασάμεθα may also
be considered.
110 See e.g. Michel 1978: 167; E. Käsemann 1980: 116; Jewetto
152 Commentary
The ὑπόθεσις states that not even those who are Jews according to the flesh need circum-
cision. The addition κατὰ σάρκα implies that the ὑπόθεσις here refers to Christians of
Jewish origin. The reason alleged for the abolishment of circumcision is again that Abram
received a new name from God. With this radical view of circumcision, the ὑπόθεσις
goes beyond what Paul says in the pre-text (e.g. 3PNo BOEXIBUIFTBZTJOIJTMFU-
ters in general. In $PSo UIFNBJOQPJOUJTUIBUFWFSZCPEZTIPVMESFNBJOJOUIF
condition he was when he was called: ἡ περιτομὴ οὐδέν ἐστιν, καὶ ἡ ἀκροβυστία οὐδέν
ἐστιν, ἀλλὰ τήρησις ἐντολῶν θεοῦ (1 Cor 7:19).111
Through no other could this (i.e. sin) be erased, he says, than through Jesus Christ, through
whom also the curse (κατάρα) came from the beginning.
The ‘curse’ probably refers to (FOo XIFSF(PEDVSTFTUIFTOBLF ГɀϧϨϟϰрϮϟϰϭ϶
σύ, v.14) and the soil (ἐπικατάρατος ἡ γῆ, v.17).112 This passage was associated with Christ
in the Early Church, especially because of the so-called Protevangelium (Gen 3:15): καὶ
ἔχθραν θήσω ἀνὰ μέσον σου καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῆς γυναικὸς καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ σπέρματός
σου καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ σπέρματος αὐτῆς· αὐτός σου τηρήσει κεφαλὴν, καὶ σὺ τηρήσεις
αὐτοῦ πτέρναν. The seed of the woman was understood as a reference to Christ.113 Thus, if
the verbs are taken not as referring to habitual actions, but to unique events in the future,
Gen 3:15 may be read as a prophecy of the death of Christ and his victory over the devil.
The words of the ὑπόθεσις that the curse came through Christ are still problematic. (1) It
could be objected that the curse in (FOoJT TUSJDUMZTQFBLJOH OPUBDVSTFPONBO
only on the snake and the soil.114 For the ancient interpreter, this objection would prob-
ably not be considerable. The curse on the soil in v. 17 affects man’s condition severely,
and the announcement in v. 19 that man from now on must return to dust, may aptly be
described as a curse.115 In the ὑπόθεσις, it is probably the curse on man that is referred to
here, not the curse on the snake in v. 14. This follows from the context: The idea is that the
curse on man, which followed from his transgression, was lifted through Christ, who, in
turn, was the same person through whom the curse came. (2) The association of the curse
with Christ may seem unexpected, but it is known from tradition. Firstly, Christ was
associated with the passage through the Protevangelium with its promise that the seed
111 Weiss (1910: 186) draws attention to the similarities between Gal 5:6, Gal 6:15 and 1 Cor 7:19. These
verses express the same idea although with some variations. In his discussion of 1 Cor 7:19 Weiss points
out that Gal 6:15 in the Euthalian list of testimonies is attributed to a lost Μωϋσέως ἀπόκρυφον. The Eu-
thalian list describes it as the first (and only) quotation from this book in the Pauline letters. Weiss argues
that Gal 6:15 may not present the quotation in a pure form, which he suggests rather may be found in 1
Cor 7:19. The reason for this is the absence of Christian elements in this version: ‘Es könnte genau so in
dem jüdischen Apokryphon gestanden haben.’ David Hellholm brought to my attention this rare reference
to the Euthalian apparatus in NT commentaries.
112 This was suggested to me by Nils A. Dahl.
113 R. A. Martin (1965: 427) suggested that an individual Messianic interpretation of Gen 3:15 is present
already in the LXX, as the masculine pronoun αὐτός here represents the neuter σπέρμα in the preceding
sentence. The Christological interpretation of σπέρμα is attested in the 2nd cent., as in Ireneus, Against
Heresies, vi, 21, 1.
114 This is emphasized by G. von Rad (1981: 66): ‘Das Weib und der Mann sind nicht verflucht; (es ist gedan-
kenlos, von ihrer “Verfluchung” zu reden!).’
115 See G. J. Wenham (1987: 83), who refers to Gen 3:19 as a ‘curse’ and points out that most commentators
consider the verse a confirmation of the death-threat in Gen 2:17.
would bruise116 the head of the snake. Thus the promise of Christ’s victory was embedded
into the curse. In the Genesis text, God is the speaker, but there are sources who offer the
interpretation that Christ was the speaker of the Protevangelium (and, by consequence,
of the entire passage).117 It is difficult to decide whether the ὑπόθεσις goes this far. The
words ‘through whom’ (δι᾽ οὗ) do not necessarily imply that Christ was the speaker; they
may refer to Christ as the agent through whom the curse was effected. If this is the case,
κατάρα would refer to the curse on the snake (the devil), not to the curse on man, since
Christ is the agent only of the destruction of the devil. The possibility exists, however, that
there is a confusion regarding these two curses in the ὑπόθεσις.118
And now, as a good house-steward, he comforts (παραμυθεῖται) on the one hand the Jews:
‘you do not become transgressors of the Law if you believe in Christ.’
Pre-text (Rom 9:31): Ἰσραὴλ δὲ διώκων νόμον δικαιοσύνης εἰς νόμον οὐκ ἔφθασεν
Pre-text (Rom 10:9): ὅτι ἐὰν ὁμολογήσῃς ἐν τῷ στόματί σου κύριον Ἰησοῦν […] σωθήσῃ
The ὑπόθεσις depicts Paul as a good house-steward comforting (παραμυθεῖται) the Jews.
The comforting words are apparently based on oćFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶NBLFT1BVMTBZ
to the Jews that they are not transgressors of the Law if they believe in Christ. This state-
ment may be reached by combining 9:31 and 10:9, with the presupposition that the ‘you’
in 10:9 represents the Jew.119 In its treatment of Paul’s thought on the salvation of Israel,
the ὑπόθεσις is quite selective: According to the pre-text, the stumbling of Israel resulted
in the conversion of the Gentiles. Still, the election of Israel is valid (oBOEo
The conversion of the Gentiles will make Israel jealous (11:11), and finally result in the
conversion of Israel (o ćJTEJWJOFQMBO XIJDIJOUIFQSFUFYUJTSFGFSSFEUPBTB
mystery (11:25) is not mentioned in the ὑπόθεσις at all. All that is left in the ὑπόθεσις is
an appeal to the Jews for their conversion.
On the other hand, he commands those from the Gentiles not to boast against Israel, but to
understand that as branches upon the root, they were grafted onto them.
Pre-text (Rom 11:18): μὴ κατακαυχῶ τῶν κλάδων· εἰ δὲ κατακαυχᾶσαι, οὐ σὺ τὴν ῥίζαν
βαστάζεις ἀλλὰ ἡ ῥίζα σέ.
The command to the Gentile Christians not to boast against Israel reflects oJO
the pre-text. According to the pre-text, the Gentile Christians have, as a wild olive shoot,
116 Or, in Greek, τηρεῖν ‘guard, watch over.’ With the Christological interpretation a possible meaning would
be: ‘guard as a prisoner’ cf. Rev 20:3.
117 On the idea that the pre-incarnate Christ spoke these words in Eden, see K. Schurb 1990: 32.
118 There is also a related idea in Pauline letters that is based on an exegesis of Deut 21:23: κεκατηραμένος
ὑπὸ θεοῦ πᾶς κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου, ‘cursed by God is everyone who is hanged on a tree.’ This passage
(without the phrase ‘by God’) is part of the proof from Scripture in (BMo*OUIJTLJOEPGBSHVNFOU
Christ himself becomes the κατάρα (i.e., the accursed person or thing) for the sake of the believers and
thus removes the ‘curse of the Law’ (Gal 3:13). This idea seems not to be reflected in the ὑπόθεσις. Possibly,
it was difficult to reconcile with the idea of Christ himself as speaker of the curse. For a summary of this
type of argument, see Priscillian (Can. LXVI): Quia in lege iudaica maledictum sit, de quo nos Christus
liberat factus ipse maledictum. ‘That there is a curse in the Jewish law, from which Christ makes us free,
having been made a curse himself.’
119 This ὑπόθεσις seems to presuppose that the vocative ἀδελφοί in 10:1 refers to οἱ ἀδελφοί μου οἱ συγγενεῖς
κατὰ σάρκα (9:3). This understanding is probably too narrow. Paul addresses the entire community in
Rome, see Michel 1978: 324; Jewett 2007: 614.
154 Commentary
been grafted upon the olive tree, which represents the people of God. Some of the natural
branches representing the Jews, who did not accept Christ, have been broken off. In the
pre-text, a threat follows that God may break the wild shoot off in order to graft the natu-
ral branches in again (o ćJTJTOPUSFQSPEVDFEJOUIFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶ćFJODMVTJPOPG
this idea would have destroyed the logic of the ὑπόθεσις, where the Jewish practices are
said to be abolished once and for all.120 Thus, the ὑπόθεσις offers at this point an idiosyn-
cratic and incomplete summary of the pre-text. The image of the olive tree is preserved,
but its original meaning has been altered.
After that (ταῦτα), having taught exhortative words (παραινετικοὺς λόγους) in order to
strengthen the morals, he ends the letter.
In the ὑπόθεσις, the abstract term ταῦτα refers to the command not to boast against
Israel in 11:18 (see above). Thus, the παραινετικοὶ λόγοι probably begin at 12:1 with a
παρακαλῶ sentence. It is, however, difficult to say where the ὑπόθεσις makes this section
end. The use of the term παραινετικός corresponds to the use of ‘paraenetic’ in biblical
scholarship.121
2.2.5. Hypothesis of 1 Corinthians

He sends this letter from Ephesus in Asia (16:8), after having seen and taught them. Still, he
reminds (ὑπομιμνήσκει) them through this letter.
That the letter was sent from Ephesus is based on 16:8.122 In contrast to Romans, this letter
JTXSJUUFOUPSFDJQJFOUTXIPIBECFFOUBVHIUCZ1BVM DGo ćJTNBLFT
it belong to the group of letters where Paul reminds (ὑπομιμνῄσκει) those he had already
seen.123
The occasion (πρόφασις) for the letter is this
The occasion is explained via reference to the main themes of the pre-text:124 The divi-
sions in the community (o UIFDBTFPGGPSOJDBUJPO o UIFNFOXIPXBOUFE
to leave their wives (o UIFGPPEPČFSFEUPJEPMT o UIFTQFBLJOHJOUPOHVFT
(o BOEUIFNZTUFSZPGSFTVSSFDUJPO o ćFTFUIFNFTBQQFBSJOUIFTBNF
order in the ὑπόθεσις and in the pre-text. In the ὑπόθεσις, they appear twice; first as a
description of the occasion, then in the summary of the contents of the letter. Thus, it
120 E.g., ‘the sign comes to an end when what it signifies becomes reality’, in its summary of Rom 4.
121 See Hellholm/Blomkvisto "QQ** 338o340).
122 Cf. the ‘Marcionite’ prologue: Hos revocat apostolus ad veram et evangelicam sapientiam, scribens eis ab
Epheso. ‘The Apostle calls them back to the true wisdom of the Gospel, writing to them from Ephesus.’
(Text in Souter 1913: 206). So also Theodoret (Preface, PG 82: 37D, quoting 16:8) and Theophylact
(Commentary, PG 124: 788B). The Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition)
on the other hand, says that the letter was written at Philippi. This divergence shows that the Euthalian
ὑποθέσεις are not dependent on the subscriptions that are found in most Byzantine manuscripts.
123 See above on the Διὰ τί. The ὑπομνηστική is one of the genres mentioned by Pseudo-Libanius:
Ὑπομνηστικὴ δι᾽ ἧς δοκοῦμέν τινα τοῦ ζητουμένου πράγματος ἡμιν ὑπομιμνήσκειν τὸν σκοπὸν ἡμῶν
ἐν αὐτῇ χαράττοντες. ‘The suggestive style is that in which we seem to make a suggestion to someone in
response to an inquiry directed to us, while (actually) stamping it with our own aim. (De forma epistolari,
42. Transl. Malherbe 1988: 73). In their translations of Pseudo-Libanius, both A. J. Malherbe and M.
Trapp (2003: 191) render ὑπομνηστική ‘suggestive.’ This seems to be the meaning of the word here, and
thus the use of the term is quite different from that of the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις.
124 On the occasion of the pre-text, see M. M. Mitchell 1991.
seems clear that the ὑπόθεσις has reconstructed the communicative situation rather me-
chanically, by going through the pre-text and summarizing it. The ὑπόθεσις presupposes,
as do all modern commentaries on the letter, that ‘the Corinthians’ refers to a Christian
community within the large city of Corinth.125
In their love of strife, the Corinthians were opposed to each other, they differed in opin-
ions, and there were now divisions among them (o . As there were divisions (ὄντων
σχισμάτων), they did not act against the man living with his stepmother o .
Pre-text (1 Cor 5:2): καὶ ὑμεῖς πεφυσιωμένοι ἐστέ, καὶ οὐχὶ μᾶλλον ἐπενθήσατε, ἵνα ἀρθῇ
ἐκ μέσου ὑμῶν ὁ τὸ ἔργον τοῦτο πράξας;
The ὑπόθεσις goes, however, beyond merely listing the themes, it also establishes a link
between them. The ὑπόθεσις discerns a link between the divisions and the case of forni-
cation. The genitive absolute construction (ὄντων σχισμάτων) probably expresses cause:
The divisions had made the Corinthians overlook the man who lived with his stepmother.
The interpretation has a basis in 5:2. Here, the ὑπόθεσις has understood (1) πεφυσιωμένοι
ἐστέ as referring to the divisions within the community, and (2) the following καὶ οὐχὶ
μᾶλλον ἐπενθήσατε, ἵνα κτλ as describing a consequence of the preceding situation. That
the interpretation of πεφυσιωμένοι refer to the divisions is understandable. The term
is used in this context in 4:6, ἵνα μὴ εἷς ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἑνὸς φυσιοῦσθε κατὰ τοῦ ἑτέρου.126
More remarkable is the view that the divisions somehow had caused the Corinthians to
overlook the error among them. The ὑπόθεσις seems to use the divisions as an apolo-
getic argument, although it is not said explicitly: The Corinthians were distracted by their
internal strife, and this is why they could overlook such a serious sin.127
Others wished to leave their wives, apparently for the sake of continence (ἐγκράτεια).
Pre-text ( $PS o ϰϭѴ϶ Ϣс ϡϣϡϟϪϥϨшϯϧϫ ɀϟϮϟϡϡтϩϩϵ ϭЯϨ Гϡы Ћϩϩп Ъ ϨъϮϧϭ϶
γυναῖκα ἀπὸ ἀνδρὸς μὴ χωρισθῆναι […] καὶ ἄνδρα γυναῖκα μὴ ἀφιέναι.
Another aspect of the occasion of the letter is that some of the Corinthians wished to
leave their wives. This wish is probably constructed on the basis of 7:11; the order not
to divorce presupposes according to the ὑπόθεσις that some of the Corinthians wanted
125 Commentators of later times may however be confused regarding the size of the Christian community at
the time Paul wrote the letter. Interestingly, Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις, PG 124: 560BC) uses a language that
seems rather to reflect the state of affairs when he wrote the commentary: He can say that ‘Corinth’ had be-
lieved in Christ, and that Paul ‘writes to the city.’ (γράφει τοίνυν ὁ Παῦλος τῇ πόλει). This has significance
for the interpretation of the letter, since the church and the city thus become more closely associated in the
mind of the commentator. The situation in the Christian community is supposed to be somehow related to
the general ‘character’ of the city. Thus, the ὑπόθεσις of Theophylact suggests that the opulence of the city
of Corinth is represented by the rich members of the community who separated themselves from the rest.
This type of exegesis, which is based on popular traditions about the ancient cities (see also Theophylact,
ὑπόθεσις of Eph), is not found in the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις.
126 For the interpretation of this statement in relation to the divisions at Corinth, see G. Feeo
A. C. Thiselton 2000: 355.
127 For a similar interpretation (though focusing on the pride of the Corinthians), see Fee (1987: 202): ‘What-
ever the actual relationship of their pride to incest, it has blinded them both to the fallen brother’s true
condition and to their own.’ A. Clarke 7* JTDMPTFSUPUIFJOUFSQSFUBUJPOPGUIFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶A:F
are full of strife and contention relative to your parties and favourite teachers, and neglect the discipline of
the Church.’
156 Commentary
divorce. It is worth noting that the ὑπόθεσις mentions only the wish of the husbands, not
the wives (cf. 7:10). That the men wanted divorce for the sake of continence is not said
explicitly in the letter, but may be based on the immediately preceding words in the pre-
text: εἰ δὲ οὐκ ἐγκρατεύονται, γαμησάτωσαν (7:9).
And first, he bears witness (μαρτυρεῖ) to their prudence (φρόνησις) and wisdom (γνῶσις)
Pre-text ($PSo ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀϰҁϦϣҁϪϭϱɀрϫϰϭϰϣɀϣϮхаϪҀϫГɀхϰѯϳрϮϧϰϧϰϭѼϦϣϭѼ
τῇ δοθείσῃ ὑμῖν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, ὅτι ἐν παντὶ ἐπλουτίσθητε ἐν αὐτῷ, ἐν παντὶ λόγῳ καὶ
πάσῃ γνώσει, καθὼς τὸ μαρτύριον τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐβεβαιώθη ἐν ὑμῖν
As in the ὑπόθεσις of Rom, the ἐυχαριστῶ of the pre-text is replaced by another meta-
communicative verb, here μαρτυρέω. Here, the change may be justified by the adverb
πάντοτε: The ἐυχαριστῶ in 1:4 may not refer to the pre-text, but to other, text-external,
thanksgivings.128 Not only the meta-communicative verb is changed in the ὑπόθεσις. In
the pre-text, the Corinthians are described as rich in every λόγος and γνῶσις. The cor-
responding terms in the ὑπόθεσις are φρόνησις and γνῶσις. The reason for this change
may be stylistic: The text that immediately follows in the ὑπόθεσις says that the Corin-
thians should esteem virtue not according to word (ἐν λόγῳ) but according to deed and
power (ἐν ἔργῳ καὶ δυνάμει). The phrase ἐν παντὶ λόγῳ (1:4) was probably replaced in
the ὑπόθεσις with ἐν φρονήσει to avoid a confusion between the expression ἐν παντὶ
ϩшϡѾ XIFSFϩшϡѾJTVTFEJOQPTJUJWFTFOTF BOEUIFϩшϡѾoЗϮϡѾPQQPTJUJPO#FTJEFT
the term φρόνησις may be the preferred term in the ὑπόθεσις because it can be used in a
paraenetic context, while this is not normally the case with λόγος.129
Because they love chastity (ἐγκράτεια), he writes to them on virginity (περὶ παρθενίας),
that it should be not by force (κατ᾽ ἀνάγκην), but by conviction (πειθοῖ).
Pre-text ($PSo Ь϶ϢсИϯϰϥϨϣϫГϫϰѯϨϟϮϢцѨϟЯϰϭѼДϢϮϟѴϭ϶ϪуЗϳϵϫЋϫрϡϨϥϫ
ἐξουσίαν δὲ ἔχει περὶ τοῦ ἰδίου θελήματος, καὶ τοῦτο κέκρικεν ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ καρδίᾳ, τηρεῖν
τὴν ἑαυτοῦ παρθένον, καλῶς ποιεῖ
The ὑπόθεσις describes the Corinthians as people who love chastity. Thus, the ὑπόθεσις
has probably taken 7:1 καλὸν ἀνθρώπῳ γυναικὸς μὴ ἅπτεσθαι as a quotation from the
letter of the Corinthians to Paul, or at least as a statement reflecting their view on the sub-
ject.130 The passage that is paraphrased in the ὑπόθεσις, is 7:37.131 The following aspects of
the ὑπόθεσις is worth noting: (1) The ὑπόθεσις does not speak of a ‘virgin’, as in the pre-
text, but uses only the abstract noun παρθενία.132 Since the ὑπόθεσις treats the pre-text in
128 Thiselton (2000: 87), on the other hand, considers it primarily as ‘a speech act of giving thanks’, which
also can operate on other levels (e.g. it may have a didactic function).
129 This was suggested to me by David Hellholm.
130 On this interpretation of 7:1, see W. Schrage 1995: 53, who also quotes Tertullian (De monogamia, 11, 6)
as an early advocate of this view. Both Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 272A) and Theophylact (Com-
mentary, PG 124: 640A) ascribe the words to Paul. According to Theophylact, the Corinthians had asked
Paul the following question: εἰ δεῖ γυναικὸς ἀπέχεσθαι, ἢ οὔ, ‘should a man stay away from women or not?’
ćBUUIFSFXFSFBTDFUJDFMFNFOUTJO$PSJOUIJTBMTPFWJEFOUGSPNo TFFConzelmann 1981: 146f. n.
11; D. Zeller 2010: 237f.
131 This is seen from the opposition κατ᾽ ἀνάγκην / πειθοῖ, which is clearly an echo of 7:37.
132 Thus the thematic marker περὶ παρθενίας in the ὑπόθεσις correspond to περὶ […] τῶν παρθένων in the
pre-text (7:25).
this way, it is impossible to know exactly how it understood the difficult phrase τηρεῖν τὴν
ἑαυτοῦ παρθένον.133 (2) The ὑπόθεσις has reproduced the term ἀνάγκη from the pre-text,
and understands it as a reference to an external compulsion to live in abstinence.134 The
ὑπόθεσις shows no ascetic tendency.135
And in the end he writes exhortative words (παραινετικοὶ λόγοι) in order to strengthen the
morals.
Dahl has pointed out that παραινετικοὶ λόγοι probably refer to a single verse (15:58) in
the pre-text, and that the language of the ὑπόθεσις here is influenced by the idea that the
Pauline letters normally ended with paraenesis.136
2.2.6. Hypothesis of 2 Corinthians

He sends this one from Macedonia
Pre-text (2 Cor 9:2a): οἶδα γὰρ τὴν προθυμίαν ὑμῶν ἣν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καυχῶμαι Μακεδόσιν
The ὑπόθεσις is here based on the pre-text, where Paul says that he boasts (presently) to
UIF.BDFEPOJBOTPGUIFDPNNJUNFOUPGUIF"DIBFBOT DGBMTPo 137 Macedonia
is also mentioned in 1 Cor 16:5 as a region Paul later will pass through.138
The Corinthians were distressed after they had received the previous letter, because of the
sin of him who had lived with his stepmother, and they were grieved because they had over-
looked such an error.
133 This phrase may refer to the man keeping his fiancée a virgin, i.e. that he does not marry her. For this view,
see Fee o Schrage (1995: 202); Lindemann (2000: 182) and Zellero"
completely different interpretation is found in Clarke 7* o XIPBSHVFTUIBUɀϟϮϦтϫϭ϶JO
7:37 means παρθενία, here referring to the man’s virginity. This would explain the great emphasis put on
the personal will of the man in the pre-text.
134 For ἀνάγκη as referring to external compulsion, see Fee 1987: 353. Fee thinks that Paul here refers to
compulsion from both sides (from Corinthian ascetics and from Paul himself). Another possible inter-
pretation is that an inner compulsion is meant, and that ἀνάγκη here = πάθος. For this interpretation, see
Schrage 1995: 202 n. 853.
135 According to Dahl (2000d: 266, n. 143) there are practically no ascetic tendencies in the Euthalian mate-
rial. The pre-text (1 Cor 7) was open to such interpretations. If we turn to the Canones of Priscillian, the as-
cetic ideal plays a greater part: Quia sanctorum corpora dei sive spiritus sancti templa et Christi membra sint
et ideo semper hostia viva et placens esse debeant atque ab omni opere carnis et a susurratione et vaniloquio
ceterisque peccatis abstinere se debeant et ut uirgines iuxta apostoli consilium sic permaneant (Can. XXXIII,
Schepss 1889: 124). ‘That the bodies of the saints are temples of God or of the Holy Spirit and members of
Christ, and for this reason always a living sacrifice and should be pleasing and abstain from all the deeds
of the flesh and from whispering and empty talk and that virgins according to the judgment of the Apostle
should remain so.’
136 See Dahl 2000d: 265; Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: 512 (App. II, page 338).
137 See Clarke 1857: VI, 302. Clarke thinks that Macedonia as the place of composition is most clearly
JNQMJFEJOo$MBSLFEPFTEJTDVTTUIFQPTTJCJMJUZUIBU$PSJTBDPNQPTJUFEPDVNFOU&WFOJGUIJTJT
assumed, Macedonia may still be considered the place of writing, see e.g. Furnish (1984: 46) on the origin
POA-FUUFS% DITo BOEA-FUUFS& DITo
138 On the differences between the travel plans in $PSoBOE$PSo TFFWindischo
The Byzantine subscription is more specific than the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις, showing Philippi as the place
of composition, sometimes with the addition τῆς Μακεδονίας; see the letter ending in the N. A. edition.
Theodoret (Preface, PG 82: 40A) also refers to the letter as written from Macedonia.
158 Commentary
The idea is based on o BOE o XIFSF 1BVM TBZT UIBU UIF HSJFG PG UIF $PSJOUIJ-
ans was caused by a letter Paul wrote to make the Corinthians react against an offender
among them. The nature of his offense is not explained in the pre-text. The ὑπόθεσις has
identified the offender with the man who lived with his step-mother ($PSo ćJT
common identification is first attested by Tertullian, who rejected it.139 Modern com-
mentators agree that the identification is false and that there were two different cases: In 1
Cor 5, Paul had demanded the expulsion of the offender from the community (1 Cor 5:5),
IFSFIFBTLTUIF$PSJOUIJBOTUPGPSHJWFUIFPČFOEFS $PSo #FTJEFT UIFPČFOTFT
cannot be identified, as the crime of incest referred to in 1 Cor was not a crime directed
against the person of Paul, which was clearly the case with the offense referred to in 2
$PSo140
Then, they were also carried away by those who had caused the divisions, to sit down beside
the letter of the Law, consider the grace from Christ unimportant, and rather attend people
who boast of their appearance (τοῖς ἐν προσώπῳ καυχωμένοις).
The opponents of Paul are described as those who had caused the divisions, obviously
with reference to 1 Cor. Thus, according to the ὑπόθεσις, Paul is fighting against the same
opponents in the two Corinthian letters. There is no clear basis for this identification in
the pre-text.141 The description of the opponents is probably based on the following pas-
sages in the pre-text: (1) 11:22, where Paul describes them as Hebrews and Israelites. (2)
o XIFSFUIF0MEBOEUIF/FX$PWFOBOUBSFDPOUSBTUFE XIFSFUIFZBSF
described as οἱ ἐν προσώπῳ καυχώμενοι.
Then, [he says] that because Christ has come (τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐλθόντος), there is a new crea-
tion (καινὴ κτίσις), and one should not live after the old order (κατὰ τὸ παλαιόν), but be
renewed in everything as in a new creation (ἐν καινῇ κτίσει), and that circumcision from
now on is useless.
Pre-text (2 Cor 5:17): ὥστε εἴ τις ἐν Χριστῷ, καινὴ κτίσις· τὰ ἀρχαῖα παρῆλθεν, ἰδοὺ
γέγονεν καινά
In 5:17, the focus is on the individual believer. The words καινὴ κτίσις is also used of an
individual being, the one who is in Christ.142 The ὑπόθεσις has transformed this into a
general statement, using κτίσις in a collective sense. This interpretation is not an impor-
tant deviation from the pre-text, as the central motive of the change from the old to the
new, is retained in the ὑπόθεσις. The interpretation, however, has some implications for
the other elements: The words ἐν Χριστῷ, which in the pre-text probably refer to the uni-
fication of the believer with Christ through baptism, are in the ὑπόθεσις represented by a
statement focusing on the historical event (τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐλθόντος). This focus on history
139 See Tertullian, De pudicitia o5FSUVMMJBOJTSFGFSSFEUPCZWindisch 1924: 9 as the only theologian in

the Early Church who rejected this identification.
140 For this discussion, see Windisch o Bultmann o Furnish o BOE
M. E. Thrall o
141 For an overview of this discussion, see Hellholm 2008: 288.
142 Bultmann (1976: 159): ‘Hier wie Gal 6,15 deutlich auf das Individuum bezogen […]’. Thus also the KJV,
‘he is a new creature.’
instead of the individual makes it possible for the ὑπόθεσις to include a reference to the
abolishment of circumcision which is not found in the pre-text.143
… he ends the letter in thanksgiving (ἐν εὐχαριστίᾳ)
Pre-text (2 Cor 13:13): ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἡ
κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν
The designation εὐχαριστία in the ὑπόθεσις for 13:13 is puzzling but it seems reasonably
clear that this is the pre-text that is being referred to.144 Modern commentators tend to
designate this verse with the term ‘benediction’, not ‘thanksgiving’.145 The use of the meta-
term εὐχαριστία is also remarkable in view of the fact that the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις in
general avoid using εὐχαριστία/εὐχαριστέω. These meta-terms are not even used where
one should expect them: in the paraphrase of the Pauline thanksgiving periods.146 Neither
is the term εὐχαριστία used elsewhere in the ὑπόθεσις with reference to other benedic-
tions that appear at the end of the Pauline letters.147 There should therefore be a special
reason for its use here. The answer may be found in the special character of the pre-text.
Commentators have pointed out that the benediction in 13:13 stands out from the other
benedictions that conclude Paul’s letters. Its outstanding features are both its length and
its triadic structure.148 Windisch describes it as a Trinitarian formula,149 and one may
assume that this feature has contributed to its unique treatment in the ὑποθέσεις. Possibly,
the elaborate benediction was associated with the celebration of the Eucharist, and so the
word εὐχαριστία may be employed for Eucharistic prayers or blessings.150
143 Cf. Priscillian (Can. LXVII): Quia per spiritalem cordis in Christo circumcisionem propudiosam illam legis
destruat apostolus. ‘That the Apostle through the spiritual circumcision of the heart in Christ abolishes the
shameless circumcision of the Law.’
144 "DDPSEJOHUPUIFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶ 1BVM IBWJOHEFTDSJCFEIJTWJTJPOTJO1BSBEJTF o PSEFSTUIBUTJOOFST
should repent ( = 13:2) before he ends (τελειοῖ) the letter in thanksgiving. The εὐχαριστία should therefore
be sought after 13:2 and in the end of the letter, and this leaves few other choices than 13:13.
145 See Doty 1973: 43; Furnish 1984: 587. German Segenswunsch (see e.g. Windisch 1924: 427). It is also
possible to consider the form a prayer. This is the opinion of Theophylact (Commentary, PG 124: 952A)
on this passage: Ἐπειδὴ συνῆψεν ἅπαντας, ἐπεύχεται αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸ εἰωθὸς, τὴν χάριν τοῦ Υἱοῦ, δι᾽ ἧς
ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς, ‘When he has united them all, he prays, according to his habit, for the grace of the Son,
through whom He saved us.’ It is worth noting that Theophylact describes this as a regular feature of the
Pauline letters.
146 Cf. the commentary. This is one of the most conspicuous differences between the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις and
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, see especially the Resumé of the present commentary.
147 Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 16:23; Gal 6:18; Eph 6:24; Phil 4:23; Col 4:18b; 1 Thess 5:28; 2 Thess 3:18; 1 Tim 6:21b; 2
Tim 4:22b; Tit 3:15b; Philem 1:25; Heb 13:25.
148 Furnish (1984: 587) finds that only the elaborate benedictory form of Eph 5:23 can be compared to 2 Cor
13:13.
149 See WindischoThrall (2000: 920) maintains the view that the word ‘trinitarian’ if used
for this benediction, should not imply a doctrine of the Trinity but that the benediction rather represents
‘one of the starting points of trinitarian development.’
150 See Lampe (s.v. εὐχαριστία B.1). The reference to the ‘holy kiss’ in 13:12 may also be associated with the
Eucharist, see Furnish 1984: 583. The Euthalian ὑποθέσεις are, however, for the most part uninterested in
the liturgical elements in the Pauline letters, see the Resumé of the present commentary.
160 Commentary
2.2.7. Hypothesis of Galatians

He sends this letter from Rome, after he has seen and taught them.
Rome is not mentioned in the pre-text, but the ὑπόθεσις here agrees with the Byzan-
tine subscription.151 Both the ὑποθέσεις and these subscriptions often name Rome as the
place of composition, and their motivation for doing this is not always clear. One may
conjecture that the ὑπόθεσις has understood Paul’s words on his στίγματα (6:17) as a
reference to scars received from mistreatment in prison, and that this has associated Gal
with the group of Imprisonment Letters.
And first (καὶ πρῶτον), he bears witness (μαρτυρεῖ) to their faith and their true conviction
of Christ. But he rebukes (μέμφεται) them for acting unwisely and for changing their minds
Pre-text (Gal 1:6): θαυμάζω ὅτι οὕτως ταχέως μετατίθεσθε ἀπὸ τοῦ καλέσαντος ὑμᾶς ἐν
χάριτι Χριστοῦ εἰς ἕτερον εὐαγγέλιον
The verb θαυμαζω is not reflected in the ὑπόθεσις, which describes the beginning of the
pre-text with the meta-communicative verbs μαρτυρεῖ and μέμφεται: Thus, the ὑπόθεσις
seems to place the testimony before the rebuke. It is not quite clear what the ὑπόθεσις
here refers to. The words ἀπὸ τοῦ καλέσαντος ὑμᾶς ἐν χάριτι Χριστοῦ may be understood
as a reference to the faith and true conviction of the Galatians, but the ὑπόθεσις gives this
theme greater prominence by the juxtaposition of μαρτυρεῖ and μέμφεται. Possibly, some
other passage of the pre-text underlies this passage of the ὑπόθεσις.152 In a paraphrase
PGUIFCFHJOOJOHPGUIFQSFUFYU POFTIPVMEFYQFDUUIBUUIFOBSSBUJWFPG(BMoTIPVME
be referred to. This is however not the case. This narrative in the pre-text is related to
the accusations against Paul’s person and these accusations are not mentioned in the
ὑπόθεσις at all.153
… that the shadow and the circumcision were given until a certain time, and that they since
the coming (παρουσία) of Christ are useless
Pre-text (Gal 5:6): ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε ἀκροβυστία, ἀλλὰ
πίστις δι’ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη
Pre-text (Gal 6:15): οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε ἀκροβυστία, ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις154
151 Πρὸς Γαλάτας ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Ῥώμης ‘The Letter to the Galatians was written from Rome’, see the letter end-
ing in the N. A. edition. So also Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 504D). The ‘Marcionite’ prologue, on the
other hand, has Ephesus, see Souter 1913: 205. Ephesus is considered also by modern commentators, see
H. Schlier 1962: 18; A. OepkeoH. D. Betz (1979: 12) notes the agreement between the
‘Marcionite’ prologue and most modern scholars with regard to the place of composition, but points out
that the sources both of this prologue and of the Byzantine subscription are unknown to us.
152 E.g., οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε; ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε (3:3). The ὑπόθεσις may also be
influenced by other Pauline letters, where praise of the recipients may occur in the thanksgiving period.
153 The ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret (PG o BOE ćFPQIZMBDU PG o EJČFS GSPN UIF &V-
thalian ὑπόθεσις by including the motive that Paul himself, not only his teaching, was slandered by his
opponents in Galatia. According to Theophylact, they accused Paul of being a disciple of the Apostles, not
of the Lord. Another accusation was that of unstableness, that Paul sometimes practiced circumcision,
sometimes not: τὸ ποτὲ μὲν περιτέμνειν, ποτὲ δὲ ἀναιρεῖν τὴν περιτομήν (ὑπόθεσις of Gal, PG 124: 953B).
This perspective on the conflict in Galatia involves the use of Acts (cf. Acts 16:3). It also represents a stron-
ger interest in historical detail than the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις.
154 Gal 6:15 is mentioned elsewhere in the apparatus: In the Euthalian list of testimonies the verse is attributed
to a lost Μωϋσέως ἀπόκρυφον and it is recorded as the first (and only) quotation from this book in the
The ὑπόθεσις here corresponds both to 5:6 and 6:15. It is hardly possible to decide which
of the two is closest to the ὑπόθεσις. The pre-text has in any case been modified, and
this makes an exact identification difficult. The following points are worth noting: (1)
The ἐν Χριστῷ formula in 5:6 is apparently interpreted as referring to the first coming
(παρουσία) of Christ (cf. the interpretation of 2 Cor 5:17). (2) The pre-text argues that
neither circumcision nor uncirumcision means anything.155 The words on uncircumci-
sion are omitted from the ὑπόθεσις, thus only the negative evaluation of circumcision
remains. (3) The ὑπόθεσις introduces the term σκιά, which is not in the pre-text. Here it
is apparently used as a metaphor for the Law. These changes alter the meaning of the pre-
text. While the pre-text emphasizes the insignificance of all external circumstances for
those in Christ (cf. 3:28), the ὑπόθεσις again focuses on the abolishment of circumcision
and the Jewish Law through the coming of Christ. It should also be noted that the entire
structure of the argument has been changed: In the pre-text, there is a contrast between
the insignificant outer appearances on the one hand, and the καινὴ κτίσις (5:6) or the
ἀγάπη ἐνεργουμένη (6:15), on the other. In the ὑπόθεσις, these are left out.
2.2.8. Hypothesis of Ephesians

He sends this letter from Rome, while he has not yet seen them, but heard about them
That the letter is sent from Rome has no basis in the pre-text. Dahl pointed out that the
statement is in conflict with the story of Paul in Acts, where Paul arrives in Ephesus be-
fore his voyage to Rome ("DUTo 3PNFBTUIFQMBDFPGDPNQPTJUJPOJTNFOUJPOFE
in the Byzantine subscription and Dahl suggested that this is the source of the ὑπόθεσις.156
The answer to this question may also be found in the pre-text. Eph belongs to the so-
called imprisonment letters (Eph, Phil, Col, 2 Tim, Philem) and the ὑποθέσεις refer to
all of them as written in Rome, presupposing that they refer to his imprisonment in that
city.157 That Paul had not met the Ephesians when he wrote the letter, is clear from the
pre-text (cf. 1:15; 3:2). The conflict with the narrative of Acts is not remarkable in itself:
In the first centuries there was no canonical account of Paul’s life, and even if the text of
Pauline letters; see hereto the notification in Weiss 1910: 186. David Hellholm brought this reference to
my attention.
155 Betz (1979: 262) translates 5:6 ‘for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means any-
thing’, similarly Schlier (1962: 228). A slightly different understanding of 5:6 is found in Oepke (1973:
158): ‘Der Sinn ist: die Beschneidung nützt nicht, und die Unbeschnittenheit schadet nicht.’
156 See Dahl 1978/2000: 202, n. 105. The Byzantine subscription runs as follows: Πρὸς Ἐφεσίους ἐγράφη ἀπὸ
Ῥώμης διὰ Τυχίκου, see the letter ending in the N. A. edition.
157 Cf. the ‘Marcionite’ prologue describes the Letter to the Laodiceans (= Eph) as written while Paul was a
prisoner in Rome: Hos conlaudat apostolos, scribens eis a Roma de carcere. ‘The Apostle praises them, writ-
ing to them from prison in Rome.’ (Text in Souter 1913: 206). This prologue may, however, not belong
to the original set, where Paul’s letters to the churches in Asia (in Laodicea and Colossae) probably both
were assigned to Ephesus. For arguments supporting this view, see DahloćFPEPSFU
assigns the letter to Rome (Preface, PG 82: 42C), and also Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG 124: 1033A):
Γράφει δὲ τὴν τῶν ὑπερόγκων νοημάτων ταύτην γέμουσαν Ἐπιστολὴν ἀπὸ Ῥώμης δεδεμένος. ‘He writes
the letter, which is full of sublime thoughts, from Rome, as a prisoner.’ Both Rome and Caesarea have
frequently been mentioned by commentators, see P. Pokorný 1992: 42; E. Besto&WFOJG&QI
is considered a pseudonymous letter, Rome may still be the ficticious place of composition implied in the
pre-text, see G. Sellin 2008: 491.
162 Commentary
Acts was known, it was not absolutely necessary to accept its itinerary.158 The Euthalian
ὑποθέσεις apparently use the text of Acts elsewhere (in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Thess, see be-
low), but neglect it here.159
They truly had faith in Him and love for all the saints and they wanted to be strengthened
(βεβαιωθῆναι) by Paul
The true faith of the Ephesians reflects the pre-text (cf. 1:15 κἀγὼ ἀκούσας τὴν καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς
πίστιν ἐν τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ), but their wish to be strengthened by Paul is a motive that
seems to belong to the ὑπόθεσις alone. It is, however, possible to arrive at this conclusion
by examining the pre-text: (1) In 6:22, Paul is said to have sent Tychikus to the Ephesians
with a twin purpose, to make the Ephesians know about his present circumstances, and
to encourage (παρακαλέω) their hearts. The meaning of παρακαλεῖν may here be close
to βεβαιόω.160 These words relate to the letter carrier, but may reasonably be applied to
the message of the letter as well.161 (2) There is a possibility that the ὑπόθεσις here uses
a similar technique as the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor, where the communicative situation was
reconstructed by referring to what Paul does in the letter. Paul had written to the Corin-
thians partly as a response to their enquiries, and the needs of the Corinthian community
emerge clearly, upon reading. One may therefore conjecture that the ὑπόθεσις of Eph
here may be based on some specific passage in its pre-text. The theme of strengthen-
ing is found in 3:16, where Paul prays that the Ephesians may be strengthened (here:
κραταιωθῆναι) with the power of God through the Spirit: ἵνα δῷ ὑμῖν κατὰ τὸ πλοῦτος
τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ δυνάμει κραταιωθῆναι διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν ἔσω ἄνθρωπον.
The ὑπόθεσις describes this in a typical manner: Paul’s strengthening of the Ephesians is
in the pre-text effected through prayer, but this is not mentioned here. Neither does the
ὑπόθεσις say how the wish of the Ephesians was communicated to Paul.
He writes this letter to them as a catechetical letter (κατηχητικὴ ἐπιστολή)
In the typology of the ὑποθέσεις, the genre of Eph is the catechetical letter.162 Thus it is
both similar to and different from Romans, which is described as a didactic letter. In the
158 Dahl (1978/2000: 202) uses the Acts of Paul as an example: The author of this book made use of the ca-
nonical Acts, but the story of Paul’s travels is quite different.
159 By contrast, Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PGo QBSBQISBTFT"DUT VTJOHUIFUFYUPG"DUTBTBO
argument against the view that Paul had not yet seen the Ephesians when he wrote the letter.
160 Cf. Pokorný (1992: 250) ‘Παρακαλεῖν »ermutigen oder ermahnen« ist ein typisches Verb der Paränese
und drückt sowohl Ermutigung als auch Ermahnung aus.’ Best (1998: 617) argues that the verb here
should not be taken in the technical sense it has in 4:1 and he refers to Tychikus as sent ‘to strengthen the
members of the community.’ If this interpretation is adopted, 6:22 may well be considered the basis for the
ὑπόθεσις.
161 On the possibility of a close relationship between the message and its carrier, see Best (1998: 617): ‘He [i.e.
Tychicus] will in effect continue what the letter itself is intended to achieve.’
162 This genre-designation is different from the description found in Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG 124:
1033A), who thinks that Paul in this letter entrusted both deeper and more exalted truths to the readers
than he did elsewhere ‘because they were already instructed in the Christian faith’ (ἅτε κατηχημένοις
ἤδη). This interpretation seems to be based on his image of the city of Ephesus (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG
124: 1033A): Ἐπεὶ οὖν δεισιδαίμων τε ἦν οὕτως ἡ πόλις, καὶ οὕτω σοφοῖς ἐκόμα, πολλῇ σπουδῇ κέχρηται
Παῦλος πρὸς τοὺς τοιούτους γράφων […].‘Since the city was so religious and had a multitude of wise
people, Paul spends great effort in writing to them […].’ This is a parallel to the method Theophylact uses
in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor: There is a tendency to view the Christian community as typical of the city to
which it belonged. The Euthalian ὑπόθεσις does not use this method.
Διὰ τί, the verbs κατηχέω and διδάσκω are closely related. Both are used with reference
to recipients that Paul had not seen (see above). It should be noted that the catechetical
letter Eph has a prophasis section in contrast to the didactic letters.
And he declares that our call has not come through a man, but through Christ, who is the
Son of God, so that they also from this may learn that they as believers in Christ do not pay
homage to a man (ἀνθρωπολάτραι), but that they truly worship God (θεοσεβεῖς)
Pre-text (&QI o ϭТ ϢϭѼϩϭϧ аɀϟϨϭъϣϰϣ ϰϭѴ϶ Ϩϟϰп ϯрϮϨϟ ϨϱϮцϭϧ϶ <y> Ϫу Ϩϟϰ‫ڍ‬
ὀφθαλμοδουλίαν ὡς ἀνθρωπάρεσκοι ἀλλ’ ὡς δοῦλοι Χριστοῦ ποιοῦντες τὸ θέλημα τοῦ
θεοῦ, ἐκ ψυχῆς (7) μετ’ εὐνοίας δουλεύοντες, ὡς τῷ κυρίῳ καὶ οὐκ ἀνθρώποις
The statement that the call has not come through a man is not to be found in the pre-text,
at least not in this pointed form. Also the terms ἀνθρωπολάτραι and θεοσεβεῖς represent
a problem as they are not found in the pre-text. Dahl suggested that this statement in the
ὑπόθεσις may be related to the Christological controversies of the 4th and 5th centuries.
The term ἀνθρωπολάτραι was used against the Arians and later against the Nestorians.163
The theme is not elaborated further in the Euthalian apparatus.164 This passage of the
ὑπόθεσις has some basis in the pre-text: (1) The term ἀνθρωπολάτραι has a counterpart
in the ἀνθρωπάρεσκοι in 6:6. The verb ἀρέσκω ‘to please’ may be used with God as an
object (Rom 8:8; 1 Thess 2:15), and the opposition between ‘pleasing men’ and ‘pleas-
ing God’ is emphasized in the Pauline letters (Gal 1:10; 1 Thess 2:15).165 In view of this,
the transformation of ἀνθρωπάρεσκοι into ἀνθρωπολάτραι is conceivable. (2) The term
θεοσεβεῖς seems to render ‘the servants of Christ’ (δοῦλοι Χριστοῦ, 6:6) who are serv-
ing (δουλεύοντες, 6:7) with cheerfulness. Both the noun δοῦλος and the verb δουλεύω
may be used of one who worships God. If this sense is presupposed the opposition in
the ὑπόθεσις between ἀνθρωπολάτραι and θεοσεβεῖς is very close to 6:7 (δουλεύοντες
… κυρίῳ … ἀνθρώποις). One objection may be raised against this interpretation of the
ὑπόθεσις: This passage in the pre-text does not focus on Christians in general but is rather
an admonition to Christian slaves on how to behave. It is however no serious difficulty for
the ὑποθέσεις. Elsewhere, the ὑποθέσεις may use a fragment of the pre-text without pay-
ing any attention to its context.166 This allows for a radical reinterpretation. The ὑπόθεσις
IBTBQQBSFOUMZVTFEoBTSBXNBUFSJBMGPSFYQSFTTJOHBOPUIFS NPSFHFOFSBMJEFB167
163 See Dahl 2000d: 263, with references.

164 This is in contrast to the so-called Confession of Euthalius (see the Introduction) where an advanced tech-
nical vocabulary is found.
165 This connection is made by Theophylact (Commentary, PG 124: 1124C), who quotes Gal 1:10 to throw
light on Eph 6:6, Ὁ ἀνθρωπάρεσκος οὐ δοῦλος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὥσπερ καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ λέγει· »Εἰ ἀνθρώποις
ἤρεσκον, Χριστοῦ δοῦλος οὐκ ἂν ἤμην«. ‘The men-pleaser is not a servant of Christ, as he also says else-
where: “If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ”.
166 An example of this is found in the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Thess, where words from the paraenetic section of the
letter are used to describe the opponents of Paul in Thessalonice, see below.
167 If this is the case, it is unnecessary to ask how the ὑπόθεσις has understood ὡς τῷ κυρίῳ (6:7). The particle
ὡς relates serving the human master with serving the Lord, and this idea is completely lost in the ὑπόθεσις.
164 Commentary
2.2.9. Hypothesis of Philippians

He sends this letter from Rome
This is not stated explicitly in the pre-text but is the common opinion found in almost
all ancient commentaries. This idea is related to Phil as one of the imprisonment letters.
(4:22).168 Besides, Rome may have been suggested by the phrases ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ πραιτωρίῳ
(1:13) and the reference to οἱ ἐκ τῆς καίσαρος οἰκίας (4:22).169
And first, he praises (ἀποδέχεται) their faith and announces (σημαίνει) that he remembers
them
Pre-text (1IJMo<o> ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀϰҁϦϣҁϪϭϱГɀхɀрϯѬϰѯϪϫϣцѨаϪҀϫɀрϫϰϭϰϣГϫ
πάσῃ δεήσει μου ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν, μετὰ χαρᾶς τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος, ἐπὶ τῇ κοινωνίᾳ
ὑμῶν εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἀπὸ τῆς πρώτης ἡμέρας ἄχρι τοῦ νῦν, πεποιθὼς αὐτὸ τοῦτο ὅτι ὁ
ἐναρξάμενος ἐν ὑμῖν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἐπιτελέσει ἄχρι ἡμέρας Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ
ćFQSFUFYUNBZJODMVEFOPUPOMZoCVUBMTPUIFWFSTFTo XIFSF1BVMBHBJOTBZT
that he is concerned about the recipients and longs to see them.170 The ὑπόθεσις has omit-
ted the references to thanksgiving and prayer in the pre-text (εὐχαριστῶ, δέησις). The
interest is thus concentrated on the function of the pre-text in relation to the recipients
only: That Paul here praises their faith.
All these things (ταῦτα πάντα) I counted as a loss for the sake of Christ
Pre-text (Phil 3:7): Ἀλλὰ ἅτινα ἦν μοι κέρδη, ταῦτα ἥγημαι διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν ζημίαν
This is the only quotation from the Pauline letters in the ὑποθέσεις. It may be signifi-
cant that this single quotation refers to the abolishment of Jewish observances because of
Christ, which is a recurrent theme in the ὑποθέσεις. Only the second half of 3:7 is quoted.
Thus there is no mention of the gains (κέρδη) that Paul might have had in Judaism before
his conversion.171 Another modification is the addition of πάντα, which intensifies the
meaning of the pre-text.
168 The letter is assigned to Rome by the ‘Marcionite’ prologue (Souter 1913: 206) and Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις
of Phil, PG 82: 560A) and in the Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition). The-
ophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Phil, PG 124: 1140A) dates the letter to Paul’s imprisonment after his first defense,
thus again implying Rome as the place of writing.
169 It has been established that these phrases cannot serve as evidence for Rome as the place of authorship, see
LohmeyeroBOE0OUIFEJČFSFOUUIFPSJFTSFHBSEJOHUIFPSJHJOPGUIJTMFUUFS TFFLohm-
eyer o XIPBTTJHOTUIFMFUUFSUP$BFTBSFB BOEMüller o XIPBSHVFTGPS&QIFTVT
170 Lohmeyer o EFTDSJCFToBTUIFUIBOLTHJWJOH der Dank BOEoBTBQFSTPOBMDPN-
munication (Persönliches). The two passages are closely related. 1:7b takes up the theme of 1:5, κοινωνία,
see Müller 2002: 45.
171 It is instructive to compare the ὑπόθεσις with a scholion attributed to Photius on the same passage: »Ἀλλ᾽
ἅτινά μοι ἦν κέρδη«. κέρδος λέγει τὰ ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου αὐτῷ συλλεγέντα· ὥστε οὐ κακίζει τὸν νόμον, ὡς οἱ
ἀπὸ Μαρκίωνος ληροῦσιν. εἰ δὲ καὶ ἥγηται αὐτὰ ζημίαν, οὐχ ἁπλῶς λέγει τοῦτο, ὅπερ ἦν ἂν κακίζοντος
τὸν νόμον, ἀλλὰ ζημίαν αὐτὰ καλεῖ τῇ πρὸς Χριστὸν συγκρίσει καὶ παραθέσει, ὅπερ μᾶλλον εἰς ἐγκώμιον
τοῦ νόμου τελεῖ, τὸ μὴ ἄλλως τολμᾶν ζημίαν αὐτὸν καλεῖν εἰ μὴ τῇ πρὸς Χριστὸν παραθέσει καὶ συγκρίσει
(on Phil 3:7, text in K. Staab 1933: 627). ‘«But everything that was gain for me». «Gain» he calls what he
has gathered for himself from the law. Thus he does not accuse the law, as Marcion’s followers foolishly
BTTFSU&WFOJGIFDPVOUFEJUBTBMPTT IFEPFTOPUTBZUIJTXJUIPVUBRVBMJĕDBUJPOoXIJDIXPVMECFUIF
XPSETPGBOBDDVTFSPGUIFMBXoCVUIFDBMMTUIFTFUIJOHTMPTTXIFODPNQBSFEBOEXFJHIFEBHBJOTU$ISJTU
which rather amounts to praise of the law in that he does not dare to call it loss except when he compares
He praises the Philippians for their gift of fellowship DG o And having again ex-
horted (προτρεψάμενος) them in order to strengthen the morals (εἰς τὰ ἤθη), he thus ends
the letter DGo
ćFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶IBTDIBOHFEUIFTFRVFODFPGoBOEoćFFYIPSUBUJPOJTSFGFSSFE
to after the praise of the gift probably because of the notion that the Pauline letters should
end with exhortation, an idea that seems also to be present in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor (see
above). The meta-term here is προτρέπω, which in the ὑποθέσεις is difficult to distin-
guish from the two related terms παραινέω and συμβουλεύω. The most stable element
in the ὑποθέσεις that appears in connection with the hortatory passages is not a specific
meta-term, but the phrase εἰς τὰ ἤθη.172
2.2.10. Hypothesis of Colossians

He sends this letter from Rome, while he has not yet seen them (cf. 2:1), but heard about
them.
As the other Imprisonment Letters (cf. 4:18), Col is assigned to Rome. This probably
means that the ὑπόθεσις dates the letter to Paul’s imprisonment there.173
Some people wanted to deceive the Colossians with Greek sophisms (σοφίσματα ἑλληνικά)
directed against the faith in Christ, concerning food permitted in the Law (2:16) and cir-
cumcision.
The term σόφισμα has some basis in the pre-text (πιθανολογία, 2:4; φιλοσοφία, 2:8),
while the characterization of the sophisms as ‘Greek’ seems to go beyond the pre-text.174
and weighs it against Christ.’ This exposition of the passage highlights the words that the ὑπόθεσις has
surpressed (ἅτινά μοι ἦν κέρδη) and the result is very different from that of the ὑπόθεσις. According to the
scholion, Paul does not at all criticize the law here, he praises it.
172 Cf. the ὑπόθεσις of Col, καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τὰ πρὸς τὰ ἤθη συμβουλεύσας, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν, and the ὑπόθεσις
of Heb, εἶτα πάλιν εἰς τὰ ἤθη προτρεψάμενος καὶ τούτους, καὶ ἀποδεξάμενος αὐτῶν τὴν διὰ τὸν Xριστὸν
ὑπομονὴν, καὶ πείσας τιμᾶν τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. See Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004:
o "QQ** 338o339).
173 So also the Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition). Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Col,
PG 82: 592A) thinks the letter was written during Paul’s second imprisonment in Rome: Ἔγραψε δὲ ἀπὸ
τῆς Ῥώμης, ἤδη τὸν πρῶτον διαφυγὼν κίνδυνον. ‘He wrote from Rome having already escaped the first
danger.’ Also Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 124: 1205A) says that the letter was written from prison
in Rome and refers to the group of Imprisonment Letters as most precious in the collection: Πᾶσαι μὲν
αἱ Ἐπιστολαὶ Παύλου ἅγιαι, μάλιστα δὲ αἱ δεδεμένου αὐτοῦ πεμπόμεναι. ‘All the letters of Paul are sacred,
but especially those that were sent by him from prison’. The assigning of the letter to Rome does not have
the same implication for Theodoret and Theophylact. Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 82: 593A) bases
his view on Acts and his detailed knowledge of the ancient geography. He assumes that Paul, while travel-
ing to Phrygia must have brought the Gospel to the Phrygian cities Laodicea and Colossae. Theophylact
(ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 124: 1205B) does not reason along such lines but simply places the letter in the same
group as the letters to the Romans and to the Hebrews, whom Paul had not met when he wrote to them.
The ‘Marcionite’ prologue on the other hand, assigns the letter to Ephesus: Ergo apostolus iam ligatus scribit
eis ab Epheso. ‘Therefore, the Apostle, now in chains, writes to them from Ephesus.’ (Text in Souter 1913:
206). The idea that Paul wrote from an imprisonment in Ephesus is rejected by Lohmeyer (1964: 14, n. 4):
‘Von einem Martyrium in Ephesus wissen wir nichts.’
174 In this, the ὑπόθεσις differs from Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 82: 593B) who describes the opponents
of Paul in Colossae as Jewish Christians (τινὲς τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων). Theophylact brings a
paraphrase of 2:20 (Commentary, PG 124: 1249CD), where he mentions a Greek element in the teaching of
the heretics, namely the observation of days: Πῶς οὖν πάλιν νῦν, ὡς ἐν τῇ προτέρᾳ ζωῇ ζῶντες, ὑπόκεισθε
τούτοις, διδάσκεσθε γὰρ ὅτι ἥδε ἡ ἡμέρα δεξιὰ, ἥδε ἀπαίσιος· ἅτινά ἐστιν Ἑλληνικὰ παρατηρήματα, ‘Why
166 Commentary
According to the ὑπόθεσις, circumcision was also a concern of the heretics. This is not
stated explicitly in the pre-text but may be inferred from the reference to a circumcision
not made with hands in 2:11.175
And first, as he gives thanks (εὐχαριστῶν) to God, he announces that they have been trans-
lated from darkness to the light of truth
Pre-text ($PMo add καὶ) εὐχαριστοῦντες (add ἅμα) τῷ πατρὶ τῷ ἱκανώσαντι ὑμᾶς
εἰς τὴν μερίδα τοῦ κλήρου τῶν ἁγίων ἐν τῷ φωτί (13) ὃς ἐρρύσατο ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῆς ἐξουσίας
τοῦ σκότους καὶ μετέστησεν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἀγάπης αὐτοῦ
This is the first instance in the ὑποθέσεις where the verb εὐχαριστῶ occurs. In the previ-
ous ὑποθέσεις this word has been avoided. But the verb in the ὑπόθεσις of Col prob-
BCMZ EPFT OPU SFĘFDU UIF ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϭѼϪϣϫ UIBU PQFOT UIF UIBOLTHJWJOH o CVU
rather εὐχαριστοῦντες in 1:12. It is in any case clear that the paraphrase in the ὑπόθεσις
reflects oBOEOPUUIFUIBOLTHJWJOH176 The matter is complicated further by a tex-
tual variant in the transmission of the pre-text: Papyrus 46 has καὶ εὐχαριστοῦντες ἅμα in
1:12, thus coordinating the participle εὐχαριστοῦντες with the preceding προσευχόμενοι
καὶ αἰτούμενοι (1:9). This makes Paul and Timothy the subject of εὐχαριστοῦντες.
On the other hand, without the addition of καί and ἅμα, the subject of the participle
εὐχαριστοῦντες is apparently the Colossians themselves. Τhe text of the ὑπόθεσις, on
the other hand, has Paul as the subject of εὐχαριστῶν. Does this mean that the ὑπόθεσις
supports the reading of Papyrus 46? This question is difficult to answer as the ὑπόθεσις
in any case has transformed the pre-text by changing the number from the plural to the
singular. With this degree of freedom, it is difficult to make conjectures regarding the
exemplar used by the ὑπόθεσις. The ὑπόθεσις has also conflated 1:12 and 1:13. In the pre-
text there is a shift between ὑμᾶς (v. 12) and ἡμᾶς (v. 13). This is ignored in the ὑπόθεσις,
where the pronoun αὐτούς and elements from both verses (φῶς 1:12; σκότος, μεθιστάναι
1:13) appear.
So that he should unite both (τὰ ἀμφότερα συνάψῃ) and give life to everything
Pre-text (Col 1:20): καὶ δι’ αὐτοῦ ἀποκαταλλάξαι τὰ πάντα εἰς αὐτόν, εἰρηνοποιήσας διὰ
τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ σταυροῦ αὐτοῦ, δι’ αὐτοῦ εἴτε τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς εἴτε τὰ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς
In the pre-text, ἀποκαταλλάξαι refers to the reconciliation of the universe (τὰ πάντα)
with God (εἰς αὐτόν). The participle εἰρηνοποιήσας refers either to the making peace
between God and the world, between conflicting entities within the world, or to both;
do you again, as if you were living your former life, obey them [i.e. the στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου]? For you
teach that this day is a lucky day, this day is unlucky, which are Greek observances.’ This Greek element
he contrasts with the observances of food, which he describes as Jewish. The presence of Greek and Jew-
ish elements is also referred to in the ὑπόθεσις. The ὑπόθεσις, however, does not say to which tradition
the different observances belong: Εἶχον δὲ καὶ παρατηρήσεις πολλὰς Ἰουδαϊκὰς καὶ Ἑλληνικὰς, ἡμέρας
παρατηρούμενοι, καὶ καιροὺς, καὶ βρώματα (ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 124: 1205B). ‘They also practiced many
Greek and Jewish observances, observing days and seasons and foods.’
175 This is how 2:11 is understood by Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 609B): Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ὑπαχθέντες τὴν
νομικὴν πολιτείαν ἠσπάσαντο, διδάσκει πάλιν τῆς περιτομῆς τὴν διαφοράν, ‘for, since they through decep-
tion embraced observance of the Law, he teaches them again on the different kinds of circumcision.’
176 For the delimitation of the text see Lohmeyer XIPSFGFSTUPoBTAEFS%BOL BOEUPo
as ‘die Bitte’, cf. H. Hübner 1997: 44.
considered one and the same process. As for the ὑπόθεσις, the first interpretation is
excluded, since God could hardly be referred to as one of the ἀμφότερα. It should be
noted that the language of the ὑπόθεσις here is reminiscent not of the pre-text, but of
Eph: ὁ ποιήσας τὰ ἀμφότερα ἓν ... ἀποκαταλλάξῃ τοὺς ἀμφοτέρους ἐν ἑνὶ σώματι τῷ θεῷ
(&QIo ćFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶PG$PMBOEUIFDBOPOJDBMUFYUPG&QITQFBLTPGACPUI ϰп
ἀμφότερα/οἱ ἀμφότεροι respectively). In Eph, ‘both’ refers to the Jews and the Gentiles.177
The affinity in language between the ὑπόθεσις of Col and the text of Eph does not, how-
ever, explain the meaning of τὰ ἀμφότερα in the ὑπόθεσις of Col. It is unlikely that the
ὑπόθεσις here refers to the unification of Jews and Gentiles in Christ, as the ὑποθέσεις
elsewhere stress the abolishment of Judaism (cf. especially the ὑπόθεσις of Rom).
2.2.11. Hypothesis of 1 Thessalonians

He sends this letter from Athens (3:1), after he has seen them and spent time with them
o
Pre-text (1 Thess 3:1): διὸ μηκέτι στέγοντες εὐδοκήσαμεν καταλειφθῆναι ἐν Ἀθήναις
μόνοι
Many ancient sources assign the letter to Athens. This may have some basis in the pre-
text, where Paul mentions that he wanted to be left there.178 The ὑπόθεσις, taking this as
a reference to the place of composition, also makes Timothy the letter carrier, probably
basing this on καὶ ἐπέμψαμεν Τιμόθεον (3:2).179 The interpretation of the ὑπόθεσις pre-
supposes that ἐπέμψαμεν in 3:2 is an epistolary aorist referring to the event from the per-
spective of the recipients of the letter. Another reason may be seen in Paul’s description
177 See H. Hübnero

178 Theodoret (Preface, PG $ RVPUFToUPQSPWFUIBU1BVMXSPUFUIFMFUUFSGSPN"UIFOT͑Ϯьϰϥϫ
γὰρ δὴ γεγράφθαι νομίζω τῶν πρὸς Θεσσαλονικέας τὴν προτέραν· ταύτην γὰρ ἐξ Ἀθηνῶν ἀπέστειλεν
ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, ὡς πρὸς αὐτοὺς γράφων ἐδίδαξεν. Ἐν γὰρ τῷ μέσῳ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς οὕτω φησί· »Διὸ
μὴ στέγοντες εὐδοκήσαμεν καταλειφθῆναι ἐν Ἀθήναις μόνοι« ‘I consider he wrote the first letter to the
Thessalonians as the first one. For this the divine Apostle sent from Athens, as he teaches us in the writing.
For in the middle of the letter he says: “Therefore, when we could no longer forbear, we thought it good
to be left at Athens alone”. The letter is assigned to Athens also in the Byzantine subscription, see the letter
ending in the N. A. edition. So also the subscription in the Peshitta and the ‘Marcionite’ prologue (text in
Souter 1913: 206). T. Holtz (1986: 123) points out that 3:1 is the source of this idea: ‘Aus der Nennung
des Ortsnamens Athen hat ein gewichtiger Teil der Überlieferung des Briefes geschlossen, er sei dort ver-
fasst worden. Das ergibt sich aus ihr nicht.’
179 The information that Timothy was the letter carrier is also found in the subscription to the letter in the
Peshitta: ‘End of the first Epistle to the Thessalonians; which was written from Athens, and was sent by the
hands of Timothy’ (Transl. Murdock 1893). It seems to be rare in the Greek tradition. According to the
N. A. edition, a reference to Timothy as the letter carrier is found in a correction to min. 1739 and in a few
other witnesses. Clarke (1857: VI, 556) refers to a subscription in a Coptic version: ‘Written from Athens,
and sent by Silvanus and Timothy.’ On this he remarks: ‘That it was not sent by either Silvanus or Timothy
is evident enough from the inscription [scil. prescript], for St. Paul associates these two with himself, in
directing it to the Thessalonian church.’ A variant of this subscription is quoted by Horner in the introduc-
tion to his edition of the Bohairic New Testament: ‘Finished and completed was the epistle of Thessalonica
the first. It was written in Athens, and sent with Silvanus and Timotheus, with help from God most high’,
followed with a prayer and a concluding doxology, see G. W. Horner 1905: xxvii. In the edited text with
translation (p. 457), he prints a shorter version with only Silvanus as the letter carrier: ‘To Thessalonike 1,
it was written in Athennas: it was sent by Silouanous. Stichoi 312, Chapters 4.’ In the textual apparatus on
this page (p. 457), Horner refers to ‘Euth.’, by which he probably means the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις.
168 Commentary
of Timothy in 3:2, which is quite similar to the description of the letter carrier Tychicus
in Eph and Col (&QIo$PMo #VUUIFEFTDSJQUJPOJOoEPFTOPUSFGFSUP
the composition and dispatch of the letter. It is explicitly stated that Paul sent Timothy
UPMFBSOBCPVUUIFDPOEJUJPOPGUIFćFTTBMPOJBOTBOEUPTUSFOHUIFOUIFN o "UUIF
time he wrote 1 Thess, Timothy had already returned to him (3:6).
The Apostle had suffered much affliction in Beroea, Philippi of Macedonia, and in Corinth,
and knowing how much he suffered in Thessalonice, he fears that the Thessalonians, when
they hear about his sufferings in the cities mentioned above, will be tempted by the tempter
and take offence.
Pre-text (ćFTTo ϨϟхϡпϮЮϰϣɀϮч϶аϪѩ϶ПϪϣϫ ɀϮϭϣϩтϡϭϪϣϫаϪѴϫЮϰϧϪтϩϩϭϪϣϫ
θλίβεσθαι, καθὼς καὶ ἐγένετο καὶ οἴδατε. διὰ τοῦτο κἀγὼ μηκέτι στέγων ἔπεμψα εἰς
τὸ γνῶναι τὴν πίστιν ὑμῶν, μή πως ἐπείρασεν ὑμᾶς ὁ πειράζων καὶ εἰς κενὸν γένηται ὁ
κόπος ἡμῶν
Only one of the cities, Philippi, is mentioned in the pre-text (2:2). The story of the suffer-
ings of Paul in the other cities is found in the text of Acts.180 One may therefore assume
that the list of cities is directly or indirectly derived from Acts. There seems however, in
UIFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶UPCFOPJOUFSFTUJOUIFJUJOFSBSZPG1BVM BOEUIFMJTUPGDJUJFToBMUIPVHI
TFFNJOHMZEFSJWFEGSPN"DUToDBOOPUFBTJMZCFTRVBSFEXJUIUIFJUJOFSBSZPGUIBUCPPL
(1) The cities are not mentioned in the order of the Acts. According to Acts, Paul had
already been in Philippi when he came to Thessalonice, but the ὑπόθεσις says that the
Thessalonians only later will hear about his suffering there. (2) If we with the ὑπόθεσις
presuppose that the letter was written from Athens, Paul’s sufferings in Corinth had
according to Acts not yet taken place, since he reached Corinth only after his stay in
Athens ("DUToo ćFTFEJďDVMUJFTJOEJDBUFUIBUUIF&VUIBMJBOаɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
do not represent the most accurate biblical scholarship of antiquity, and one gets the
impression that scraps of information have been put together without any real interest in
historical questions.181
2.2.12. Hypothesis of 2 Thessalonians

This he sends from Rome
The sending of the letter from Rome has no basis in the pre-text.182
Some idle and unruly (ἀργοὶ καὶ ἄτακτοι) impostors from Thessalonice were seducing them,
saying that the coming was already imminent.
180 1IJMJQQJoćFTTBMPOJDFo #FSPFBo$PSJOUIo

181 With regard to this, Theodoret (Preface, PGo SFQSFTFOUTBNPSFTPQIJTUJDBUFEBQQSPBDI XIFSF
every letter is dated within the chronology of Acts. This attempt to harmonize the biblical writings is not
found in the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις and κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, but only in the Euthalian Prologue to the Letters of
Paul.
182 The Byzantine subscription says that the letter was written from Athens, but the subscription in a number
of Greek medieval manuscripts assign the letter to Rome; see the letter ending in the N. A. edition. The
prologue to the letter that was made to supplement the ‘Marcionite’ set (text in Souter 1913: 207) agrees
with the Byzantine subscription.
Pre-text (2 Thess 3:11): ἀκούομεν γάρ τινας περιπατοῦντας ἐν ὑμῖν ἀτάκτως, μηδὲν
ἐργαζομένους ἀλλὰ περιεργαζομένους
Pre-text (2 Thess 2:2): […] ὡς ὅτι ἐνέστηκεν ἡ ἡμέρα τοῦ κυρίου
The description of the deceivers is a remarkable conflation of passages from the pre-text.
A description of the idle from the paraenetic part of the letter is used to describe Paul’s
opponents. Ἀτάκτως is transformed into ἄτακτοι, and μηδὲν ἐργαζόμενοι into ἀργοί. The
application of these words to the deceivers explains why the ὑπόθεσις says that the deceiv-
ers came from Thessalonice. This reflects the words ἐν ὑμῖν in the pre-text (3:11). The rea-
son for the identification of the idle with the opponents can be found in the description of
the idle as περιεργαζόμενοι (3:11). This term may be used with reference to people who
in their idleness become ‘busybodies’ and speak of things of which they should not (e.g.
1 Tim 5:13). Thus, the ὑπόθεσις has apparently linked the religious speculation in Thes-
salonice with idleness.183
And in general, he ordered (παρήγγειλεν) that he who did not obey his words should be
expelled from the community (ἀποσυνάγωγον γίνεσθαι).
Pre-text (ćFTTo ϰϭѴ϶Ϣсϰϭϧϭъϰϭϧ϶ɀϟϮϟϡϡтϩϩϭϪϣϫϨϟхɀϟϮϟϨϟϩϭѼϪϣϫГϫϨϱϮцѾ
Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ ἵνα μετὰ ἡσυχίας ἐργαζόμενοι τὸν ἑαυτῶν ἄρτον ἐσθίωσιν […] (14) εἰ δέ τις
οὐχ ὑπακούει τῷ λόγῳ ἡμῶν διὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς, τοῦτον σημειοῦσθε, μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι
αὐτῷ, ἵνα ἐντραπῇ· (15) καὶ μὴ ὡς ἐχθρὸν ἡγεῖσθε, ἀλλὰ νουθετεῖτε ὡς ἀδελφόν
The meta-communicative verb παραγγέλλω seems to be derived from the pre-text,
although it there introduces another command. The ὑπόθεσις has omitted the second verb
παρακαλοῦμεν and this omission makes the ὑπόθεσις somewhat sharper than the pre-
text.184 The most important deviation lies however in the paraphrase: The ὑπόθεσις repro-
duces μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι αὐτῷ with the stronger expression τοῦτον ἀποσυνάγωγον
γίνεσθαι, thus interpreting the words in the pre-text as a precept about excommunication.
This is why both the purpose clause ἵνα ἐντραπῇ ‘that he should feel ashamed’ (3:14) and
the exhortation to comfort the disobedient (3:15) are omitted from the ὑπόθεσις.
And now, having prayed (ἐπευξάμενος) for peace on their behalf, he ends the letter
Pre-text (2 Thess 3:16): αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ κύριος τῆς εἰρήνης δῴη ὑμῖν τὴν εἰρήνην διὰ παντὸς
ἐν παντὶ τρόπῳ. ὁ κύριος μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν.
The ὑπόθεσις uses the meta-communicative verb ἐπεύχομαι to describe 3:16. The classifi-
cation of the pre-text as an act of prayer is reasonable inasmuch as the first clause has the
183 This interpretation seems to be suggested by Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 672C) when writ-
ing on 2 Thess 3:11, he says: Ἴδιον γὰρ τῶν ἀργίᾳ συζώντων ἀδολεσχία, καὶ φλυαρία, καὶ ἡ ἀνόνητος
πολυπραγμοσυνή, ‘for frivolity, silly talk and useless curiosity belong to those who live together in idle-
ness.’ Trilling (1980: 151) discusses the link between the idleness and the eschatological speculation
in Thessalonice and finds this interpretation false: ‘Das alles weist in die eingeschlagene Richtung einer
»Alltagsmoral« und ergibt kein Anzeichen für religiöse Motivation oder für typisch »schwärmerische«
Phänomene.’
184 Theophylact (Commentary, PG 124: 1353D) notes the effect on the reader when the two verbs are used
together: Εἰπὼν »παραγγέλλομεν« προσηνέστερον πάλιν ποιεῖ τὸν λόγον, καί φησι· »παρακαλοῦμεν«.
Φοβερωτέρα οὖν ἡ παράκλησις, καὶ ἀξιοπιστοτέρα. ‘Having said “we order”, again he makes his speech
more gentle, and says “we exhort”. Thus, his exhortation becomes more frightful and carry more weight.’
One may say that the ὑπόθεσις goes even further than this by omitting παρακαλοῦμεν.
170 Commentary
verb in the optative with God as subject.185 It is worth noting that this text is the only text
that is directly classified as a prayer in the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, although there
are many texts that could have received this designation, as is the case in the κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι (εὐχή).
2.2.13. Hypothesis of Hebrews

He sends this from Italy
Pre-text (Heb 13:24b): ἀσπάζονται ὑμᾶς οἱ ἀπὸ τῆς Ἰταλίας
The interpretation of the ὑπόθεσις of 13:24 is found in many ancient commentaries, but is
not the only possible interpretation. The phrase οι απο Ιταλιας may refer to their original
home and not necessarily their present one.186
He writes also to all Hebrew believers of the circumcision this letter as a demonstrative
(ἀποδεικτική) letter about the coming of Christ and the abolishment of the shadow of the
Law.
The genre-designation ἀποδεικτική ἐπιστολή is in the ὑποθέσεις used only of Heb. It
is related to the meta-communicative verb ἀποδείκνυμι which occurs frequently in the
ὑπόθεσις:
And first, he shows (ἀποδείκνυσι) that the prophets were sent to proclaim the Savior
o
And he shows that Christ himself is the Son of God, through whom everything came into
being o
And he shows that the Law has not made anyone perfect, but contained a shadow of the good
things to come o
Again, he shows that the office of the High Priest was translated from Aaron to Christ
o
4JODFUIFBSHVNFOUGSPN4DSJQUVSFJTDFOUSBMJOUIFTFQBTTBHFT DGooo
one may assume that scriptural argument is what the genre-designation here refers to.
The fathers (πατέρες) were justified by faith (πίστει), he announces, not by the deeds of the
Law (οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου)
Pre-text (Heb 11:2): ἐν ταύτῃ [i.e. πίστει] γὰρ ἐμαρτυρήθησαν οἱ πρεσβύτεροι
185 Theophylact (Commentary, PG %o" BMTP SFGFST UP 2 Thess 3:16 as ‘prayer’: Πανταχοῦ
μετὰ τὰς παραινέσεις τὰς εὐχὰς τίθησιν, ὥσπερ τινὰς σφραγῖδας καὶ σήμαντρα τῶν ἀποτεθησαυρισμένων
ἐπιτιθεὶς τὰς εὐχάς. ‘Everywhere he places the prayers after the exhortations, as if putting his prayers as
seals and marks on goods in the store-house.’
186 This is pointed out by Michel (1966: 545): ‘Entweder befindet sich der Verfasser bei den grüssenden
Leuten aus Italien und schreibt selbst aus Italien, oder aber die grüssenden Leute stammen aus Italien und
halten sich ihreseits im Ausland beim Verfasser auf.’ Both views are attested in the subscriptions to the
letter. The majority of manuscripts have ἀπὸ τῆς Ἰταλίας, but minuscule 1911 has ἀπὸ Ἀθηνῶν. Theodoret
(Preface, PG 82: 44A) assigns the letter to Rome, quoting 13:24b as evidence. According to Theophylact
(ὑπόθεσις of Heb, PG 125: 188BC), the letter is sent from Italy, but it is earlier than 2 Tim since Paul’s
death is here not imminent. He thinks it was written during Paul’s first imprisonment in Rome: Ἐν ταύτῃ
δὲ ἐπαγγέλλεται τοῖς Ἑβραίοις, ὅτι ὄψεται αὐτούς. [...] Εἶτα εἰς τὰς Σπανίας ἐλθὼν, ἐκεῖθεν ἴσως εἶδε καὶ
τοὺς Ἑβραίους, εἶτα εἰς Ῥώμην ἦλθεν αὖθις, ὅτε καὶ ὑπὸ Νέρωνος ἀνῃρέθη. ‘But in this letter, he promises
the Hebrews that he will see them […]. Then, having traveled to Spain, thereupon he perhaps saw also the
Hebrews. Then he came to Rome again at the time he was killed by Nero.’
The treatment in the ὑπόθεσις of Heb 11 is a remarkable transformation of the pre-text.
According to Michel, Heb 11 is in itself a ‘summary’ composed after Jewish models.187
The ὑπόθεσις has replaced πρεσβύτεροι with πατέρες (cf. 1:1). More important is the
replacement of μαρτυρεῖσθαι with δικαιοῦσθαι. This interpretation has some basis in the
pre-text, cf. the description of Abel and Noah: Abel ἐμαρτυρήθη εἶναι δίκαιος (11:4), and
Noah became an ‘heir’ (κληρονόμος) ‘according to the faith of righteousness’ (κατὰ πίστιν
δικαιοσύνης). But the idea of justification is not central in the majority of the examples
in Heb 11, the idea being absent even from the story of Abraham (11:17). The antithesis
πίστει/οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου is not found in the pre-text, and appears to be derived from
other letters in the Pauline collection (cf. Rom 3:28; &QIo BOEQMBDFEIFSFCZUIF
ὑπόθεσις.
2.2.14. Hypothesis 1 Timothy

He sends this from Laodicea.
Laodicea is not mentioned in the pre-text and seems to contradict it.188
About the ordaining of bishops, presbyters (πρεσβύτεροι) and deacons, and about the behav-
ior and qualities required of those who are appointed.
The ὑπόθεσις is here summarizing o *U TIPVME CF OPUFE UIBU UIF аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶ BEET
the order of the πρεσβύτεροι. It seems clear from the list that the πρεσβύτεροι form a
separate group, distinct from the ἐπίσκοποι and the διάκονοι. The term πρεσβύτερος is
VTFEJO CVUOPUJOUIFQBTTBHFPOPSEBJOJOH o ćFMJTUJOUIFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶TFFN
thus to be anachronistic, reflecting the later distinction between the ἐπίσκοπος and the
πρεσβύτερος.189
About the younger men (τοὺς νεωτέρους), that they should curb their passions, rather
marry, and not live shamefully.
Pre-text (1 Tim 5:14): βούλομαι οὖν νεωτέρας γαμεῖν, τεκνογονεῖν, οἰκοδεσποτεῖν,
μηδεμίαν ἀφορμὴν διδόναι τῷ ἀντικειμένῳ λοιδορίας χάριν
In the pre-text, there is a distinction between the older and the younger widows
(νεωτέρας). The younger widows are ordered to remarry (5:14). In the ὑπόθεσις, this
command has oddly been transformed into a command to the younger men (τοὺς
187 Michel (1966: 368) thinks however that the author of Heb found this ‘summary’ as a Christian composi-
tion: ‘Kap. 11 selbst ist ein „Summarium“ nach dem Muster spätjudischen Paradigmenreihen, ist aber
wohl auch in seiner Vorlage schon christlich gewesen.’ Weiss o POUIFPUIFSIBOE UFOET
to assume that the Vorlage was a Jewish text that the author of Heb through his editing made ‘readable’ for
Christians.
188 According to 1:3, Paul has left Timothy in Ephesus and has moved on to Macedonia. From there he writes
1 Tim, see Dibelius/Conzelmann o BOEJ. Roloff (1988: 62). The Byzantine subscription is
the following: Πρὸς Τιμόθεον α´ ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Λαοδικείας ἥτις ἐστὶν μετρόπολις Φρυγίας τῆς Πακατιανῆς
(see the letter ending in the N. A. edition). ‘The first letter of Timothy was written from Laodicea, which
is the capital of Phrygia Pacatiana.’ A similar subscription is found in Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82:
829C): ἡ πρὸς Τιμόθεον α´ Ἐπιστολὴ ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Λαοδικείας ἥτις ἐστὶν μετρόπολις Φρυγίας. ‘The first
letter to Timothy was written from Laodicea, which is the capital of Phrygia.’
189 The meaning of the term πρεσβύτερος is 1 Tim is debated. It may refer to (1) the elders in the congrega-
tion; (2) the ἐπίσκοποι and the διάκονοι; or (3) the older men in the congregation, see I. H. Marshall
1999: 610, with references.
172 Commentary
νεωτέρους). If the verse is read without its context, it would be possible to take νεωτέρας
as an object of γαμεῖν, and thus to understand the verse as a command to the men, that
they should marry younger women, beget children (τεκνογονεῖν), and rule the house-
hold (οἰκοδεσποτεῖν). But the context makes this interpretation difficult to defend. Either
the ὑπόθεσις is based on a different pre-text that is unknown to us, or the ὑπόθεσις pres-
ents a misinterpretation of 5:14. The reason for this may be found in the pre-text: The
verb οἰκοδεσποτεῖν could easily be associated with the male οἰκοδεσπότης.
2.2.15. Hypothesis of 2 Timothy

Once again from Rome, he sends this letter.
Pre-text (2 Tim 1:17): ἀλλὰ γενόμενος ἐν Ῥώμῃ σπουδαίως ἐζήτησέν με καὶ εὗρεν
The letter is dated to the imprisonment of Paul in Rome on the basis of 1:17 and the
description of Paul’s imminent martyrdom. The ὑπόθεσις does not make any distinction
between Paul’s first and second imprisonment in Rome.190
2.2.16. Hypothesis of Titus

He sends this letter from Nicopolis, since he spent the winter there.
Pre-text (Tit 3:12): Ὅταν πέμψω Ἀρτεμᾶν πρὸς σὲ ἢ Τυχικόν, σπούδασον ἐλθεῖν πρός με
εἰς Νικόπολιν, ἐκεῖ γὰρ κέκρικα παραχειμάσαι
That the letter was sent from Nicopolis is derived from the pre-text. This is however a
misinterpretation, since the pre-text implies that Paul has not yet arrived there (ἐκεῖ).191
And first, giving thanks to God (εὐχαριστῶν τῷ θεῷ) for his devotion, he announces
(σημαίνει) that faith in Christ is not something new, but was prepared and promised by
God before the world began.
Pre-text (5JU o ͑ϟѼϩϭ϶ ϢϭѼϩϭ϶ ϦϣϭѼ Ћɀшϯϰϭϩϭ϶ Ϣс ΚϥϯϭѼ ͗ϮϧϯϰϭѼ Ϩϟϰп ɀцϯϰϧϫ
ἐκλεκτῶν θεοῦ καὶ ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας τῆς κατ’ εὐσέβειαν ἐπ’ ἐλπίδι ζωῆς αἰωνίου, ἣν
ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ ἀψευδὴς θεὸς πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων ἐφανέρωσεν δὲ καιροῖς ἰδίοις, τὸν
190 The Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition) explicitly dates the letter to Paul’s sec-
ond imprisonment there: Πρὸς Τιμόθεον β´ τῆς Ἐφεσίων ἐκκλησίας ἐπίσκοπον πρῶτον χειροτονηθέντα
ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Ῥώμης ὅτε ἐκ δευτέρου παρέστη Παῦλος τῷ καίσαρι Ῥώμης Νέρωνι. ‘The Second Letter to
Timothy, who had been elected the first bishop of the Church of the Ephesians, was written from Rome
when Paul stood before Nero, the emperor of Rome, for the second time.’ So also Theodoret (Preface, PG
82: 44A): Ἐσχάτην δὲ πασῶν τὴν δευτέραν πρὸς Τιμόθεον γέγραφε· καὶ τοῦτο δὲ πάλιν ἐκ τῶν αὐτοῦ
γραμμάτων καταμαθεῖν ῥᾴδιον. ‘As the last of all, he wrote the second letter to Timothy. And, again, one
may easily learn this from the letter itself.’
191 See Dibelius/Conzelmann 1972: 153 and Marshall 1999: 342. This misunderstanding is however
widespread. The Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition) refers to Nicopolis in
Macedonia: Παύλου ἀποστόλου πρὸς Τίτον τῆς Κρητῶν ἐκκλησίας πρῶτον ἐπίσκοπον χειροτονηθέντα
ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Νικοπόλεως τῆς Μακεδονίας. ‘The Letter of Paul the Apostle to Titus, who had been elected
the first bishop of the church of the Cretans, was written from Nicopolis in Macedonia.’ Theodoret (Com-
mentary, PG 82: 869B) though describes Nicopolis as a Thracian city: Τῆς Θρᾴκης ἐστὶν ἡ Νικόπολις, τῇ
δὲ Μακεδονίᾳ πελάζει. Δῆλον τοίνυν ὡς κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν, καθ᾽ ὃν ἐν τῇ Μακεδονίᾳ καὶ Ἀχαΐᾳ
διέτριβεν, ἔγραψε τὴν ἐπιστολήν. ‘Nicopolis is in Thracia, close to Macedonia. Thus, it is clear that Paul
wrote the letter at the time when he was staying in Macedonia and Achaia.’ Cf. Theophylact (Commentary,
PG 125: 169B): Ἡ δὲ Νικόπολις τῆς Θρᾴκης ἐστὶ, τῷ Ἴστρῳ ἐπικειμένη. ‘Nicopolis lies in Thracia, on the
Ister.’
λόγον αὐτοῦ ἐν κηρύγματι ὃ ἐπιστεύθην ἐγὼ κατ’ ἐπιταγὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν θεοῦ,
Τίτῳ γνησίῳ τέκνῳ κατὰ κοινὴν πίστιν· χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς καὶ Χριστοῦ
Ἰησοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν.
The ὑπόθεσις uses the participle εὐχαριστῶν together with the finite verb σημαινει in its
paraphrase of the letter opening (o *UJTQV[[MJOHUIBUUIFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶IFSFVTFTUIF
phrase εὐχαριστῶν τῷ θεῷ since there is no thanksgiving in the pre-text. In the ὑπόθεσις,
the following prepositional phrase διὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ εὐλάβειαν represents the reason for the
thanksgiving. This phrase seems to be derived from the description of Titus as γνησίῳ
τέκνῳ κατὰ κοινὴν πίστιν. The meta-communicative verb εὐχαριστία has probably been
introduced into the ὑπόθεσις because thanksgivings regularly are placed at the beginning
of the other Pauline letters. It should be noted that this kind of interference is unex-
pected, as the ὑποθέσεις as a rule do not represent the Pauline thanksgiving periods with
εὐχαριστέω/εὐχαριστία. The ὑπόθεσις does use it here, where the term is not found in the
pre-text.192
2.2.17. Hypothesis of Philemon

He sends this letter from Rome.
Rome is not mentioned in the pre-text, but the ὑπόθεσις assigns the letter to Rome to-
gether with the other imprisonment letters.193
Onesimus, the slave of Philemon, had escaped, and he went to the Apostle, was instructed by
him and became useful to him for service.
The depiction of Onesimus as the runaway slave of Philemon is found in many ancient
and modern commentaries on the letter.194 Recent scholars have argued that this is not
192 One may compare the use of εὐχαριστία for the final benediction in 2 Cor (see above).
193 Cf. the ‘Marcionite’ prologue (text in Souter 1913: 206): Scribit autem ei a Roma de carcere. ‘He writes
to him from prison in Rome.’ The Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition)
also shows Rome: Ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Ῥώμης διὰ Ὀνησίμου οἰκέτου. ‘It was written from Rome [and sent] by
the slave Onesimus.’ The Euthalian ὑπόθεσις does not contain any discussion of the canonical status of
this letter. Interestingly, such a discussion is found in Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις, PG$o" XIP
strongly defends it: Φασὶ δέ τινες μὴ χρῆναι ταύτην συναριθμεῖσθαι ταῖς λοιπαῖς, ἅτε ὑπὲρ εὐτελοῦς οὖσαν
πράγματος· ἀλλ᾽ ὅρα πόσα ἐκ ταύτης τὰ χρήσιμα. Πρῶτον μὲν παιδεύει ἡμᾶς καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν δοκοῦντων
εὐτελῶν σπουδάζειν. »Μὴ καταφρονήσατε γὰρ«, φησὶν ὁ Κύριος, »ἑνὸς τῶν μικρῶν«. Δεύτερον δὲ, ὅτι εἰ
δοῦλος οὕτως ἰταμὸς καὶ κακοῦργος ὑπέστρεψεν, οὐ χρὴ ἀπογινώσκειν ἑαυτῶν, καὶ μάλιστα ἐν ἐλευθερίᾳ
ἀνατραφέντων. Τρίτον, ὅτι οὐ χρὴ προφάσει εὐλαβείας δούλους ἀποσπᾶν τῶν δεσποτῶν μὴ βουλομένων.
Τέταρτον, ὅτι οὐ χρὴ ἡμᾶς ὑπερφρονεῖν τῶν δούλων ἐναρέτων ὄντων, οὐδὲ ἐπαισχύνεσθαι αὐτοὺς, ὁπότε
Παῦλος καλεῖ τέκνον τὸν Ὀνήσιμον. ‘Some say that this should not be counted among the other letters
since it is about a slight matter. But see how many the benefits of this letter are! First, he teaches us to be
FBHFSBMTPJONBUUFSTXIJDIBQQFBSTMJHIUA'PSEPOPUEFTQJTFoTBZTUIF-PSEoPOFPGUIFMJUUMFPOFT/FYU
if a slave so bold and crafty was converted, we should not feel despair about ourselves, who indeed were
raised in freedom. Third, that we should not use religion as a pretext to separate slaves from their masters,
if the masters do not want it. Fourth, we should not despise virtuous slaves, nor should we be ashamed of
them, since Paul calls Onesimus his child.’
194 According to Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις, PG 82: 872A), Onesimus had ‘stolen something and run away’
(ὑφελόμενός τι καὶ ἀποδράς), and Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις, PG 125: 172B) even refers to money: καὶ γὰρ
κλέψας χρήματα ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας τοῦ Φιλήμονος, ἀπέδρα. ‘For he stole money from the house of Philemon
and ran away.’
174 Commentary
explicitly stated in the text of the letter, and have offered various explanations, while even
Onesimus’ status as a slave has been doubted.195
2.2.18. The Hypotheses of the Pauline Letters: Summary

The meta-terminology
Thanksgiving. The ὑποθέσεις tend to avoid the verb εὐχαριστέω and the corresponding
noun εὐχαριστία. One would expect that these would appear in the paraphrases of the
Pauline thanksgivings, but this is not the case. The thanksgivings are generally treated
from another perspective: The center of interest is their function in relation to the re-
cipients of the letter. Instead of an expected εὐχαριστεῖ, we find ἀποδέχεται, μαρτυρεῖ
or other meta-communicative verbs that refer to the various functions of the thanksgiv-
ings. Thus, the perspective of the ὑποθέσεις is in general that of rhetorical analysis, with
little interest in the liturgical elements of the Pauline letters. The terms εὐχαριστία and
εὐχαριστέω however do appear, but the motivation for using them is not found in the
thanksgiving formula of the pre-texts (εὐχαριστῶ/εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ θεῷ) but elsewhere.
εὐχαριστία is once used with reference to the final benediction (ὑπόθεσις of 2 Cor). In
the ὑπόθεσις of Col, the verb is used with reference not to the thanksgiving, but to the
passage that immediately follows it ($PMo
Prayer. The treatment of prayer in the Pauline letters is similar. Generally speaking,
the ὑποθέσεις do not include Paul’s prayers. The verb προσεύχομαι and the correspond-
ing noun προσευχή (εὐχή) appear in the ὑπόθεσις 1 Cor, 1 Thess, and 1 Tim. In these
ὑποθέσεις they are not used as text-deictica with reference to the pre-text, but are used
on another level, namely, paraphrasing statements about prayer in the pre-texts.196 Τhe
verb ἐπεύχομαι appears once as a text-deicticon with reference to the final benediction of
a letter (2 Thess).
Paraenesis. The treatment of the Pauline paraenesis in the ὑποθέσεις has been examined
in a previous study.197 In this previous study, it was demonstrated that the ὑποθέσεις
use a flexible terminology for moral exhortation: The nominal form παραινετικοὶ λόγοι
(ὑποθέσεις of Rom,1 Cor, Eph) alternates with the verbs παραινέω (ὑποθέσεις of 1 Cor,
Gal, Col, 1 Thess, 2 Thess, 2 Tim, Tit), and προτρέπω (ὑποθέσεις of 2 Cor, Phil, 1 Thess,
Heb, 1 Tim, 2 Tim). A frequent element in the ὑποθέσεις used to describe moral exhor-
195 E. Reinmuth (2006: 18) thinks that Onesimus was a fugitive slave who was on his way to the sanctuary of
"SUFNJTBU&QIFTVT1.àMMFS o POUIFPUIFSIBOE BTTVNFTUIBUUIFTMBWF0OFTJNVTDBNF
to Paul not as a fugitivus but to ask him to act as a mediator in some conflict. According to M. Wolter
o Hübner o J. A. Fitzmyer BOEo 0OFTJNVTXBTBTMBWFCVU
not a fugitive slave, cf. the material from the papyri collected in P. Arzt-Grabner o UP
support the thesis that the slave Onesimus was a ‘wanderer’ (erro). A. D. Callahan o HPFT
further and argues that he was not a slave but a brother of Philemon. The status of Onesimus as a runaway
slave is presupposed also in the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. On this problem see, Hellholm/Blomkvist
o "QQ** 334o335), with references.
196 Ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor: ‘About marriage, he teaches that the union is not to be broken, and that abstinence
should be for a short time only, for the sake of prayer (διὰ τὴν εὐχήν). Ὑπόθεσις of 1 Thess: ‘He exhorts
them to improve morally and to always rejoice in hope, to pray (προσεύχεσθαι) and give thanks to the
Lord.’ Ὑπόθεσις of 1 Tim: ‘He then draws up church rules about prayer (περὶ προσευχῆς); how, where and
for whom one should pray (προσεύχεσθαι).’
197 Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004 (App. II).
tation is the prepositional phrase εἰς τὰ ἤθη (ὑποθέσεις of Rom, 1 Cor, Gal, Phil, Heb, 2
Tim) . It should also be noted that the meta-communicative verb παρακαλῶ, which in the
pre-texts regularly introduces the exhortation, tends to be avoided.
The paraphrase of the pre-text
The present commentary has confirmed the observation of Willard that the ὑποθέσεις
represent a less thorough paraphrase than the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. It may be said that not
only are they less thorough, but they also contain errors. Some of these errors are found
elsewhere in the tradition as well,198 while others are more difficult to explain.199 This
feature must be kept in mind in any attempt to reconstruct the text form of the biblical
writings that was used by the author of the ὑποθέσεις. The use of the ὑποθέσεις for this
purpose is problematic.
The ‘Paulusbild’
The ὑποθέσεις include the historical circumstances of each letter and thus one would ex-
pect references to Acts. There are, however, no such references. Acts are for the most part
neglected. The ‘Paulusbild’ of the ὑποθέσεις is almost exclusively based on the Pauline
letters regarding the circumstances (or occasion) of each letter. The subscriptions of the
letters may also have been the source for some information. According to the ὑποθέσεις,
all the imprisonment letters were sent from Rome, but this is said of other letters also (e.g.
2 Thess). From the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Thess one gets the impression that the text of Acts was
known, but no attempt is made to place the letters of Paul within the relative chronology
of that book: The ὑπόθεσις of Eph is impossible to synchronize with Acts, as Paul is said
to write to the Ephesians from Rome before he has seen them. With regard to this, the
ὑποθέσεις differ from the works of Theodoret and Theophylact, where the texts of Acts
is used.
Since the ὑποθέσεις are based almost exclusively on the letters, it comes as no surprise
that Paul here has the status of apostle. There is here an interesting combination of de-
pendence and transformation of the pre-text, since the ὑποθέσεις refer to Paul not only as
an apostle but as ‘the Apostle’ (ὁ ἀπόστολος). This use of the title is obviously dependent
on the letter openings, but the presence of the definite article transforms him into ‘the
Apostle’, κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν. According to the ὑποθέσεις, the letters of Paul the Apostle has one
important emphasis: That the Law was abandoned through the coming of Christ.200 This
was recognized by Dahl as the main concern of the ὑποθέσεις.201 Thus, the opponents
of Paul are for the most part in the ὑποθέσεις ‘Jews’ or ‘Judaizers’. This tendency has
certainly a basis in the pre-texts, but the ὑποθέσεις have developed this idea further. The
present commentary has pointed out that the ὑποθέσεις go beyond Paul in saying that
not even the Jews need circumcision after the coming of Christ. Moreover, the ὑποθέσεις
198 Such as the assignment of Titus to Nicopolis based on the mentioning of this city in the letter or the idea
that Timothy carried the letter of Paul to the Thessalonians.
199 Such as the admonition to the young men (not to the young widows, as in the pre-text) in the ὑπόθεσις of
1 Tim.
200 This is also indicated by the reference in the ὑπόθεσις of Hebrews where ‘the office of the high priest was
translated from Aaron to Christ, whose type was Melchisedec, who was not of the tribe of Levi. The fathers
were justified by faith, he announces, not by the deeds of the Law.’
201 See Dahl 2000d: 264.
176 Commentary
omit positive statements in Paul about the Jewish elements and the part of the Jews in the
history of salvation (see especially the ὑπόθεσις of Rom). The focus on the abolishment
of Jewish practices is a feature that the ὑποθέσεις share with the ‘Marcionite’ prologues to
the letters of Paul. The idea that Paul sometimes is fighting a two-front battle (Theodoret),
against the Jews and against the Gnostics, is not found in the ὑποθέσεις at all. The abol-
ishment of the Jewish practices is treated as an inevitable turning point of history marked
by the coming of Christ. The ὑποθέσεις seem to be less interested in the individual, since
they transform statements about the individual as being ‘in Christ’ with general state-
ment about salvation history (see the Commentary above on 2 Cor 5:17 and Gal 5:6,
where the ὑποθέσεις replaces the phrase ἐν Χριστῷ with a clause referring to the coming
of Christ.). This tendency confirms Dahl’s observation that the Euthalian apparatus in
general does not focus on mystical theology. The existence of the individual believer in
Christ is a theme that is included in the ὑποθέσεις only in the context of paraenesis.
In the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, Paul is on one rare occasion depicted as preach-
ing to the Jews through his letters (see the paraphrase of 3PNo CVUGPSUIFNPTU
part, he is concerned with the condition of the Christian churches, ‘reminding’, ‘correct-
ing’, ‘teaching’, and ‘instructing’ them (so the Διὰ τί). On the basis of the Anti-Judaic
polemics, Dahl assumed that the ὑποθέσεις must have originated at a time when the
Jewish observances were still debated within the church. For this reason he suggested that
the ὑποθέσεις originated at quite an early period. Dahl further noted that the Euthalian
ὑποθέσεις share this feature with the ‘Marcionite’ prologues to the Pauline letters. It is
however uncertain whether the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις can be dated on the basis of this
feature. The genre is also open for other interpretations. The ὑπόθεσις is by definition a
secondary genre and the ὑποθέσεις aim to reproduce the contents of their pre-texts. The
polemical elements in the ὑποθέσεις may be viewed simply as attempts to capture and
reproduce something important in the pre-texts, regardless of the state of affairs at the
time the ὑποθέσεις were composed.
2.3. The Hypotheses of the Catholic Letters

2.3.1. Authorship
Like the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters appear in a
number of ancient works. They are found in Euthalius, the commentary of Oecumenius
(PG o BOE JO UIF QTFVEP"UIBOBTJBO Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae (PG o
438). In addition to these works, they are also found in the commentary of Theophylact
(PG oo ćFаɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶PGUIF$BUIPMJDMFUUFSTUIVTIBWFBXJEF
dissemination, and it is difficult at the present stage of research to say whether they were
originally composed for any of the works mentioned above.
2.3.2. Structure
The ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters have a similar structure to that of the ὑποθέσεις of
the Pauline letters:202
202 See the remarks in Ehrhard 1891: 391 and above on the structure on the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters.
1. An introductory notice
[2. The prophasis of the letter]
3. A summary of its contents, beginning with και πρωτον μεν in all ὑποθέσεις except
James.
4. A notice on the letter ending, usually in the form και ουτως τελειοι την επιστολην.
Only 2 John and Jude have a prophasis section. By contrast, the ὑποθέσεις of the Pau-
line letters with the exception of Romans all have this section. This difference probably
reflects the character of the pre-texts. The Pauline letters more often contain information
on the communicative situation than the Catholic letters do. The text of the introductory
notices in the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters is transmitted in a variety of forms. von
Dobschütz demonstrated that the history of the text could be explained on the basis of
the pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae. von Dobschütz found three different
recensions, and described the history of the text as follows:203
(1) The most primitive form is represented by the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, where it is
stated that the Catholic letters are named after their respective authors.
Opening of the ὑπόθεσις of James from the My translation

Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae. (PG 28: 405D)
Ἐπιστολαὶ καθολικαὶ ἑπτά The Seven Catholic Letters.
τούτων ἐστὶν πρώτη Ἰακώβου. Of these the first is [the letter] of James.
ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν τῶν γραψάντων καὶ αὗται These are alsoa named after the authors them-
προσαγορεύονται· selves;
αὐτὸς γὰρ Ἰάκωβος ταύτην γράφει […] because James himself writes this […]
a The idea may be that the Catholic letters like the Gospels are named after their authors, since the Catholic letters in the
Synopsis do not follow after the Pauline letters but immediately after Acts.
The causal clause that contains the explanation of the name may be introduced by ἐπειδή
instead of γάρ, e.g. the opening of the ὑπόθεσις of 1 John, referred to as the fourth letter
in the collection: Τετάρτη, Ἰωάννου. Οὕτως καὶ αὕτη καλεῖται, ἐπειδὴ καὶ αὐτὸς Ἰωάννης
ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς καὶ ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει. There is also a similar formula in the Synopsis
Scripturae Sacrae prefixed to the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters: οὕτω καλοῦνται ἐπειδὴ
αὐτὸς Παῦλος … ‘They are thus called because Paul himself …’ 204 (2) The next stage in
the development in the text is the omission of the clause οὕτω καλεῖται (or its equivalent).
This occurs in a branch of the tradition.205 The result is that the ὑποθέσεις begin abruptly
with ἐπειδὴ: ‘Because (ἐπειδὴ) James himself writes this…’ In this text form, the reader is
not told that the causal clause is intended as an explanation of the title. von Dobschütz
found this form in the majority of manuscripts.206 This is also the preferred text of von
204 See von Dobschütz 1893: 70. This formula corresponds to the Διὰ τί that is found in Euthalian manu-
scripts. On the Διὰ τί, see WillardooBOEBCPWF
205 This variant is found e.g. in Zacagni’s most important witness, Codex Regio-Alexandrinus ( = 181), which
Zacagni at this point did not follow.
206 This is the text that von Soden preferred in his edition of the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. It is also
used as a basis for the present translation.
178 Commentary
Soden in his edition of the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. (3) The third stage is a cor-
rection of the second: The word ἐπειδὴ is now omitted and the ὑπόθεσις begins with
ταύτην γράφει (or ἐπιστέλλει). Thus, the second form of the text is evidence of the antiq-
uity of the first, which was unknown to Zacagni.207
2.3.3. Hypothesis of James

Because James himself (αὐτὸς Ἰάκωβος) writes this to those of the scattered twelve tribes
(τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν δώδεκα φυλῶν διασπαρεῖσι) who believed in our Lord Jesus Christ.
Pre-text (Jas 1:1): Ἰάκωβος θεοῦ καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοῦλος ταῖς δώδεκα φυλαῖς
ταῖς ἐν τῇ διασπορᾷ χαίρειν
The explanation of the name of the letter is based on the letter opening. The name of the
author is not discussed at all and the ὑπόθεσις has also omitted the description of him as
θεοῦ καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοῦλος. By contrast, the description of the recipients has
been transformed. In the pre-text, the twelve tribes probably represents the Christians
as the true Israel, and the reference to the dispersion should also be taken in a symbolic
sense, referring to the dispersion of the Christians in the world.208 The ὑπόθεσις has taken
the reference to the twelve tribes literally, and makes James write to Jewish Christians.
And he writes it as a didactic letter (διδασκαλικὴ ἐπιστολή) teaching about different temp-
tations what kind of temptation comes from God, and what kind comes from the heart of
men.
The genre-designation ‘didactic letter’ associates Jas with Rom and 1 Pet. According to
UIFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶ +BNFTUFBDIFTBCPVUEJČFSFOULJOETPGUFNQUBUJPO GSPN(PEoGSPNNBO
This is apparently contradicted by the pre-text: Μηδεὶς πειραζόμενος λεγέτω ὅτι ἀπὸ
θεοῦ πειράζομαι· ὁ γὰρ θεὸς ἀπείραστός ἐστι κακῶν, πειράζει δὲ αὐτὸς οὐδένα. ἕκαστος
δὲ πειράζεται ὑπὸ τῆς ἰδίας ἐπιθυμίας (oB ćFJOUFSQSFUBUJPOPGUIFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶NBZ
however be based on the following: (1) There is a certain ambiguity in the pre-text in the
use of the term πειρασμός. It is used in a positive sense in 1:2 where ποικίλοι πειρασμοί
are said to produce endurance (ὑπομονή). Also 1:12 represents a positive statement:
μακάριος ἀνὴρ ὃς ὑπομένει πειρασμόν. Commentators have argued that there seems to
be a shift in the meaning of the word πειρασμος between 1:2 and 1:13.209 Thus, the state-
ment of the ὑπόθεσις does have some basis in the pre-text, even if the pre-text does not
say explicitly that the πειρασμός comes from God. (2) But even this idea may find some
support in the pre-text. Possibly, the πειρασμὸς ἀπὸ θεοῦ in the ὑπόθεσις refers to the
207 See von Dobschütz 1893: 70. Zacagni (1698: 486, n. i = PG 85: 675, n. 39) did however conjecture
that such a text form once existed: Causa hujus diversitatis inde orta fuisse videtur, quod fortasse aliquam
interrogationem tituli loco huic argumento Euthalius præfixerit, puta διὰ τί Ἰακώβου ἐπιστολὴ καθολικὴ
λέγεται, vel quid simile; quam interrogationem, veluti supervacaneam nulla in ipso argumento mutatione
facta, librarii rejecerint […]. ‘The diversity seems to have been created as follows: Perhaps Euthalius had
prefixed to this Hypothesis a question in the place of a title, for instance ‘Why is it called the Catholic Let-
UFSPG+BNFT PSTPNFUIJOHMJLFJU BOEUIJTRVFTUJPOXBTPNJUUFECZUIFTDSJCFToBTJGJUXFSFSFEVOEBOU
oXJUIPVUUIFJSNBLJOHBOZDIBOHFJOUIFUFYUPGUIF)ZQPUIFTJTJUTFMGćFQSPOPVOϰϧJTPNJUUFEJOUIF
Migne edition.
208 This is the interpretation of Dibelius (Dibelius/Greeven o ABO EBT XBISF *TSBFM EFN EFS
Himmel die Heimat, die Erde aber nur Fremde d. h. Diaspora ist, also an die Christenheit auf Erden.’ So
also W. Popkes (2001: 72) and C. Burchard (2000: 6).
209 Popkes (2001: 103): ‘Man kann argumentieren, Jak spiele mit der Mehrschichtigkeit des Terminus.’
testing of Abraham. This story is used in +BTo BOEUIFMBOHVBHFVTFEJOUIF(FO-
esis account (ὁ θεὸς ἐπείραζεν τὸν Ἀβραάμ, Gen 22:1) may have influenced the language
of the ὑπόθεσις.210
About the rich he orders (παραγγέλλει) that they should not be preferred in the churches (ἐν
ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις) to the poor.
Pre-text (+BT o ͳϢϣϩϲϭц Ϫϭϱ Ϫу Гϫ ɀϮϭϯϵɀϭϩϥϪϴцϟϧ϶ Зϳϣϰϣ ϰуϫ ɀцϯϰϧϫ ϰϭѼ
κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τῆς δόξης; ἐὰν γὰρ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς συναγωγὴν ὑμῶν ἀνὴρ
χρυσοδακτύλιος […]
ćFQBTTBHFPOUIFSJDI o JTSFGFSSFEUPCZNFBOTPGUIFNFUBDPNNVOJDBUJWFWFSC
παραγγέλλω, which reflects the imperative μὴ ἔχετε in 2:1.211 The ὑπόθεσις introduces
the verb προκρίνω ‘prefer before’ which corresponds to ἐν προσωπολημψίαις ἔχειν in
the pre-text. The change should be considered a stylistic revision. Notably, the words
προσωπολημπτέω and προσωπολημψία are both avoided in the ὑποθέσεις. Another
change is the replacement of συναγωγή with ἐκκλησία. The pre-text uses both words for
the Christian community (συναγωγή 2:2; ἐκκλησία in 5:14).
And that one should show faith not only in word, but also in deed, and that the doers of the
Law are justified, not the hearers.
Pre text (Jas 2:18b): δεῖξόν μοι τὴν πίστιν σου χωρὶς τῶν ἔργων, κἀγώ σοι δείξω ἐκ τῶν
ἔργων μου τὴν πίστιν
Pre-text (Jas 1:22): γίνεσθε δὲ ποιηταὶ λόγου καὶ μὴ ἀκροαταὶ μόνον παραλογιζόμενοι
ἑαυτούς
The expression ‘to show faith’ seems derived from the pre-text (2:18b), where the idea that
there is a close connection between faith and works is already present. In the pre-text, the
imperative is used polemically against an imaginative opponent. The ὑπόθεσις, on the
other hand, does not reproduce this aspect of the pre-text but concentrates on the moral
exhortation: The ὑπόθεσις thus interprets the letter as paraenetic, the concern of James
is, according to the ὑπόθεσις, not to combat a theological opponent, but to exhort his
readers. Moreover, the ὑπόθεσις has apparently replaced the ‘doers of the word’ with the
‘doers of the Law’, if not, the variant reading ποιηται νομου already existed in the pre-text
of the ὑπόθεσις.212
2.3.4. Hypothesis of 1 Peter

Because Peter himself writes this as a didactic letter to Jews in the Diaspora who have
become Christians. He strengthens them, since they are believers of Jewish origin.
210 As the ὑπόθεσις, Theophylact (Commentary, PG 125: 1136B, on Jas 1) speaks of two different kinds of
temptation: Φαμὲν οὖν, ὅτι διττοί εἰσιν οἱ πειρασμοὶ, οἱ μὲν τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἔχοντες, οἱ δὲ ἀπὸ Θεοῦ
γυμνασίας χάριν καὶ ἀναῤῥήσεως ἡμῖν ἐπαγόμενοι. ‘Therefore, we answer that there are two kinds of
temptation, the ones that have their cause in ourselves, and the ones from God that are brought upon us
for the sake of exercise and manifestation.’
211 The use of παραγγέλλει as a meta-communicative verb representing an imperative is found also in the
paraphrase of προσκαλεσάσθω τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους (5:14). The ὑπόθεσις paraphrases this as παραγγέλλει
προσκαλεῖσθαι τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους.
212 On this variant, see Dibelius/Greeven 1964: 146 and Popkes 2001: 112 and 130.
180 Commentary
Pre-text (1 Pet 1:1): Πέτρος ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐκλεκτοῖς παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς
Πόντου, Γαλατίας, Καππαδοκίας, Ἀσίας, καὶ Βιθυνίας
In the pre-text, the ‘exiles of the Diaspora’ is used metaphorically of the recipients as
exiles in the world. With regard to this, the letter opening of 1 Pet resembles that of
Jas.213 In the ὑπόθεσις, the words are taken literally and understood as a reference to
Jewish Christians of the Diaspora.214 The ὑπόθεσις even considers their Jewish origin the
reason for strengthening them with the letter. It should also be noted that the ὑπόθεσις
has omitted the title ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. The intention can hardly be that the
ὑπόθεσις denies Peter this title, but the omission may be related to the fact that Paul in
the ὑποθέσεις throughout is described as ὁ ἀπόστολος. The ὑποθέσεις of the letters do
not use this title for others.
He announces that the message of salvation and resurrection (τὸ κήρυγμα τῆς σωτηρίας καὶ
ἀναστάσεως) from the Lord has reached even the nether world (ᾅδης), so that also they who
have died before will rise and be judged (κριθῶσι) with their bodies (ἐν τῷ σώματι), and
they will last (διαμείνωσι) through the grace of resurrection (τῇ χάριτι τῆς ἀναστάσεως).
Pre-text (1 Pet 4:6): εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ νεκροῖς εὐηγγελίσθη ἵνα κριθῶσι μὲν κατὰ
ἀνθρώπους σαρκὶ ζῶσι δὲ κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι
Pre-text (1 Pet 3:19): ἐν ᾧ καὶ τοῖς ἐν φυλακῇ πνεύμασιν πορευθεὶς ἐκήρυξεν
The ὑπόθεσις here apparently presents a conflation of 4:6 and 3:19. 4:6 is one of the most
difficult passages in the pre-text. The meaning of νεκροῖς εὐηγγελίσθη is not clear. It
may refer to a preaching in the realm of the dead.215 There are also other possibilities:
The word νεκροῖς may be taken as a metaphor referring to the ‘spiritually dead’, Chris-
tian dead who heard the proclamation of the Gospel during their lifetime.216 In addition,
it is uncertain what is meant by the expressions κριθῆναι κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκί and
ζῇν κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι. It is unlikely that κριθῶσι refers to the final judgment,217 and
213 So R. Feldmeier (2005: 33): ‘Gerichtet ist der Brief an Christen »in der Zerstreuung«. Der Begriff διασπο-
ρα geht auf die LXX zurück und umschreibt dort die Exilsituation des unter die Fremdvölker zerstreuten
Gottesvolkes.’ Cf. also N. Brox o BOEAchtemeier o
214 That the addressees were Jewish Christians was the opinion also of Eusebius (H. E. iii, 4): καὶ ἐκ τῶν
Πέτρου δὲ λέξεων ἐν ὁπόσαις καὶ οὗτος ἐπαρχίαις τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς τὸν Χριστὸν εὐαγγελιζόμενος τὸν
τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης παρεδίδου λόγον, σαφὲς ἂν εἴη ἀφ᾽ ἧς εἰρήκαμεν ὁμολογουμένης αὐτοῦ ἐπιστολῆς,
ἐν ᾗ τοῖς ἐξ Ἑβραίων οὖσιν ἐν διασπορᾷ Πόντου καὶ Γαλατίας Καππαδοκίας τε καὶ Ἀσίας καὶ Βιθυνίας
γράφει. ‘Similarly, from Peter’s language we can gather the names of the provinces in which he preached
the Gospel of Christ to the circumcised, proclaiming the message of the New Covenant. It is clearly stated
in the epistle which, as I said, is accepted as his, in which he writes to the Hebrews of the Dispersion in
Pontus and Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia.’ (Transl. G. A. Williamson/A. Louth). According
to Brox (1979: 25), this view was generally held by the Greek fathers. It is found also in some Western
commentators, e.g. Bengel o
215 For this interpretation, see BroxoBOEFeldmeier 2005: 144.
216 These possibilities are discussed by Acthemeier o
217 Especially because a description of God’s judgment as ‘in the flesh’ (σαρκί) and somehow ‘after human
standards’ (if this is actually what κατὰ ἀνθρώπους means) would be unacceptable, see Achtemeier 1996:
288. A common interpretation is that this judgment has already taken place, and that it refers to the judg-
ment of the antediluvian world. See Clarke (1857: VI, 864) and Feldmeier (2005: 144). Theophylact
(Commentary, PG 125: 1240C) takes both κριθῶσι and ζῶσι as verbs referring to past events and, accord-
ing to him, the judgment was effected when Christ visited the dead in Hades. Thus he solves the problem
ζῶσι does not necessarily refer to the life of the believers after the resurrection.218 Also
3:19, with its reference to the proclamation of Christ to the ‘spirits in prison’, is a difficult
verse. The ὑπόθεσις presents a solution to these exegetical problems. According to the
ὑπόθεσις, the message (κήρυγμα) has reached Hades or the nether world. The κήγρυμα of
the ὑπόθεσις corresponds to ἐκήρυξε in 3:19. Some Greek minuscules (614 pc) as well as
the Peshitta read ‘in Hades’ (ἐν τῷ ᾅδῃ) for ἐν φυλακῇ. This is close to the language of the
ὑπόθεσις, but it is uncertain whether the author of the ὑπόθεσις read ἐν τῷ ᾅδῃ in 3:19.
One may however assume that the ὑπόθεσις understands 3:19 and 4:6 as references to the
same event, and that this event is the proclaiming to the dead in Hades.219 The ὑπόθεσις
has also a definite idea of the content of the proclamation as being the message of salva-
tion and resurrection (τὸ κήρυγμα τῆς σωτηρίας καὶ ἀναστάσεως), which is not stated in
the pre-text. The judgment (cf. κριθῶσι both in the pre-text and the ὑπόθεσις) is under-
stood in the ὑπόθεσις as a reference to God’s final judgment. The various transformations
of the text in the ὑπόθεσις may be understood against this background: (1) The antithesis
of the pre-text between judgment κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκί on the one hand, and life κατὰ
θεὸν πνεύματι on the other, is abandoned. Since the ὑπόθεσις understands the judgment
as God’s final judgment, the words κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκί represented a difficulty and
were omitted. (2) The νεκροί of the pre-text is replaced with προπαθόντες. This word has
a more narrow meaning, one which excludes the metaphorical sense (‘spiritually dead’),
which is possible with νεκροί. (3) The σαρκί of the pre-text is replaced with ἐν σώματι. (4)
The ὑπόθεσις adds ἀναστῶσι before κριθῶσι, so that the phrase ἐν σώματι refers to the
resurrected bodies of the dead before judgment. (5) The ὑπόθεσις changes the ζῶσι ‘live’
of the pre-text to διαμείνωσι ‘last, remain’. (6) As a replacement of κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι,
the ὑπόθεσις adds τῇ δὲ χάριτι τῆς ἀναστάσεως. Thus the various changes represent a
coherent interpretation of the text. The ὑπόθεσις interprets the antithesis κριθῶσι μὲν
κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκί / ζῶσι δὲ κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι as a chronological sequence.
And that the end of all things has now drawn close, and everybody must be ready to account
to the Judge.
Pre-text (1 Pet 4:7): πάντων δὲ τὸ τέλος ἤγγικεν. σωφρονήσατε οὖν καὶ νήψατε εἰς
προσευχάς
Pre-text (1 Pet 4:5): οἳ ἀποδώσουσιν λόγον τῷ ἑτοίμως ἔχοντι κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς
The ὑπόθεσις presents a conflation of 4:7 and 4:5. 4:7a is reproduced with minor changes.
The second half of the verse (4:7b) is not rendered in the ὑπόθεσις. Instead, the ὑπόθεσις
offers a transformation of 4:5. According to the pre-text, men will account ‘to Ηim who
with the phrase σαρκι mentioned in the context of judgment: Τοῦ κυρίου τοῖς ἐν ᾅδη φοιτήσαντος, οἱ μὲν
ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ σαρκικῶς ζήσαντες κατεκρίθησαν. ‘When the Lord went to those in Hades, they who had
lived their life in the world according to the flesh, were condemned.’
218 See Brox (1979: 199), who does not limit its meaning to the post-resurrection period: ‘Für Menschen ist
das Gericht entsprechend, für Gott die pneumatische Existenz, in die er Menschen überführt.’ Similarly
Bengel (1742: 1021): Vivere dicuntur, non vivificari, quia vivificatio illorum iam facta est cum Christo.
‘They are said to live, not to be made alive, since they have already been made alive with Christ.’
219 In 3:19 it is said explicitly that Christ made the proclaiming, while this is not the case in 4:6. This is one
of the difficulties with the identification of the two events (ἐκήρυξε in 3:19 and εὐηγγελίσθη in 4:6), see
AchtemeieroćFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶EPFTOPUTBZFYQMJDJUMZUIBU$ISJTUQSPDMBJNFEUPUIFEFBE CVU
speaks instead of the message reaching Hades.
182 Commentary
stands ready (ἑτοίμως) to judge the living and the dead’ (4:5). The ὑπόθεσις changes
ἑτοίμως to ἕτοιμοι and uses similar words to express another idea: ‘that everybody must
be ready (ἕτοιμοι) to account to the Judge’. The transformation of 4:5 in the ὑπόθεσις may
have a basis in exhortations in 4:7b. In the pre-text, these exhortations appear as a conse-
quence (cf. οὖν) of the coming end. Thus, to follow these exhortations may be considered
an act of preparation for judgment. It is still difficult to explain why the ὑπόθεσις uses
phrases from 4:5 to express this. There is a possibility that the author of the ὑπόθεσις has
misunderstood the language in 4:5.
2.3.5. Hypothesis of 2 Peter

The letter is a reminder of primary subjects (ὑπόμνησις τῶν πρώτων).
Pre-text (1FUo ϢϧчϪϣϩϩфϯϵЋϣхаϪѩ϶аɀϭϪϧϪϫѭϯϨϣϧϫɀϣϮхϰϭъϰϵϫ ϨϟцɀϣϮϣСϢшϰϟ϶
καὶ ἐστηριγμένους ἐν τῇ παρούσῃ ἀληθείᾳ. δίκαιον δὲ ἡγοῦμαι, ἐφ’ ὅσον εἰμὶ ἐν τούτῳ τῷ
σκηνώματι, διεγείρειν ὑμᾶς ἐν ὑπομνήσει
Pre-text ( 1FU o ϰϟъϰϥϫ НϢϥ Ћϡϟɀϥϰϭц ϢϣϱϰтϮϟϫ аϪѴϫ ϡϮрϲϵ Гɀϧϯϰϭϩфϫ Гϫ ϟШ϶
διεγείρω ὑμῶν ἐν ὑπομνήσει τὴν εἰλικρινῆ διάνοιαν, μνησθῆναι τῶν προειρημένων
ῥημάτων ὑπὸ τῶν ἁγίων προφητῶν καὶ τῆς τῶν ἀποστόλων ὑμῶν ἐντολῆς τοῦ κυρίου
καὶ σωτῆρος
The designation of the letter as a reminder of primary subjects has a basis in 1:12 and
oXIFSFUIFQISBTFϢϧϣϡϣцϮϵ ϣϧϫ ГϫаɀϭϪϫфϯϣϧPDDVST DGBMTPϪϫфϪϥϫɀϭϧϣѴϯϦϟϧ
1:15). The meaning of the pre-text has been modified: 1:12 is a general statement of what
UIFBVUIPSBMXBZT Ћϣц XJMMEP BOEoJTOPUBEFTDSJQUJPOPG1FUPOMZ CVUSFGFSUP
both letters (ἐν αἷς). The ὑποθέσεις, on the other hand, considers only 2 Peter ὑπόμνησις,
while it describes 1 Peter as ἐπιστολὴ διδασκαλική.220 The designation of 2 Peter as
ὑπόμνησις corresponds to the genre-designation ἐπιστολὴ ὑπομνηστική in the epistolo-
graphic handbook of Pseudo-Libanius.221
And he commands (ἐντέλλεται) everybody to be ready for it [i.e. the day of the Lord] with
good works, and to love (ἀγαπᾶν) the writings of the Apostle, not paying heed to those who
slander (τοῖς διαβάλλουσιν) them, because they slander all divine scripture as well.
Pre-text (1FUo Ϣϧш Ћϡϟɀϥϰϭц ϰϟѼϰϟɀϮϭϯϢϭϨҀϫϰϣ϶ϯɀϭϱϢрϯϟϰϣЏϯɀϧϩϭϧϨϟх
ἀμώμητοι αὐτῷ εὑρεθῆναι ἐν εἰρήνῃ, καὶ τὴν τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν μακροθυμίαν σωτηρίαν
ἡγεῖσθε, καθὼς καὶ ὁ ἀγαπητὸς ἡμῶν ἀδελφὸς Παῦλος κατὰ τὴν δοθεῖσαν αὐτῷ σοφίαν
ἔγραψεν ὑμῖν, ὡς καὶ ἐν πάσαις ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς λαλῶν ἐν αὐταῖς περὶ τούτων, ἐν αἷς ἐστιν
δυσνόητά τινα, ἃ οἱ ἀμαθεῖς καὶ ἀστήρικτοι στρεβλοῦσιν ὡς καὶ τὰς λοιπὰς γραφὰς πρὸς
τὴν ἰδίαν αὐτῶν ἀπώλειαν.
The ὑπόθεσις says that Peter commands (ἐντέλλεται) them to be ready for the day of
the Lord (cf. 3:12) with good works and to love the writings of the Apostle. The meta-
communicative verb ἐντέλλομαι reflects the imperatives in the pre-text (σπουδάσατε,
220 Cf. the distinction between those who Paul had seen and those he had not seen in the Διὰ τί. Paul reminds
and corrects the first group, while he instructs and teaches the second.
221 Pseudo-Libanius (De forma epistolari 42, cf. 89): ὑπομνηστικὴ δι᾽ ἧς δοκοῦμέν τινα τοῦ ζητουμένου
πράγματος ἡμῖν ὑπομιμνήσκειν τὸν σκοπὸν ἡμῶν ἐν αὐτῇ χαράττοντες. ‘The suggestive style is that in
which we seem to make a suggestion to someone in response to an inquiry directed to us, while (actually)
stamping it with our own aim.’
ἡγεῖσθε). The ὑπόθεσις agrees with the pre-text regarding the command to readiness.
There are however three deviations: (1) The ὑπόθεσις omits the exhortation to regard
the patience of the Lord as salvation. (2) The ὑπόθεσις adds the exhortation ‘to love the
writings of the Apostle’. This is not said explicitly in the pre-text, but does reflect its lan-
guage: In the pre-text, Paul is referred to as ὁ ἀγαπητὸς ἡμῶν ἀδελφός, and the command
to love (ἀγαπάω) his writings in the ὑπόθεσις seems to be a transformation of this. (3)
According to the pre-text, there are some things in the letters of Paul that are difficult to
understand. These difficult things (cf. the relative pronoun ἅ) are twisted (στρεβλόω) by
the ignorant,222 who treat the other scriptures likewise. In the ὑπόθεσις, this is changed:
Now it is the writings of the Apostle in general that are slandered (διαβάλλω), and this
applies to all divine scripture as well. This statement in the ὑπόθεσις may be understood
in different ways: (1) The slandering of Paul’s letters implies a rejection of them as Scripture.
If this is the meaning, then the opponents also reject ‘all divine scripture’, and this makes
this interpretation difficult to defend.223 (2) The word διαβάλλουσιν is used figuratively.
The slandering of the writings may be taken as a figure of speech implying that any mis-
interpretation or misuse of Paul’s letters gives these letters a bad reputation, and thus
indirectly is act of slandering. This is most probably the idea expressed by the ὑπόθεσις.
2.3.6. Hypothesis of 1 John

Because John himself, the author of the gospel, sends this, reminding those who were already
believers in the Lord (cf. 2:7; 3:11).
The ὑπόθεσις identifies the author of the letter with the evangelist, according to tradition,
John the Son of Zebedee.224 One should note that the ὑπόθεσις does not use the title απο-
στολος.225 The avoidance of the title for the author is a feature that the ὑποθέσεις of the
Johannine letters share with those of 1 and 2 Pet. The sending of the letter is character-
ized by the meta-communicative verb ὑπομιμνῄσκω. Within the summary, διδάσκω and
παραινέω occur in general statements about the letter.226 Thus, the distinction between
didactic and reminding letters is not clear. The epistolographic handbook of Pseudo-
Libanius includes the mixed type, a type of letter that represents different genres.227
222 Theophylact (Commentary, PG 125: 1288A) gives the following explanation: »Δυσνόητα« δὲ λέγει, ἃ καὶ
ὑπὸ τῶν ἀσεβῶν φησιν ἐνδιαστρόφως ἐξαγγέλεσθαι. Τοῦτο γὰρ τὸ »στρεβλοῦσθαι« σημαίνει. “Hard to be
understood”, he says, which also, he asserts, are interpreted in a distorted fashion by the godless. For this
is the meaning of the word “wrest”. Cf. Bengel (1742: 1042): ‘στρεβλοῦσιν) distorquent’.
223 In his commentary on the pre-text, Paulsen o QPJOUTPVUUIBUUIFPQQPOFOUTSFGFSSFEUP
are invariably Christians: ‘Es gibt Menschen (offenkundig ChristInnen), die sich dieser Texte in einer
unzulässigen Weise bedienen.’ It is hard to believe that the ὑπόθεσις refers to non-Christians or more
specifically, to Jews. The Jews could obviously not be described as people who rejected ‘all divine scripture.’
224 Cf. The letter is attributed to the apostle John already in the Muratorian Fragment (Text in Souter 1913:
209). On the significance of this early testimony, see Strecker 1989: 12 and Klauck 1991: 18. One may
say that this attribution was adopted by all ancient commentators who treated this letter as part of their
canon.
225 Cf. the various forms of the superscriptions where these occur:, e.g., Ἐπιστολὴ καθολικὴ τοῦ ἁγίου
ἀποστόλου Ἰωάννου, see the letter opening in the N. A. edition.
226 εἶτα λοιπὸν δι᾽ ὅλης τῆς ἐπιστολῆς περὶ ἀγάπης διδάσκει […] παραινεῖ δὲ δι᾽ ὅλης τῆς ἐπιστολῆς μὴ
ἀθυμεῖν τοὺς πιστεύοντας τῷ κυρίῳ.
227 Pseudo-Libanius (De forma epistolari 45): μικτὴ δὲ ἣν ἐκ διαφόρων χαρακτήρων συνιστῶμεν, cf. 92.
184 Commentary
He explains that the mystery that [has come] to us is not something new (μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι
τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον), but that He was from the beginning and will always be.
Pre-text (1 Joh 1:1) Ὃ ἦν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς, ὃ ἀκηκόαμεν, ὃ ἑωράκαμεν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν, ὃ
ἐθεασάμεθα καὶ αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐψηλάφησαν, περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς
The ὑπόθεσις introduces the word μυστήριον, which is not found in the pre-text. The
entire phrase μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον is found also in the ὑποθέσεις of
Eph and 2 John. The phrase may be considered a paraphrase of &QIo DGϪϱϯϰфϮϧϭϫ
in Eph 1:9), and its use in the context of 1 John is unexpected. Possibly, the ὑπόθεσις has
supplied the word μυστήριον as the antecedent of the neuter relative pronoun in 1:1, thus
postulating the following text: τὸ μυστήριον ὃ ἦν ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς.
And he demonstrates (δεικνύει) the unity of the Son with his Father, and that he who denies
the Son does not have the Father.
Pre-text (1 Joh 2:23) πᾶς ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν υἱὸν οὐδὲ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει· ὁ ὁμολογῶν τὸν
υἱὸν καὶ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει
2:23a in the pre-text is reproduced verbatim in the ὑπόθεσις. The preceding words in
the ὑπόθεσις, that the author demonstrates the unity of the Son with the Father, seem
UP SFĘFDU UIF TFDPOE QBSU PG UIF WFSTF Ъ ЪϪϭϩϭϡҀϫ o Зϳϣϧ 0OF TIPVME OPUF UIBU UIF
ὑπόθεσις does not contain a Trinitarian statement, as it refers only to the unity of the Son
and the Father (cf. ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν, Joh 10:30). It is therefore unlikely that the
ὑπόθεσις reflects a Greek text that contained the Comma Johanneum (1 Joh 5:7).228
And he makes a distinction in this letter, saying that the hallmark of Antichrist (τὸ ἴδιον τοῦ
ἀντιχρίστου) is the claim that Jesus was not the Son, Christ, so that it would not be clear. For,
in making out as if it were not Him, the liar will say it is himself.
Pre-text (1 Joh 2:22): τίς ἐστιν ὁ ψεύστης εἰ μὴ ὁ ἀρνούμενος ὅτι Ἰησοῦς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ
χριστός; οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἀντίχριστος, ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱόν
The ὑπόθεσις agrees with the pre-text in the description of antichrist as one who denies
that Jesus was the Christ, but adds the reason behind his action: That the liar does this
in order to present himself as the Messiah. The ὑπόθεσις thus understands ἀντίχριστος
OPUBTBHFOFSBMEFTJHOBUJPOGPSUIFPQQPOFOUT DGo CVUBTSFGFSSJOHUP.FTTJBI
pretenders.
And at the end of the letter, he again reminds (ὑπομιμνῄσκει) them, saying that the Son of
God is heavenly life and true God, and that we should serve Him (ἵνα τούτῳ δουλεύωμεν)
and guard ourselves (φυλάττωμεν ἑαυτούς) against the idols.
Pre-text (+PIo ϭХϢϟϪϣϫϢсЮϰϧЪϱТч϶ϰϭѼϦϣϭѼОϨϣϧ ϨϟхϢтϢϵϨϣϫКϪѴϫϢϧрϫϭϧϟϫ
ἵνα γινώσκωμεν τὸν ἀληθινόν· καὶ ἐσμὲν ἐν τῷ ἀληθινῷ, ἐν τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ.
οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἀληθινὸς θεὸς καὶ ζωὴ αἰώνιος. Τεκνία, φυλάξατε ἑαυτὰ ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων
The ὑπόθεσις uses the meta-communicative verb ὑπομιμνῄσκει, which is justified by the
οἴδαμεν in the pre-text. The pre-text is reproduced with some significant changes: (1) ζωὴ
228 Clarke (1857: VI, 932) mentions the ‘Synopsis of Scripture’ among ancient Greek witnesses that do not
quote this verse. This work (otherwise known as Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, see PG o DPOUBJOT
the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, and Clarke’s reference is thus to the present ὑπόθεσις.
αἰώνιος is replaced with ζωὴ οὐράνιος. (2) ἵνα γινώσκωμεν τὸν ἀληθινὸν καὶ ἐσμὲν ἐν τῷ
ἀληθινῷ, ἐν τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ has been understood as an exhortation to serve
Christ. The ὑπόθεσις refers to this exhortation with a ἵνα-clause with a first person plural
subjunctive. In the pre-text, an ἵνα-clause is also found (ἵνα γινώσκωμεν τὸν ἀληθινόν),
but this does not refer to an exhortation: In the pre-text, ἵνα γινωσκωμεν is dependent on
διάνοιαν, which it explains.229 The ὑπόθεσις has transformed 5:20 into an exhortation of
John. (3) The final exhortation in the pre-text φυλάξατε ἑαυτὰ ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων has also
been reformulated in the first person plural. (4) The ὑπόθεσις has in this way coordinated
5:20 and 5:21. Not only John’s original audience, but also the author and readers of the
ὑπόθεσις are addressees of the exhortation.

This he writes as an older man (ὡς πρεσβύτερος) to Cyria and her children.
Pre-text (2 Joh 1:1a): Ὁ πρεσβύτερος ἐκλεκτῇ κυρίᾳ καὶ τοῖς τέκνοις αὐτῆς
In the pre-text, ὁ πρεσβύτερος appears to be a title, although its meaning is debated.230
The ὑπόθεσις uses the word without the article, thus taking it as a reference to his age.231 It
is clear from the context (the ὑπόθεσις of 1 John) that this ὑπόθεσις identifies him as the
apostle John, and not as ‘John the Presbyter’.232 The word κυρία represents a problem both
in the pre-text and in the ὑπόθεσις. It may be used as an appellative or as a proper name.233
In the present translation the second possibility is adopted. Moreover, the ὑπόθεσις has
omitted the epithet ἐκλεκτή.234
And first, he praises (ἀποδέχεται) her children for walking honestly. Then teaching
(διδάκσων) them that the mystery that [has come] to us is not new, he exhorts (παραινεῖ)
229 So Bultmann (1967: 92, n. 5): ‘Der ἵνα-Satz ist nicht von δέδωκεν abhängig, sondern expliziert das
διάνοιαν.’
230 Bultmann (1967: 95) adopts the view that the term here refers to the author as one of the πρεσβύτεροι
who according to Papias (in Eusebius, H. E. iii, 39) were carriers of the apostolic tradition in Asia Minor.
Also Strecker o JTJODMJOFEUPIPMEUIJTWJFX*UIBTIPXFWFSCFFOPCKFDUFEUIBUUIFVTFPG
the term in Papias is quite different from its use in 2 and 3 John. In Papias it is used as a honorary title for
others, while in the Johannine letters it occurs as a self-designation, see Klauck 1992: 32.
231 Cf. Theophylact (Commentary, PG 126: 69BC), who mentions two alternatives: Πρεσβύτερον δὲ μόνον
ἑαυτὸν ἠξίωσε καλέσαι, ὅτι γηραιὸς ὢν ἤδη ἔγραψε ταύτας, ἢ ὅτι καὶ ἐπίσκοπον ἑαυτὸν ἐκάλεσε διὰ
τοῦ πρεσβυτέρου, εἰωθότος, τὸ κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνο καιροῦ, καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐπισκόπων φέρεσθαι τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ
πρεσβυτέρου. ‘He claimed to call himself presbyter only because he was now old when he wrote these
letters, or because he also called himself bishop by the name presbyter, since at that time the name of
presbyter was used also for bishops.’
232 On the ancient idea that 2 and 3 John was his work, not the work of the apostle, see Strecker (1989:
o BOEKlauck o BOEU. Schnelle o
233 Clarke (1857: VI, 936) notes that the Peshitta has retained ‘Kyria’ as a proper name. Bultmann (1967:
103) translates it as an appellative, but points out that most translators have overlooked the fact that the
noun is anarthrous. He therefore prefers the translation of Jülicher, ‘an eine auserwählte Herrin.’ Jüli-
cher/Fascher 1931: 233.
234 This was observed already by Bengel (1742: 1069): Synopsis Athanasiana ait, γράφει κυρίᾳ, ubi nomen
proprium ponit, epitheton ἐκλεκτὴ, electa, reticet. ‘The Athanasian Synopsis says γράφει κυρίᾳ [writes
Cyria], where it places the proper name but passes over the epithet ἐκλεκτὴ [elect].’ In general, Bengel was
not interested in the ὑποθέσεις, since his aim above all was to extract meaning from the biblical text itself.
The occasion for this rare digression was his need to refute the old view that the lady’s name was ‘Eclecta’.
186 Commentary
them again about love; that they should abide by the teaching that was handed down to
them.
Pre-text ( +PI o ͽϳрϮϥϫ ϩцϟϫ Юϰϧ ϣдϮϥϨϟ ГϨ ϰҀϫ ϰтϨϫϵϫ ϯϭϱ ɀϣϮϧɀϟϰϭѼϫϰϟ϶ Гϫ
ἀληθείᾳ, καθὼς ἐντολὴν ἐλάβομεν παρὰ τοῦ πατρός. καὶ νῦν ἐρωτῶ σε, κυρία, οὐχ ὡς
ἐντολὴν καινὴν γράφων σοι ἀλλὰ ἣν εἴχομεν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς, ἵνα ἀγαπῶμεν ἀλλήλους. καὶ
αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἀγάπη, ἵνα περιπατῶμεν κατὰ τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ […]
There is a close correspondence between the statements concerning the antiquity of the
ἐντολή (in the pre-text) and the μυστήριον (in the ὑπόθεσις). This replacement is dif-
ficult to explain. One should note that the phrase in the μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς
μυστήριον also occurs in the ὑποθέσεις of Eph and 1 John. The fact that the same phrase
is used in three ὑποθέσεις to describe different pre-texts suggests that it is not intended
as a paraphrase of the pre-text, but should rather be considered as an independent state-
ment.

But he accuses (αἰτιᾶται) Diotrephes of not giving to the poor (παρέχοντα τοῖς πτωχοῖς), of
preventing others and of speaking much foolishness.
Pre-text (+PIo Ћϩϩ‫ڍ‬ЪϲϧϩϭɀϮϵϰϣъϵϫϟЯϰҀϫͅϧϭϰϮтϲϥ϶ϭЯϨГɀϧϢтϳϣϰϟϧКϪѩ϶Ϣϧп
τοῦτο, ἐὰν ἔλθω, ὑπομνήσω αὐτοῦ τὰ ἔργα ἃ ποιεῖ, λόγοις πονηροῖς φλυαρῶν ἡμᾶς, καὶ
μὴ ἀρκούμενος ἐπὶ τούτοις οὔτε αὐτὸς ἐπιδέχεται τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς καὶ τοὺς βουλομένους
κωλύει καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐκβάλλει.
The ὑπόθεσις adds the meta-communicative verb αἰτιάομαι. The most important changes
are the following: (1) The blame for not receiving the elder and his followers (ἡμᾶς)
and for spreading false charges against them is omitted. Instead, the ὑπόθεσις refers to
Diotrephes as speaking much foolishness generally. (2) In the ὑπόθεσις, Diotrephes is
accused of not giving to the poor. This is an interesting interpretation of the ἐπιδέχεται
τοὺς ἀδελφούς of the pre-text. In the pre-text, this probably refers to the supporting of
itinerant missionaries or teachers.235 The ὑπόθεσις has a wider perspective: According to
the opening of the ὑπόθεσις, the letter is ‘about hospitality’ (περὶ φιλοξενίας), hospitality
here also include acts of charity in general (τοῖς πτωχοῖς παρέχειν).
2.3.9. Hypothesis of Jude

And first, he exhorts (παρακαλεῖ) them to fight and to abide by the faith, which was handed
down to them (τῇ παραδοθείσῃ αὐτοῖς).
Pre-text (Jude 1:3b): ἀνάγκην ἔσχον γράψαι ὑμῖν παρακαλῶν ἐπαγωνίζεσθαι τῇ ἅπαξ
παραδοθείσῃ τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστει
The ὑπόθεσις adds the meta-communicative verb παρακαλει. This verb occurs only here
in the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. Here it reflects the παρακαλῶν in the pre-text.
The ὑπόθεσις has replaced τοῖς ἁγίοις with αὐτοῖς.236
235 See Bultmann (1967: 100): ‘Diotrephes versagt auch den (wandernden) Brüdern die Gastfreundschaft.’
So also Strecker (1989: 369); Klauck o BOESchnelle o
236 This change may be defended, since οἱ ἅγιοι may refer to the Christian community in general, so Paulsen
(1992: 55): ‘Es handelt sich bei ἅγιοι nicht um eine Beschränkung auf die Apostel allein, gemeint ist viel-
It is therefore necessary to withdraw from such people. For even Michael the Archangel could
not bear the blasphemy of the devil (οὐχ ὑπήνεγκε βλασφημίαν τοῦ διαβόλου).
Pre-text (+VEF o γϪϭцϵ϶ Ϫтϫϰϭϧ Ϩϟх ϭжϰϭϧ ГϫϱɀϫϧϟϤшϪϣϫϭϧ ϯрϮϨϟ Ϫсϫ Ϫϧϟцϫϭϱϯϧϫ
κυριότητα δὲ ἀθετοῦσιν, δόξας δὲ βλασφημοῦσιν. ὁ δὲ Μιχαὴλ ὁ ἀρχάγγελος, ὅτε τῷ
διαβόλῳ διακρινόμενος διελέγετο περὶ τοῦ Μωϋσέως σώματος, οὐκ ἐτόλμησεν κρίσιν
ἐπενεγκεῖν βλασφημίας, ἀλλὰ εἶπεν· Ἐπιτιμήσαι σοι κύριος.
The pre-text alludes to the apocryphal story of Michael contending with the devil over
the body of Moses. This story is according to the testimony list of the Euthalian apparatus
found in a Μωϋσέως ἀπόκρυφον. From this writing, the words ἐπιτιμήσαι σοι ὁ Κύριος
(1:9) were allegedly quoted.237 A difficult phrase in the pre-text is κρίσιν ἐπενεγκεῖν
βλασφημίας. The genitive may be understood as (1) an objective genitive referring to the
blasphemy of the devil, which Michael did not condemn, or as (2) a descriptive genitive
that describes the κρίσις itself as containing βλασφημία. In the latter case, the idea is
that Michael did not bring a slanderous accusation against the devil, but left the mat-
ter to God.238 In the pre-text, Michael is used as a paradigm: With his reliance on the
authority of the Lord, Michael serves as a contrast to the opponents who reject authority
(κυριότητα ἀθετοῦσιν). The ὑπόθεσις highlights another aspect of the story, saying that
Michael could not bear (ὑπενεγκεῖν) the slander or blasphemy of the devil (βλασφημία
τοῦ διαβόλου). The example of Michael here has another function, illustrating the impor-
tance of staying away from the deceivers (δεῖ ἀπὸ τούτων ἀναχωρεῖν). The idea is that
when even Michael could not endure the blasphemy of the devil, the believers should
likewise avoid the blasphemy of the deceivers. The ὑπόθεσις uses words that are similar to
the language of the pre-text. The change of ἐπενεγκεῖν to ὑπενεγκεῖν affects only a single
letter. It is difficult to say whether the ὑπόθεσις here represents a conscious reworking of
the text or simply a misinterpretation of it.239
And, having prayed for the confirmation of their faith by the Lord, he ends the letter.
Pre-text (+VEFo ϰҁϢсϢϱϫϟϪтϫѾϲϱϩрϬϟϧаϪѩ϶Ћɀϰϟцϯϰϭϱ϶ϨϟхϯϰѮϯϟϧϨϟϰϣϫьɀϧϭϫ
τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ ἀμώμους ἐν ἀγαλλιάσει μόνῳ θεῷ σωτῆρι ἡμῶν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ
κυρίου ἡμῶν δόξα μεγαλωσύνη κράτος καὶ ἐξουσία πρὸ παντὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος καὶ νῦν καὶ
εἰς πάντας τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν.
ćF EPYPMPHZ JO o JT UIF POMZ QBTTBHF UIBU JT SFGFSSFE UP BT BO BDU PG QSBZFS
(ἐπεύχομαι) in the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. This description of the text may
mehr die ganze Gemeinde.’

237 See the Euthalian list of testimonies (Zacagni 1698: 485 = PG 85: 676A): Ἰούδα Ἐπιστολή. Μωϋσέως
ἀποκρύφου α´· Ἐπιτιμήσαι σοι ὁ Κύριος. ‘The letter of Jude. One from the Apocryphon of Moses: May the
Lord rebuke you.’
238 These interpretations are discussed by Paulsen (1992: 68), who prefers the second alternative: ‘Michael,
obwohl ἀρχάγγελος, hat kein Urteil gegen den Satan ausgesprochen, das eine βλασφημία enthalten hätte,
sondern dies Gott überlassen.’ So also A. Vögtle (1994: 61): ‘Der Ausdruck κρίσιν βλασφημίας in Jud 9
meint ein richtendes Schmähurteil.’
239 A similar idea, as well as many others, is found in Theophylact (Commentary, PG%o" γϪсϫ
Μιχαὴλ, φησὶν, οὕτως οὐδὲ κατὰ ἀνδρὸς, ἤτοι τοῦ Μωϋσέως, ἠνέσχετο τῶν τοῦ διαβόλου βλασφημιῶν.
‘Michael, he says, could thus not bear the blasphemies of the devil against a man, indeed against Moses.’
The blasphemies of the devil against Moses refer to the killing of the Egyptian (96B).
188 Commentary
be defended inasmuch as the doxologic genre presupposes the use of the optative or its
equivalent (e.g. δόξα [εἴη] τῷ θεῷ…). The ὑπόθεσις describes it as a prayer for the confir-
mation (βεβαιότης) of their faith. This description is based on the first part of the doxol-
ogy that describes Christ as ‘Him who is able (τῷ δυναμένῳ) to keep you from the falling’.
The ὑπόθεσις has made this clause the object of the prayer.
2.3.10. The Hypotheses of the Catholic Letters: Summary

Thanksgiving. The ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters do not use εὐχαριστία/εὐχαριστέω.
Although the Catholic letters do not as a rule open with thanksgivings (as the Pauline let-
ters do), there are nevertheless texts that could have received this designation.240
Prayer. The ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters rarely use εὐχή/εὔχομαι (προς-). The
related verb ἐπεύχομαι is used once as a text-deiction (with reference to +VEo ćF
other occurrence is in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 John, which refers to a statement about prayer
(1 Joh 5:16).
Paraenesis. As a previous study has demonstrated, a flexible terminology is used for ethi-
cal exhortation. Although the nominal form παραινετικοὶ λόγοι is not found, the verb
παραινέω occurs (ὑποθέσεις of 1 Pet, 2 Pet, 1 Joh, 2 Joh). Προτρέπω may also be used
of moral exhortation (ὑποθέσεις of Jas, 1 Pet, 3 Joh), and once, παρακαλῶ (ὑπόθεσις of
Jude). In this context, the phrase εἰς τὰ ἤθη is found twice (ὑποθέσεις of 1 Pet and Jud), in
both instances with the verb παραινέω.241
The paraphrase
The ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters occasionally use scraps from the pre-text to express
a new meaning. This occurs in the paraphrase of +VEFo XIFSFUIFFYBNQMFPG.J-
chael serves another purpose than that of the pre-text. Similar transformations are found
in the paraphrases of 1FUoBOE1 Pet 4:6. It is not clear whether these are intended
changes or represent a misunderstanding of the biblical text.
The ‘Paulusbild’
Also the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters contribute to the ‘Paulusbild’ of the Euthalian
apparatus. The transformation of 1FUoJOUPBOFYIPSUBUJPOUPAMPWFUIFXSJUJOHT
of the Apostle’ is remarkable, especially since the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters do
not use the title ‘apostle’ for the authors. Even if the authors of the major Catholic letters
were considered apostles in the ὑποθέσεις as well, this is passed over in silence. This is in
agreement with the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, where Paul seems to be ‘the Apostle’
par excellence.
240 See the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι to the Catholic letters.

241 On the terminology of the ὑποθέσεις to describe moral exhortation, see Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004:
o "QQ** 339o340).
2.4. Hypothesis of Acts

Hypothesis of the Book of the Acts
The heading of the ὑπόθεσις refers to Acts as ‘The Book of the Acts’ (τὸ βιβλίον τῶν
πράξεων).242 In this, it differs from the Euthalian Prologue to Acts, which refers to Acts
as ἡ βίβλος τῶν ἀποστολικῶν πράξεων. It also differs from the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, which
use the title Πράξεις. The use of different titles bears witness to the complex origin of the
apparatus.
The opening of the ὑπόθεσις is transmitted in various forms. von Soden notes the
following main variants:243
[Variant I]
The narrator of the Acts of the Apostles is Luke the evangelist. For he was an Antiochene by
birth and a physician by profession.
[Variant II]
The book is called the Acts of the Apostles, because it contains the acts of all the apostles. The
narrator is Luke the evangelist, who wrote this book also.244
[Variant III]
The book is called the Acts of the Apostles, because it contains the acts of all the apostles. The
narrator is Luke the evangelist, who wrote this book also. For he was an Antiochene by birth
and a physician by profession.
Variant I is considered the simplest form by von Soden. Variant II adds the explanation of
the title, while it omits the biographical data of Luke. von Soden considers Variant III a
conflation of I and II, since it includes both the explanation of the title and the biographi-
cal data. I find this argument convincing. Regarding I and II, the question of priority is
difficult to answer at the present stage of research. Variant II reflects a pattern known
elsewhere in the apparatus. Both in the Διὰ τί and in the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters,
the explanation of the title is a regular feature.245 A survey of the distribution of the vari-
ants in the manuscripts may shed more light on this question. For the present translation,
it was decided to use the simple form that seems to be independent of the other Euthalian
ὑποθέσεις.
Variant I opens with the identification of the narrator (διηγούμενος) as Luke the evan-
gelist. This follows from Acts 1:1, where the author refers to the Gospel as his first book
(λόγος). The term διηγούμενος has a close parallell in Luke 1:1 (διήγησις). The biographi-
cal data are derived from tradition, and not from the pre-text. The idea that he was a
physician is widespread due to his identification with Luke the physician in Col 4:14.
His Antiochene origin is, on the other hand, first mentioned by Eusebius.246 The sources,
242 Sometimes expanded with τῶν ἀποστόλων or τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων, see von Soden 1902: 331.
243 See von Soden 1902: 331.
244 Πράξεις ἀποστόλων τὸ βιβλίον καλεῖται, ἐπειδὴ τὰς πράξεις ὁμοῦ τῶν ἀποστόλων περιέχει, ὁ δὲ
διηγούμενος ταῦτα ἐστὶν Λουκᾶς ὁ ευαγγελιστὴς ὁ καὶ τοῦτο τὸ βιβλίον συγγράφων. See von Soden
1902: 331.
245 A necessary presupposition is that the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters originally exhibited this feature.
The text form beginning with ἐπειδή cannot be original, as the causal clause is only possible if the words
οὕτως καλεῖται (vel sim.) preceded, see von Dobschütz 1893: 70.
246 See W. G. Kümmel 1975: 147. The so-called Anti-Marcionite prologue to Luke also has this information,
but the date of this prologue is uncertain, see Jervello
190 Commentary
if there were any, on which Eusebius based this assumption are unknown. Haenchen
suggested that the assumption rests on a ‘Western’ variant of the text of Acts. Accord-
ing to Haenchen, Eusebius read συνεστραμμένων δὲ ἡμῶν ‘when we were gathered’ in
Acts 11:28. Thus, the first mention of ‘we’ would be in the description of the Antiochian
church. The author had thus identified himself indirectly in the text.247 Bengel had a simi-
lar idea, as he conjectured that Eusebius had identified Luke with Lucius of Cyrene (Acts
13:1), who is mentioned among the prophets and teachers in the church of Antioch.248
Regardless of how Luke became connected to Antioch in the history of interpretation,
the question whether the ὑπόθεσις here is based on Eusebius should be examined.249 The
language used in this context by Eusebius and the ὑπόθεσις is quite similar:
Euthalian ὑπόθεσις: Ἀντιοχεὺς γὰρ οὗτος ὑπάρχων τὸ γένος ἰατρός τε τὴν ἐπιστήμην.
Eusebius (H. E. iii, 4, 6): Λουκᾶς δὲ τὸ μὲν γένος ὢν τῶν ἀπ᾽ Ἀντιοχείας, τὴν ἐπιστήμην
δὲ ἰατρός.
The style of the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις is less sophisticated than Eusebius, as it uses the sim-
ple Ἀντιοχεύς instead of the more elaborate expression τῶν ἀπ᾽ Ἀντιοχείας. Moreover,
the ὑπόθεσις does not balance the statement with μέν … δέ, as in Eusebius. The following
words in the ὑπόθεσις has also a close parallell in the same passage in Eusebius:
For he was traveling with the other apostles, and with Paul in particular
ὑπόθεσις: συναπεδημεῖ γὰρ τοῖς τε ἄλλοις ἀποστόλοις καὶ μάλιστα τῷ Παύλῳ
Eusebius (H. E. iii, 4, 6): τὰ πλεῖστα συγγεγονὼς τῷ Παύλῳ, καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς δὲ οὐ
παρέργως τῶν ἀποστόλων ὡμιληκώς
Again, the ὑπόθεσις has a more simple and straightforward style than that of Euse-
bius. In Eusebius, there is apparently a distinction between Luke being a companion
(συγγεγονώς) of Paul, and his communication or association (ὡμιληκώς) with the other
apostles. This distinction is lost in the ὑπόθεσις, where Luke is said to have traveled with
the other apostles as well. This seems to favor the view that the text of Eusebius is the pre-
text, and that the ὑπόθεσις has simplified the account.
The idea that Luke traveled with Paul has a basis in the so-called ‘we’ texts in Acts,
where the author gives the impression of being an eyewitness.250
… and wrote accurately what he knows
According to the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις, the accuracy of Luke in the composition of Acts fol-
lows from his companionship with Paul. The same thought is also expressed by Eusebius,
who mentions the different methods Luke used in composing his two volumes; in the
first he was a transmitter of reliable traditions, in the second he reports what he has seen
himself (H. E. iii, 4, 6).
247 See Haenchen 1965: 11. Pervo (2009: 296 n. 62) remarks that ‘we’ does not occur after the arrival of new
characters in Acts and thinks that the D-text here reflects a preference for eyewitness accounts in (Chris-
tian) texts from the 2nd century.
248 See Bengel 1773/1855: 133.
249 Harris demonstrated that Euthalius sometimes is very close to Eusebius. With respect to the biographical
data of Luke, Harris (1896: 69n) drew attention to material in the Euthalian Prologue to Acts and Euse-
bius H. E. iii, 4, 6. In the present study, it is observed that this applies also to the ὑπόθεσις of Acts.
250 "DUToooo0OUIFTFUFYUT TFFHaenchenoKümmel 1975:
oJervelloH. ConzelmannYYYWJJJoYMD.-A. Koch 2008.
Thus, the entire description of Luke in the ὑπόθεσις appears to be an epitome of Eu-
sebius, written in a simplified style. Another explanation could be that Eusebius has in-
corporated elements from a pre-existing ὑπόθεσις into his work, and, in doing this, has
improved it stylistically. This seems less likely, especially as Eusebius in this passage treats
both the Gospel and the Acts.
He narrates in the book how the Lord was taken up (ἀνελήφθη) by angels who lifted Him
up (ὑπολαβόντων)
Pre-text (Acts 1:9b): ἐπήρθη καὶ νεφέλη ὑπέλαβεν αὐτὸν […]
This description of the ascension of Christ goes beyond that of the pre-text. The cloud is
replaced by angels. Accordingly, ὑπολαμβάνω is probably used in the sense ‘take up from
below’ (LSJ) and is rendered ‘lift up’ in my translation. In the pre-text, where the cloud
is the subject, the sense of the verb may be closer to ‘receive’, hence, ‘conceal’.251 That the
ascencion was effected through angels, is not unexpected. According to the pre-text, the
return of Christ will happen in the same way as his ascent into heaven (1:11). Thus, the
coming of Christ with angels (eg Jud 1:14) corresponds to his being carried up to heaven
by them. The angels represent the divine action. One may compare the account of the res-
urrection and the ascension as one and the same event in Codex Bobiensis (Mark 16:4),
where angels ascend with Christ into heaven.252 The corresponding image is that of Christ
being received by a cloud (Acts 1:9) and returning with (or on) the clouds in the parousia
(Mark 13:26; 14:62; Rev 1:7; cf. Dan 7:13). The two images may be combined by interpret-
ing the clouds as angels.253 Such an interpretation seems to underlie the ὑπόθεσις, even
though the shift from the singular (νεφέλη) to plural (ἄγγελοι) is problematic.
… and how the Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost upon the apostles and all those
present o , the appointing (κατάστασις) of Matthias in place of Judas the traitor
o , the appointing (κατάστασις) of the seven deacons o , the electing (ἐκλογή)
of Paul o and what he went through o , and, finally, his voyage to Rome
o .
An interesting feature of the ὑπόθεσις is that the order of the events has been changed.
The coming of the Holy Spirit is placed before the appointing of Matthias. This is prob-
ably because the ὑπόθεσις places the most important event first. It is reasonable that the
Spirit, which plays a fundamental role in the book, is mentioned before the appointing
of Matthias. As for the selection of events, the ὑπόθεσις focuses on Matthias, the deacons
and Paul. The meta-term κατάστασις reflects the verb καταστήσομεν in the pre-text (6:3,
cf. ἔστησαν 1:23). This term contrasts with the meta-term ἐκλογή for the election of
Paul. This term is also derived from the pre-text (cf. σκεῦος ἐκλογῆς, 9:15). The result is
BDVSJPVTTVNNBSZPG"DUTćFEFTDSJQUJPOPGUIFCVMLPGUIFCPPL o TJNQMZ
as ‘what Paul went through’ is not very helpful to the reader. It must be said that the asym-
251 ‘[I]n ὑπολαμβάνω liegt hier das Moment des Verbergens und des Trennens’, Haenchen 1965: 116 n. 4; ‚‘er
wurde durch eine Wolke aufgenommen, so dass er ihren Blicken entschwand’, Jervell 1998: 116.
252 Et descenderunt de caelis angeli et […] simul ascenderunt cum eo. ‘And angels descended from the sky and
… they ascended together with him.’ Text in B. Metzger o XIPBMTPESBXTBUUFOUJPOUPB
TJNJMBSEFTDSJQUJPOJOUIF(PTQFMPG1FUFS ffo )FSFUIFBOHFMTQMBZBNPSFBDUJWFSPMF CSJOHJOH
Jesus out of the tomb.
253 This identification is known in rabbinic exegesis of Dan 7:13, see J. J. Collins 1993: 311.
192 Commentary
metry between pre-text and ὑπόθεσις in this case is extreme. In this, the ὑπόθεσις of Acts
stands out when compared to the ὑποθέσεις of the letters. The question is how to explain
this remarkable asymmetry. A possible explanation may be that the text is not composed
as a complete ὑπόθεσις but is rather an introduction to lists of various kinds. According
to von Soden, the ὑπόθεσις of Acts is in the majority of manuscripts followed by a list of
apostles and deacons and also a list of wonders (see below). The ὑπόθεσις seems to pre-
suppose the list of apostles and deacons. A related text is the gloss on the on the voyage
(πλοῦς) of Paul to Rome.254 Possibly, the actual pre-texts of the ὑπόθεσις may be lists and
glosses of this kind that were already present in the tradition. Thus, the ὑπόθεσις may
reflect two kinds of scholarly activity. On the one hand, an independent work with the
text of Acts (the meta-terms used in the ὑπόθεσις may indicate this), and the secondary
reworking of already existing lists on the other. It is of course impossible to separate these
elements with any certainty.
Regarding the ‘Paulusbild’ of the ὑπόθεσις, there are two points worth noting: 1. Paul
is elected, but he is not said to be an apostle. The different meta-terms (κατάστασις and
ἐκλογή) indicate that Paul has a special status, but the title ‘apostle’ is not used for him.
This is in agreement with the text of the Acts, but in conflict with the ὑποθέσεις of the
Pauline letters, where Paul is described as ‘the Apostle’ (ὁ ἀπόστολος). 2. Paul, the apos-
tles and the deacons, are not depicted as wonder-workers. This is in contrast to other
auxiliary material to Acts in the apparatus, especially the List of Wonders.
2.5. The List of Apostles and Deacons

According to von Soden, a list of apostles and deacons is frequently found immediately
after the ὑπόθεσις of Acts.255 The list is made on the basis of Acts 1:13.26 and 6:5. The list
is concluded with a paragraph on the election of Paul and his mission with Barnabas ‘to
preach the Lord to the Gentiles everywhere’.
2.6. The List of Wonders

This list is often followed by a list of the wonders (σημεῖα) in Acts.256 Apart from the meta-
term σημεῖα, the list is based on Acts, and includes in the category of σημεῖα all kinds
254 The text seems based on glosses to the text of Acts and runs as follows: Πλοῦς Παύλου ἀποστόλου εἰς
Ῥώμην. Ὁ ἑκατοντάρχης ὁ ἀπαγαγὼν τὸν Παῦλον εἰς Ῥώμην, Ἰούλιος ἦν ὄνομα αὐτῷ, ἐκ σπείρης τῆς
λεγομένης Σεβαστῆς. Συνῆν δὲ αὐτῷ Λουκᾶς καὶ Ἀρίσταρχος. τὸ δὲ πλοῖον Ἀνδραμυτινὸν ἐτύγχανεν.
Ἐνέβησαν δὲ αὐτῷ ἀπὸ Καισαρείας ἕως Λύστραν, κἀκεῖθεν ἀλεξανδρινὸν ἔλαβον ἕως Μελίτη τῆς Νήσου,
καὶ πάλιν ἀλεξανδρινὸν ἕτερον εὑρόντες παράσημον τοῖς Διοσκούροις ἐνέβησαν καὶ τούτῳ καὶ εἰς Ῥώμην
οὕτως ἀνήχθησαν. ‘The Voyage of Paul the Apostle to Rome. The centurion who led Paul to Rome was
called Julius, a man of the cohort called the Augustan. Luke and Aristarch were with him. They went on
board a ship from Adramyttium, going from Caesarea to Lystra. And from there they took an Alexandrian
ship till they reached the island of Malta. Having again found another Alexandrian ship, dedicated to the
Dioscouri, they boarded this also, and thus they sailed to Rome.’ Text in von Soden 1902: 366. Willard
o OPUFEUIBUUIJTQJFDFIBTOPĕYFEQMBDFJOUIFNBOVTDSJQUT
255 See von Sodeno
256 See von SodenoćJTUFYUJTGPVOEBMTPJOUIFDPNNFOUBSZPO"DUTBTDSJCFEUPćFPQIZMBDU
(PG #o# )FSFUIFMJTUIBTOVNCFST DPVOUJOHUXFOUZPOFXPOEFSTJOBMMćFUFYUGPMMPXT
immediately after the ὑπόθεσις of Acts, without the lists of apostles and deacons.
PGXPOESPVTBDUT JODMVEJOHWJTJPOT FH1FUFSTWJTJPO o BOEQVOJUJWFNJSBDMFT
FH UIF EFBUI PG "OBOJBT BOE 4BQQIJSB o *U EPFT OPU TUSJDUMZ GPMMPX UIF PSEFS
of Acts but organizes the material around the wonder workers in Acts.257 Even if the list
may seem insignificant, it should be noted that it is one of the few items in the apparatus
that focus on Paul as a wonder worker since the ὑπόθεσις of Acts does not mention these
actions of Paul at all.
2.7. The Hypotheses: Summary

In previous research on the Euthalian apparatus, scholars have given the Euthalian
ὑποθέσεις relatively little attention. For scholars like Robinson, who considered the
ὑποθέσεις secondary in relation to the Euthalian prologues, they were not the center of
interest, since they, by definition, were ‘spurious’. But the ὑποθέσεις represent a work
which may be studied for its own sake, and which in particular has an interesting meta-
terminology, as Dahl observed.258
The present commentary has demonstrated that the hypotheses’ meta-terminology, al-
though interesting, is not an entirely adequate tool to describe the apostolic writings: The
ὑποθέσεις pay little attention to literary forms in the letters that belong to the Jewish-
Christian sphere, such as thanksgivings, benedictions, doxologies and prayers. On the
other hand, the terminology used to describe moral exhortation is flexible, and in this
way one may see the ὑποθέσεις as representing essentially a Greek paideia. This learn-
ing is applied to the biblical writings without any particular attention being paid to their
Jewish-Christian literary forms.
The significance of the meta-terminology for the question of authorship. Another aspect
is noteworthy: The meta-terminology throughout the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline and of the
Catholic letters is quite homogenous. That these ὑποθέσεις are written in the same style
is evident for every reader, and von Soden goes so far as to saying that they doubtless
are all by the same author, although he (as an afterthought) admits that the ὑποθέσεις of
the Catholic letters may be imitations, made by a later hand.259 This question cannot be
answered here. The evidence examined in the present commentary shows, however, that
the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline and Catholic letters appear to belong together. In contrast to
the evidence of the prologues, the evidence of the ὑποθέσεις does not suggest that Acts
and the Catholic letters belonged together in one volume. One rather gets the impression
that the book of Acts is viewed from a great distance. The ὑπόθεσις of Acts is a curious
work. It is poorly written, by far the most incomplete in the entire set. If the length of
the pre-text is taken into consideration, it is also found to be very short. This sets it apart
from the other ὑποθέσεις, and one may assume that the piece originally did not belong
to the set.
257 ćVT 1FUFSTWJTJPO o JTUPMECFGPSFUIFTUPSZPG1BVMTWJTJPOPOUIFSPBEUP%BNBTDVT o

258 See DahlEo
259 See von Soden 1902: 339.
194 Commentary
The ’Paulusbild’
The ὑποθέσεις of both the Pauline and the Catholic letters describe Paul as ‘the Apostle’
and do not use the title ‘apostle’ for the others. In general, one may say that Paul here
outshines all the others. On the other hand, Paul is never called ‘the holy Apostle’, or the
‘divine’ or ‘blessed’ Apostle as often in the tradition. Again, the ὑπόθεσις of Acts differs
from the others. It uses the title ‘apostle’ with reference to the twelve apostle, but not with
reference to Paul, who is, however, described as σκεῦος ἐκλογῆς. In this description, it
betrays its dependence on the pre-text (Acts 9:15).
3. Commentary on the Prologues

3.1. The Genre ‘Prologue’
The term πρόλογος may be used in a wide sense, of anything that precedes the work
(λόγος). In this sense it is apparently used by Brock, who refers to all the Euthalian
introductory material, including the list of Old Testament quotations as the ‘Euthalian
prologue’.260 This use of the term is rare in the secondary literature on Euthalius. In the
present commentary, the definition used in Hennig Brinkmann’s study of the medieval
prologue is adopted: According to Brinkmann, the prologue is the opening of communi-
cation between the author and the reader.261 The author usually speaks in the first person.
With regard to this, there is a difference between the genre ‘prologue’ on the one hand and
the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις on the other: In κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and ὑποθέσεις,
the first person is usually not employed. This difference in style reflects a difference in
function: The prologue usually contains a personal element, as it aims to establish a rela-
tionship between the author and his readers.
According to Brinkmann, the prologue has two main functions: (a) to win the be-
nevolence of the reader, and (b) to introduce the reader to the subject matter of the work.
Brinkmann finds that the prologues to ancient drama (i.e. the prologue speeches that
often open them) had no influence on the theory of the prologue in medieval times, since
the ancient dramatic tradition ceased to exist.262 But a relatively clear division between
these two functions is found also in the ancient theory of drama. An influence from
drama or from the theory of drama cannot be completely ruled out. Evanthius distin-
guishes between four kinds of prologues in comedy: (1) The commendatory, where the
play is commended to the audience; (2) the responsive, where the author criticizes his
adversaries or praises the audience; (3) the dramatic, which offers an exposition of the
plot; and (4) the mixed. In addition he mentions the difference between ‘prologue’ and
‘prologium’. This twofold division appears to be a simplification of the previous division
into four types. The first (the ‘prologue’) may contain the author’s excuses or his commen-
dation of the play. Thus it combines the commendatory and responsive functions. The
second (the ‘prologium’) treats the plot only, and thus has the function of the ‘dramatic’
prologue in the fourfold division. Although there is a certain amount of confusion in this
260 See Brock 1979: 121. Cf. also the quotation from Evanthius below.
261 See Brinkmann 1964: 1.
262 See Brinkmann 1964: 1.
Commentary on the Prologues 195
terminology, the ancient theory distinguishes clearly between winning the benevolence
of the audience and introducing the audience to the world of the play.263
The distinction between ‘prologue’ and ‘prologium’ corresponds to the distinction be-
tween (a) prologus praeter rem, which serves to introduce the author to the reader and
win his or her benevolence, and (b) prologus ante rem, which serves to introduce the
reader to the contents of the work.264 Since these terms are more precise than the pair
‘prologue’/‘prologium’ of Evanthius, they are used in the present commentary on Eutha-
lius. The terms prologus praeter rem / ante rem are not genre-designations, but pragmatic
terms that describe the function of various sub-texts. A prologue may also be given an
epistolary form and appear as a dedicatory letter. This is the case in the Onomasticon
of Pollux (2nd cent.). This short dedicatory letter may here serve as an illustration of the
genre ‘prologue’:
Pollux, Onomasticon, I,1. Dedicatory letter to Commodus, text and trans. in Trapp 2003: 143
(rev.).
[Prologus praeter rem] [Prologus praeter rem]
Ἰούλιος Πολυδεύκης Κομμόδῳ Καίσαρι χαίρειν. Julius Pollux to Commodus Caesar, greetings.
ὦ παῖ πατρὸς ἀγαθοῦ, πατρῷόν ἐστί σοι κτῆμα O son of a noble father, kingship and wisdom
κατ᾽ ἴσον βασιλεία τε καὶ σφοία. τῆς δὲ σοφίας alike are your paternal inheritance. Of wisdom,
τὸ μέν τι ἐν τῇ τῆς ψυχῆς ἀρετῇ, τὸ δ᾽ ἐν τῇ part lies in the virtue of the soul, and part in
χρείᾳ τῆς φωνῆς. τῆς μὲν οὖν ἀρετῆς ἔχεις the use of voice. As far as virtue is concerned,
τὸ μάθημα ἐν τῷ πατρί, τῆς δὲ φωνῆς, εἰ μὲν you have your model in your father; as for the
ἦγεν αὐτὸς σχολήν, παρεῖχεν ἄν σοι τὸ ἡμῶν voice, if he himself had the leisure, he would
ἐλάχιστα δεῖσθαι· ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ἐκεῖνον ἡ σωτηρία ensure that you had minimal need of me. But
τῆς οἰκουμένης ἀπασχολεῖ, ἔγωγ᾽ οὖν ἕν γέ τι since he is preoccupied with the preservation
σοι πρὸς εὐγλωττίαν συμβαλοῦμαι. of the inhabited world, I can make you at least
this one contribution to the cultivation of elo-
quence.
263 Evanthius (De comoedia WJJ o Comoedia autem dividitur in quattuor partes: prologum, πρότασιν,
ἐπίτασιν, καταστροφήν. Prologus est prima dictio, a Graecis dicta πρῶτος λόγος vel antecedens veram
fabulae compositionem elocutio, <ὁ πρὸ τοῦ δράματος λόγος>. eius species sunt quattuor: συστατικός
commendativus, quo poeta vel fabula commendatur; ἐπιτιμητικός relativus, quo aut adversario maledictum
aut populo gratiae referuntur; δραματικός argumentativus, exponens fabulae argumentum; μικτός mixtus,
omnia haec in se continens. inter prologum et prologium quidam hoc interesse voluerunt quod prologus
est, ubi aut poeta excusatur aut fabula commendatur, prologium autem est, cum tantum de argumento
dicitur. ‘A comedy is divided into four parts: Prologue, πρότασις, ἐπίτασις, καταστροφή. The prologue is
UIFĕSTUTQFFDI CZUIF(SFFLTDBMMFEɀϮҀϰϭ϶ϩшϡϭ϶ PSUIFTQFFDIUIBUQSFDFEFTUIFBDUVBMQMBZЪɀϮчϰϭѼ
ϢϮрϪϟϰϭ϶ϩшϡϭ϶ćFSFBSFGPVSLJOETPGJUϯϱϯϰϟϰϧϨш϶DPNNFOEBUPSZ CZXIJDIUIFBVUIPSPSUIFQMBZ
is commended. Ἐπιτιμητικός responsive, by which either an adversary is abused or the audience is praised.
δραματικός dramatic, bringing an exposition of the plot of the play; μικτός mixed, containing all these
things. Somebody wanted to distinguish between the prologue and the prologium; the prologue is where
either the author excuses himself or where the play is commended, the prologium, on the other hand, is
where only the plot is spoken about.’
264 On this terminology, see Brinkmanno
196 Commentary
Pollux, Onomasticon, I,1. Dedicatory letter to Commodus, text and trans. in Trapp 2003: 143
(rev.).
[Prologus ante rem] [Prologus ante rem]
Ὀνομαστικὸν μὲν οὖν τῷ βιβλίῳ τὸ ἐπίγραμμα, ‘Vocabulary’ then is the title of this work; it sets
μηνύει δὲ ὅσα τε συνώνυμα ὡς ὑπαλάττειν out which words are synonyms and thus in-
δύνασθαι, καὶ οἷς ἂν ἕκαστα δηλωθείη. terchangeable, and which words denote what.
πεφιλοτίμηται γὰρ οὐ τοσοῦτον εἰς πλῆθος I have striven not so much for quantity as for
ὁπόσον εἰς κάλλους ἐκλογήν. οὐ μέντοι πάντα elegant selection. This book does not however
τὰ ὀνόματα περιείληφε τουτὶ τὸ βιβλίον· οὐδὲ contain all words, as it would be no easy task
γὰρ ἦν ῥᾴδιον ἑνὶ βιβλίῳ πάντα συλλαβεῖν. to encompass everything in a single volume. I
ποιήσομαι δὲ τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀφ᾽ ὧν μάλιστα will begin where the most pious most properly
προσήκει τοὺς εὐσεβεῖς, ἀπὸ τῶν θεῶν· τὰ δ᾽ should, with the gods; the rest I will arrange as
ἄλλα ὡς ἂν ἕκαστον ἐπέλθῃ τάξομεν. ἔρρωσο. each item occurs to me. Farewell.
In the Onomasticon, similar letters are prefixed to each book of the work.265 The three
Euthalian prologues also follow this scheme, having the prologus praeter rem first. It has
also been suggested that the Euthalian prologues once appeared as letters.266
The genre-designation in common use for the prologus praeter rem is ‘prooemium’.
The characteristics of this genre is treated below. The prologus ante rem is more difficult
to describe, as its contents depend on the genre of the work.
3.2. Commentary on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul

3.2.1. Structure of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul
The Prologue to the Letters of Paul may be divided into two main parts according to the
theory discussed above. The prologus ante rem is in this case quite complex, consisting
mainly of pieces that pertain to the work of Paul (the ‘Life’, the ‘Epitome’ and the ‘Chron-
icle’), but also one piece that pertains to the work of Euthalius (‘Editorial notice’). There
are no headings for these pieces in the Greek manuscripts, but some of these genre-des-
ignations appear in the text (see the commentary below).
(1) Prologus praeter rem: Prooemium
(2) Prologus ante rem: Life of Paul, Epitome of the Pauline Letters, Editorial Notice,
Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul
There is a structural problem with the Prologue to the Letters of Paul that indicates that it
has been produced in stages. After the biography of Paul has been narrated in the ‘Life’,
there follows another treatment of the same subject in the ‘Chronicle’. The ‘Chronicle’
is probably secondary. The most important reason for this assumption is the tension
between the ‘Life’ and the ‘Chronicle’: According to the ‘Life’, Paul died as a martyr shortly
after his arrival in Rome. The ‘Chronicle’, on the other hand, tells that he was released and
preached the gospel for ten more years, the time between his first and second defense
265 See Trappo

266 See Harris 1893: 82, and below.
before Nero.267 The ‘Chronicle’ seems, however, to have been appended to the Euthalian
prologue at an early stage, since the Euthalian prologue is not transmitted without it.268
3.2.2. The Heading to the Prologue to the Letters of Paul

The heading to The Prologue to the Letters of Paul is transmitted in many different
forms. Zacagni, following his main witness 181, prints the heading as follows: Εὐθαλίου
ἐπισκόπου Σούλκης πρόλογος προτασσόμενος τῶν δεκατεσσάρων ἐπιστολῶν Παύλου
τοῦ ἁγίου ἀποστόλου. von Soden, on the other hand, considers the following form the
original: Πρόλογος Εὐθαλίου διακόνου προτασσόμενος τῆς βίβλου τῶν ἐπιστολῶν
Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου. The most detailed discussion of the headings is found in the
first study by von Dobschütz, who divides the manuscripts into three classes: (1) Man-
uscripts without the name of the author; (2) Manuscripts with the author’s name as
Εὐθαλίου διακόνου; and (3) Manuscripts with the author’s name as Εὐθαλίου ἐπισκόπου
Σούλκης. Of these, he thinks that (1) is closer to the original, presumably a short form
like πρόλογος τῶν δεκατεσσάρων ἐπιστολῶν Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου. According to von
Dobschütz, the author had placed his own name and the name of the addressee elsewhere
on the codex, and later scribes transferred the name Εὐθαλίου with his title as deacon
or bishop to the heading.269 A different theory was proposed by Harris, who considered
the headings in the manuscripts with the designation πρόλογος secondary. The original
heading was according to Harris in the form of an epistolary prescript.270 At the present
stage of research, it is difficult to evaluate the different hypotheses. A new edition of the
text is needed before its history can be described.
3.2.3. Prologus praeter rem
3.2.3.1. The Genre ‘Prooemium’

The designation ‘prooemium’ is in the present work used with reference to the text that
has the function of the prologus praeter rem. The material is so rich and diverse that in
this commentary only some of the important elements of the genre in antiquity and early
medieval times can be listed here: These elements include: (a) Prayer. The prayer that
the author may receive divine assistance in his composition of the work is frequent both
in Pagan and Christian texts. According to Boethius, the invocation of God was obliga-
tory in every prooemium.271 (b) Address of the dedicatee. The work may be dedicated to
267 See WillardoBOEDahl 2000d: 236.
268 The evidence of the Syriac version should be noted: According to von Dobschütz o UIF
‘Chronicle’ is placed immediately after the ‘Life of Paul’ in the Peshitta manuscript L (dated 768 AD). The
‘Chronicle’ here has a title meaning ‘Summary’, and is followed by an excerpt from the second book of Eu-
sebius’ History of the Church. The ‘Epitome of the Pauline letters’, which in the Greek manuscripts usually
is placed between the ‘Life’ and the ‘Chronicle’, here appears later. This sequence seems more reasonable
than the make-up of this prologue in the majority of Greek Euthalian manuscripts. von Dobschütz thinks,
however, that the manuscript L here reflects a secondary rearrangement of the Euthalian apparatus. On
the theories of von Dobschütz, see also Willardoo
269 For the different variants, see von Dobschützo
270 See Harris 1893: 82 and above on the history of research.
271 Boethius (Consolation of Philosophy 3, 9): Invocandum, inquam, rerum omnium patrem, quo praetermisso
nullum rite fundatur exordium. ‘We must call upon God for this, too, I said, for if this is omitted, there
198 Commentary
a person of high status.272 The dedication has often been linked to the publication of the
work. The ‘sending’ of the work to the dedicatee may imply that the work now is put into
circulation.273 (c) Confession of the author’s inability. This is frequently encountered in
Christian texts.274 It may be considered a part of the ‘modesty topos’, which is found also
in Jewish Wisdom literature and apocalypses.275 This motive may be associated with the
prayer of the author for understanding.276
3.2.3.2. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’

Admiring your zealous love of learning (τὸ φιλομαθές), most honored father, I have obeyed
your authority and your persuasive powers, and set out through a certain narrow strait and
passage, that of scholarship, to write this prologue about the deeds (πραγματεία) of Paul.
The description of the unnamed father uses the word φιλομαθές. This word belonged
since Hellenistic times to the conventional language of dedications.277 The father is thus
cannot even be a first step that is proper and correct.’ (Tr. D. Slavitt). The words of Boethius are quoted
in Brinkmann 1964: 4. In pagan literature, the model may be found in the invocation of the Muse in the
opening lines of the Homeric poems. In Christian literature, the prayer may be replaced by a request for
intercession. This is found in the prooemium that Rufinus prefixed to his translation of Origen’s Com-
mentary on Romans: Aggrediar tamen, si forte orationibus tuis, quae mihi tamquam homini impossibilia
videntur, aspirante Domino possibilia fiant. ‘Nevertheless I shall set out in the hope that by your prayers
the things which seem to me to be humanly impossible might be possible as God assists me.’ (Tr. Th. P.
Scheck)
272 Such as the dedication of Pollux’ Onomasticon to Commodus (see above).
273 This function has often been assigned to the dedicatee of Luke-Acts, Theophilus. See L. T. Johnson 1991:
29; Jervell 1998: 109. The prologue of Luke has been studied in the context of prologues from Hellenistic
and early Imperial times by L. Alexander (1993).
274 See Brinkmann 1964: 5. His examples are mostly drawn from medieval literature written in the vernacu-
lar. The phenomenon he describes is, however, widespread. Hellholm indicated to me its presence in a
number of authors, including the Shepherd of Hermas, Tertullian and Cyrillus of Jerusalem. For the Shep-
herd, see e.g., Sim V, 4,2; 7* oIX, 3,6; 14,4, and also the introductory paragraph to the Mandates (=
Vis V, 4): ὅλος συνεκόπην ἀπὸ τῆς λύπης, ὅτι οὕτως αὐτῷ ἀπεκρίθην πονηρῶς καὶ ἀφρόνως. ‘I was utterly
overcome with sadness because I had spoken so wickedly and foolishly to him.’ Similarly, Tertullian (De
baptismo, 10, 1), says diximus, quantum mediocritati nostrae licuit […] ‘We have spoken so much as our
mediocrity allowed us […] Cf. also Cyrillus of Jerusalem (Myst. Cat. 2, 8): κατέχετε διὰ τῆς μνήμης, ἵνα
κἀγὼ ἀνάξιος ἐπὶ ὑμῶν λέγω· ἀγαπῶ ὑμᾶς ὅτι πάντοτέ μου μέμνησθε […]. ‘Keep it in mind so that also I,
the unworthy, may say of you: I love you, because you always remember me […]’ Examples are also found
in historians that are presumably close to the time of Euthalius, see e.g., the historian Menander writing
in the 6th cent. AD (L. Dindorfius, Historici Graeci minores II, 2): Οὐ τοσοῦτον τῷ τῆς λέξεως εὐγενεῖ
ὅσον τῇ τῶν πραγμάτων ἀφηγήσει καρποῦσθαι θαρρήσας· πῶς γὰρ οἷόν τε ἦν ἐμὲ ἐς τοσοῦτον ἀφῖχθαι
παιδείας ὡς καὶ ἐς τὸ συγγράφειν ἰέναι; ἀμέριμνος γὰρ ἐσότι ἔμοιγε ὁ βίος καὶ ἐκδεδιῃτημένος ὑπῆρχεν.
‘I build my hopes of success upon the interest of my subject rather than the distinction of my style; for I
cannot conceivably have attained to that level of culture which would justify my embarking upon literary
composition, considering the careless and irregular life which I have led hitherto.’ (Tr. A. Toynbee 1950:
94). See also the preface to the Universal HistoryPGćFPQIZMBDUVT4JNPDBUUB AUIFTOVCOPTFEDBU oth
cent AD): ‘If any reader should find here and there a touch of felicity in my narrative, he must attribute it
to chance, for most certainly it will not be due to the competence of the writer.’ (Tr. Toynbee 1950: 100).
275 See K. B. Larsen*OIJTTUVEZPOUIFANPEFTUZUPQPTJOUIF2VNSBOUFYUT IFSFGFSTUP84PMo
%BOBOE&OPDIo
276 4FFFH 84PMo84JSo
277 This is observed by Alexander (1993: 100): ‘The most striking feature of hellenistic dedication-courtesy
is the popularity of adjectives and verbs compounded with philo- (especially, but not only, philomathes)
described as the patron of the work.278 The author states that he has undertaken the work
at the instigation of the father, which is also a conventional motive. It reflects the ‘mod-
esty topos’ and counters a possible accusation for being arrogant or self-assertive.279
The work is compared to a sea voyage. The use of this metaphor may merely point to
the difficulties in writing, but it may also have a special significance: According to Joseph
Balogh, there is evidence that writers in antiquity used to read the text aloud as it was be-
ing written, like a self-dictation. Thus, to begin to write was literally to break the silence,
and the finishing of the work could be compared to the return to a quiet harbor.280 This
perspective may be applied to this prologue and the Euthalian prologue to the Catholic
letters, where the image of the sea voyage again appears.
The theme of the prologue is described as the ‘deeds’ (πραγματεία, Zacagni: gesta) of
Paul. The prologue referred to may therefore not be identical with the expanded version
found in the manuscripts. Since it does not mention the letters, the prologue may have
contained the ‘Life of Paul’ only, and not the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters.’
But come, offer your prayers for me, and, as though you were furnishing (πτερώσας) me
with steering oars on both sides, stretch out your hands to God, just like the great Moses
himself once extended his hands when he gave aid to Israel, drawn up for battle (ἐν τῇ
παρεμβολῇ).
applied to patrons and readers.’

278 The question of the identity of the father has been treated above, in the chapter on the history of research.
The question (together with the question of authorship) is still one of the most difficult to answer.
279 See, e.g. the opening paragraph of the anonymous prologue to Acts edited by von Dobschütz (1898:
o ГϨϣѴϫш϶ϰϣϡпϮϰуϫϣС϶ϰчϣЯϟϡϡтϩϧϭϫДϮϪϥϫϣцϟϫљϰϥϯϣɀϟϮ҈КϪҀϫи϶ДϬѮ϶ϡϣϨϟхɀϣϮхϰҀϫ
ἀποστολικῶν πράξεων δεησόμενος ἡμῶν·. ‘For he requested from us a commentary upon the gospel, in-
tending, no doubt, later to ask also from us one upon the Acts of the Apostles.’ (Tr. von Dobschütz). Cf.
also the letter of Jerome to Pope Damasus, where Jerome states that the Pope had forced him to make his
translation of the Bible: Novum opus facere me cogis ex veteri <y>A:PVGPSDFNFUPNBLFBOFXXPSLPO
the basis of the old.’ See the Epistula ad Damasum in J. Wordsworth and H. J. White 1889: 1.
280 J. Balogh o JMMVTUSBUFTUIJTXJUIUIFPQFOJOHPGUIFConlationes by Johannes Cassian: …
mihi nunc in portu silentii constituto inmensum pelagus aperitur. ‘…now for me, who had anchored in the
port of silence, an immense ocean opens up.’ Cassian returns to this image in the final sentence of the work,
where he describes his return to the silent port now that the work is concluded. Balogh offers rich material
to support his theory, including also the story of the healing of Zacharias (Luk 1:63) whose mouth was
opened in the very moment he wrote the name on the tablet (this is how Balogh understands the con-
struction ἔγραψεν λέγων). Thus, he links the image in Cassian with the ancient custom of self-dictation.
Moreover, in some final remarks added to the study (p. 240), he considers the possibility that the medieval
scribes had to ‘modernize’ the meaning of the image, since they usually no longer spoke the words when
they were writing. He reproduces a distichon by Alcuin where he supposes that the image has undergone
this revision: Hactenus in sanctum sulcando movimus aequor // Littoris ad finem nostra carina venit. Here,
according to Balogh, the idea is no longer the return from garrulitas to silentium, but rather the arrival of
the fatigued scribe to the longed-for shore when the painful work is ended. It is possible, however, to find
an earlier example of the use of the same image. In the end of his Remedia amoris (WWo 0WJETBZT
Hoc opus exegi: fessae date serta carinae // contigimus portus, quo mihi cursus erat. ‘I have brought this work
to completion: Give garlands to the tired boat // We have reached the port that I was heading for.’ Ovid
probably refers to the creative writing process, not its physical aspect. We may assume that the image has
gone through several stages and also that the ancient examples could be reinterpreted. The return of the
vessel to the silent port is also mentioned at the end of the Euthalian prooemium: ‘… I may bring for you
the vessel of my work into a calm harbor.’ In view of the examples above, it is hard to say what significance
this image has in the Euthalian prologue.
200 Commentary
The appeal for intercession is conventional (see above). The imagery used in this appeal
includes the furnishing of the author’s vessel with steering oars. The verb πτερόω ‘to fur-
nish a ship with oars’ (LSJ) is here used of the two steering oars of the ancient ship. Thus,
the images of the prooemium are connected: The two steering oars, the extended hands
of the praying father, and those of Moses. The allusion to Moses may be understood in
different ways depending on how one translates ἐν τῇ παρεμβολῇ. Willard translates this
phrase ‘in encampment’, apparently taking this as a reference to the encampment of Israel
immediately before the passage of the Red sea (Ex 14).281 If this is assumed, the reference
is to Moses dividing the sea for the Israelites. Against this, one may object that Moses
in the Euthalian text is described as extending both his hands. This is the case only in
the story of Israel’s battle against Amalek (&Yo -99 )FSF.PTFTNJSBDVMPVTMZ
helped Israel win in this way.282 For this reason, παρεμβολή is here taken as referring to
Israel as an army drawn up for battle.283
3.2.4. Prologus ante rem
3.2.4.1. The ‘Life of Paul’
3.2.4.1.1. The Genre ‘Life’

A short biography of the author is often prefixed to the work.284 These texts may be con-
sidered a sub-genre of the Greco-Roman genre βίος/vita. What separates this sub-genre
from the genre βίος/vita is how the texts are transmitted: The ‘life of the author’ is trans-
mitted as auxiliary material together with his work. It therefore belongs, together with the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις, to the genres that are intended to guide the reader,
who supposedly will understand the work better if acquainted with the life of the author.
The ‘Life’ may appear together with κεφάλαια-τίτλοι or ὑποθέσεις. This is the case in
Porphyrius’ Περὶ τοῦ Πλωτίνου βίου καὶ τῆς τάξεως τῶν βιβλίων αὐτοῦ ‘About the Life
of Plotin and the order of his books’, which was prefixed to Plotin’s Enneads. Here the
‘Life’ and lists of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι appear together, since the different parts of the work are
assigned to different phases in Plotin’s life.285
281 See Willard 1970: 193/2009: 147. Cf. Ex 14:9 LXX, καὶ κατεδίωξαν οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι ὀπίσω αὐτῶν καὶ εὕροσαν
αὐτοὺς παρεμβεβληκότας παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν. ‘And the Egyptians pursued after them and found them
having encamped by the sea.’
282 Cf. Ex 17:11 LXX, καὶ ἐγίνετο ὅταν ἐπῆρεν Μωυσῆς τὰς χεῖρας, κατίσχυεν Ἰσραηλ. ‘And it came to pass,
when Moses held up his hands, that Israel prevailed.’ The Masoretic text has the singular ‘hand’. Which
battle Zacagni (PG 85: 694A) had in mind when he translated ἐν τῇ παρεμβολῇ as in pugnae discrimine
(‘in the decisive moment of the battle’), is difficult to say, but it would probably be a better description of
the battle against Amalek than the escape from the Egyptians.
283 On this meaning of the word, see Bauer s. v. παρεμβολή.
284 For the Lives of the Greek poets, see M. R. Lefkowitz o XIFSFUIF-JWFTPG)PNFS 1JOEBS
the tragedians and Artistophanes are printed in translation. For Lives of Homer, see also the edition of
M. L. West 2003. The rich tradition of Lives of Virgil is found in J. Götte/M. Götte/K. Bayer 1981. The
text of the Life of Terence may be found in P. Wessner’s edition of %POBUVT * o
285 See the Life of Plotin in the P. Henry and H.-R. Schwyzer’s edition of Plotin’s Enneads. On the work of
Porphyrius as an editor, see A. Grafton and M. WilliamsoćFKVYUBQPTJUJPOPGAMJGFBOE
‘work’ is common. A striking illustration, in miniature form, is the epitaph of Virgil: Mantua me genuit,
Calabri rapuerunt tenet nunc // Parthenope cecini pascua, rura, duces. ‘Mantua bore me, Calabria snatched
The sub-genre as far as the Greek poets are concerned has been studied by Mary
Lefkowitz, who has shown that the lives of the Greek poets to a large extent were based
on a ‘biographical’ reading of their works: Fictional elements in the works may be pre-
sented as reflecting events in the life of the author. This method could be supplemented
by using other traditions, especially anecdotes drawn from comedy where authors such
as Euripides were objects of derision.286 Their value as sources for the life of the authors is
therefore questionable, to say the least. One of the main points of Lefkowitz is that these
lives have nevertheless exerted a great influence on classical scholarship up to the present
day.287 The practice of prefixing a biography of the author to the work is also known from
the Early Church. A series of short lives of the evangelists were ascribed to Dorotheus,
and occurs in manuscripts of the gospels.288 For his Life of Mark, von Soden gives the
following text:
Life of Mark (Text: von Soden 1902: 307) My translation

Βίος Μάρκου ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Δωροθέου μάρτυρος Life of Mark from the Synopsis of the martyr
καὶ Τυρίων ἐπισκόπου συνόψεως Dorotheos bishop of Tyre.
Μᾶρκος ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς καὶ πρῶτος Mark the evangelist and first bishop of Alexan-
Ἀλεξανδρείας ἐπίσκοπος Ἀλεξανδρεῦσι dria preached the gospel of the Lord to the peo-
καὶ πάσῃ τῇ περιχώρῳ αὐτῆς ἐκήρυξε τὸ ple of Alexandria and the whole surrounding
εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ κυρίου ἀπὸ Αἰγύπτου καὶ area, from Egypt to Pentapolis. In Alexandria,
μέχρι Πενταπόλεως. ἐπὶ δὲ τῆς βασιλείας under the reign of Trajan, a rope was bound
Τραιάνου, ἐν Ἀλεξανδρείᾳ κάλων λαβὼν ἐπὶ around his neck and he was dragged from the
τοῦ τραχήλου καὶ συρεὶς ἀπὸ τῶν καλουμένων place called Boukolou to the place called An-
Ἀγγέλων ἐκεῖ ἐκάη πυρὶ ὑπὸ τῶν εἰδωλομανῶν gelion. There, in the month of Pharmouthi, he
μὴν Φαρμουθηλεως καὶ ἐκεῖ ἐτάφη ἐν τοῖς was burned in the fire by the frenzied idol-wor-
Βουκόλου. shippers, and he was buried there, in Boukolou.
This Life of Mark does not refer to the text of the Gospel at all. But in other instances one
may observe that the biblical writings were used as sources and supplemented with tradi-
tions of unknown provenance.289 Regarding the structure of the Lives, one may observe
a difference between pagan and Christian texts. In the Lives of pagan authors, the birth
and death of the author naturally formed the frame of the narrative.290 But in the Lives of
me away, now Parthenope keeps me. My song was of pastures, of the countryside, and of princes.’ (Text
with commentary in E. Courtney 2003: 258). For a similar phenomenon in patristic literature, see Theo-
doret (Preface, PGo )FSFUIFMFUUFSTPG1BVMBSFBMMQMBDFEXJUIJOB SFMBUJWF DISPOPMPHZćFUFYU
is, however, not a biography of Paul in a strict sense, since the main focus is the occasion of each letter.
286 See LefkowitzWJJJoJY
287 Thus, Lefkowitz (1981: x) suggests that the image of the pious Sophocles or the innovative Euripides
largely rests on the picture painted of these authors and their works in the Lives.
288 The Lives of the evangelists were reproduced by Erasmus in his first edition of the Greek and Latin NT
(1516).
289 E.g. in the use of the Gospel of John, Acts and extra-canonical sources in the ‘Life of John’ ascribed to
Sophronius (Text in von Soden o Κϵрϫϫϥ϶ Ьϫ ΚϥϯϭѼ϶ ɀϟϫϱϥϡрɀϥϯϣϫ ϱТч϶ ͇ϣϠϣϢϟцϭϱ
ἀδελφὸς Ἰακώβου τοῦ ὑπὸ Ἡρώδου μετὰ τὸ πάθος τοῦ κυρίου ἀποκεφαλισθέντος, ἔσχατος πάντων
ἔγραψεν εὐαγγέλιον. ‘John, whom Jesus loved in particular, son of Zebedee, brother of James who was
beheaded by Herod after the Passion of the Lord, wrote the Gospel as the last of them all.’
290 See the Lives of Homer, Pindar, Aeschylus, Sophocles and Aristophanes in Lefkowitzo
202 Commentary
the biblical authors this frame is not always present.291 Some of the biblical authors had,
according to tradition, suffered martyrdom. Since this event was considered the most
important in their lives, the texts tend to focus on this. This focus sometimes makes the
heading ‘Life’ in the biblical manuscript seem rather paradoxical, as in the ‘Life of Mark’
above, where the heading ‘Martyrdom’ would be possible. The information on the life of
Mark seems here to be only the pre-history to his martyrdom.
3.2.4.1.2. Structure and Pre-texts

According to von Soden, the ‘Life of Paul’ can be divided into six sub-sections. These divi-
sions are adopted in the present study in a modified form, as the note on the celebration
of Paul’s martyrdom is treated as an independent section. There are no titles for these
sub-sections in the original. The pre-texts of the different sub-sections may be identified
thus (see the comments below for details).
(1) The background of Paul (pre-texts: Acts and the Letters)
(2) Saul the persecutor (pre-texts: Acts and the Letters)
(3) Paul’s conversion (pre-text: Acts)
(4) The beginnings of his work (an independent piece which introduces Paul as a
writer of letters)
(5) His great missionary travels among the Gentiles (pre-texts: Gal, Rom)
(6) The death of Paul (pre-texts: Acts, extra-biblical sources)
(7) The celebration of his martyrdom. (pre-texts: extra-biblical sources)
3.2.4.1.3. Comments on the ‘Life of Paul’

[The background of Paul]
Paul the Apostle was a Hebrew by race (2 Cor 11:22; Phil 3:5), of the tribe of Benjamin
(Acts 13:21; Rom 11:1), belonging to the party of the Pharisees (Acts 23:6; 26:5, Phil 3:6),
educated in the Law of Moses by Gamaliel (Acts 5:34; 22:3), the faithful (πιστός) teacher.
The opening that gives the name and nation of the man is the conventional opening of a
biography.292 The description of Gamaliel as διδάσκαλος πιστός replaces νομοδιδάσκαλος
τίμιος in the pre-text (Acts 5:34). The epithet πιστός ‘faithful’ may be used of him because
his intervention saved Peter and John from being executed ("DUTo "OPUIFSQPT-
sibility is that the word here has the meaning ‘trustworthy’ and refers to εἰ δὲ ἐκ θεοῦ
ἐστίν, οὐ δυνήσεσθε καταλῦσαι αὐτούς (Acts 5:39) as a prediction spoken by Gamaliel
that was fulfilled with the spread of Christianity.
291 Only the reference to Luke as an Antiochene occurs frequently. The shortest form of the ‘Life of Luke’ (Text
in von Soden 1902: 305) has this tradition in a confused form, saying that Antioch was where he died:
Λουκᾶς ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς ὁ καὶ τὰς πράξεις τῶν ἀποστόλων συγγράψας εἷς ἐστι τῶν μαθητῶν, ἐκοιμήθη ἐν
Αντιοχίᾳ. ‘Luke the evangelist who also wrote the Acts of the Apostles was one of the disciples. He died in
Antioch.’
292 See, e.g., the opening of the ‘Life of Hannibal’ by Nepos (Text in P. K. Marshall 1977: 80): Hannibal,
Hamilcaris filius, Carthaginiensis. ‘Hannibal, son of Hamilcar, a Carthaginian.’
For this very reason, he was present at the slaughter of Stephen, the apostle and the martyr,
and he was also then taking part in the killing, as he received the mantles of all those who
stoned him, to watch over them so that he could use the hands of all to kill.
Pre-text (Acts 7:58b): καὶ οἱ μάρτυρες ἀπέθεντο τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτῶν παρὰ τοὺς πόδας
νεανίου καλουμένου Σαύλου
Pre-text (Acts 22:20): καὶ ὅτε ἐξεχύννετο τὸ αἷμα Στεφάνου τοῦ μάρτυρός σου, καὶ αὐτὸς
ἤμην ἐφεστὼς καὶ συνευδοκῶν καὶ φυλάσσων τὰ ἱμάτια τῶν ἀναιρούντων αὐτόν
The ‘Life’ combines elements from the story told in "DUToBOEUIFTVNNBSZPG
the same story in the speech of Paul in Jerusalem (Acts 22:20). In "DUT o UIF
motif that Paul watched over the mantles is absent but it is found in 22:20. Another ele-
ment from 22:20 is the title ‘martyr’ applied to Stephen, which in Acts 7:58 is used in a
completely different sense, being applied to the witnesses that take part in the execution.
But the ‘Life’ has also added elements that are not in the pre-text: (1) The idea that those
who stoned Stephen were only agents of Paul has been added to the text.293 (2) Also the
description of Stephen as an ‘apostle’ is an innovation with regard to Acts.
[Saul the persecutor]
And he left nothing behind in excessive fury (οὐδὲν εἰς ὑπερβολὴν μανίας ἐνέλιπεν, cf. Acts
26:11), because in this he believed (ἐνόμιζεν) he was acting piously (εὐσεβεῖν) and that he
was setting the greatest things right, as both he himself confesses in his letters, and as Luke
tells us in his second book.
The references to the Pauline letters and to Acts cannot be identified with certainty. As to
the letters, the ‘Life’ may refer to Phil 3:6 κατὰ ζῆλος διώκων τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, κατὰ τὴν ἐν
νόμῳ δικαιοσύνην γενόμενος ἄμεμπτος. The reference to Acts is probably Acts 26:9 ἐγὼ
μὲν οὖν ἔδοξα ἐμαυτῷ πρὸς τὸ ὄνομα Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου δεῖν πολλὰ ἐναντία πρᾶξαι.
If this is the case, the word ἐνόμιζεν reflects ἔδοξα ἐμαυτῷ (26:9) and the idea of ‘acting
piously’ reflects δεῖν (26:9), emphasizing the element of obligation in piety.
[Paul’s conversion]
And when Paul at that time had received letters from the priests and the teachers to the Jews
in Damascus, he set out, roaring like a violent river (χείμαῤῥος λάβρος), thinking he would
dash against the disciples in Damascus from all sides and send them into the pit of perdition.
Pre-text ("DUToDG22:5; o γϢс͓ϟѼϩϭ϶ЗϰϧГϪɀϫтϵϫЋɀϣϧϩѮ϶Ϩϟхϲшϫϭϱ
εἰς τοὺς μαθητὰς τοῦ κυρίου, προσελθὼν τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ ᾐτήσατο παρ’ αὐτοῦ ἐπιστολὰς
εἰς Δαμασκὸν πρὸς τὰς συναγωγάς, ὅπως ἐάν τινας εὕρῃ τῆς ὁδοῦ ὄντας, ἄνδρας τε καὶ
γυναῖκας, δεδεμένους ἀγάγῃ εἰς Ἰερουσαλήμ
The ‘Life’ has apparently used "DUToBTBNPEFMCVUBEEFEFMFNFOUTGSPNUIFQBSBMMFM
passages Acts 22:5 and 26:12.294 Unlike Acts, the ‘Life’ uses the name ‘Paul’ throughout
293 This was observed by Dahl (2000d: 235). There is here a difficulty in the narrative of Acts. In Acts, Paul
advances from an apparently insignificant position to the most powerful persecutor within a few days. On
this problem, see Haenchen 1956: 245 and Pervo 2009: 200. By giving Paul the responsibility for the
killing of Stephen, the Life has eliminated this difficulty.
294 That Paul brought the Christians to be executed is not said explicitly in 9:1 but in 22:4, ἐδίωξα ἄχρι
θανάτου and 26:10, ἀναιρουμένων τε αὐτῶν κατήνεγκα ψῆφον.
204 Commentary
the text.295 The imagery resembles the description in Rev 12 where a river296 comes out
of the mouth of the dragon threatening the woman who has fled into the desert with her
child (Rev 12:15). The context in Rev 12 is also that of persecution and according to some
ancient interpreters, the woman represents the Church.297 This corresponds to the figure
of Rhode in the Shepherd of Hermas (Vis I 1,6).298 Thus, the image of the ‘Life’ is tradi-
tional but its use here makes Saul seem even more fierce than in the accounts in Acts. His
aim is not simply to take prisoners (as in the narrative of Acts) but to send the disciples
into the pit of perdition, which is also a piece of apocalyptic imagery.
He confessed (ὁμολογεῖ) his faith in Christ
Since Paul according to the ‘Life’ immediately becomes a follower of Jesus,299 the verb
ὁμολογεῖ here probably refers to Paul’s address of Jesus as κύριε in the dialogue that takes
place within the vision: τί ποιήσω, κύριε; (Acts 22:10).300 The text of Acts does not men-
tion Paul’s confession in the context of his baptism.301
[The beginnings of his work]
Thus he transformed his zeal into the utmost piety, strengthening (βεβαιόω) the pious dis-
ciples (τοὺς τῆς εὐσεβείας μαθητάς) with letters if he sometimes happened to be absent, in
order that they for the future might acquire the teaching (διδασκαλία) not only through his
deeds, but also through his words, and, being strengthened by both, they might carry an
unshakeable stronghold of piety (ἄσειστον τῆς εὐσεβείας ἔρυμα) within their souls.
The introduction of Paul’s letters is an isolated piece within the ‘Life’. No attempt is made
to relate the letters to different periods in Paul’s life. This aspect of Paul’s work is treated
in very general terms. The verbal meta-term used for the letter writing is βεβαιόω ‘to
strengthen’ and the nominal meta-term διδασκαλία ‘teaching’. It is puzzling that there is
no mention here of the ‘Epitome’ which soon will follow. A possible explanation is that
the ‘Life’ and the ‘Epitome’ are independent compositions and that the fusion of the two
represents a later stage.302
295 With the exception of a short passage on the change of name from Saul to Paul. This is included in the
present translation. Willard (1970: 18, n. 2/2009: 14, n. 17) considers the passage a later addition.
296 In his translation of the Euthalian prologue, Willard (1970: 195/2009: 148) omits the word χείμαρρος:
‘Paul rushed on, roaring, as if some stormy, turbulent thing…’
297 See Andreas of Caesarea, the 35th κεφάλαιον-τίτλος of the Apocalypse (text in von Soden 1902: 474):
ὅπως ὁ δράκων διώκων τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οὐ παύεται. ‘How the dragon did not cease to persecute the Church’.
298 On this image representing the Church in the Shepherd, see Hellholm 2007: 289; idem 2010: 222.
299 Ἱκέτης γὰρ εὐθὺς ὁ πολέμιος γίνεται. ‘The enemy became straightaway a follower of Jesus’.
300 Willard (1970: 195/2009: 148) points out that the ‘Life’ also offers a remarkable rationalization of the
stimulus for Paul’s conversion: God exempts Paul from further punishment because he has improved, an
idea that is not found in Acts. Willard’s interpretation seems to presuppose that Paul’s conversion accord-
ing to the ‘Life’ did not take place on the road to Damascus, but shortly afterwards.
301 $G"DUToXIFSFUIFDPOGFTTJPOUIBUQSFDFEFTUIFCBQUJTN JTBMBUFSBEEJUJPOUPUIFUFYU4FF
Metzgero
302 Elements from the ‘Epitome’ are in fact transmitted independently, in Latin manuscripts from Monte
Cassino. On these manuscripts, see HarnackoBOEBCPWF*UTIPVMEBMTPCFOPUFEUIBU
the ‘Epitome’ may have been transmitted detached from the Euthalian Prologue to the Letters of Paul in the
Syriac manuscript L (Dated 768 AD), see von Dobschütz 1899: 125.
One of the key words in the passage is εὐσέβεια ‘piety’: The disciples are described as
οι της ευσεβειας μαθηται, and the letters of Paul will create an ἄσειστον τῆς εὐσεβείας
ἔρυμα in the readers. According to von Dobschütz, the word εὐσέβεια can in many in-
stances only be accurately rendered by ‘Christianity’.303
[His great missionary travels among the Gentiles]
After some time (μετὰ χρόνον τινά), Paul again went up to Jerusalem, to see Peter. Then
they also divided the whole world between them, and after Paul received the part of the
Gentiles, as it befell Peter to teach the Jewish people, he traversed many cities and many
lands and he almost filled (ἐνέπλησε) all of Illyricum with the teachings of faith in Christ.
Pre-text (Gal 2:1): Ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν πάλιν ἀνέβην εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα μετὰ
Βαρναβᾶ συμπαραλαβὼν καὶ Τίτον
Pre-text ((BM o Ћϩϩп ϰϭЯϫϟϫϰцϭϫ СϢшϫϰϣ϶ Юϰϧ ɀϣɀцϯϰϣϱϪϟϧ ϰч ϣЯϟϡϡтϩϧϭϫ ϰѮ϶
ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς, ὁ γὰρ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ εἰς ἀποστολὴν τῆς
περιτομῆς ἐνήργησεν καὶ ἐμοὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη
Pre-text (Rom 15:19b): ὥστε με ἀπὸ Ἰερουσαλὴμ καὶ κύκλῳ μέχρι τοῦ Ἰλλυρικοῦ
πεπληρωκέναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ
The ‘Life’ differs from the pre-text in Gal with regard to chronology. The reference to the
lapse of fourteen years (Gal 2:1) is omitted, and Paul visits Jerusalem ‘after some time’.
Only one visit to Jerusalem before Paul’s final journey is referred to in the ‘Life’ (omitting
(BMo ćFNFFUJOHJTEFTDSJCFEJOUIFA-JGF as between Paul and Peter only, there
is no interest in Paul’s co-workers or in the other leaders of the Church in Jerusalem (see
Gal 2:9).304 The motivation for the meeting is according to the ‘Life’ ‘to see Peter’. This
would be a possible paraphrase of Gal 1:18 ἱστορῆσαι Κεφᾶν, which Paul in Gal gives as
the reason for his previous visit. In Gal, Paul says that he went to the second meeting with
Peter κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν (2:2), a motive that is omitted from the ‘Life’. The description
303 This suggestion is made by von Dobschütz o DPNNFOUJOHPOBOBOPOZNPVTQSPMPHVF
to Acts. This prologue, he conjectured, belonged to the lost commentary on that book by Theodore of
Mopsuestia. The prologue contains formulas like τὴν εὐσέβειαν διδάσκειν, κηρύττειν, παραδιδόναι, and
ὑποδέχεσθαι. von Dobschütz suggests the translation ‘Christianity’ in these instances. But he also draws
attention to the close association between εὐσέβεια and παίδευσις found in this author: ‘The εὐσέβεια is
for him a schooling (παίδευσις) of mankind’ (p. 383). The reference is to the following passage: μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνο
δὲ ἀποῤῥήτοις οἰκονομίαις ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιποὺς ἀνθρώπους τῆς εὐσεβείας τὴν παίδευσιν ἐκβαλὼν πολλοῖς
τισι καὶ ποικίλοις ἄγαν τοῖς τρόποις. ‘And [God] having after this with mysterious dispensations sent forth
VQPOUIFSFTUPGNFOUIFJOTUSVDUJPOJOQJFUZJONBOZBOEWFSZWBSJPVTXBZT 5FYUPOQo USBOTMB-
tion by von Dobschütz on p. 364).
304 The lack of care in the paraphrase of the pre-text indicates that the Prologue to the Letters of Paul is not
interested in historical details. With respect to this, the prologue may be compared to Priscillian, who
gives a strange turn to this story: Quia gentium sit apostolus quibus et euangelium praedicat, et quod veniens
Antiochiam reprehendit Petrum sibique dextras dederint Iacobus et Iohannes et Barnabae societatis (Can.
LXXV, Schepss 1889: 140). ‘That he is the Apostle of the Gentiles, to whom he also preaches the Gospel,
and that coming to Antioch he rebuked Peter, and James and John gave the right hands of fellowship to
himself and Barnabas.’ Apparently, the Apostolic Council is assigned to Antioch, and Peter is not even
included in the agreement. A very different approach may be found in the ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret. Instead
of the dangerous method of paraphrasing, Theodoret prefers to quote the biblical texts in order to dem-
onstrate his main points. Thus, in his ὑπόθεσις of Ephesians (PGo IFHJWFTBNPSFBDDVSBUF
account of the Apostolic Council, see Appendix.
206 Commentary
in the ‘Life’ of the extension of Paul’s mission is apparently based on Rom 15:19. In the
pre-text, Paul describes Illyricum as the extreme border of his missionary activity so far.
This has been transformed in the ‘Life’, where Paul has almost filled the whole of Illyricum
with his teaching of faith. This change may reflect the actual spread of Christianity at the
time the ‘Life’ was composed.305
[The death of Paul]
So there the blessed Paul, having fought the good fight, as he says himself, received the crown
(στέφανος) of the holy and victorious martyrs of Christ.
The crown of the martyrs that Paul receives may allude to the martyrdom of Stephen, al-
though this is not explicitly said.306 Possibly, this motive is present also in the text of Acts.
[The celebration of his martyrdom]
The Romans, having enclosed his remains in the most beautiful kingly buildings, attend a
festival to his memory once a year, on the third day before the calends of July, on the fifth day
of the month Panemos, celebrating his martyrdom.
The last section notes the celebration of Paul’s martyrdom on the 29th of June. The date
is referred to both as the third day before the calends of July and as the fifth day of the
month Panemos.307 The 29th of June is actually the day of Peter and Paul, but the ‘Life’
mentions only Paul.308
3.2.4.2. The ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’
3.2.4.2.1. The Genre ‘Epitome’

The genre ‘Epitome’ is classified by Raible as a form of reduction, i.e. a genre that rep-
resents an abbreviated form of another work. It is thus related to the ὑπόθεσις.309 A dif-
ference between the epitome and the ὑπόθεσις is the extent of the pre-texts. The genre
ὑπόθεσις represents a specific work or text-sequence. An epitome may have the total
literary output of an author or an entire philosophical system as its ‘pre-text’.310 According
to Ilona Opelt, the genre ‘Epitome’ was primarily associated with history and scientific
literature in general. Its use in later times includes also the mythology, paroemiography
305 This was suggested to me by David Hellholm.

306 Cf. Eusebius (H. E. ii, 1) on the death of Stephen: καὶ ταύτῃ πρῶτος τὸν αὐτῷ φερώνυμον τῶν ἀξιονίκων
τοῦ Χριστοῦ μαρτύρων ἀποφέρεται στέφανον. ‘Thus he was the first to win the crown called by the same
name as he, and reserved for Christ’s worthily victorious martyrs. (Tr. Williamson/Louth)
307 Robinson o EJTDVTTFTUIFUFYUVBMQSPCMFNTJOUIFUSBOTNJTTJPOPGUIFEBUFćFSFGFSFODFUP
the fifth of Panemos is omitted in some manuscripts, and a reference to the sixth of Lous takes its place.
There are also manuscripts where both Panemos and Lous are found in a corrupt form. According to Rob-
inson, the reference to Lous points to Asia Minor, but he admits that the textual tradition is so confused
that it is difficult to draw any conclusion regarding the origin of the apparatus.
308 See Dahl 2000: 237.
309 See Raibleo
310 Thus Raible (1995: 58) draws attention to the importance of the genre ‘Epitome’ among the Epicureans
and the Stoics. An example of this kind of ‘philosophical epitome’ is the Kyriai doxai of Epicurus, which
Betz o DPOTJEFSTBQBSBMMFMUPUIF4FSNPOPOUIF.PVOU
and poetry.311 The designation ‘epitome’ is used with reference to this text in the following
Editorial Notice: Καὶ τὰ μὲν κατ᾽ ἐπιτομὴν παρ᾽ ἡμῶν εἰρήσθω περὶ αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον
‘so far, let this be said about them as described in our epitome’.
3.2.4.2.2. Structure
The ‘Epitome’ may be divided into three main parts: (1) Introduction, (2) The Letters of
Paul, and (3) Conclusion. The second part is divided into two sub-sections: (a) On the
letters that Paul wrote to the churches, and (b) on the letters he wrote to individuals. This
division is expressed by the following transitory and meta-textual formula: ‘Up to this
point, the letters deal with the progress that is characteristic of each community’ (see
below).
3.2.4.2.3. Comments
3.2.4.2.3.1. [Introduction]
Before this, the blessed one had already written (ἐποιήσατο) many exhortations on both life
and virtue (πολλὰς παραινέσεις ὑπέρ τε βίου καὶ ἀρετῆς), and Paul the Apostle had ex-
plained (εἰσηγήσατο) much regarding what people ought to do (πολλὰ περὶ τῶν πρακτέων
τοῖς ἀνθρώποις). And not only that, but throughout the text of the fourteen letters he de-
scribed all patterns of proper social conduct (τὴν ὅλην ἀνθρώποις διέγραψε πολιτείαν).
The writing of the Pauline letters is characterized with two meta-communicative expres-
sions: ἐποιήσατο and εἰσηγήσατο. The objects of these verbs refer both to moral exhor-
tation. The hendiadys puts great emphasis on this aspect of the Pauline letters, they are
described as παραινέσεις, and it is noteworthy that the Christian character of the letters
is not even mentioned: The παραινέσεις are ‘on life and virtue’ not on ‘life in Christ’. Thus,
the Pauline letters are in this Introduction presented as a handbook in ethics. That the
letters in fact are far more than exhortations, but also contain teaching on doctrine and
also polemic against heresy, is not the center of interest in the following ‘Epitome’.
3.2.4.2.3.2. [Paul’s Letters to the Churches]

An important idea of the ‘Epitome’ is that the letters to the churches are ordered accord-
ing to the spiritual progress (αὔξησις, προσαύξησις) of the addressees. This idea may be
unique to the ‘Epitome’. It may be understood against the background of the pre-texts:
The idea of progress is often found in the thanksgiving sections of the Pauline letters,
where Paul praises the progress of the different communities (e.g. Phil 1:9; Col 1:6). The
innovation of the ‘Epitome’ is to make this idea the organizing principle of the collection
of community letters.
From the perspective of the reader, the idea of progress turns the book of Pauline
letters into a manual, with lessons of increasing difficulty. It is not said that there is a con-
tinued progress from each community to the next. This would be difficult to demonstrate,
as the letter to the Galatians is placed as the fourth, and the Galatians had, according
311 See I. Opelto XJUIBMJTUPGFQJUPNFTGSPNWBSJPVTHFOSFTPG(SFDP3PNBOMJUFSBUVSF DPMT
o BOEGSPNUIF$ISJTUJBOQFSJPE DPMTo ćFFQJUPNFTGSPNUIF$ISJTUJBOQFSJPEJODMVEF
epitomes of works such as the pseudo-Clementine Recognitiones and Homiliae, the Panarion of Ephipha-
nius and the Conlationes of Johannes Cassian.
208 Commentary
to the ‘Epitome’, defected to Judaism. The explanation may be that the letters constitute
different groups. Although not explicitly stated, the ‘Epitome’ seems to divide the letters
to the communities into three such groups, each representing a stage of development.312
First group: Second group: Third group:

Letters to churches that have Letters to the faithful Letters to the persecuted
not yet proven themselves churches churches
worthy
Romans: Their devotion was Ephesians: Faithful and en- Thessalonians: Endured per-
new. during. secution.
Corinthians: Their behavior Philippians: Faithful and fruit
was not worthy of faith. bearing.
Galatians: Defected to Juda- Colossians: Faithful and stead- Hebrews: Endured persecu-
ism. fast. Ordered not to pay attention. Received a letter on Jew-
tion to Jewish observances. ish mysteries and the transla-
tion of these to Christ.
The members of the first group do not have any positive qualities. The Corinthians have
failed morally, while the Galatians have erred through their defection to Judaism. It may
be significant that the ‘Epitome’ has nothing special to say about the faith of the church in
Rome, while the pre-text offered a praise of the community (Rom 1:8). We could expect
an echo of this praise in a summary of the letter, but this would of course destroy the idea
of progress that is the main point of the ‘Epitome’. Possibly, the praise was suppressed
for this reason. Moreover, one may suspect that this silence contains a hidden polemic
against Rome. The depiction of the Romans as people whose devotion was ‘new’ at least
does not grant any special status to the Roman church.313 The difficulty in dating the
material does not allow us to go further with regard to this.314 The ‘Epitome’ does however
point out that there is an affinity between Rom and Eph, but this affinity is related to the
genre of the letters (see below). The members of the second group are all characterized as
faithful (πιστός) together with another epithet that is specific for each community. Both
the Philippians and the Colossians have virtues that the corresponding members of the
first group do not have: The Philippians are fruit bearing in contrast to the Corinthians.
The steadfast Colossians are contrasted to the defection of the Galatians. The members
of the third group are churches that have suffered persecution (cf. 1 Thess 2:14; Heb
o
312 This was suggested to me by Nils A. Dahl. In his study of Euthalius, however, Dahl (2000d: 238) argued
that the epitomizer saw a progress in the collection from each community to the next. Dahl saw that the
sequence 1 Cor-2 Cor-Gal presented a problem. He tried to solve it by suggesting that the Galatians in
the eyes of the epitomizer were above the Corinthians since the Galatians had a genuine faith before their
defection. Against this explanation, it may be objected that the genuine faith of the Galatians is not men-
tioned in the ‘Epitome’ but only in the ὑπόθεσις of Gal.
313 Cf. also the omission of Peter in connection with the day of Peter and Paul (see above).
314 It is most interesting that the three members of this first group are the same as the communities that Paul,
according to the so-called Marcionite prologues ‘calls back’ (revocat) to the true faith. This may simply be
explained on the basis of the pre-texts, although the letter to the Romans does not exactly suggest this.
Thus, the letter to the Romans contains a catechism of Christ (κατήχησις εἰς Χριστόν), in
particular through an argument based on natural reasoning (διὰ τῆς ἐκ φυσικῶν λογισμῶν
ἀποδείξεως). This is why it is placed first, as a letter written to people whose devotion was
new.
The meta-term κατήχησις suggests that the letter contains elementary instruction and
this is repeated in the summary of Eph below. This aspect is supposed to explain why
Rom is placed first in the collection.315 Regarding the argument based on natural rea-
soning, one may assume that the ‘Epitome’ distinguishes this kind of argument from an
argument based on Scripture. The brief summary does however not explain this further.
Placed as fifth is the one to the Ephesians, who were faithful and enduring. In its exordium
the mystery is described in a way similar to Romans. He knew both [communities] from
what he had heard. These letters differ from others, as they are primary principles for cat-
echumens (ἀρχαὶ κατηχουμένων) and introductions for believers (πιστῶν εἰσαγωγαί).
According to the ‘Epitome’, the mystery is explained in a similar way in the προγραφή of
Eph and in Rom. The term προγραφή probably refers to the exordium of Eph.316 Another
shared feature according to the ‘Epitome’, is that Paul had not met the recipients person-
ally. The idea seems to be that Paul had explained the mystery himself to those he had met
and taught. To the Romans and to the Ephesians, on the other hand, he had to explain it
through a letter.317
315 The view of Romans as a letter with elementary instruction may be contrasted with the description by
Origen in the Commentary on Romans (Praefatio): […] ceteris apostoli Pauli epistulis difficilior putatur ad
intelligendum haec, quae ad Romanos scripta est. ‘The letter that was written to the Romans seems to be
more difficult to understand than the other letters of Paul the Apostle.’
316 The question of which texts the ‘Epitome’ refers to is difficult to answer. As far as Eph is concerned, Eph
o DGo TIPVMECFDPOTJEFSFEćFTFUFYUTNBZCFDPOOFDUFEUP3PNoćFTFUFYUTSFGFS
to the revelation of the mystery that now has been revealed, see DahloBOEHellholm 1998.
Percy o BSHVFTGPSBOBďOJUZCFUXFFO3PNoBOE&QIPOUIFTUZMJTUJDMFWFMBOEUIJT
may also be implied in the ‘Epitome’ by the word παραπλησίως ‘in a similar way’.
317 Cf. the remark by Pokorný on the significance on the mystery in Col and Eph (1992: 18): ‘Die Schule de-
ren Lehre der Kolosser- und Epheserbriefe repräsentieren, hat den Paulinismus als Deutung des Geheim-
nisses begriffen.’ It is worth noting that the Prologue to the Letters of Paul does not spell out what the mys-
tery is, as it is probably considered self-evident. As far as Eph (and possibly Col) is concerned, the mystery
is the inclusion of Gentiles in the universal church through Christ, see J. B. Lightfoot (1892: 166) and
Percy o Sellin (2008: 101) points out that the exclusive use of the singular το μυστηριον
in Paul reflects a view of the Christ-event as the definitive eschatological event. Thus, one may also say
with Sellin (2008: 253) that the mystery is Christ ‘insofern er das Hauptinhalt des göttlichen Heilsplans
ist.’ The identification of the mystery with Christ may also lead to a different emphasis, where the mystery
is interpreted as a sacrament. The usual rendering of μυστήριον in the Vulgate is sacramentum, and for
this reason the ambiguity of the Latin term is well known. In the parallel material treated in the present
commentary, such a development may be observed in the summaries of Priscillian (Can. XLII): Quia
corpus ac sanguinem Christi, quod est magnum pietatis sacramentum, manifestatum in carne, iustificatum
in spiritu, si quis indigne sumpserit, corporis ipsius sanguinisque sit reus. ‘That the body and blood of Christ,
which is the great mystery of faith, has been revealed in flesh and justified in the spirit, if someone takes
it unworthily, he shall be guilty of his body and blood.’ This summary, which combines the idea of the
revealed mystery with teaching on the sacrament has a clear basis in the pre-texts (1 Tim 3:16 and 1 Cor
11:27, see Schepss 1889: 128), but would appear misplaced if it were found in the Euthalian material: It is
worth noting that there is no explicit reference to the Eucharist in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, and,
as far as I can see, not in the entire Euthalian apparatus.
210 Commentary
This letter (i.e. Phil) differs from Corinthians, because to them he said: ‘Be followers of me’
(μιμηταί μου γίνεσθε, 1 Cor 11:1), but to the Philippians: ‘Be followers together with me’
(συμμιμηταί μου γίνεσθε, Phil 3:17). But he also calls them his crown and his joy. To such
a degree do they differ from the Corinthians.
According to the ‘Epitome’, the difference between the two exhortations is evidence of the
more advanced progress of the Philippians. Thus, the ‘Epitome’ apparently understands
συμμιμηταί as follows: The Philippians are companions of Paul in imitating Christ. This
places the Philippians above the Corinthians who are merely imitators of Paul.318
Placed after these is the letter to the Hebrews, whose followers were the aforementioned. This
contains treatment of Jewish mysteries and the translation of these as pertaining to Christ,
which was announced beforehand by the prophets.
The words on Heb is the most interesting part of the Epitome. Judaism has been treated
also within the earlier groups. The Galatians had defected to Judaism, while the Colos-
sians were threatened by a heresy that implied adherence to Jewish observances. Now,
the theme appears for the third time and is given a far more positive treatment. Elements
of the Jewish religion, presumably the cult in the temple and the objects that were used
for this purpose, are respectfully referred to as ‘Jewish mysteries’. These mysteries have
not been abandoned, but instead they have been transformed and given a new meaning.
This positive statement differs strikingly from the depiction of Judaism in the ὑποθέσεις.
Up to this point, the letters deal with the progress that is characteristic of each community.
(Ἐνταῦθα περικλείουσι τὴν κατὰ τὸν λαὸν ἰδιωτικὴν αὔξησιν αἱ ἐπιστολαί).
It is clear that the meta-formula indicates a division between the two groups of letters,
but the exact meaning of the formula is unclear. Willard translates ‘Thereupon the letters
deal with the individual growth of the people’, thus taking the formula as referring to the
following letters to individuals.319 Zacagni, on the other hand, considers it a reference to
the previous letters and has the following interpretation: Et hic desinunt Pauli epistolae,
juxta majorem minoremque profectum singularum gentium, ad quas scriptae sunt in hunc
ordinem digestae.320 ‘At this point, the Letters of Paul cease to be ordered according to the
greater or lesser progress of each community to which they were written’. The translation
of the present work follows Zacagni in taking the sentence as a reference to the previous
letters, since the phrase κατὰ τὸν λαόν seems to point to the communities, and not to
individuals persons.
3.2.4.2.3.3. [Paul’s Letters to Individuals]

[2 Tim] He orders him to come. Perhaps he might see him close to the end of his completion
(πρὸς τὸ τέλος ὁρᾶν τῆς αὐτοῦ συμπληρώσεως), as he pointed out by saying: ‘I am already
on the point of being sacrificed; the time of my departure has drawn near’ ( = 2 Tim 4:6).
Pre-text (2 Tim 4:9): σπούδασον ἐλθεῖν πρός με ταχέως
In the treatment of Paul’s letters to individuals, martyrdom is the central theme. This
emphasis may explain why the ‘Epitome’ makes a clear division between these and the
318 This rare interpretation of Phil 3:17 is found also in W. Schenk (1984: 329).
319 See Willardo
320 Zacagni 1698: 526 = PG: 85: 106A.
community letters. The ‘Epitome’ pays special attention to Paul’s martyrdom referring to
it as τὸ τέλος τῆς αὐτοῦ συμπληρώσεως. It seems clear, however, that this ideal, at the
time the ‘Epitome’ was composed, already belonged to the past.
But he [i.e. Onesimus] became a martyr for the sake of Christ in the city of the Romans,
when Tertullus was prefect. By the shattering of his legs he suffered the lot of martyrdom.
Also the summary of the letter to Philemon is connected to this theme, as the ‘Epitome’
mentions the martyrdom of Onesimus in Rome. Dahl observed that this piece also is
found as an addition to the ὑπόθεσις of Philem in Zacagni’s edition but is absent from the
same ὑπόθεσις in Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae.321
3.2.4.2.3.4. [Conclusion]
Thus, the book (βίβλος) as a whole includes every aspect of proper social conduct (παντοῖον
εἶδος πολιτειῶν) arranged according to progress.
The conclusion refers to the Pauline letters as a book. The ‘Epitome’ is not intended as
an introduction to each letter, but rather to the entire work of Paul.322 It should be noted
that precisely in the conclusion of the Epitome, we find that the paraenetic aspect again
is emphasized.
3.2.4.3. The ‘Editorial Notice’
3.2.4.3.1. The Genre ‘Editorial Notice’

In the present study, the short introductions to technical aspects of the edition are referred
to as ‘editorial notices’. These texts occur in all the Euthalian prologues. The function of
these meta-communicative texts is to help the reader understand the entire system of
the Euthalian edition. To interpret these texts today, when the Euthalian editions in their
original form no longer exist, is difficult: The surviving manuscripts may present the edi-
tions in a very different form.
3.2.4.3.2. Comments
So far, let this be said about them as described in our epitome. But in the following, we will
prefix to each (καθ᾽ ἑκάστην) letter a short exposition of the chapters (ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων),
worked out by one of the wisest of our fathers, a Christ lover.
In the oldest surviving witness Codex H, the lists of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are found distribut-
ed so that the list precedes each letter. According to Willard, this is also the most common
arrangement in the Euthalian manuscripts. An alternative is to present the κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι of e.g. all the Pauline letters at the beginning of the manuscript.323 von Dobschütz
argued that καθ᾽ ἑκάστην ἐπιστολὴν means ‘with reference to each letter’324 and that the
321 See Dahl 2000d: 239 n. 35. According to Zacagni (PG 85: 788D), the piece on the martyrdom of Onesi-
mus is added also to the ὑπόθεσις of Titus in Aldus’ edition of the New Testament. On the manuscript
evidence, see von Soden (1902: 349). The piece probably belongs to the ‘Epitome’ and has later been
added to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις.
322 See Dahl 2000d: 239.
323 For these alternatives, see Willard 1970: 65/2009: 46.
324 See von Dobschütz 1898: 149. In his interpretation of the text, he is followed by Zuntz (1945: 82).
212 Commentary
distribution of the lists immediately before each letter is due to a misunderstanding, or at

least in conflict with the intention of the original editor. In the present work, on the other
hand, the passage is translated as it apparently was understood in later times. The identity
of the father who is referred to is unknown. In one manuscript, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of
Acts are ascribed to Pamphilus, who has also been considered the author of the list to the
Pauline letters.325
Not only that, but by going over the reading of the text we have with scholarly method in-
dicated briefly the accepted list of the divine testimonies (εὐαπόδεκτος εὕρεσις τῶν θείων
μαρτυριῶν)
The reference to the εὕρεσις τῶν θείων μαρτυριῶν is problematic. The present translation
is here based on Willard, who renders εὕρεσις ‘list’. It is still not clear what kind of list the
prologue here is referring to. The apparatus contains two sets of lists, and probably only
one set is original:
a) Μαρτυρίαι.326 These are long lists that give the full text of the biblical quotations.
In the simplest form of these lists, each quotation is numbered and this number
corresponds to a number in the margin of the biblical text.327 The μαρτυρίαι have
two main functions. As a mere picture of the biblical text they help the reader to
identify the testimonies. This scholarly use does not exclude another important
function of the list: It may be used as an excerpt from the biblical text and be read
independently of it.
b) Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις τῶν μαρτυριῶν.328 These are short lists that do not reproduce the
quotations but merely point to them by means of numbers. This form differs from
the μαρτυρίαι, since it has no function other than to assist the reader of the bibli-
cal text, and the ἀνακεφαλαίωσις is useless without it.
There is no consensus among scholars regarding the question of priority.329 The ‘Editorial
notice’ uses the term ευρεσις which is not used as a title in the manuscripts.
and the most accurate division of the readings (ἡ τῶν ἀναγνώσεων ἀκριβεστάτη τομή)
‘The division of the readings’ also represents a problem. It may refer to the division of the
biblical text into lections. Lists of lections are attested in a few manuscripts, but it is not
certain whether these existed when this ‘Editoral notice’ was written. Robinson pointed
out that the lists of lections are absent from the majority of manuscripts. He argued that
the phrase ἡ τῶν ἀναγνώσεων ἀκριβεστάτη τομή should be interpreted in the light of a
similar phrase in the Prologue to Acts: μετρίαις ταῖς τῆς ὀλιγομαθοῦς ἡμῶν ἀναγνώσεως
τομαῖς. This phrase does not refer to the lection lists, but to the division of the biblical
text into sense-lines. Robinson suggested that the words in the ‘Editoral notice’ referred
325 See Harris 1893: 88 and DahlEo

326 According to von Soden, the title μαρτυρίαι occurs as a heading to this form. von Soden (1902: 661)
reproduces the full title in one manuscript as μαρτυρίαι ἐκ τῶν θείων γραφῶν, ἃς ἐμνημόνευσεν ὁ
ἀπόστολος ἐν ἀμφοτέραις αὐτοῦ ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς.
327 See Robinsono
328 According to von Soden (1902: 659) this is the regular title for these lists.
329 Robinson o BSHVFE UIBU POMZ UIF MPOH MJTUT CFMPOHFE UP UIFPSJHJOBM FEJUJPOT PG &VUIBMJVT
while von Soden o DPOTJEFSTPOMZUIFTIPSUMJTUTPSJHJOBM
to the sense-lines also, but that this had not been correctly understood. An ancient scribe
or editor may have thought that the ‘Editorial Notice’ here referred to a list. He then cre-
ated the ‘lection list’ in order to fill what he perceived to be a gap in the apparatus.330 The
attractive hypothesis of Robinson thus considers the ‘lection list’ a characteristic feature
of the ‘restored’ Euthalian apparatus. If Robinson is correct, the ‘Editorial notice’ here
contains a reference to the sense-lines, which are not mentioned elsewhere in the Pro-
logue to the Letters of Paul.
3.2.4.4. The ‘Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul’
3.2.4.4.1. The Genre ‘Chronicle’

This section is in the present translation labeled ‘Chronicle’. The main characteristic of
this genre is the places of a series of events within a chronological framework. The genre
is represented by the Breviarium of Eutropius, where the years of consulships and the
reckoning ab urbe condita are repeatedly referred to.331 Works belonging to the genre may
be based on more comprehensive historical works and represent them in a condensed
form, as the Books of Chronicles represent an abridgement and reworking of earlier his-
torical books of the Old Testament. The ‘Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul’ is also pre-
sented as a ‘summary’ (ἀνακεφαλαίωσις) of the chronological tables of Eusebius. Thus, it
is close to the genre ‘epitome’.
3.2.4.4.2. Structure and Pre-texts

The ‘Chronicle’ may be divided as in the following list. Harris has argued convincingly
that the author had access both to Eusebius’ History of the Church and his Chronikon. The
following table is reproduced from the work of Harris.
Euthalius Eusebius
H. E. ii, 25
Ἀνεῖλεν μὲν Ἀγριππίναν πρῶτα τὴν ἰδίαν Μητέρα δὲ ὁμοίως καὶ ἀδελφοὺς καὶ γυναῖκα
μητέρα, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν ἀδελφὴν τοῦ πατρὸς, καὶ σὺν καὶ ἄλλοις μυρίοις τῷ γένει προσήκουσι…
Ὀκταουΐαν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα, καὶ ἄλλους
Chronikon, quoted by Syncellus 636.8
μυρίους τῷ γένει προσήκοντας·
Νέρων ἀνεῖλε τὴν ἑαυτοῦ μητέρα Ἀγριππίναν
καὶ τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς ἀδελφήν.
Chronikon Armen.
Neron cum aliis viris illustribus et Hochtabiam
uxorem suam interfecit.
Chronikon quoted by Cedrenus, Historiarum
compendium 360.17
Καὶ ἄλλους μυρίους τῷ γένει προσήκοντας.
330 See Robinsono

331 Cf. the preface of the Breviarium of Eutropius (Text in C. Santini 1979: 2): Res Romanas ex voluntate
mansuetudinis tuae ab urbe condita ad nostram memoriam, quae in negotiis vel bellicis vel civilibus
eminebant, per ordinem temporum brevi narratione collegi […]. ‘In keeping with the wish of your Clem-
ency I have gathered in a brief narrative, in chronological sequence, the conspicuous achievments of the
Romans, whether in war or piece […].’ (Tr. H. W. Bird 1993: 1).
214 Commentary
Euthalius Eusebius
H. E. ii, 25
Mετέπειτα δὲ καθολικὸν ἐκίνησε διωγμὸν Ταύτῃ γοῦν οὗτος θεομάχος ἐν τοῖς μάλιστα
κατὰ τῶν Χριστιανῶν, καὶ οὕτως ἐπὶ τὰς κατὰ πρῶτος ἀνακηρυχθεὶς, ἐπὶ τὰς κατὰ τῶν
τῶν ἀποστόλων ἐπήρθη σφαγάς. ἀποστόλων ἐπήρθη σφαγάς.
Ἐπὶ πᾶσιν δ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῖς ἀτυχήμασι καὶ τὸν
πρῶτον κατὰ Χριστιανῶν ἐνεδείξατο διωγμὸν,
ἡνίκα Πέτρος καὶ Παῦλος…
Euthalius Eusebius
H. E. ii, 25
He killed Agrippina, his own mother, and also And also his mother, his brothers, his wife and
his father’s sister, his own wife Octavia and countless other relatives.
countless other relatives. Chronikon, quoted by Syncellus 636.8
Nero killed his own mother, Agrippina, and
his father’s sister.
Chronikon Armen.
Nero killed his wife Octavia together with oth-
er eminent men.
Chronikon quoted by Cedrenus Historiarum
compendium 360.17
And countless other relatives.
H. E. ii, 25
After that, he instigated a general persecution Then, having been proclaimed the first enemy
of the Christians. And thus, he was roused to of God, he was roused to bring slaughter upon
bring slaughter upon the apostles. the apostles.
In addition to all the other calamities he
brought, he also began the first persecution of
Christians, when Peter and Paul…
The references in the list below are based on the work of Harris.332 The author of the
‘Chronicle’ has basically rewritten passages from Eusebius’ History and placed them
within the timeline of the Chronicon. The quotations from 2 Tim (oBOECo
are presumably also mediated through Eusebius, since they are found also in H. E. ii, 22.
1. Introduction (with reference to the Eusebius’ Chronikon)
2. The period from the passion of Christ to Paul’s imprisonment in Rome (pre-texts:
Eusebius’ Chronikon and H. E. ii, 1 and 22)
3. On the use of sources (with reference to Eusebius’ History of the Church)
4. From Paul’s first defense to his martyrdom (pre-texts: Chronikon and H. E. ii, 22
and 25)
332 See Harris 1896: 67.
5. Chronological summary (pre-texts: Chronikon and H. E. ii, 22 and 25)
6. Appeal to the reader (appeal to trust the authority of Eusebius)
3.2.4.4.3. Comments
[Introduction]
I also considered it necessary (ἀναγκαῖον δὲ ἡγησάμην) to indicate briefly the period of time
covered by the preaching of Paul, by making a summary based on the chronological tables of
Eusebius, the disciple of Pamphilos.
The opening formula ἀναγκαῖον δὲ ἡγησάμην of the ‘Chronicle’ is the conventional open-
ing of a scientific work. Alexander lists this form among the most common topics in the
scientific prefaces.333 The ‘Chronicle’ has a special place in the Euthalian apparatus as it
explicitly mentions the names of Eusebius and Pamphilus. In general, the apparatus does
not mention the names of any Christian writers other than the biblical authors them-
selves. von Dobschütz has argued that the apparatus for later scribes and translators may
have appeared almost as an integral part of the biblical text.334 The lack of explicit refer-
ences in the apparatus to the Fathers confirms his assumption. Since the ‘Chronicle’ is
different with regard to this, it is closer to the catena type of commentary than any other
element of the Euthalian apparatus.
[From the passion of Christ to Paul’s imprisonment in Rome]
When I get the book in my hand and open it, I find that the passion of our Savior, His res-
urrection on the third day, and the assumption of Christ back to heaven happened in the
eighteenth year of the emperor Tiberius.
Harris observed that the dating of the Passion of Christ to the 18th year of Tiberius (~ 31
AD) is in agreement with the Hieronymian version of the Chronikon but in conflict with
the Greek text preserved in Syncellus and the Armenian translation of Eusebius. Both
date the Passion in the 19th year of Tiberius.335
[From Paul’s first defense to his martyrdom]
Then it happened, in the thirty-sixth year after the passion of our Savior, in the thirteenth
year of Nero, that Paul died as a martyr by having his head cut off by the sword.
333 See AlexanderoBOEo*OUIFNBUFSJBMSFGFSSFEUPCZ"MFYBOEFS UIFQSFGBDFPG)FS-

on’s Pneumatika is closest to the ‘Chronicle’: Τῆς πνευματικῆς πραγματείας σπουδῆς ἠξιωμένης πρὸς τῶν
παλαιῶν φιλοσόφων τε καὶ μηχανικῶν […] ἀναγκαῖον ὑπάρχειν νομίζομεν καὶ αὐτοὶ τὰ παραδοθέντα ὑπὸ
τῶν ἀρχαίων εἰς τάξιν ἀγαγεῖν. ‘Since the science of pneumatics was considered worth studying by the an-
cient philosophers and mechanics […] we, too, consider it necessary to present in an orderly fashion what
has been handed down by the ancients.’ See also the study by Rydbeck on the language of the NT (1967),
and his synoptic table with comments on the prefaces on Luke and Heron (L. Rydbecko
334 von Dobschütz (1899: 154) here refers to the Syriac translators of the Euthalian apparatus, arguing that
the presence of the apparatus in the Bible translations of the Monophysites (and not in the Peshitta) has
no significance for the origin of the apparatus: The translators may have considered the apparatus part of
the biblical text.
335 See Harris 1896: 65. Harris gives the following text of Eusebius (quoted in Syncellus): Ἰησοῦς ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ
υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν κατὰ τὰς περὶ αὐτοῦ προφητείας ἐπὶ τὸ πάθος προῄει ἔτους ιθ´τῆς Τιβερίου
βασιλείας. ‘Jesus Christ, the Son of God, our Lord, proceeded to His Passion, according to the prophecies
concerning Him, in the 19th year of the reign of Tiberius.’
216 Commentary
According to Willard, the dating of Paul’s death in the 36th year of the Passion, and in
the 13th year of Nero coincides with one of the dates given in the Martyrdom.336 This cor-
responds to our year 66 AD, which in the Martyrdom is reckoned as the 69th year of the
coming of Christ.
3.2.5. Prologue to the Letters of Paul: Summary

Structure and composition. The Euthalian Prologue to the Letters of Paul is composed
according to a common scheme with a prologus praeter rem placed first. This section
opens the communication between author and reader and serves to justify the author and
his undertaking in the eyes of the reader. In this prologue, this section is kept within rea-
sonable limits, and the bulk of the prologue is made up by the prologus ante rem, which
is related to the work itself, i.e. the Euthalian edition of the Pauline letters. The prologues
ante rem is seemingly a composite work. On the basis of both internal and external evi-
dence, the three main parts the ‘Life’, the ‘Epitome’ and the ‘Chronicle’ may be origi-
nally independent of each other. This is especially clear with respect to the ‘Life’ and the
‘Chronicle’. They treat basically the same subject matter, but are quite different as far as
their method is concerned. The ‘Life’ depends apparently upon the biblical books (Acts
and the Pauline letters) as pre-texts, while the ‘Chronicle’ seems rather to be based on the
works of Eusebius. The ‘Life’ is uninterested in questions of chronology, referring to this
with vague expression like ‘after some time’. The ‘Chronicle’, on the other hand, is struc-
tured on the basis of the timeline of Eusebius’ Chronikon, using that work as the starting
point for various calculations.
Moreover, there is also no evident coherence between the ‘Life’ and the ‘Epitome’. The
‘Life’ includes a short paragraph on Paul’s letter writing, but contains no forecast of the
relatively comprehensive treatment of the letters that follows. An interesting feature of
the ‘Epitome’ is the idea that the letters of Paul are ordered according to the degree of
progress of the communities. This is the only perspective the ‘Epitome’ has on the collec-
tion, and it does in general not attempt to relate the letters to different phases in the life of
Paul. The only exception is 2 Tim which obviously refers to Paul’s martyrdom.
The meta-terminology. The ‘Life’ refers to Paul’s letter writing as an act of strengthen-
ing (βεβαιόω) the disciples. The contents of the letters is characterized as διδασκαλία.
The ‘Epitome’ offers a richer material. Here the term παραινέσεις is used with reference
to the entire collection. Paul’s exhortations concerning ‘life and virtue’ are apparently
considered the most important feature of his letters. This theme is related to the view
that the Pauline letters form a coherent treatment of all aspects of proper social conduct.
This does not mean, however, that Paul’s fight against heresy is completely forgotten (see
below), rather that this theme seems here to be less important. The ‘Epitome’ also sup-
poses a special affinity to exist between Rom and Eph, describing both letters as εἰσαγωγή
‘introduction’ and ἀρχαί ‘first principles’. The ‘Chronicle’, on the other hand, does not give
the letters any independent treatment. A few passages from Paul’s letters that refer to his
martyrdom are quoted.
336 See Willard 1970: 205, n. 1/2009: 154, n. 22.

The paraphrase. The short descriptions of the life of Paul found in the ‘Life’ and the
‘Chronicle’ are both incomplete. This is only to be expected. The pre-texts contained so
much material that it would be impossible to include all of it. It should, however, be noted
that different material is omitted in the ‘Life’ and the ‘Chronicle’. The ‘Life’ includes the
story of Ananias (Acts 9) and the story of Paul’s meeting with Peter in Jerusalem (Gal 2).
Both are omitted in the ‘Chronicle’. The ‘Chronicle’, on the other hand, has included Paul’s
imprisonment in Caesarea, which is not mentioned in the ‘Life’. The most striking diver-
gence between the two is the description of the prosecution against Paul: The ‘Chronicle’
has the story of Paul’s two defenses before Nero, which is derived from Eusebius.
The ‘Paulusbild’. The ‘Life’ includes a description of the pre-Christian Paul. This descrip-
tion goes to great lengths to emphasize the cruelty of his persecution. The model is the
picture painted in Acts, but this picture has been elaborated in various ways. The sec-
tion on the pre-Christian Paul is also an opportunity for the ‘Life’ to express some harsh
anti-Jewish sentiments. The ‘Life’ puts great emphasis on the fury (μανία) of the Jews.
Although Paul shares the fury of his countrymen, he has magnified it so that his fury
alone is greater than that of the whole people. When he sets out to Damascus, his aim is
not to bring the Christians back as prisoners to Jerusalem but rather to send them into
the ‘pit of perdition’. In the murder of Stephen, Paul is described as responsible for the act.
The ‘Chronicle’ also includes a description of the pre-Christian Paul, but this description
is not extreme and seems closer to Acts: In the description of the murder of Stephen, the
‘Chronicle’ follows Acts in saying that Paul consented to the murder.
In the description of Paul after his conversion, the ‘Life’, the ‘Epitome’ and the ‘Chron-
icle’ present a fairly unified picture. All three texts refer to Paul as ‘Paul the Apostle’ or
simply ‘the Apostle’. They share this feature with the Pauline letters, although the op-
ponents of Paul are in all three texts the ‘Jews’. The ‘Epitome’ mentions briefly that Paul
in 2 Tim foretold the rising of the heretics, but the nature of this heresy is not explained.
The ‘Epitome’ also mentions the deceits of philosophy, but this philosophy may have been
conceived as Jewish as well. It is an interesting feature of the ‘Epitome’ that the Galatians
are said simply to have defected to ‘Judaism’, and that Paul therefore ends this letter as
though he were bidding them farewell. But the picture of the Jewish religion is not a
purely negative one. The ‘Epitome’ states that there is a continued progress within the
collective and the Hebrews belong to the most advanced group. This is related to their
suffering of persecution, but the translation of the ‘Jewish mysteries’ to Christ is also said
to be a theme in this letter.
The most important aspect of the work of Paul seems to be the paraenetic. This is es-
pecially emphasized in the introduction to the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’, where his
writings are referred to as ‘many exhortations’ (πολλαὶ παραινέσεις).
Another aspect of the ‘Paulusbild’ that is present in all three texts, is the strong interest
in the martyrdom of Paul.
218 Commentary
3.3. Commentary on the Prologue to the Catholic Letters

3.3.1. Structure of the Prologue to the Catholic Letters
The Prologue to the Catholic letters has the prologus praeter rem in the form of a ‘proo-
emium’ placed first. This is the longest section. It is followed by a brief prologus ante rem
in the form of an ‘Editorial Notice’ on the apparatus. This prologue differs from the other
Euthalian prologues as it does not contain any introductory material to the biblical text,
but refers only to the work the editor has done on that text.
3.3.2. The Heading to the Prologue to the Catholic Letters

According to von Soden, the heading is usually transmitted in the form πρόλογος τῶν
καθολικῶν ἐπιστολῶν or occasionally in the short form πρόλογος. He further points out
that the heading does not contain the name ‘Euthalius’ except in min. 181.337 Min. 181 has
the following text: εὐθαλίου ἐπισκόπου σούλκης ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων τῶν καθολικῶν ἑπτὰ
ἐπιστολῶν σταλεῖσα πρὸς ἀθανάσιον ἐπίσκοπον ἀλεξανδρείας. ‘Survey of the Chapters
of the Seven Catholic Epistles by Euthalius, bishop of Sulci, sent to Athanasius, bishop
of Alexandria.’338 A remarkable feature of this variant is that it is seemingly not intended
as a heading to the prologue at all but to a list of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. The present transla-
tion is based on the form πρόλογος τῶν καθολικῶν ἐπιστολῶν. This has been chosen for
the sake of clarity. As for the question of priority, the shortest form πρόλογος should be
preferred.

And I, the smallest one, in trying to do something beyond my powers, have certainly not
escaped danger, like someone who believes he can cleave the waves in the middle of the sea
on the most tiny raft and fancies he well can bear the unruly blow of the winds.
The modesty topos is markedly present in this prologue.339 It returns to the image of
the work as a sea voyage, which was used in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. In this
prologue, the man is not on a boat, but on a tiny raft, an image that resembles Odysseus
on his way from the island of Ogygia (Od7 o 340 This image is carefully chosen,
since the raft corresponds to the couch in the second image in this prologue, the healing
of the lame in .LoćFJNQFUVPVTNBOPOUIFSBęJTUIFDPVOUFSQBSUPGUIFMBNF
man on the couch, who was saved through his faith. The two images both serve to embel-
lish the appeal for intercession (see below).
337 See von Sodeno

338 Text in von Dobschütz 1893: 64. von Dobschütz finds that this form reflects the tendency to conformity
in this manuscript, since the text is very close to the heading to the Prologue to Acts.
339 See See note 274 on page 198.
340 The sailor in a tiny vessel depending on divine assistance was proverbial. In Theophilus of Antioch the
following saying is ascribed to Thestius: θεοῦ θέλοντος σῴζῃ, κἂν ἐπὶ ῥῖπος πλέῃς (Ad Autolycum 2, 8). ‘If
God will, you are safe, even if you sail on a mat.’ (Tr. R. M. Grant 1970: 37).
Therefore, I ask for forgiveness for what I dare to do, having been forced by the law of love, by
you, most reverend brother Athanasius […] Receive therefore, receive from us with pleasure,
the work carried out at your orders, and in return for our obedience, pray for us till the end.
As in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, the work was made at the instigation of the dedi-
catee, who is addressed directly and asked to intercede for the author. The difference be-
tween this and the previous prologue is that the dedicatee here is named, and that he here
(and in the Prologue to Acts) is addressed as a ‘brother’ not as a ‘father’. This difference has
occasioned many theories regarding the career of Euthalius: The address ‘brother’ is be-
lieved to be evidence that this Euthalius now is writing to a fellow bishop. Thus, Euthalius
had supposedly made the edition of the Pauline letters while still a deacon, and when he
became bishop of the mysterious city of Sulci, he published the edition of Acts and the
Catholic letters.341
3.3.4.1. Comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’

I will read the Catholic Epistles one after another, verse by verse (στιχηδόν), and at the same
time make a mediocre exposition (ἔκθεσις) from this of their chapters and divine testimonies.
In contrast to the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, the modesty topos is here also present in
the ‘Editorial Notice’. The description of the edition is not entirely clear, and its interpre-
tation is made difficult as we do not have the Euthalian edition before us in its original
form. The first problem is the expression ‘one after another’. Does this presuppose the
same sequence of the Catholic letters as that found in our modern Bible editions?342 This
question cannot be answered on the basis of this prologue, since it does not discuss the
single letters. The second problem is the adverb στιχηδόν. This is associated with the
noun στίχος, which has a double meaning:
a) The στίχος is a standard line of approximately 16 syllables. That the στίχος corre-
sponded to the standard hexameter line was argued convincingly by Harris, who
draws a distinction between the στίχος and στιχηδόν: The noun refers to the ‘stan-
dard line’ but the adverb may refer to a sense-line. The ‘sense-line’ may not neces-
sarily correspond to a real line in the manuscript, but be indicated by punctuation
only.343
b) The στίχος is sense-line. This use of the term στίχος is now rarely encountered. If
this meaning is adopted, there is a close association between στίχος and the ad-
verb στιχηδόν, which refers to the writing of the text in sense-lines. Among schol-
341 This theory is found already in Zacagni (1698: lxiii), who thought that Euthalius was made bishop of
Sulci because of the merits he earned by his edition of the Pauline letters. The most detailed account is
found in von Soden o TFFBCPWFPOUIF)JTUPSZPG3FTFBSDI
342 On this problem, see Jülicher/Faschero
343 See Harris XJUIBMBSHFDPMMFDUJPOPGNBUFSJBMPOQQo"DDPSEJOHUPHarris o
312), confusion arises at a later stage, when the term στιχηδόν is applied to ‘colon-writing’. His example
is the words of Hesychios (PG 93: 1340) on his edition of the minor prophets. Here he understands the
word στιχηδόν to refer to interpunction, which is a first step towards writing the text in cola. In this he is
followed by Zuntz o BOEWillard o
220 Commentary
ars discussing Euthalius, this view of στίχος/στιχηδόν is found in Wettstein344 and

Islinger.345
Thus, although their terminology is not identical, all scholars agree that the Prologue to
the Catholic letters here refers to sense-lines. The present translation uses the English
‘verse’ in order to avoid a too technical terminology and also preserve some of the ambi-
guity of the original. It should be remembered that it is not known how these sense-lines
originally were indicated.
Another problem with the ‘Editorial Notice’ is that the ‘lections’ (ἀναγνώσεις) are not
mentioned at all. von Soden was perplexed by this and suspected a primitive error in the
textual tradition: Euthalius would, according to von Soden, not have been capable of such
an omission.346
3.3.5. The Prologue to the Catholic letters: Summary

In contrast to the Prologue to the Pauline letters, we find that the modesty topos here
dominates entirely. The prologue contains no material related to the Catholic letters and
the prologus ante rem focuses on the characteristic features of the Euthalian edition only.
3.4. Commentary on the Prologue to Acts

3.4.1. Structure of the Prologue to Acts
The prologue may be divided as follows:
1. Prologus praeter rem
a. Prooemium
b. Encomium of Melete, the personified meditation on Scripture
2. Prologus ante rem
c. Editorial Notice
d. Epitome of Acts
A striking feature of this prologue is the long ‘Encomium of Melete’ which occurs after
the prooemium. The presence of this piece makes the prologue quite asymmetric in its
structure. Much is here said about Bible study and its benefits, but the prologue contains
344 Wettstein (1752: 75) defines the στίχοι as minores distinctiones and has the following to say on the work
of Euthalius (p. 74): Libros istos etiam στιχηδὸν scripsit, id est, ita ut singulae lineae singulae sententias
absolverent, eaque distinctione observata lectores scire possent, quae continuo spiritu legerent & ubi paulum
intermitterent. ‘He also wrote these books στιχηδόν, i.e., so that each line completed its meaning, and the
readers, through observance of this distinction, could know what they should read with one breath and
where they should make a short break.’
345 Islinger (1867: 4) seems to be deriving much from Wettstein, but introduces a different terminology.
According to Islinger, writing στιχηδόν is the same as writing κατὰ ῥήσεις, each ῥῆσις being the words
that the speaker should recite as a unity ‘ohne mit der Stimme abzusetzen’. A. C. Clark (1933: 178) shares
the view of Wettstein and Islinger regarding the meaning of στίχος. He argues against the existence of the
‘normal line’, saying that the theory is not supported by the material from the papyri where all sort of sizes
are found.
346 See von Sodeno
little that is relevant for the study of Acts. The prologus praeter rem occupies the bulk of
this prologue, as in the Prologue to the Catholic letters.
3.4.2. The Heading to the Prologue to Acts

Both Zacagni and von Soden reproduce the heading in its shortest form, πρόλογος τῶν
πράξεων.347 In the present translation this is rendered ‘Prologue to Acts’. One should note
that the πράξεις here possibly refers not to the Book of Acts only but to the combination
of Acts and the Catholic letters.348 The fact that this prologue mentions both Acts and the
Catholic letters may be evidence of this.349 If this is the case, the Prologue to the Catholic
letters may be a later supplement written in order to create a perfect symmetry in the
apparatus.

They meditate day and night in their own souls on the words about the divine Word. [ἀληθῶς
τὸ τῆς ἀγλαοφεγγοῦς καὶ μακαρίας ταύτης ἡμεροτρωθέντες] and taste its virtuous and
divine fruits, they withdraw their minds from everything else, and now, rejoicing, they turn
their eyes upwards to immortality itself.
The context is the description in the ‘Prooemium’ of the heavenly and godly com-
munity. This apparently refers to a monastic community, and it should be noted that
in the entire apparatus, only the Prologue to Acts refers to the recipients as living in a
monastic community.350 They have chosen the first beatitude of David (= Psalm 1) as
their guideline and meditate day and night upon ‘the words about the divine Word.’ After
this follows the apparently corrupt clause ἀληθῶς τὸ τῆς ἀγλαοφεγγοῦς καὶ μακαρίας
ταύτης ἡμεροτρωθέντες. The main difficulties are (1) the meaning of the participle
ἡμεροτρωθέντες, a word that Harris considered non-existent in Greek,351 and, (2) the
meaning of the phrase τὸ … ταύτης. Both Zacagni and Harris tried to solve the problem
by making conjectures:
347 von Soden (1902: 667) notes that the heading occasionally is transmitted with various expansions, such
as τῶν ἀποστόλων or τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων. Min. 181 has the peculiar form Ἀθανασίου ἐπισκόπου
Σούλκης ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων τῶν πράξεων σταλεῖσα πρὸς Ἀθανάσιον ἐπίσκοπον Ἀλεξανδρείας. The word
Ἀθανασίου is clearly an error, anticipating the name of the dedicatee. Zacagni restored the name Εὐθαλίου
in this heading. It follows the same pattern as the heading to the Prologue to the Catholic letters and seems
rather to be a heading to a list of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. On the different forms of headings, see also von Dob-
schütz 1893: 64 and Willardoo
348 On this meaning of πράξεις, see Souter 1913: 12.
349 See the ‘Editorial Notice’ in this prologue: ‘Being such an eminent lover of the word, and incessantly hon-
oring this task, as a friend, and praising it always, you just ordered me, my best friend, brother Athanasius,
to read the Book of Acts and the Catholic Epistles with a correct pronunciation […].’
350 See von Dobschütz (1893: 65), who made this observation: ‘Unrichtig aber ist es, dass es sich beidesmal
um den gleichen Kreis von Vätern und Brüdern einer Mönchsgemeinschaft handle. Nur im Prolog zu Act.
Ap. finden sich die ἀδελφοὶ καὶ πατέρες, welche er bittet, seine Kühnheit zu entschuldigen und die Fehler
ἀδελφικῶς zu korrigieren.’
351 According to Harris (1896: 76) such a word would have the meaning ‘gently pierced’ (as if from ἥμερος
and τιτρώσκω).
222 Commentary
Textual conjectures
Zacagni’s text (Zacagni 1698: τὸ τῆς ἀγλαοφεγγοῦς καὶ Lauto hocce felique cibo
404 = PG 85: 628A) with his μακαρίας ταύτης (τροφῆς) quotidie sumpto
addition of τροφῆς: ἡμεροτρωθέντες ‘having daily consumed this
resplendent and blessed nour-
ishment’ (my translation)
Harris’ text (1896: 76) reading τῷ τῆς ἀγλαοφεγγοῦς καὶ ‘smitten with passion for this
τῷ for τὸ and ἱμέρῳ τρωθέντες μακαρίας ταύτης ἱμέρῳ resplendent and blessed crea-
ἡμεροτρωθέντες: τρωθέντες ture’
Zacagni added the word τροφῆς, thus making the clause refer to the daily meditation on
scripture as ‘nourishment’. Harris rejected the word ἡμεροτρωθέντες and understood it
as an itacistic error for ἱμέρῳ τρωθέντες. According to Harris, the clause refers to the pas-
sion (ἵμερος) the dedicatee feels for Melete (meditation on Scripture). This is the ‘creature’
that Harris thinks is hiding behind the transmitted text. If this is correct, this personifica-
tion is alluded to already in the opening of the ‘Prooemium’. It is not necessary to adopt
any of these conjectures. Even if the words of the two conjectures are quite different,
they are not so far from each other in meaning: The original text apparently contained a
praise of the benefits of scriptural reading, whether this was personified or referred to as
‘blessed nourishment’.
First, I read and wrote the Apostolic Book in verses (τὴν ἀποστολικὴν βίβλον στιχηδὸν
ἀναγνούς τε καὶ γράψας) and sent it not long ago to one of our fathers in Christ
The description of the earlier edition of the Pauline letters is interesting, since it is the
only cross-reference that is found between the Euthalian prologues. In the Prologue to the
Letters of Paul, there is no mention of a future work, and the short Prologue to the Catholic
Letters does not refer to the other prologues. The lack of any reference in the Prologue to
the Letters of Paul can easily be explained by assuming that the edition of Acts was not
planned at that stage. It is an interesting feature of this prologue that it uses a new term
to describe the edition of the Pauline letters: In the Prologue to Acts (as in the Prologue to
the Catholic Letters) the term στιχηδόν is used. This term probably refers to sense-lines
although it is not clear at this point how the divisions were indicated.352 When the author
says ‘read and wrote’, he seems to present himself not only as an editor of the text, but also
as a scribe. The idea that he himself wrote the manuscript is however not supported by
what he says in the following about molesting the work of others (see below).
For I have no knowledge that any servant of the word previously with zeal has worked out
the shape (τὸ σχῆμα) of this writing. For there was never a man so stubborn and audacious
that he himself would cruelly molest (ἀφειδῶς καθυβρίζειν) the painstaking work of others
(τοὺς ἑτέρους εὖ μάλα πεποιημένους πόνους) with mediocre divisions of our unlearned
reading.
In this continued description of the edition of the Pauline letters, the reader may learn
more about that edition than the information contained in the Prologue to the Letters of
352 See my comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’ in the Prologue to the Catholic Letters above. The term στιχηδόν
is not used in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, whose language is not quite clear regarding what the
author had done with the biblical text.
Paul.353 The work of the editor concerns the shape (σχῆμα) of the biblical text. The shape
is clearly related to some kind of division of the text. The author has ‘cruelly molested’
the painstaking work of others with his divisions. This probably means that he has added
marks in manuscripts that were already written by an earlier scribe. The idea of ‘molest-
ing’ can hardly refer to the production of a new manuscript.
The sense-lines were thus probably not separate lines in the manuscript, but marked
by lectional signs. This interpretation of the work done by Euthalius is found in von
Soden and was adopted by Bousset.354 The problem with this interpretation is the de-
scription above, where the author uses the expression στιχηδὸν ἀναγνούς τε καὶ γράψας
with reference to his own work. Possibly, this expression may refer to the division of the
sense-lines only.
3.4.3.2. The ‘Encomium of Melete’
3.4.3.2.1. The Genre ‘Encomium’

The genre ‘Encomium’ praises the qualities of a person, a thing or an abstract idea. It thus
belongs at a higher level of abstraction to the epideictic genre.355 The praise of a personi-
fied virtue may however give epideictic oratory a deliberative function.
3.4.3.2.2. Comments on the ‘Encomium’

I speak of wisdom-bringing meditation on the divine words, in whose power and in whose
nets you are, Christ lover, being heard through long and sleepless exercises, busy with her
beloved name, as you are making her bloom exceedingly.
Greek μελέτη may refer to physical training or to scholarly study. The term is used in
Psalm 118: 97 and 99 for meditation upon the Law, rendering Hebrew shichah. In the
‘Encomium’ μελέτη is personified. The image of the dedicatee in the nets of Melete is
close to the image in 84JSo XIFSFUIFTPOJTBTLFEUPQVUIJTGFFUJOUPUIFGFU-
ters of Wisdom, whose bands are purple lace. In the ‘Encomium’, as in this prologue in
general, the meditation on Scripture is closely associated with progress, especially in the
image of the artist (see below). This idea is also found in a Deutero-Pauline letter: ἕως
ἔρχομαι πρόσεχε τῇ ἀναγνώσει […] ταῦτα μελέτα, ἐν τούτοις ἴσθι, ἵνα σου ἡ προκοπὴ
φανερὰ ᾖ ἐν πασιν (5JNo ćFMBTUDMBVTFXPVMECFBOFYDFMMFOUTVNNBSZPGUIF
‘Encomium’. The correspondence is probably due to the dependence of both texts upon
the traditions of Wisdom literature.356
353 This was observed by Robinson (1895: 13), who found that we here ‘gain fresh light as to the earlier work
on the Pauline Epistles.’
354 See von Soden 1902: 666 and Bousset 1903.
355 On the genre ‘encomion’, see M. Vallozza 1994.
356 On 1 Tim 4:15, see MarshalloMarshall chooses the translation ‘practice’ for the impera-
tive μελέτα. As for the idea of progress (προκοπή), he finds that the word-group belongs more to Hel-
lenism, being found in the LXX only in WSir 51:17 and 2 Macc 8:8. The language in WSir 51:17 is close
to the Euthalian prologue: προκοπὴ ἐγένετό μοι ἐν αὐτῇ· τῷ διδόντι μοι σοφίαν δώσω δόξαν. ‘By her [i.e.
Wisdom], there was progress for me. I will give honor to Him who gives me wisdom.’
224 Commentary
As also one of the poets has truly said, recommending the most wonderful benefits that come
to us from her. He almost cries out and says that ‘Melete benefits the work’ (Hesiod, Erga
412).
And again, the most noble of the wise (πανάριστος σοφῶν = Cleoboulus of Lindos) has, in
his advice on how to live, attributed everything to Melete.
‘For, blessed’, he says, ‘is he who meditates (μελετήσει) on the law of the Lord day and night’.
1To
‘Hear, O Israel…’ %FVUo
‘The meditation (ἡ μελέτη) of my heart is always in thy sight, O Lord, my helper and my
redeemer.’ Ps 18:15
‘Cursed be he who does not confirm all the words in this book of law by doing them.’ Deut
27:26
The praise of Melete is illustrated by a number of quotations. It is a characteristic feature
of this prologue that quotations from pagan authors are used together with quotations
from the OT books.357
For, as a clever artist who has come upon the most beautiful work of his art, for the remain-
der he works over again its tiniest parts, adjusting them and bringing them into harmony, he
searches always, using a thousand devices, to bring his own design to still greater perfection.
The meditation on Scripture is finally compared to the artist who puts together his work,
formed in tiny parts, possibly alluding to the sense-lines. The image refers to the ancient
practice of making a statue out of minor parts that were made in separate molds. Perfect
harmony is attained when the seams are no longer visible.
3.4.4.1. Comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’

to read the Book of Acts and the Catholic Epistles with a correct pronunciation (ἀναγνῶναι
κατὰ προσῳδίαν)
The first task of the author was to read the biblical book κατὰ προσῳδίαν. According
to Zuntz, this phrase originally referred to the reading of the text with the right pitch
and tone. The προσῳδίαι were originally the three accent signs. Later it also included a
larger group of signs that signified breathings, word divisions and vowel length.358 The
reading of the text aloud κατὰ προσῳδίαν is necessary for the editor who will, probably
at the same time, add the προσῳδίαι to the text he is working on. Since we do not have
detailed knowledge of the system used in the Euthalian edition, I have rendered the phase
ἀναγνῶναι κατὰ προσῳδίαν as ‘reading with a correct pronunciation.’ The Euthalian edi-
357 All the quotations were identified by Zacagni (PGo ćFBUUSJCVUJPOPGFWFSZUIJOHUP.FMFUF

(Μελέτη τὸ πᾶν) is only paraphrased in the text. Fabricius (quoted by Galland in PG o GPVOE
that this maxim is ascribed to Cleoboulus of Lindos, one of the Seven Sages of Greece. This explains the
description of him as πανάριστος σοφῶν.
358 That this was one of the tasks of Euthalius was perceived already by Wettstein (1752: 73): [Euthalius]
istis libris primus spritus & accentus apposuit. ‘[Euthalius] was the first who added breathings and accents
to those books.’ Zuntz o IBTBEEFENPSFBODJFOUFWJEFODFRVPUJOH&QJQIBOJVT On Weights
and Measures (PG 43: 237B), who lists the ten προσῳδίαι.
tions was thus a help for the reader who was supposed to read the text with the educated,
‘received’ pronunciation of Greek.359
… make some summaries (πως ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι)
The second task is described with a vague phrase. It is not clear what this refers to. von
Soden assumed that the author here referred to various lists that were similar to those in
the edition of the Pauline letters. The author possibly did not bother to describe them in
detail, as they were known from the earlier edition.360 This would be a strange negligence
on the part of the author, since the two editions were sent to different recipients.
… and divide the contents of both of them into smaller parts (διελεῖν τούτων ἑκάστης τὸν
νοῦν λεπτομερῶς). And this I have done with zeal, without hesitation. Having organized
the texts into verses (στιχηδόν) according to my own design (συμμετρία), aiming at a clear
reading (εὔσημος ἀνάγνωσις), I sent them both promptly to you.
The third task is the division of the text into sense-lines. The author has organized the
text into verses since his aim was the clear reading of the biblical text. This last task has
already been described by the author above, in his treatment of the earlier edition of the
Pauline letters.
3.4.4.2. Comments on the ‘Epitome of Acts’

In the following I have prefixed a short summary of the work of Luke the Evangelist. He
was of Antiochene ancestry and learned in medicine. After he had become a disciple of Paul,
he composed two books. The first of them was the Gospel, the second the book about the
apostolic acts.
The ‘Epitome of Acts’ has no title in the original. The designation ‘Epitome’ is used here
since it is not only a ὑπόθεσις of Acts, but refers to the background of the author and
his authorship of both the Gospel and Acts. According to von Soden, the ‘Epitome’ is
also transmitted independently of the Euthalian prologue with the heading πρόλογς τῶν
πράξεων.361 Luke’s Antiochene ancestry and his being learned in medicine are motives
that are found repeatedly from Eusebius onwards.362
359 The phenomenon of the double pronunciation of Greek in antiquity and beyond is an obscure subject of
which little is known. Scholars of Greek origin tend to assume that the modern pronunciation prevailed at
a quite early stage. It appears, however, that the pronunciation in schools differed much from the everyday
language. An early study is that of Prince Trubetzkoy (1936), one of the founders of the Prague school
of linguistics. In this study he argued that certain archaic features (such as the pronunciation of φχθ as
aspirated stops) were still practiced in Byzantine schools in the 10th cent. This archaism in pronunciation
may have included other features as well, such as distinction in vowel length. The composition of poetry
written in the old meters throughout the Byzantine era (e.g. Tzetzes in the 12th cent.) may be evidence of
the survival of the ancient pronunciation, unless one presupposes that this poetry was written not for the
ear but for the eye only. The evidence of Coptic also shows that it was an archaic pronunciation of Greek
(generally non-itacistic) that served as a model for the scholars who created this writing system, see G.
Steindorff 1951: 13. This was probably the pronunciation of Greek in the Christian schools of Alexan-
dria. If the Euthalian apparatus is of Egyptian provenance, as many scholars have believed, this evidence
may be relevant for the study of this aspect of the apparatus.
360 See von Soden 1902: 670.
361 When transmitted independently, the transitory clause is not included and the text begins: Ἀντιοχεὺς
ὑπάρχων τὸ γένος ὁ Λουκᾶς κτλ. See von Soden 1902: 330. It may be noted that the heading πρόλογος
τῶν πράξεων is a much better description of this piece than of the entire Euthalian prologue.
362 See above on the ὑπόθεσις of Acts.
226 Commentary
So, the entire content of this volume is about the ascension of Christ to the heavens after
the resurrection, the coming of the Holy Spirit to the holy apostles, and how and where the
disciples proclaimed piety toward Christ, and the miracles they worked through prayer and
faith in Him. And about the divine calling of Paul that came from heaven, his apostleship
and the flowering message, and, to put it briefly, about the many and great dangers that the
apostles endured for the sake of Christ. 150 lines (στίχοι).
The summary of Acts mentions three specific events: The ascension of Christ, the coming
of the Holy Spirit and the conversion of Paul. The summary does therefore not intend to
give a survey of the contents of the book since it does not refer explicitly to any event after
Acts 9. One may assume that the three events referred to were considered the most im-
portant in the book. In the summary, Paul is clearly considered an apostle. The summary
also mentions the proclamation of the disciples, the miracles they worked, and the dan-
gers they endured. The reference to the miracles of the apostles differs from the Prologue
to the Letters of Paul, where there is no mention of the wonders. The Prologue to Acts ends
with a stichometric note. The term στίχος here obviously refers to space-lines: (1) There is
no evidence that the Euthalian prefatory matter was arranged in separate sense-lines, and
(2) the counting is only useful if it is space-lines that are counted.
3.4.5. Prologue to Acts: Summary

The structure of the Prologue to Acts is basically similar to that of the other two Euthalian
prologues. A problem for the analysis of the structure is the long ‘Encomium of Melete’
that may be a later addition to the text. The heading of this prologue may use the term
πράξεις with a special meaning, referring to the collection of Acts and the Catholic letters,
since the prologue also mentions the Catholic letters as a part of the volume. Thus, the
status of the Prologue to the Catholic Letters is uncertain. Possibly, it was only the Prologue
to Acts that was prefixed to the volume that contained Acts and the Catholic letters. The
prologue sheds some light not only on the second Euthalian volume, but also on the first
on Paul. It goes into more detail regarding one of the objectives of the work, to make the
biblical text easier to read by dividing it up into small units. It is, however, difficult to
imagine how this was achieved, since the surviving manuscripts may represent a later
form of arranging the text. As is the case with the Prologue to the Catholic Letters, this
prologue is also dominated by the modesty topos. It contains very little that is of interest
to the reader of Acts. The short ‘Epitome of Acts’ could only be illuminating for the reader
who had almost no knowledge of the contents of that book.
3.5. The Prologues: Summary

All scholars have assumed that the three Euthalian prologues are the work of a single
author. Even if the commentary above has not offered conclusive evidence against this
assumption, there is a tension between the texts that is worth summing up.
The use of the genre. A striking difference between the Prologue to the Letters of Paul
and the two other prologues is that only in the first prologue is there a reasonable bal-
ance between the prologus praeter rem and the prologus ante rem. In the Prologue to Acts
and the Prologue to the Catholic Letters, the prologus praeter rem tends to dominate. This
change in style was noted by von Soden, who used it as a basis for his reconstruction of
the life of Euthalius: The older Euthalius was anxious to give thanks to his superiors who
had made him bishop of Sulci. But instead of this biographical interpretation, one may
see in these differences a different use of the genre: The two later prologues put so great an
emphasis on the prologus praeter rem that one gets the impression that the high-sounding
language has become an end in itself, the prologue has become a work of art that has
liberated itself from the original subject matter. This phenomenon is known from Greek
literature. In her study of the letters of Theodoret, Monica Wagner draws attention to the
genre προλαλιά. These are rhetorical showpieces written in a conversational style that
precede the speech, some of them having survived as independent compositions.363 This
is a possible literary context for the two later Euthalian prologues, which have so little to
say on the biblical text. Their primary function may be to please the reader with a highly
sophisticated language, not to convey information.
The description of the editions. If the three prologues are the work of one hand, one might
assume that the editions of the Pauline letters, Acts and the Catholic letters were basi-
cally similar in the way the biblical text was presented. But the reading of the Euthalian
prologues leaves some doubt regarding the supposed similarities between the editions.
(a) The Prologue to the Letters of Paul. The ‘Editorial Notice’ in the Prologue to the Let-
ters of Paul mentions the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the μαρτυρίαι. In connection with these,
two meta-terms occur, ἔκθεσις (of the chapter titles) εὕρεσις (of the testimonies). The
third task, the most accurate division of the reading (ἡ τῶν ἀναγνώσεων ἀκριβεστάτη
τομή) possibly refers to the division of the text into sense-lines, as Robinson believed. The
other possibility is that it refers to the division of the text into lections. The conclusion is
that whether we choose this interpretation or the other, an element commonly assumed
to be a part of the Euthalian apparatus must be left out: Either the sense-lines or the lec-
tions.
(b) The Prologue to the Catholic Letters. Similarly, the Prologue to the Catholic Letters
has an incomplete description of the edition, if we presuppose that the edition contained
all the elements in the comprehensive Euthalian manuscripts (such as min. 181). In the
Prologue to the Catholic Letters, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the μαρτυρίαι are again men-
tioned, along with the meta-term ἔκθεσις. Ἔκθεσις is here used not only of the chapter ti-
tles but also of the testimonies. The most interesting feature is the fact that the lections are
not mentioned at all. In this prologue, the sense-lines are referred by the term στιχηδόν.
(c) The Prologue to Acts. In this prologue, a description of the former edition is also
included. This description uses other terms than those in the Prologue to the Letters
of Paul. Especially noteworthy is the term στιχηδόν that is used with reference to the
sense-lines. It is remarkable that this important term only occurs in the Prologue to Acts
and the Prologue to the Catholic Letters. As for the description of the edition of Acts, its
vagueness has been noted. It is not possible to know what the author referred to by πως
ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι. The ‘Editorial Notice’ uses again the term στιχηδόν. Another new
expression occurs here: the reading of the text κατὰ προσῳδίαν.
A new edition of the apparatus may shed more light on these problems. Possibly the
lections are mentioned in other manuscripts of the Prologue to the Catholic Letters than
those used for our printed editions. At the present stage, however, the lections seem to be
363 See M. Wagner 1948: 145.

228 Commentary
the most uncertain element. If the interpretation of Robinson is adopted, the lections are
not mentioned in any of the Euthalian prologues. The differences in terminology, espe-
cially the absence of στιχηδόν and κατὰ προσῳδίαν in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul,
give an impression of diversity.
The idea of progress. The idea of progress (αὔξησις, προσαύξησις, προκοπή) plays a major
part both in the Prologue to the Pauline Letters and the Prologue to Acts. But the kind of
progress treated in the two prologues is quite different. In the Prologue to the Pauline
Letters, especially in the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ the progress is related to ethics:
The behavior of the communities improves throughout the letter collection. The Pau-
line letters are described as a manual describing how one should act (πολλὰ περὶ τῶν
πρακτέων τοῖς ἀνθρώποις). In the Prologue to Acts, on the other hand, the progress is
related to meditation on Scripture where the objective is to make progress in learning
(ὅσῳ γὰρ ἄν τις ἐν ἕξει, καὶ γνώσει, πλειόνων γίγνεται μαθημάτων, τρὶς τόσον μειζόνων,
καὶ σπουδαιοτέρων ὀρέγεσθαι πέφυκεν). This difference may be related to the observa-
tion made by von Dobschütz, that the monastic life of the author comes to the fore only in
the Prologue to Acts. It is only in this prologue that we learn that the author is surrounded
by fathers and brothers who may correct him and help him. In this environment, the
meditation on Scripture becomes more important. These differences also give an impres-
sion of diversity.
The possibility that the Euthalian prologues are not the work of one hand should there-
fore be considered.
Part Four
Résumé
IV. Résumé
1. Introduction
The present commentary has been devoted to the Euthalian apparatus, a corpus of auxil-
iary texts that summarize the apostolic writings of the New Testament. The apparatus is
divided into three main genres: Chapter titles (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι), hypotheses, (ὑποθέσεις),
and prologues (πρόλογοι). These three genres divided the present commentary into
three main parts. This division does not correspond to any particular manuscript but
is justified because the different genres may represent independent traditions that later
were combined. The name ‘Euthalius’ has become the name of the shadowy figure who
is supposed to have edited the apparatus on the basis of separate traditions. The name
appears, however, only in a small number of manuscripts. The original independence of
the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is attested by statements in the Euthalian prologes. The ὑποθέσεις
have also been circulating independently of the apparatus. This is attested by the Synopsis
Scripturae Sacrae (of unknown date). The apparatus also includes other genres, such as
lists of biblical quotations and lections. These texts offer little information that is not
contained in the biblical texts and were therefore not the focus of the present commen-
tary. The work of Euthalius also included the division of the text into sense-units so that
the text could be easily understood when read aloud. This aspect of the work is very dif-
ficult to describe today since the medieval manuscripts use punctuation. Euthalius, on
the other hand, probably arranged the biblical texts in sense-lines (as in the ‘Euthalian’
Codex H).
The original language of the Euthalian apparatus was Greek, and the apparatus is at-
tested in a great number of medieval Greek manuscripts. Practically all of these manu-
scripts also contain the biblical text. It also exists in Syriac, Armenian and Georgian. Parts
of the apparatus exist in Slavonic, Gothic and Latin but whether the entire apparatus
once existed in these languages is altogether uncertain. The apparatus thus may be said to
belong to the Eastern churches.
Much ink has been spilled over the ‘Euthalian’ question. The starting point of this
survey is Lorenzo Zacagni, prefect of the Vatican library, who in 1698 published the editio
princeps of the apparatus. His work was summarized and further advanced by Jacob Wett-
stein in his edition of the New Testament. (1752). Research on Euthalius experienced its
golden age in the last decade of the 19th century and the first decade of the 20th. In 1895,
James Armitage Robinson published his Euthaliana, and this study was the starting point
of a lively discussion among scholars such as James Rendel Harris, Fredrick Cornwallis
Conybeare and Ernst von Dobschütz. In 1902, Hermann von Soden included the Eu-
thalian apparatus in his edition of New Testament. Later, relatively few works on Eutha-
lius appeared, the most important from the middle of the 20th century is a contribution
by Günther Zuntz (1945), although his main concern was not Euthalius but the history of
the Syriac NT. In 1970, -PVJT$IBSMFT8JMMBSEĕOJTIFEIJT:BMFEJTTFSUBUJPOPOUIFBQQB-
232 Résumé
ratus where previous work of Euthalius was surveyed and carefully evaluated. Nils Dahl,
who had been his advisor, returned to Euthalian studies in the year 2000. Almost every-
thing that has been written on the apparatus shows a strong interest in isagogic questions:
‘Who was Euthalius?’ ‘Where and when did he live?’ ‘Which elements were included in the
original edition?’ The answers to these questions exhibit a great diversity. Euthalius has
been imagined as living in Alexandria, in Pselcha in Upper Egypt, in Antioch, and, finally,
on the island of Sardinia. The dates vary from the 4th to the 7th centuries. von Soden even
tried to write a biographical sketch of Euthalius which bears almost novel-like qualities.
In the eyes of von Soden, Euthalius is a tragic figure who was seduced to sign a heretical
confession, he was ‘ein schwacher Geist’ and also ‘ein Opfer seiner Zeit’. This aspect of the
work of von Soden on Euthalius has unfortunately overshadowed its merits. It should be
remembered that von Soden offers a rich selection of auxiliary materials that he and his
co-workers found in the manuscripts. Among them was the Greek text of the so-called
‘Prayer of Euthalius’, which previously had been known only in the Syriac and Armenian
versions. The isagogic questions pertaining to Euthalius should not be neglected in future
studies. It should however been said that a new edition of the Euthalian text is needed
before substantial progress can be made in this area. Scholars have for the most part been
relying on Zacagni’s text from 1698, which is the foundation of all later editions, includ-
ing von Soden’s text, which was translated for the present commentary.
2. Aim of the Present Commentary

While previous scholarship on Euthalius has focused on isagogic questions, the present
commentary focuses on the apparatus itself and its relation to the New Testament text. A
key term is ‘pre-text’, which refers to the text that is reworked in the ‘meta-text’. The pre-
text in this case is the NT letters and Acts; the meta-text is the Euthalian apparatus. The
presupposition of the present commentary is that the pre-text and the meta-text should
be studied together. Not only can the apparatus shed light on the biblical text (its original
intention), but the biblical text can also shed some light on the apparatus. This is what the
present commentary is trying to achieve. By studying the relationship between the two
levels, it is possible to describe some of the methods that were used when the apparatus
was composed. The aim of the commentary was therefore not to write a commentary on
the apparatus in isolation, but always to have the entire ‘system’ of pre-text and meta-texts
in mind.
Three aspects should be mentioned in particular: (1) The ancient commentator could,
just as the modern, refer to a text by quoting it, either in full or only its opening words.
In this case, the pre-text is used as meta-text. It stands, as the logician Quine puts it, as
a hieroglyph for itself. (2) A far more interesting method is to replace the pre-text with
something else, a meta-communicative term (meta-term), such as ‘prayer’ or ‘command’.
This is a method that is often employed in the Euthalian apparatus. The choice of these
terms may reveal how the ancient commentator understood the pre-text. This aspect of
the apparatus was examined in a study by Hellholm and myself (2004) on the term ‘par-
aenesis’ in the apparatus. In the present study, all the central meta-terms were included.
(3) Another common technique found in commentaries both ancient and modern, is
the paraphrase of the pre-text. In the case of the Euthalian apparatus, the paraphrase is
The Meta-terminology of the Euthalian Apparatus 233
almost always shorter than the pre-text. A common method is to combine (2) and (3) and
thus let a meta-communicative term introduce a short paraphrase of the pre-text.
The reader who has access to both the biblical text and the apparatus will probably get
an impression that is quite different from the reader who uses only the biblical text. It was
not the aim of the present commentary to give a complete interpretation of the entire Eu-
thalian ‘system’ (biblical texts + auxiliary materials) but rather to point to some important
motifs in this ‘system’. Of particular interest here is the ‘Paulusbild’, i.e. the image of Paul
in the various sections of the apparatus. Paul is undoubtedly the most important figure
in the context of the apparatus, being viewed as the author of all fourteen letters (includ-
ing Heb) and one of the main characters of the one narrative text, Acts. The apparatus
frequently refers to him simply as ‘the Apostle’.
3. The Meta-terminology of the Euthalian Apparatus

Much space was given in the present commentary on the meta-terminology of the
apparatus. The most important discoveries were related to three important meta-terms;
‘prayer’, ‘thanksgiving’ and ‘paraenesis’:
Prayer (εὐχή, προσευχή). The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι designate fourteen texts in the letters
as prayers. The word preferred in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is εὐχή, a word that is used in
the NT in this sense only in Jas 5:15. A comparison of the use of εὐχή in the κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι gave an interesting glimpse into the study of the ancient commentator: In several
instances, the pre-text used the optative mood with God or Christ as subject. If the opta-
tive mood was not used, the pre-text itself had a form of the meta-communicative verb
προσεύχομαι (εὔχομαι). Only one instance, the designation of +VEoBTϣЯϳфXBT
more difficult to explain. Here, the pre-text may have been misunderstood, or, possibly,
the meta-term ‘doxology’ (which also is used) may be the motivation for introducing the
related meta-term ‘prayer’. This pattern was not repeated in the ὑποθέσεις: Here, we find
a related designation only once, in the paraphrase of 2 Thess 3:16, which the ὑπόθεσις
renders ‘and now, having prayed (ἐπευξάμενος) for peace on their behalf ’. When we turn
to the Euthalian prologues, we find that there is no reference to ‘prayer’ in the biblical
texts. Instead, the prologues themselves contain prayers for the author and his work. This
diversity indicates that the methods used in the separate traditions in the apparatus were
quite different. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι use a method that we would expect for a Christian
grammarian; showing an awareness on word-forms and meta-communicative verbs in
the pre-text and using them as a basis for the meta-term that he creates. The ὑποθέσεις
and the prologues do not follow this path, and have in general little to say on prayers in
the pre-texts.
Thanksgiving (εὐχαριστία). The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι designate nine texts in the letters and
one in Acts as εὐχαριστία. Most of the material corresponds to the thanksgiving sections
of the letters, which regularly open with the verb εὐχαριστῶ. The benediction in 2 Cor
oJTBMTPEFTDSJCFEBTϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰцϟJOUIFϨϣϲрϩϟϧϟϰцϰϩϭϧćJTDPSSFTQPOETUPUIF
opinion of modern scholars who consider the benediction in Jewish letters an equivalent
of the Greek thanksgiving. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι thus seem to treat the thanksgivings in
the pre-texts in a similar way to their treatment of prayers: The meta-communicative verb
εὐχαριστέω is the marker that justifies the use of the meta-term εὐχαριστία. This does not
234 Résumé
mean that there is a complete correspondence between pre-text and meta-text, where
every instance of the verb in the pre-text would be reflected by the noun in the κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι. Some of the thanksgivings in the pre-texts (e.g., Rom, 1 Cor) are simply referred
to as the προοίμιον, and in one instance (1 Thess), the opening thanksgiving section is
described as ἔπαινος ‘praise’. In the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Philemon, ἔπαινος and εὐχαριστία
appear together. When we turn to the ὑποθέσεις, we find quite a different picture. Here,
the thanksgiving sections of the letters are generally not referred to as thanksgivings (e.g.,
by the verb εὐχαριστέω) but described by other verbs, such as ἀποδέχομαι ‘praise’ (Rom,
2 Cor, Phil, 2 Thess, 2 Joh, 3 Joh) or μαρτυρέω (1 Cor). Unexpectedly, the ὑποθέσεις use
the verb εὐχαριστέω with reference to 5JUoBOEUIFOPVOϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰцϟXJUISFGFSFODF
to 2 Cor 13:13. Neither of these would be classified as ‘thanksgivings’ by modern scholars.
The method used in the ὑποθέσεις is thus different from that of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. The
ὑποθέσεις seem to pay more attention to the impact that the thanksgivings have on the
recipients of the letter. This aspect is certainly not neglected by the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι (cf.
their use of ἔπαινος), but it is clearly highlighted in the ὑποθέσεις. When we turn to the
πρόλογοι, we find that the thanksgivings in the biblical texts are not referred to explicitly.
Possibly, the opening thanksgiving section in 1 Thess is referred to as ἔπαινος ‘praise’,
when the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ (included in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul)
says ὧν ἡ μὲν ἔπαινον περιέχει αὐτῶν εὐπειθείας ἐκ προσαυξήσεως, ἄχρι καὶ θλίψεων
πεῖραν ἐσχηκότων, ‘one of them containing praise of their obedience on account of their
progress, even unto the test of persecution.’ If this is the case, this passage in the pre-text
is described by the same meta-term as in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι.
Paraenesis (παραίνεσις). This part of the present commentary was based on an earlier
study by Hellholm and myself: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι use παραίνεσις (in singular or plu-
ral) for fourteen pre-texts, three of these in Acts. The use of the term for moral exhorta-
tion in the epistolary texts seems to correspond well with the use of the term in biblical
scholarship of the 20th century. This correspondence between the ancient and the modern
views is particularly clear in ćFTTo DGMartin Dibelius) and in 1IJMo
(cf. Ernst Lohmeyer). It should be noted that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι sometimes use this
meta-term in a different sense. This is found especially in the list for Acts: It is used with
reference to the words of James to Paul concerning circumcision (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts
XXXI) and also with reference to the speech Paul gave on the ship before the shipwreck
off Malta (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXXVIII, second ὑποδιαίρεσις). In the ὑποθέσεις, we
find that corresponding meta-terms (παραινέω/παραινετικοὶ λόγοι) are used frequently,
both in the the ὑποθέσεις to the Pauline and the Catholic letters (Rom, 1 Cor, Gal, Eph,
$PM oćFTT 5JN 5JU o1FU o+PI "MTPIFSF UIFUFSNTSFGFSUPNPSBMFYIPS-
tation. The frequent use of the prepositional phrase εἰς τὰ ἤθη in this context, indicates
this. It is, however, in the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ (included in the Prologue to
the Letters of Paul), that the most remarkable use of the term is found. Here the entire
Pauline collection is characterized as παραινέσεις ὑπέρ τε βίου καὶ ἀρετῆς. The meta-
term παραίνεσις (and its cognates) is thus important in all three genres (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι,
ὑποθέσεις, πρόλογοι) of the apparatus.
The present commentary on the meta-terms of the apparatus has confirmed the views
of previous scholarship that the apparatus is the application of Greek paideia on the Ap-
ostolic writings. The new insight is that the Greek learning has been applied in rather dif-
The ‘Paulusbild’ 235
ferent ways: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι use meta-terms from the religious sphere frequently to
describe the biblical writings. This is not the case with the other two genres, the ὑποθέσεις
and the πρόλογοι. Thus, the study of meta-terms confirms the views of earlier scholars
that the apparatus is made up of originally independent traditions. It is most interesting
to note that the three genres of the apparatus converge when it comes to the meta-term
παραίνεσις, a term that does not belong especially to the language of religion.
In this study, the relationship between the meta-terminology in the Euthalian tradi-
tion and linguistic phenomena in the pre-text has been a main focus. In future stud-
ies of the Euthalian traditions, it will be possible to move beyond this, and explore the
rhetorical structures behind the meta-terminology. The importance of this aspect was
brought to my attention by Dieter Sänger, who used the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Galatians as
an example: Here, the first κεφάλαιον-τίτλος clearly uses διήγησις as a rhetorical term.
The argumentatioPGUIFMFUUFSCFHJOTXJUIUIFGPVSUIϨϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫ o BOEJUJTNPTU
interesting to note that the argumentatio is represented in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι as a series
of ὅτι-clauses. The exhortatio section corresponds to the eleventh κεφάλαιον, and here we
again find a meta-term in its κεφάλαιον-τίτλος (ὑπογραφή). The peroratio o JT
the twelfth κεφάλαιον with the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος ‘warning against those who drag men
to circumcision, and encouragement to a new life under the spirit.’ Here, Sänger observes
that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι show acquaintance with the rhetorical rule that one should sum
up the most important points of the speech in the end. This kind of rhetorical analysis
will give us a more complete understanding of the hermeneutical relevance of the Eu-
thalian traditions. The Euthalian material serves to guide the interpretation of the biblical
texts by those reading it. I hope to return to this aspect in a future study.
4. The ‘Paulusbild’
The ‘Paulusbild’ of the Euthalian apparatus is closely associated with the meta-terminol-
ogy of the apparatus. Through this terminology, the apparatus describes in many dif-
ferent ways what Paul does in his letters. In addition to the meta-terms, the apparatus
also contain a great amount of paraphrase of the biblical writings that highlight different
aspects of the ‘Paulusbild’. In the following summary, the ‘Paulusbild’ is treated under five
different headings so that the reader may more easily perceive the great diversity of the
apparatus.
The pre-Christian Paul. This theme is not explicitly referred to in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι.
The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts mention only ‘the Jews’ as accusers of Stephen and are si-
lent about Paul’s role in this context (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι Acts VIII and IX). Interestingly,
the Damascus event is not described as a conversion but only as a ‘call to apostleship’
(κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XIII). Neither do the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the letters refer to Paul
as a former persecutor of the Church. The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Gal I does not mention his
persecution of the Church (as the pre-text Gal 1:13 and 23) but only his renunciation of
Judaism. Similarly, the passage about the pre-Christian Paul who persecuted the Church
in 1IJMoJTOPUQBSBQISBTFEJOUIFϨϣϲрϩϟϧϟϰцϰϩϭϧPGUIBUMFUUFSćFQJDUVSFEPFTOPU
change when we turn to the ὑποθέσεις. In the ὑποθέσεις of Acts, Galatians and Philip-
pians, where we might have expected it, there is no mention of Paul the persecutor. The
ὑπόθεσις of Acts refers to the ‘election’ of Paul and not to his former life. The ‘Epitome of
236 Résumé
the Pauline Letters’ (included in Prologue to the Letters of Paul) is similar to the κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις with regard to the pre-Christian Paul. In this short summary of
the letters, there are no references to his past. The ‘Epitome of Acts’ (included in the
Prologue to Acts) also focuses on his calling and on what happened after it. In the ‘Life of
Paul’ (included in the Prologue of the Letters of Paul), on the other hand, there is a signifi-
cant difference. Here, the persecution of Paul is highlighted to such a degree that it goes
far beyond the pre-texts. Here, Paul is not only present when Stephen is killed, he is also
the brain behind the deed, as he uses ‘the hands of all to kill’. The ambition of Paul the
persecutor goes so far as to send the Christians into ‘the pit of perdition’. This hyperbolic
language was noted by N. A. Dahl in his study of Euthalius. The present commentary has
demonstrated that the apparatus with regard to this shows a strange diversity: The major-
ity of the texts included in the apparatus paint a static and harmonized picture of Paul
the Apostle as one who acts according to God’s will at all times. This picture is of course
well suited for a paraenetic purpose. The ‘Life of Paul’ chooses instead to emphasize the
contrast between the furious pre-Christian Saul and the later Apostle.
Paul the Apostle. In the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters, the word ‘apostle’ oc-
curs only once, in a general heading for all the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters:
‘Survey of the general chapters of every letter of the Apostle Paul…’. The occurrence of
the title only in the heading is worth noting, especially since the relationship between the
heading and the lists of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is not quite clear. The heading may be second-
ary, as often is the case, and the use of the title in the heading may be evidence of this. It
seems in any case clear that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters do not count Paul’s
apostleship among the main themes of his letters, even if modern interpreters might
maintain this view, e.g., with regard to Galatians or 2 Corinthians. The picture is slightly
different in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts. In the pre-text, Acts, Paul is rarely referred to as
an apostle (only in Acts 14:4 and 14). Still, κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XIII refers to the Da-
mascus event as a ‘call to apostleship’. The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXI also picks up the
term from the pre-text (Acts 14:4): ‘How the apostles were persecuted in Iconium…’, one
of the two instances in Acts where the title is used of Paul. Its occurrence exactly here, in
this κεφάλαιον-τίτλος, is evidence of how closely the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts are mod-
eled after the pre-text. The result is that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts refer to Paul’s status
as an apostle more frequently than the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters. This is puz-
zling if we consider the pre-texts, where Paul’s apostleship is primarily emphasized in the
letters and not in Acts. In the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, on the other hand, the title
‘apostle’ is used frequently. Here, ‘the Apostle’ is used frequently by itself as a substitution
for ‘Paul’. This usage is also found in the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. The ὑπόθεσις of
2 Pet makes Peter say to everyone that they should love ‘the writings of the Apostle’, seem-
ingly reserving this title only for Paul. The idea can hardly be that Peter was not an apostle.
Still, this mode of expression is evidence of the strong emphasis on Paul as an apostle
that is found in the ὑποθέσεις of the letters. The fact that the title is used so frequently
does not mean that Paul’s apostleship is considered a main theme in the letters, since
Paul’s defense for his apostleship is not paraphrased. The ὑπόθεσις of Acts refers to the
Twelve as apostles. Paul seems, however, not to be reckoned among the apostles, since the
ὑπόθεσις of Acts refers to his ‘election’ but does not use the title ‘apostle’ when referring to
him. This shows that the language of the ὑποθέσεις is not uniform regarding the descrip-
tion of Paul’s status. A greater uniformity is found in the Euthalian prologues. In all main
parts of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, Paul is referred to as ‘Paul the Apostle’ or the
‘Apostle’. The ‘Epitome of Acts’ (included in the Prologue to Acts) speaks of Paul’s apostle-
ship following the Damascus event. Thus, the designation ‘Apostle’ for Paul is found in all
the three main genres of the apparatus but not all the genres use this title with the same
frequency. There is also a variation within texts that represent the same genre.
Paul and the Law. This central theme is treated in all three genres of the apparatus
and is instructive to throw light on its great diversity. In general, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι do
not present a tendentious picture of the Jews and the Law. The Law is not necessary for
salvation (e.g., κεφάλαια-τίτλοι Gal IV and X), and Paul is said to have warned against
those who drag men to circumcision (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Gal XII). This theme is in gen-
eral treated with a firm basis in the pre-text. The most negative and misleading statement
about the Jews is found in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Thess II, which says that Anti-christ in the
end will be sent especially against the Jews. This statement, which has no clear basis in
the pre-text, seems to stand isolated in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. Especially interesting is the
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Romans with regard to questions related to the Law. The κεφάλαιον-
τίτλος Rom III transforms Paul’s question τί τὸ περισσὸν τοῦ Ἰουδαίου into the phrase
περὶ ὑπεροχῆς Ἰσραήλ ‘about the superiority of Israel’. The formulation of the κεφάλαιον-
τίτλος is worth noting, since it emphasizes the positive answer to the rhetorical question.
The most extensive text in the Pauline corpus on the relationship between the Church
and Israel, 3PNo JTGBJUIGVMMZSFQSPEVDFEoJGXFUBLFUIFMJNJUBUJPOTPGUIFHFOSF
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος into account. One should admire the skill which manages to repro-
duce so much of Paul’s thought in a few words. The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom XVI gives
the following paraphrase of Romans 11: ‘About the plan, according to which they were
rejected, so that they may return on a second occasion, in zeal of the Gentiles who had
the privilege of being joined to the faithful Israel.’ This very precise formulations should
be kept in mind in a comparison between the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις. Here,
the picture is changed and Paul’s polemic against the Law becomes the main theme. This
was observed by N. A. Dahl in his study of the apparatus. Paul’s opponents are according
to the ὑποθέσεις for the most part Judaizers. This is of course not completely without
foundation in the pre-texts, but the ὑποθέσεις have radicalized Paul’s views. The ὑπόθεσις
of Rom thus makes Paul say that not even the Jews need circumcision after the coming
of Christ, and that circumcision now is to be abandoned by everyone. This is not what
1BVMTBZToFWFOJGPOFNBZVOEFSTUBOEIPXUIFJEFBDPVMECFEFWFMPQFEPOUIFCBTJTPG
Paul’s theology. The treatment of 3PNoNBZJMMVTUSBUFUIJTUFOEFODZUPTJNQMJGZ1BVMT
NFTTBHF*OUIFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶PGUIBUMFUUFS DIBQUFSToBSFQBSBQISBTFEBTGPMMPXTA"OE
now, as a good house-steward, he comforts on the one hand the Jews: ‘you do not become
transgressors of the Law if you believe in Christ.’ On the other hand, he commands those
from the Gentiles not to boast against Israel, but to understand that as branches upon the
root, they were grafted onto them.’ This passage of the ὑπόθεσις is a balanced composi-
tion paraphrasing both words of comfort and warning directed against the two groups
respectively. This impression of balance is, however, a creation of the ὑπόθεσις which has
put together scraps of the pre-text (apparently Rom 9:31; 10:31 and 11:18). The pre-text
(3PNo EPFTOPUIBWFUIJTTUSVDUVSFCVUIBTJUTGPDVTPO*TSBFMBOEJUTSPMFJOUIFIJT-
tory of salvation. In the use of the image of the olive tree, Paul even suggests that God may
238 Résumé
break the wild shoot (the Gentile Christians) off and graft the natural branches (the Jews)
in again (o ćJTJEFBIBTCFFODPNQMFUFMZMPTUJOUIFаɀшϦϣϯϧ϶ QSPCBCMZCFDBVTF
it is difficult to make it congruent with the polemics of the ὑποθέσεις against the Law.
Here, the difference between the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the more tendentious ὑποθέσεις
is clearly visible. A difference with regard to accuracy was noted by L. Ch. Willard in his
dissertation with regard to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑπόθεσις of Eph. Here, Willard
perceived that the ὑπόθεσις, though longer, was less thorough in its description of the let-
ter than the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of that letter. Willard says that he did not attempt to support
this observation by studying all of the relevant materials. The present commentary on the
apparatus has added new material that support Willard’s observation. The most striking
inaccuracy of the ὑποθέσεις may be their simplistic summaries of Paul’s view on the Law
and circumcision. The third treatment of the theme ‘Paul and the Law’ that should be
mentioned here is the one found in the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ (included in the
Prologue to the Letters of Paul). In this text, the Pauline corpus is treated on the basis of
the strange presupposition that the letters were ordered according to the progress of the
addressees. The communities are apparently divided into three groups (Romans, Cor-
inthians, Galatians/Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians/Thessalonians-Hebrews). This
structure allows different themes to be treated at several levels, and the ‘Epitome’ draws
vertical lines, as it were, between different communities. Thus, the theme of Judaism and
adherence to the Law is met first in Gal, at the lowest level according to the ‘Epitome’,
where the addressees are said to have defected to Judaism. At the second level, we meet
the theme again, as the Colossians are warned both against the deceptions of philosophy
and against Jewish observances. The fact that they need a warning places them above
the Galatians: They are more steadfast and have not abandoned their faith. Interestingly,
the Hebrews appear (by necessity, as the final community letter) at the highest level. The
recipients of this letter learns from Paul about ‘Jewish mysteries’ and their translation to
Christ. The ‘Epitome’ thus makes the most advanced readers receive instruction about the
Jewish tradition and its meaning. The modern reader of the apparatus may note how dif-
ferent this description is from the ὑποθέσεις, which use another language (especially ‘the
shadow’) to speak of Old Testament motives. Thus, when viewed together, the genres of
the apparatus again give an impression of diversity regarding its treatment of this theme.
Paul and his opponents. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι do not offer much information about
Paul’s opponents. This can be explained on the basis of the pre-texts, which the κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι follow closely. The opponents of Paul in Galatia ‘drag men to circumcision’
(κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Gal XII), and those in Colossae are associated with a ‘deceitful human
philosophy’. In the treatment of the Pastoral epistles, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι emphasize that
the threat from heresy lies in the future, as κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 1 Tim VII, ‘demonic her-
esies’. The passage on the deceivers in 5JNoJTMBCFMFEBAQSFEJDUJPOćFаɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
have more to say on Paul’s opponents. This is mainly found in their prophasis section,
where the background of each letter is explained. It is significant that the ὑποθέσεις put
great emphasis on the Judaizers. The term appears in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Tim but the oppo-
nents of Paul at Philippi and Colossae were, according to the ὑποθέσεις, of the same kind.
Both the Corinthian letters are associated with Judaists. The opponents who caused the
divisions that Paul referred to in 1 Cor were allegedly the same people as his opponents in
2 Cor, people who made the Corinthians ‘sit down beside the letter of the Law’ (ὑπόθεσις
of 2 Cor). Interestingly, other aspects of Paul’s opponents seem to be unimportant in the
ὑποθέσεις. The ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor refers to the deception concerning the resurrection
in Corinth, but no attempt is made to explain how this theme was related to the activity
of the Judaists. The opponents of Paul in Colossae tried to deceive the Colossians with
‘Greek sophisms, directed against faith in Christ, concerning food permitted in the Law
and circumcision’ (ὑπόθεσις of Col). Thus, the Greek ‘sophisms’ are closely associated
with the favorite theme of the ὑποθέσεις and are not treated as expressions of a ‘philoso-
phy’. The emphasis on the Judaizers is felt also in the ὑποθέσεις of the Pastoral epistles
(see the prophasis sections of the ὑποθέσεις of 1 Tim and Tit). In the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Tim,
one of the few references in the ὑποθέσεις to another kind of heresy is found: Hymenaeus
and Philetus said that ‘the resurrection has already taken place’ (cf. 2 Tim 2:18). The
ὑποθέσεις of the Pastoral letters emphasize the problems that lie in the future: Paul warns
Timothy, ‘as he should know that there will be times when some will renounce the faith’
(ὑπόθεσις of 1 Tim, cf. the reference to the ‘last days’ in the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Tim). When we
turn to the Euthalian prologues, we find the only treatment of this theme in the ‘Epitome
of the Pauline Letters’. The opponents of Paul here seem to recede into the background.
The entire collection of Pauline letters is described as ‘paraeneses’, and Paul is, according
to the ‘Epitome’ mainly concerned about how men should act. The focus is thus on the
praise and the blame that Paul gives his addressees: Thus, the problem at Corinth is not
the opponents (which are not mentioned by the ‘Epitome’) but that the Corinthians ‘did
not behave worthy of their faith’. Similarly, Paul’s opponents in Galatia are passed over
in silence and the ‘Epitome’ states that the Galatians had defected to Judaism. The most
detailed description of the threat from heresy in the ‘Epitome’ is found in the summary of
Colossians, who received warnings both against ‘the deceptions of philosophy’ and ‘Jew-
ish observances’ (apparently viewed as two different and separate subjects). In its summa-
ry of 2 Tim, the ‘Epitome’ refers to Paul’s prediction of the rise of the heretics, just as the
other genres of the Euthalian apparatus do. The general impression is, however, that the
three main genres of the apparatus treat this theme in different ways: The characteristic
feature of the ὑποθέσεις is the identification of almost all of Paul’s opponents as Judaists,
while this idea is not found in the two other main genres of the apparatus.
Paul the Martyr. An interest in the martyrdom of Paul is found in all the three main
genres of the apparatus although this interest finds different expressions. The κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι refers to the theme where it occurs in the pre-texts but does not give it additional
space. Thus, the final words in 2 Tim are referred to briefly as ‘About his coming death to
eternal glory’ (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Tim IX). The ὑπόθεσις is more explicit with regard to
this and paraphrases the same text as ‘having […] announced that the time of his death
is close at hand and that he will be offered and die as a martyr’ (μαρτυρεῖν). The strongest
interest in the martyrdom of Paul is found in the Prologue of the Letters of Paul. This
prologue includes the ‘Life of Paul’, where the final sections are devoted to his martyr-
dom. Here, Paul is said to have received ‘the crown of the holy and victorious martyrs of
Christ’, and the ‘Life’ even concludes by telling how ‘the Romans’ celebrate his martyrdom
on 29 June. This note probably was the pre-text of the ‘Martyrdom of Paul’, one of the
short texts that are transmitted with the apparatus. The Prologue of the Letters of Paul
returns to this theme in the following ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’, where more space
is given to 2 Tim than to any other Pauline letter. The third main part of the prologue, the
240 Résumé
‘Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul’ (which is mainly based on Eusebius) shows the same
strong interest in Paul the martyr, and brings three quotations from the end of 2 Tim. The
‘Chronicle’ ends with an apologetic section that explains why Luke did not include Paul’s
martyrdom.
The most important conclusion regarding the ‘Paulusbild’ in the Euthalian apparatus
is that it shows a great diversity. The differences are not only between texts that belong to
different genres; there are also differences within texts that belong to the same genre. This
diversity exists at all levels. Some of the texts, especially the Prologue to the Letters of Paul,
can only be characterized as patchworks, and the ‘Paulusbild’ of each part (e.g., the ‘Life’
and the ‘Epitome’) may be studied separately. This has consequences for the possibility of
placing the apparatus in a particular theological milieu, as Willard suggested as a task for
scholars in the future. If some of the idiosyncratic interpretations of the apparatus may
be found in a patristic author, one may possibly establish a link between the Euthalian
piece in question and that author, but one should not draw any conclusions regarding the
apparatus as a whole. This insight is not new in Euthalian scholarship, but the present
commentary has offered substantial evidence that confirms it.
5. The Catholic Letters in the Euthalian Apparatus

The Catholic letters are treated in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις. The κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι do not seem to venture far beyond the pre-text. In one instance we find new infor-
mation, namely the identification of the Mount of Transfiguration as Tabor (κεφάλαιον-
τίτλος 2 Pet II). This is found to be a well-known tradition, probably based on an
interpretation of Ps 88:13 (LXX). The ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters show more exam-
ples of a rather free paraphrase that may say something quite different from the pre-text.
This is found e.g. in the ὑπόθεσις of Jud, which states that ‘Michael the archangel could
not bear (ὑπήνεγκε) the blasphemy of the devil’, a transformation of the difficult phrase
οὐκ ἐτόλμησεν κρίσιν ἐπενεγκεῖν in the pre-text (Jud 1:9), which probably means that
Michael did not dare to accuse the devil but left the matter to God. Thus Michael is
used as an example of showing restraint against adversaries. This rather difficult thought
has been replaced by the condemnation of blasphemy, which is easier to understand.
It is worth noting that this ὑπόθεσις presents the new idea in a language that closely
resembles the pre-text, the most important change being the use of ὑπενεγκεῖν instead of
ἐπενεγκεῖν. On a few occasions the ὑπόθεσις may use a language that clearly has another
source: The ὑπόθεσις of 1 Joh says that John ‘explains that the mystery that has come to
us is not something new’ (μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον). This phrase is
also found in the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Joh and in the ὑπόθεσις of Eph, where it may belong, as it
looks like a paraphrase of &QIo
The Euthalian apparatus has not much to say on the authors and circumstances of
the Catholic letters. This may be explained on the basis of the pre-texts. The letters of
Peter are clearly considered works by the apostle both in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the
ὑποθέσεις. The ὑπόθεσις of 1 Joh identifies the author as ‘he who wrote the gospel’ and
does not introduce another person named John. There is no mention of the fifth Johan-
nine writing, the Apocalypse, but it is difficult to say if this has any significance. As for
the addressees, we find a few short statements. The ὑποθέσεις of Jas and 1 Pet understand
Acts in the Euthalian Apparatus 241
the prescripts of these letters literally and takes the ‘Diaspora’ as a reference to the Jewish
origin of the addressees. The ὑπόθεσις 1 Pet even states that the addressees needed to
be strengthened because they were of Jewish origin. In this we may see a repetition of a
similar tendency in the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters.
A most interesting difference between the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις is found
in their respective paraphrases of Jas. The teaching found in this letter on the relation-
ships between justification, works and faith has presented a problem for the interpreters.
Some find in this letter a view opposed to that of Paul, others find that Jas merely tries to
correct a misunderstanding of Pauline theology. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι offer a paraphrase
of +BToUIBUJTWFSZDMFBSBOEBMTPEJďDVMUUPIBSNPOJ[FXJUI1BVMAćBUPOFOPU
by faith alone, but also by works, not by one of them separately, but by both together, is
justified.’ (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Jas IV). This may not be a very tendentious interpretation
(cf. 2:24) but it is worth noting that there are also some ideas in the passage (o
that the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος does not mention. The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος does not include the
idea that the faith of Abraham was made complete through works (ἐκ τῶν ἔργων ἡ πίστις
ἐτελειώθη, 2:22), which would have been easier to harmonize with the Pauline view. In
the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος, there is no mention of any organic connection between faith and
works: They are treated separately, as two necessary components in the process of justifi-
cation. When we consider the ὑπόθεσις of Jas, we find that the pair faith/works has been
omitted and that the ὑπόθεσις instead emphasizes the opposition between hearers and
doers of the law (which correspond to the opposition between hearer and doers of the
word in the pre-text, 1:22). More importantly, the ὑπόθεσις makes James say that ‘one
should show faith not only in word, but also in deed’ (καὶ οὐ λόγῳ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔργῳ
δεῖ δεικνύναι τὴν πίστιν). The expression πίστιν δεικνύναι seems to be borrowed from
the pre-text (κἀγώ σοι δείξω ἐκ τῶν ἔργων μου τὴν πίστιν, 2:18). The ὑπόθεσις has how-
ever replaced the phrase ἐκ τῶν ἔργων with ἔργῳ. The conclusion is that the κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι and the ὑπόθεσις have treated this problem differently. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι pres-
ent a pointed text that is difficult to harmonize with Paul since faith and works apparently
are placed on the same level, as equally necessary for justification. The ὑπόθεσις proceeds
in the opposite direction and has combined 1:22 and 2:18 into a statement that can more
easily be harmonized with Pauline theology: One should show faith both in word and
deed.
6. Acts in the Euthalian Apparatus

Acts is given a less thorough treatment in the apparatus than we would expect. The most
detailed paraphrase is found in the long list of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. This list seems to be
based on a careful reading of Acts and contains very few errors. An apparent misunder-
standing is the reference to Philip in Acts 8 as the ‘apostle’, but the text may possibly use
the term in a wider sense. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι also seem to forget that Paul according
to Acts spoke to the Ephesian elders in Miletus and not in Ephesus. This error occurs in a
ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος and may be secondary. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι in Acts pay attention to
the major themes of the pre-text, such as the coming of the Spirit, the preaching and the
miraculous healings of the apostles, the outpouring of the Spirit on the gentiles, and the
conflicts with the Jews leading to the arrest and process against Paul. Throughout the list,
242 Résumé
the geographical movements of the characters are carefully noted. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
of Acts are in some manuscripts attributed to Pamphilus of Caesarea. Even if this attribu-
tion is doubtful, one may say that it reflects a recognition of the high standard of this list.
When we turn to the ὑπόθεσις of Acts, we find that this text lies on the opposite end
of the spectrum. This text is a very short summary of Acts. It mentions the Ascension of
Christ, the coming of the Spirit, the appointing of Matthias and of the deacons, and the
election of Paul. The remainder of Acts is summarized simply as ‘what he went through,
and, finally, his voyage to Rome.’ This very unsatisfactory ὑπόθεσις was apparently ex-
panded by two lists; one of apostles and deacons and another of the wonders (σημεῖα) in
Acts. The ὑπόθεσις of Acts includes the traditions about Luke known from Eusebius, that
he was an Antiochene and a physician. A similar short treatment of Acts is the ‘Epitome
of Acts’ (included in the Prologue to Acts). This text includes the same traditions about
Luke as the ὑπόθεσις, and the summary of Acts is also very similar. Only three specific
events are referred to: The Ascension of Christ, the coming of the Spirit, and the con-
version of Paul. The other themes of the work, such as the miraculous healings and the
persecution of the apostles are referred to only in general statements.
Finally, Acts was also one of the pre-texts of the ‘Life of Paul’ and the ‘Chronicle of the
Preaching of Paul’, both included in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. In both texts we
find that the story of Paul in Acts has been used together with material from the letters
and extra-canonical traditions. Neither of these two texts attempt to give any complete
paraphrase of Acts, since they are only interested in one of its characters. The ‘Life’ is
very selective in its summary, mentioning only one visit of Paul to Jerusalem before his
final journey and focusing on the conversion of Paul and on his death as a martyr. The
‘Chronicle’ is also selective since its main interest is to date the events on the basis of Eu-
sebius’ Chronikon.
7. The Composition of the Euthalian Editions

A strong interest in the secondary literature on the apparatus has been to determine which
of its elements were original, i.e., belonged to the editions to which the prologues were
prefixed. Scholars have had a range of different views on the subject. At one end of the
spectrum stands J. Armitage Robinson, who made the words in the Euthalian prologues
a criterion of authenticity. Only components explicitly mentioned there could, accord-
ing to Robinson, be considered original. At the other end stands von Soden, who was
willing to accept practically the complete apparatus as original. The differences between
these two scholars regarding this correspond well with their different views on the date
of the apparatus: Robinson has an early date (4th cent.) for Euthalius and a ‘minimal-
ist’ view of the contents of the apparatus, while von Soden places him late (in the 7th
cent.) and includes the maximum of the material found in the manuscripts. The present
commentary has not focused on these questions, since a new edition of the apparatus is
needed. At the present stage of research only conjectures can be made. One may in fact
ask the question whether ‘Euthalius’ and the uniformity of the editions is evidence of a
later construction. Some observations made by earlier scholars show that this possibility
at least should be considered: (1) von Dobschütz pointed out that there are indications
of a change between the first prologue (to the Pauline edition) and the two later ones (to
The Composition of the Euthalian Editions 243
Acts and to the Catholic letters): Only in the two later ones do we get the impression that
the author is in a monastic environment, since he only there asks brothers and fathers
to pray for him. (2) Another important change is the stylistic one, a change which von
Soden paid special attention to in his study. The two later prologues are composed in
a high-sounding language loaded with self-deprecating phrases that the first prologue
employs in a more moderate way. One may say that the two later prologues have more
form than content. The so-called Prologue to the Catholic Letters is a striking example,
as it does not offer one word on the contents of these letters. This change in style may
of course be explained on the basis of the biography of Euthalius, as von Soden tried to
do. (3) An interesting link between the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ and the Prologue
to Acts is that both have ‘progress’ as a central theme. But the theme is developed in two
different ways: The ‘Epitome’ concentrates on the progress on the communities and this
progress is perceived in their behavior. The Prologue to Acts, on the other hand, treats the
individual progress of the student of scripture. The constant reading and meditating upon
the biblical text will in the end lead to the contemplation of eternity itself. (4) There are
also some strange differences in the ‘Editorial notices’ (contained in the prologues) that
describe the Euthalian editions: It is only the Prologue to Acts that says that the author
read the biblical text kata prosodian, and von Soden pointed out that the Prologue to the
Catholic Letters seems to forget the division of the text into lections (if the text in our
printed editions is sound). The language used to describe the divisions also shows differ-
ences. The ‘Editorial Notice’ in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul speaks of the ‘division of
the readings’, while the corresponding ‘Editorial Notice’ in the Prologue to Acts mentions
the ‘mediocre divisions of our unlearned reading’. The interpretations of these phrases is
quite uncertain. The shift in number is unexpected in this kind of technical language and
one also feels that ‘reading/readings’ (anagnosis) here refers to quite different things, to
the act of reading and to ‘lections’. — These differences cannot be considered evidence
that the editions were not actually of the same kind but they nevertheless raise the suspi-
cion that the vague phrases and terminology do not necessarily describe the same scribal
processes. This complex of questions is made more difficult by the transmission of the
apparatus. The vast majority of manuscripts are medieval minuscules that are separated
from the original editions by several centuries. Besides, the only uncial manuscript from
late antiquity that supposedly represents the Euthalian edition of Paul (Codex H) is not
preserved in entirety. If the Prologue of Acts and the Prologue to the Catholic Letters are
the work of a later hand (or hands) than the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, one may think
that the Prologue of Acts was written in imitation of the earlier work, since this prologue
explicitly refers to an earlier work on the Pauline letters. In this context, it should also be
remembered that only the edition of Paul exists in a Syriac version. The close association
between that edition and the edition of Acts and the Catholic letters is not found to be
universal and may belong to a strand in the Greek tradition. In any case, the diversity in
the descriptions of the edition contained in the ‘Editorial Notices’ comes as no surprise
in view of the commentary on the ‘Paulusbild’ found in the apparatus.
244 Résumé
8. The Ancient and Medieval Parallel Materials

in Relation to the Euthalian apparatus
The present commentary has also included parallel materials, mainly exegetical literature
from ancient, medieval and modern times. Four sources have especially been consulted:
The so-called Marcionite prologues; the Canones of Priscillian, and the commentaries of
Theodoret and Theophylact, which both include ὑποθέσεις. These were selected because
they contain parallels to the Euthalian material with respect to genre, not because they
were considered particularly relevant when it comes to placing ‘Euthalius’ in a theologi-
cal milieu. The present commentary has confirmed the insights of previous scholars that
the Euthalian material is so diverse in itself that it will be very difficult to place it in one
specific environment. At the present stage of research, the comparison with material on
the basis of genre therefore seemed to be more promising. For the purpose of comparison,
the Canones of Prisicillian may be considered together with the Euthalian κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι, since their form at first glance seems quite similar to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. Both
consist of short, independent phrases that do not form a continuous text. The ‘Marcionite’
prologues, and the ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret and Theophylact, on the other hand, may be
compared to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. They are all continuous texts that treat the contents
of the pre-texts as well as the communicative situation.
The Canones of Priscillian and the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. It has long been ob-
served that the Canones of Priscillian is one of the few real parallels to the Euthalian
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι in the West. In his introduction to the New Testament, Jülicher de-
scribed Priscillian as ‘eine Art Seitengänger zu Euthalius’ (see the edition revised by Fas-
cher; Jülicher/Fascher 1931: 576), but points out that Priscillian did his work ‘aus dogma-
tischem Interesse’. Jülicher was clearly correct when he established this work of Priscillian
as a parallel to the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. We may also agree that the special interests
of Priscillian are clearly visible in the Canones. There is a dualistic tendency in his dog-
matics and an ascetic tendency in his ethics (Fontaine 1997: 452; Brennecke 1999: 599).
These tendencies can be felt in his summaries of the Pauline teaching (see e.g., Can. III, IV,
XXIX, XXXIII). If we turn to the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, we may say that it is more
difficult to find any special theological tendency in this material that is foreign to the pre-
texts. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι seem to follow their pre-texts closely, and if they diverge from
them, it is rather with respect to style (cf. how Rom 3:1, τί τὸ περισσὸν τοῦ Ἰουδαίου, has
been rewritten as περὶ ὑπεροχῆς Ἰσραήλ in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom III!). We should not
exclude the possibility that the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι might represent a tendentious
interpretation and possible distortion of the pre-texts, but this creative element seems
rather to belong at the level of selection (e.g. by neglecting certain passages) and is there-
fore more difficult to grasp. If there is a hidden agenda, it seems that this agenda has been
concealed with great skill. Jülicher observed that there is clearly a dogmatic interest in the
Canones, and he seems to suggest that this is not the case in the corresponding κεφάλαια-
τίτλοι. These observations have been confirmed by the present study. There is however
another difference between the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the Canones: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
are clearly meta-texts in the sense that they are texts about texts. The Canones may also be
called meta-texts, but their actual ‘pre-text’ seems rather to be the Pauline teaching itself,
not different passages in his letters. This is suggested by the terminology of the Priscil-
The Ancient and Medieval Parallel Materials in Relation to the Euthalian apparatus 245
lian prologue, where the passages in the Pauline letters are referred to as testimonia, i.e.,
‘testimonies’ of the Pauline teaching. The Canones thus search behind the Pauline text
and present a series of statements that summarize the teachings of Paul. This seems to
be the reason why the Canones do not include the rich meta-vocabulary of the Euthalian
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι (e.g., εὐχή, εὐχαριστία, παραίνεσις). Their primary object is not the text
but the teaching, while the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι has, one may say, this order re-
versed.
The ‘Marcionite’ prologues and the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. The old theory that these pro-
logues originated in Marcionite circles has been attacked by Dahl (1978/2000). The con-
ventional reference to these texts as ‘Marcionite’ has however been kept throughout the
present study. Regardless of what one may think about their origin, the ‘Marcionite’ pro-
logues go far in identifying Paul’s opponents as Judaists. The church at Rome had, accord-
ing to these texts, been tempted by the ‘false apostles’ to adhere to the Law and circumci-
sion. It is most interesting to note that with regard to this, the ‘Marcionite’ prologues are
close to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, where also the anti-Judaistic ideas dominate. As has
been noted earlier in the present Resume, the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις are more radical than
Paul himself as they make Paul abolish circumcision even for Jewish Christians (ὑπόθεσις
of Rom). In addition to this similarity in outlook, there is also an affinity with regard to
genre and structure. The term ‘prologue’ used for the Marcionite set is unfortunate. In the
present study, the designation ‘prologue’ has been used for texts that open the conversa-
tion between author and reader. This is not the case with these ‘Marcionite’ texts. I have
however kept the genre-designation ‘prologue’ since it has been in use for a long time.
A better designation would perhaps be ‘argumenta’ (ὑποθέσεις). Just as the Euthalian
ὑποθέσεις, the ‘Marcionite’ texts were probably composed by the use of a ‘search formula’,
a series of questions that will produce the essential information about the pre-text.
The ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret and the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. The 5th cent. ὑποθέσεις of
Theodoret differ from the Euthalian ones as they are part of a commentary on the Pauline
letters that have come down to us. They often refer to the commentary and assure the
reader that the ideas will be clearer in the commentary than in the ὑπόθεσις. In contrast
to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, Theodoret makes a serious attempt to place the Pauline let-
ters within the framework of Paul’s biography. This is the case, e.g., in the ὑπόθεσις of
Ephesians, where a large section is occupied by the theme ‘Paul in Ephesus’. The material
is taken from Acts. The use of Acts throughout these ὑποθέσεις provides an interesting
contrast to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, which never refer explicitly to
Acts. Thus, in the work of Theodoret we see the methods of a biblical scholar who tries
to bring harmony between the different apostolic writings, something that the Euthalian
ὑποθέσεις as a rule do not attempt. Related to this ‘scholarly’ approach is Theodoret’s
more detailed description of Paul’s opponents. Thus, according to Theodoret, Paul is in
the letter to the Romans fighting against two enemies at the same time; the ordered ‘pha-
lanx’ of the Jews, and the more undisciplined ‘gang’ of the heretics, made up of (proto-)
Marcionites, Valentinians and Manichaeans. This creates a very interesting contrast to
the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, which never refer to heretical movements by name. In contrast
to the ‘Marcionite’ prologues and the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, the ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret
are not dependent on any search formula and their structure is therefore more flexible.
246 Résumé
Thus, the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις share in fact more features with the ‘Marcionite’ prologues
than with Theodoret.
The ὑποθέσεις of Theophylact and the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. The 11th cent. commentary
of Theophylact on the New Testament (without the Apocalypse) has also been used in the
present commentary as comparative material. This work is also related to the Euthalian
apparatus, as the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters also appear here. The com-
mentary of Theophylact also bears the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts, though in a shorter form.
This demonstrates that the auxiliary material in the Greek tradition often has been recy-
cled. This has the consequence that the question of authorship here becomes as complex
as with the biblical books themselves. The main point of interest in the present Resume,
is Theophylact’s ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters. These ὑποθέσεις are possibly medieval
compositions, as they probably were written for Theophylact’s commentary. The content
of these texts may confirm this: Here, we find an interest in describing the ancient cities
where Paul’s churches were situated. Thus, Corinth is ‘flourishing with much wealth and
wisdom’, and Ephesus was the home of the ‘most famous philosophers.’ These conven-
tional images of the ancient cities are cleverly connected with the themes of the letters.
The rich members of the church at Corinth are therefore ‘typical’ of the city. This kind of
exegesis probably belongs to an age where knowledge about the environment Paul lived
in is something one learned in school. This aspect of Theophylact’s ὑπόθεσις makes for an
interesting contrast to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, which do not show this interest.
Thus, when compared to various elements of the Euthalian apparatus, the parallel ma-
terials included in the present study offer both similarities and contrasts. The Euthalian
ὑποθέσεις share the emphasis on the anti-Judaistic Paul with the ‘Marcionite’ prologues.
The Greek sources, however, include some perspectives that the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις do
not have, for example, the harmonization with Acts (Theodoret) and the ‘antiquarian’
interest in the Greco-Roman world (Theophylact).
9. Comparison of the Parallel Materials

In this final section, I will briefly compare some features of the parallel materials that I
find particularly interesting. Hopefully, it will be possible to return to this material in
future studies.
The ‘Paulusbild’. The parallel materials used in the present study is evidence of how
the person of Paul was exalted in later exegetical literature. The most elegant way to ex-
press this reverence is to refer to Paul simply as ‘the Apostle’ (in contrast to Paul’s own
use of the title without the article). This is used by all four of the sources. In the Latin
material and in Theophylact, this title is not expanded with epithets, but in Theodoret we
find these added to it: Paul is frequently called ‘the divine (θεῖος) Apostle’ or ‘the divinely
inspired (θεσπέσιος) Apostle’. This reverence for the Apostle extends to his co-workers
in all the sources except one: In the short ‘Marcionite’ prologues, mention of co-workers
is not a regular feature, but Priscillian devotes some space to them (LIV and LXXVI),
where the titles that Paul himself uses are repeated: Timothy is his ‘fellow worker’ and
Epaphroditus his ‘fellow apostle’ and ‘fellow soldier’. In the Greek sources, however, the
co-workers also are given epithets. Thus, Theodoret refers to Timothy as the ‘thrice-
blessed’ (τρισμακάριος) and Tychicus as the ‘admirable’ (θαυμάσιος). The interest in the
Comparison of the Parallel Materials 247
co-workers is strongest in Theophylact, who devotes much space in his ὑποθέσεις of the
Pastorals to Paul’s co-workers and his role towards them. Here, there is an interesting
discussion of the genre of the Pastorals, where the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Timothy answers the
possible objection ‘why did Paul first entrust the care of communities to his disciples and
afterwards write to educate them?’ For the excellent answer given by Theophylact, I refer
the reader to the Appendix. In all four of the sources, however, it is Paul who is the center
of interest, and three of the sources refer to him as an ‘Apostle of the gentiles’ (Priscillian,
Canon LXXV; Theodoret and Theophylact both use this title in the ὑπόθεσις of Hebrews).
Their interest in Paul’s biography varies. It has been noted that as far as the ὑποθέσεις
are concerned, Theodoret pays more attention to Paul’s travels than the other three sourc-
es. The short ‘Marcionite’ prologues had no space for such material and its absence can-
not really be considered to betray a lack of interest. The Canones of Priscillian include, in
spite of their mainly dogmatic interest, some material related to Paul’s life: The Apostolic
Council (oddly, assigned to Antioch, LXXV) and Paul’s past as a persecutor (LXXI). In-
terestingly, this reference to the pre-Christian Paul is in the same canon followed by a
reference to his rapture to Paradise and the instruction he received there from Christ (sic).
This juxtaposition serves to preserve the idealized image of Paul and the authorization of
his letters. An idealized image may also be found in the two Greek sources. The ὑποθέσεις
of Theodoret and Theophylact do not devote much space to Paul’s persecution of the
church. Theodoret gives in his ὑπόθεσις of Galatians a catalogue of the terms of abuse that
Paul uses of himself in the letters (including ‘persecutor’), saying that ‘they who read his
letters know that.’ In their detailed commentary on the text of the letters (especially with
regard to Galatians), the biographical material was of course included, but the ὑποθέσεις
do not highlight it. In addition to Paul’s conversion, the most significant event of his life
may be his death as a martyr. The ‘Marcionite’ prologues briefly allude to it, referring to
Paul’s imprisonments in Ephesus and Rome. ‘Martyrdom’ is also mentioned as a theme
in the ‘Marcionite’ prologue to 1 Timothy. Theodoret expresses an interest in Paul’s mar-
tyrdom by quoting Paul’s words on his imminent end, both in the ὑπόθεσις of Eph and
in the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Tim. This theme is important also for Theophylact, who also brings
the well-known quotation from 2 Tim (4.6; ὑπόθεσις of Heb). Theophylact also creates
a division within the Pauline letter collection that is related to this theme, saying that all
the letters of Paul are holy, but especially the ones written from prison (ὑπόθεσις of Col).
The clearest difference between our sources lies in their description of Paul’s oppo-
nents. According to the ‘Marcionite’ prologues, the opponents are the ‘false apostles’. The
significance of this phrase within the ‘Marcionite’ prologues have been much debated,
and it has not been the aim of the present study to solve this problem. Here, we can
only say that these apostles are associated with Judaistic teaching, although a ‘rhetoric
of philosophy’ also appears as an opposing ideology (see the ‘Marcionite’ prologue on
1 Cor). When we turn to Theodoret, the picture is quite different. His language with
regard to Paul’s opponents has already been referred to: Theodoret depicts them as proto-
Valentinians, proto-Marcionites, and even as ‘Manichees’. Another aspect in Theodoret is
the idea that Paul’s letters function polemically even for later generations. Thus, accord-
ing to Theodoret, the Arians, provoked by the high Christology of the opening chapter
of Hebrews, react by trying to expel the letter from the canon. In the latest source in our
parallel material, Theophylact, we find that this aspect is less prominent. In his ὑποθέσεις,
248 Résumé
we encounter a less specific vocabulary. In his ὑπόθεσις of Galatians, Theophylact men-

tions the observances of the Galatians as Greek and Jewish, but only his verse-by-verse
commentary explains to which traditions the different observances belong.
The meta-terminology. The parallel material offers a variety of meta-terms. These have
not been the focus of the present commentary. The ‘Marcionite’ prologues gives a good
opportunity to observe how meta-terms function, since they are short and as a rule con-
tain only one or two terms. These are most often meta-communicative verbs. Interest-
ingly, the prologues that treat the first three communities in the collection (Galatians/
Corinthians/Romans) all depict Paul as one who calls them back (revoco) to the true
faith. This presupposes that even the Romans had erred, something that is not altogether
clear on the basis of the pre-text. The use of the same meta-communicative verb for Paul’s
communication with these churches creates a sub-group in the collection. Similarly, Paul
is said to ‘praise’ (conlaudo) three other communities (Thessalonians/ Laodiceans/Philip-
pians). According to Dahl (1978/2000: 189) only two of the prologues deal with literary
genre. 2 Cor is referred to as a letter of consolation (litterae consolatoriae) while Philemon
is labeled as a private letter (litterae familiares). He considers this to be evidence of an
expansion of the set: Originally, the text focused on the churches, not the letters. At a
later stage, new prologues were added. This had an influence on how the entire set was
read and transformed the prologues into meta-texts in a strict sense. That is why the
nominal genre-designations occur only in these added prologues. This is a convincing
argument. The Canones of Priscillian also use some meta-terms. These are all in the form
of meta-communicative verbs. I have already suggested that the reason for this may be
that the Canones have the teachings of Paul as their ‘pre-text’ and only use the letters
as a medium. If this is the case, they are related to the hypothetical first edition of the
‘Marcionite’ prologues. The meta-terms that do occur are the ones that we would expect:
Paul ‘commends’ (commendo LIV), he ‘commands’ (iubeo LVII), ‘orders’ (praecipio LVII),
‘gives thanks (gratias ago LX), ‘gives testimony’ (testimonium reddo, LXI), and ‘rebukes’
(exprobro, LXII). When we turn to the Greek parallel materials, we find a greater variety.
Some of the long ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret contains a rich meta-vocabulary describing
the different sections of the letter. The use of these terms is therefore much more specific
than in the ‘Marcionite’ prologues and in the Canones. His ὑπόθεσις of Romans may
serve as an example. The opening declares that Paul in this letter brings ‘various teaching
of different kinds’ (ποικίλη καὶ παντοδαπὴ διδασκαλία). This general designation is fol-
lowed by more specific ones: Paul ‘shows’ (δεικνύω), ‘proves guilty’ (ἐξελέγχω), ‘teaches’
(διδάσκω), ‘exhorts’ (παραινέω), and ‘encourages’ (προτρέπω). Theodoret however does
not use this method throughout. In the long ὑπόθεσις on Ephesians, he is too much
concerned with the biographical details and does not attempt to cover the subject matter
of the letter in any detail. He uses only two nominal genre-designations at the end: The
letter consists of two parts, he says, the teaching of the divine message (διδασκαλία τοῦ
θείου κηρύγματος) and ethical exhortation (παραίνεσις ἠθική). We finally turn to the
medieval ὑποθέσεις of Theophylact. These texts also express an admiration for the rhe-
torical element in the Pauline letters. The ὑπόθεσις of Romans even mentions the episode
in Acts where Paul is referred to as ‘Hermes’ because of his excellence of speech. The use
of meta-terms is however not consistent. The ὑποθέσεις of Romans and Ephesians do
not contain any such designations of the pre-texts. The ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor, however uses
Comparison of the Parallel Materials 249
‘correct’ (διορθέομαι) to characterize the entire letter, while Paul in the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Cor
is said to apologize (ἀπολογέομαι), approve (ἀποδέχομαι) and praise (ἐπαινέω). The lack
of consistency in the meta-terminology reflects the fact that the genre ὑπόθεσις is used
with great freedom. Some of Theophylact’s ὑποθέσεις are rather general prefaces that may
go far into other matters, such as the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels or general proverbs.
Thus, in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor, it is said that worldly wisdom is the mother of all evils for
those who trust her in all things. In the use of proverbs, the ὑποθέσεις of Theophylact
resemble the medieval prologue.
The whole system of meta-terms in various commentators on Paul, both in the Greek
and Latin tradition deserves to be studied more intensively. Within the framework of
the present commentary, it has not been possible to give the parallel material a full treat-
ment.
Part Five
Appendices
V. Appendix I
1. ‘Marcionite’ Prologues
[‘Marcionite’ Prologues of the Letters of Paul.

Text in 4PVUFSo>
Ad Galatas To the Galatians
Galatae sunt Graeci. Hi verbum veritatis The Galatians are Greeks. First, they re-
primum ab apostolo acceperunt sed post ceived the word of truth from the Apostle,
descessum eius temptati sunt a falsis apo- but after he left, they were tempted by the
stolis ut in lege et circumcisione verteren- false apostles to turn themselves to the Law
tur. Hos apostolus revocat ad fidem uerita- and circumcision. The Apostle calls them
tis, scribens eis ab Epheso. back to belief in the truth, writing to them
from Ephesus.
Ad Corinthios To the Corinthians

Corinthii sunt Achaei. Et hi similiter ab The Corinthians are Achaeans. In a similar
apostolis audierunt verbum veritatis, et way, they also had heard the word of truth
subversi mulitfarie a falsis apostolis, qui- from the apostles, but they were in many
dam a philosophiae verbosa eloquentia, ways subverted, some by a verbose rheto-
alii a secta legis Iudaicae inducti. Hos re- ric of philosophy, others led by the heresy
vocat apostolus ad veram et evangelicam of the Jewish Law. The Apostle calls them
sapientiam, scribens eis ab Epheso. back to the true wisdom of the Gospel,
writing to them from Ephesus.
Ad Romanos To the Romans

Romani sunt in parte Italiae. Hi praeventi The Romans are partly of Italian origin.
a pseudapostolis, sub nomine domini no- They were reached first by the false apos-
stri Iesu Christi in lege et prophetis erant tles, and under the name of Jesus Christ
inducti. Hos revocat apostolus ad veram et they had been deceived by means of the
evangelicam fidem, scribens eis ab Athenis. Law and the prophets. The Apostle calls
them back to the true faith of the Gospel,
writing to them from Athens.
Ad Thessalonicenses To the Thessalonians

Thessalonicenses sunt Macedones in Chri- The Thessalonians are Macedonians in
sto Iesu, qui accepto verbo veritatis persti- Christ Jesus, who, having received the
terunt in fide, etiam in persecutione civium word of truth, persisted in faith even in
suorum; praeterea nec receperunt ea quae persecution from their own citizens. Be-
254 Appendix I
a falsis apostolis dicebantur. Hos conlaudat sides, they did not accept what the false
apostolus, scribens eis ab Athenis. apostles said. The Apostle praises them,
writing to them from Athens.
Ad Laodicenses To the Laodiceans.

Laodicenses sunt Asiani. Hi accepto verbo The Laodiceans are Asians. Having re-
veritatis perstiterunt in fide. Hos conlaudat ceived the word of truth, they persisted in
apostolus, scirbens eis a Roma de carcere. faith. The Apostle praises them, writing to
them from prison in Rome.
Ad Colosenses To the Colossians

Colosenses et hi, sicut Laodicenses, sunt The Colossians are also Asians, as the La-
Asiani. Et ipsi praeventi erant a pseudapo- odiceans. Also they were first reached by
stolis, nec ad hos acessit ipse apostolus, sed the false apostles, and the Apostle did not
et hos per epistulam recorrigit: audierant come to them himself but he corrects even
enim verbum ab Archippo, qui et mini- them through a letter, for they had heard
sterium in eos accepit. Ergo apostolus iam the word from Archippus, who also re-
ligatus scribit eis ab Epheso. ceived a ministry to them. Therefore, the
Apostle, now in chains, writes to them
from Ephesus.
Ad Philippenses To the Philippians

Philipenses sunt Macedones. Hi accepto The Philippians are Macedonians. Having
verbo veritatis perstiterunt in fide, nec re- received the word of truth they persisted in
ceperunt falsos apostolos. Hos apostolus faith and did not receive the false apostles.
conlaudat, scribens eis a Roma de carcere. The Apostle praises them, writing to them
from prison in Rome.
Ad Philemonem To Philemon
Philemoni familiares litteras facit pro One- To Philemon he writes a private letter on
simo servo eius. Scribit autem ei a Roma behalf of Onesimus, his servant. He writes
de carcere. to him from prison in Rome.
Ad Corinthios II To the Corinthians II

Post actam paenitentiam consolatorias After they had repented he writes a letter
scribit eis a Troade, et conlaudans eos hor- of consolation to them from Troas, and,
tatur ad meliora. praising them, he exhorts them to behave
even better.
Ad Thessalonicenses II To the Thessalonians II

Ad Thessalonicenses secundam scribit et To the Thessalonians he writes a second
notum facit eis de temporibus novissimis, letter and he makes things known about
et de adversarii detectione. Scribit ab Athe- the last days and about the disclosure of
nis. the adversary. He writes from Athens.
<&EJUJPOPG1SJTDJMMJBO5FYUJO4DIFQTTo> 255
Ad Timotheum I To Timothy I
Timotheum instruit et docet de ordinatio- He instructs and teaches Timothy about
ne episcopatus et diaconii et omnis eccle- rules pertaining to the office of bishops
siasticae disciplinae. and deacons and to the entire discipline of
the church.
Ad Timotheum II To Timothy II
Item Timotheo scribit de exhortatione Likewise, he writes to Timothy about ex-
martyrii et omnis regulae veritatis, et quid hortation to martyrdom and to adhere to
futurum sit temporibus novissimis, et de the entire rule of truth, and what will hap-
sua passione. pen in the last days and about his suffering.
Ad Titum To Titus
Titum commonefacit et instruit de consti- He reminds and instructs Titus about the
tutione presbyterii, et de spiritali conversa- ordaining of the office of elders, about spir-
tione, et de hereticis vitandis, qui in scrip- itual conversation and about avoiding her-
turis Iudaicis credunt. etics, who believe in the Jewish writings.
2. Edition of Priscillian
[Edition of Priscillian.
Text in 4DIFQTTo>
Prologus Priscilliani in canones epistu- Prologue to the Canons of the Letters of

larum Pauli apostoli. Paul by Priscillian
Multis occupatus necessitatibus litteris tuis Since I have been occupied with many du-
tardius respondi, carissime. Postulaveras ties I respond late to your letter, my dearest
enim, ut contra haereticorum versutam friend. For you demanded that I through a
fallaciam firmissimum aliquod propugna- clever device should find a defense in the
culum in divinis scripturis sagaci indagine divine scriptures against the cunning de-
reperirem, quod non tam prolixum vel ceit of the heretics, that should not be as
fastidiosum esset quam concinnum ac ve- verbose and burdensome as it should be
nustum existeret, per quod velocius eorum elegant and graceful, something through
prosterneretur inpudentia, qui obiecta sibi which their impudence might be over-
verissima testimonia in suum pravissimum thrown. They, who when confronted with
sensum ea interpretari nituntur aut certe the most true testimonies either labor to
negent haec esse scripta. Ideoque contra interpret them in their own most corrupt
eos tale aliquid excogitandum esse dicis, sense or even deny that these things are
quod not versuta oratoris eloquentia tur- written. Therefore, you say that against
gescat vel lubricis dialecticae syllogismis them something should be invented that
involvatur, nam haec quibusdam maxima is not inflated with the eloquence of the
256 Appendix I
solent esse perfugia, sed tale sit vis, quod orator or wrapped up in the deceitful syl-
mera veritate effulgeat atque mira constet MPHJTNTPGEJBMFDUJDToGPSUPUIFTFUIJOHT
scripturarum auctoritate. Illa vero vitari TPNF QFPQMF VTF UP UBLF SFGVHF o CVU JO-
debere quae sunt spiritali et innocuae fi- stead you wish it to be such that it shines
dei Christianae contraria atque inimica, with the pure truth and stands firm with
quippe quae mundi existens sapientia ab the wonderful authority of the scriptures.
apostolo sit stultitia nuncupata. Haec te Those things, which are harmful and hos-
saepissime audiens et alia his similia mihi tile to the spiritual and innocent Christian
scribente e re mihi visum est ipsas scrip- faith, should be avoided, especially be-
turas in medio positas idest quattuordecim cause the Apostle refers to the wisdom of
epistolas beatissimi Pauli apostoli in earum the world as foolishness. Listening to you,
textu sensus testimoniorum distinguere ip- who most wisely wrote me this and other
sisque testimoniis numeros ordinare, quo- things similar to these, I decided that it is
sque numeros unicuique epistularum ab beneficial to place the scriptures in the cen-
uno incipiens usque in finem quantitatis ter, that is, the fourteen letters of the most
suae modum sequaciter atramento super- blessed Paul the Apostle, to distinguish the
notare. Praeterea ex ipsis testimoniis quae- sense of the testimonies in their text, to
dam verba decerpens canones iisdem con- number the testimonies themselves, and to
cinnavi saporibus ipsorum testimoniorum write above, in black ink, the numbers in
constantes. Quibus canonibus epistularum sequence, beginning with the number one
titulos et ipsorum testimoniorum numeros for each letter and continuing to its end.
subternotavi, ut ubi vel quotum quaeres te- Moreover, selecting some words from the
stimonium, per eundem canonem cui haec testimonies themselves, I put together can-
subdita sunt facillime reperias. Ipsi autem ons made up of the essence of the testimo-
canones proprios habent numeros mineo nies. Below the canons I noted the names
descriptos idest in quattuordecim epistulas of the letters and the numbers of the testi-
canones nonaginta; quosque numeros in monies so that you easily, by means of the
omnem textum scripturae convenientibus same canon below which they are noted,
sibi testimoniis supernotatos invenies illic may know where and in what place of the
videlicet, unde unicuique canoni pauca sequence you will find a testimony. Even
verba necessaria esse videntur. Cur autem the canons have their own numbers, writ-
non omne testimonium possideat canon, ten in red ink, that is, ninety canons from
sollerti studio animadverte, quia eadem the fourteen letters of Paul. These numbers
testimonia ex multis versibus constant, you will find throughout the entire scrip-
canones autem ex paucis verbis eo quod tural text, written above the corresponding
semper ad respondendum pauca verba testimonies, in those instances, of course,
proferantur. Ideoque evenit, ut aliquorum where a few words seem closely related to a
testimoniorum principia tantum cum ca- given canon. But listen carefully to the rea-
none cui subdita sunt conveniant, aliorum son why the entire testimony does not have
autem medietas, nonnullorum vero finis, a canon: Because the testimonies consist of
plerumque totum. Et idcirco duorum vel many verses but the canons of few words,
trium seu plurimorum canonum nume- because few words are always uttered as a
rum in unum testimonium mineo super- response. And for this reason, it happens
notatum invenies, ut iam dixi, illic tamen that with regard to some of the testimonies,
only their beginning corresponds to the
unde pauca verba unicuique videntur esse canon below which they are noted, with
necessaria. regard to others, their middle section, and
Hoc enim me elaborasse volo intellegas, with regard to others, their ending. Often
quo fideliter continentiam scriptuarum the entire testimony corresponds to the
palam facerem nulli existens inimicus canon. And for this reason, you will find
et ut errantium velocius, sicut postulasti, the number of two or three or more can-
corrigerentur mentes. ons written in red above a testimony. As I
have already said: In the instances where
Vale in Christo! a few words seem closely related to a giv-
en canon. I want you to know that I have
worked this out in order to faithfully make
clear the contents of the scriptures, as I am
no one’s enemy, and in order to more swift-
ly correct, as you demanded, the minds of
those who have gone astray.
Farewell in Christ!
I Deus verax est, spiritus quoque deus et I God is true, God is also spirit and God
deus saeculorum possidens inmortalita- of the ages, possessing immortality and
tem estque invisibilis lucem habitans inac- dwelling in inaccessible light, king and
cessibilem, rex etiam atque dominus, cuius lord, whose image and first-born is Christ,
est imago ac primogenitus Christus, in quo in whom ‘yes and no’ is not found, but only
non invenitur ‘est et non’, sed ‘est’ tantum- ‘yes’.
modo.
II Quaenam sint quae sibi dissona et inimi- II What are the things that exist as con-
ca motu ac fructibus existant; est namque fused and hostile towards themselves
natio prava, sed et perditio habens filium through their desire and its fruits: because
proprium. it is an evil race; but also perdition has its
own son.
III Quia duo genera spirituum sunt, unum III That there are two kinds of spirits, the
dei, alterum mundi ad errores. one of God, the other of the world, leading
to errors.
IV Quia duae sint sapientiae, una quidem IV That there are two kinds of wisdom, the
dei, altera vero hominum vel carnis. one belongs to God, but the other truly be-
longs to men or the flesh.
V Quia multi dicuntur dii et quorundam 7 ćBU NBOZ BSF DBMMFE HPET o GPS TPNF
ventrem deum esse et spiritus aeris huius their god is their stomach, and the spirits
atque potestates tenebrarum, sed et ele- of the air and the powers of darkness, but
menta mundi. also the elements of the world.
258 Appendix I
VI Quia peccata vel daemones tenebrae VI That sins or demons are named ‘dark-
sive opera tenebrarum ab apostolo nuncu- ness’ or the ‘works of darkness’ by the
pentur. Apostle.
VII Quia stultorum atque carnalium vel VII That it belongs to the fools and to the
dubiorum sit crasse de divinitate sapere carnal or the irresolute to have a coarse in-
vel sentire. sight or understanding of the divine.
VIII Quia ex deo et in deo sint omnia, qui VIII That all things are from God and in
universa operatur, omnisque paternitas ab God, who brings forth everything, and that
eo nominetur atque omnia condita sint per every family is named from him, and that
Christum. all things were created through Christ.
IX Quia sapientia et gratia atque benedic- IX That wisdom, grace and blessing are
tio dona spiritalia sint et quod invisibilia spiritual gifts and that the invisible things
eius per ea quae facta sunt intellecta con- of him are clearly seen, being understood
spiciuntur. by the things that are made.
X Quia inscrutabilia sunt iudicia dei et in- X That the judgments of God are inscru-
vestigabiles viae eius; similiter et divitiae table and his ways unsearchable; so also
Christi et multiformis sapientia. the riches of Christ and manifold wisdom.
XI Quia quae videntur temporalia, quae XI That the things which are seen are tem-
autem non videntur aeterna sunt, ideoque poral; but the things which are not seen
qui in hac vita tantum sperantes sunt, mi- are eternal, and for this reason they who
serabiliores esse omnibus hominibus. have hope only in this life are of all men
the most miserable.
XII Quia Christus similitudinem car- XII That Christ in his ministry put on the
nis peccati sumpserit in ministerio, in likeness of sinful flesh; in him are the trea-
quo sunt thensauri sapientiae, qui fecit sures of wisdom, he who has made both
utrumque unum et ascendens in altum one, and, ascending up on high, led captiv-
captivam duxit captivitatem, quemque iam ity captive, he, whom the Apostle said that
non secundum carnem nosse se dicebat he has not known after the flesh.
apostolus.
XIII That Christ in the flesh died for us,
XIII Quia Christus in carne pro nobis mor- one and the same is God and man, media-
tuus idem homo et deus, mediator dei et tor between God and men.
hominum sit.
XIV That Christ is the foundation of the
XIV Quia fidei apostolicae fundamentum apostolic faith, he who is the cornerstone
Christus sit, qui est lapis angularis et caput and our head, from which is the whole
nostrum, ex quo omne corpus et in quo body, and in which all who believe the
construuntur qui credunt evangelio. Gospel are built up together.
XV Quia sacramentum olim filiis homi- XV That the mystery that once was hidden
num absconditum, nunc per apostolum for the sons of men now has been revealed
sanctis manifestatum sit et quod Christus to the saints through the Apostle, and that
sapientia nuncupetur, quam nemo princi- Christ is called Wisdom, whom none of
pum huius mundi cognovit. the rulers of this world knew.
XVI Quia Christus filius dei imago virtutis XVI That Christ, the Son of God, is the im-
ac sapientia patris sit et quod in ipso pleni- age of the power of the Father and his wis-
tudo divinitatis corporaliter habitet, solus dom, and that in him dwells the fullness
nesciens in carne peccatum; omnis autem of the Godhead bodily, as he alone knew
homo mendax. OPTJOJOUIFĘFTIoCVUFWFSZNBOJTBMJBS
XVII Quia homo Christus ab apostolo XVII That Christ the man is called God
deus et dominus nominatus sit et quod and lord by the Apostle, and that he is said
non in divinitate sed ex semine David et ex to be made of the seed of David and of a
muliere factus dicatur. woman.
XVIII Quia Christus pax nostra sit ideo- XVIII That Christ is our peace and there-
que in cruce sua inimicitias solvens dele- fore, abolishing on his cross the enmities,
vit quod adversum nos erat chirographum he blotted out the handwriting that was
medio pariete destructo. against us, having broken down the mid-
dle wall.
XIX Quia Christus non invitus, sed sua vo- XIX That Christ not unwillingly, but by his
luntate in passione sua patris inpleverit vo- own will fulfilled the will of the Father in
luntatem, humilians se usque ad mortem. his suffering, humbling himself unto death.
XX Quia Hierusalem illa caelestis sit libera XX That the heavenly Jerusalem is free,
et quod nos secundum Isac promissiones and that we according to the promises
deputemur in semine et quod caput ac ple- to Isaac are considered his offspring, and
nitudo ecclesiae Christus sit. that Christ is the head and fullness of the
church.
XXI Quia spiritus dei omnia scrutetur et XXI That the Spirit of God examines ev-
noverit etiam alta dei, quae spiritales tan- erything and knows also the deep things
tummodo intellegant et loquantur omnia of God, which only the spiritual under-
iudicantes, ipsi a nemine iudicantur occur- TUBOEBOETQFBL BTUIFZKVEHFBMMUIJOHTo
suri Christo. they will attain Christ and are themselves
judged by none.
XXII Quia peccatum mortem afferat atque XXII That sin brings death and enslaves
in servitutem animam redigat. the soul.
260 Appendix I
XXIII Quia ignorantia tenebrae sint, scien- 99*** ćBU JHOPSBODF JT EBSLOFTT o CVU
tia vero lux in domino, et utraque filios knowledge is light in the Lord, and both
suos habent. have their own sons.
XXIV Quia deus ante saecula sapientiam XXIV That God before all time designed
in sacramento absconditam ad gloriam the wisdom hidden in a mystery for our
nostram praedestinavit, eorum videlicet glory, the glory of those, certainly, whom
quos ante constitutionem mundi elegit. he elected before the foundation of the
world.
XXV Quia gratiae dei sit atque miseri- XXV That it belongs to the grace of God
cordiae, ut credant audientes et salventur and his mercy that they who hear believe
credentes, obtunsio vero vel induratio de and that they who believe are saved; but
peccato veniat non credentibus et quod that the dullness or hardness comes to the
contra naturam insertae sint gentes gratiae unbelievers from sin, and that the Gentiles
dei, quippe ex quo et per quem et in quo were grafted in contrary to nature through
sint omnia. the grace of God, because from him and
through him and in him are all things.
XXVI Quia peccatum et mors per Adam in XXVI That sin and death passed on to
omnes homines venerit et regnaverit mors all men through Adam, and that death
ab Adam usque ad Moysen. reigned from Adam to Moses.
XXVII Quia corrumpant mores bonos XXVII That the most evil speakings cor-
confabulationes pessimae et quod quae- rupts good manners and that investiga-
stiones atque contentiones subvertant po- tions and contentions rather overthrow the
tius quam aedificent audientes. hearers than build them up.
XXVIII Quia peccandi cupiditas idest vo- 997***ćBUUIFEFTJSFUPTJOoUIBUJT UIF

luntas carnis, quae ex consuetudine diu- will of the flesh, which because of long
turna lex iam dicitur atque natura, sanctae IBCJUOPXJTDBMMFEMBXBOEOBUVSFoJTBM-
adversa semper sit voluntati. ways against the holy will.
XXIX Quia caro eiusque prudentia deo sit XXIX That flesh and its wisdom are hostile
inimica et a deo atque ab omni bono sem- to God and that it always leads away from
per absentet. God and from every benefit.
XXX Quia per habitantem in nobis dei spi- XXX That our mortal bodies will be made
ritum vivificentur mortalia corpora nostra. alive through the spirit of God that dwells
in us.
XXXI Quia novus homo interior sit, cuius XXXI That the new man is the inner man,
caelestis imago est, quippe ad imaginem whose image is the heavenly, because it is
dei formatus quique dei gratia et scientiae created in the image of God and is recre-
lumine reformatur et ut thensaurus in fic- ated through the grace of God and the light
tili vase consistens visceribus misericor- of knowledge and, as a treasure lying in an
diae et fidei atque caritatis induitur. earthen vessel, it puts on tender mercies,
faith and love.
XXXII Quia vetus homo exterior sit, qui XXXII That the old man is the outer man,
corrumpitur et in quo corpus peccati de- which perishes and in which the body of
struitur quique terrestris domus et vas fic- sin is destroyed, which is called an earthly
tile ab apostolo nuncupatur. house and an earthen vessel by the Apostle.
XXXIII That the bodies of the saints are

XXXIII Quia sanctorum corpora dei sive temples of God or of the holy spirit and
spiritus sancti templa et Christi membra members of Christ, and for this reason
sint et ideo semper hostia viva et placens always a living sacrifice and should be
esse debeant atque ab omni opere carnis pleasing and abstain from all the deeds of
et a susurratione et vaniloquio ceterisque the flesh and from whispering and empty
peccatis abstinere se debeant et ut virgines talk and from other sins and that virgins
iuxta apostoli consilium sic permaneant. according to the judgment of the Apostle
should remain so.
XXXIV Quia sancti carnem suam cum vi- XXXIV That the saints crucify the flesh
tiis et concupiscentiis crucifigant glorian- with the affections and lusts, glorying in
tes in cruce Christi, per quem mundo eiu- the cross of Christ, through whom they
sque operibus mortui sunt. have died to the world and its deeds.
XXXV Quia cum carnibus et vino aliqui XXXV That when some abstain from meat
abstineant, nec iudicari ab aliis debeant and wine, they should not be judged by
nec ipsi alios iudicare eo quod mundis others nor should they judge others them-
omnia munda sint et quia esca et potus selves, because everything is pure to the
neminem commendat. Deus enim et hunc, pure, and food and drink do not recom-
inquit, et haec destruit. mend us to God. For God destroyed (sic)
both of them.
XXXVI Quia vinum sit omnis causa luxu- XXXVI That wine is the cause of all excess
riae et ideo abstinendum sit ab eo, quippe and therefore one should abstain from it,
quod pro sola infirmitate et ipsud modico BTIFBMMPXTJUGPSVTFPOMZGPSJMMOFTToBOE
uti indulgeat. even this moderately.
XXXVII Quia per beatam voluntariam XXXVII That the just through their blessed
paupertatem iusti radicem malorum om- voluntary poverty reject the root of all
nium avaritiam respuant, contenti cotti- evils, avarice, and are content with daily
diana exhibitione et tegumenti sufficientia sustenance and sufficient clothing offered
per pietatem sibimet ministrata. them through piety.
262 Appendix I
XXXVIII Quia iustorum militia et arma XXXVIII That the warfare and weapons,
et hostes et lucta vel pugna spiritalia sint, the enemies, and the fights and battles of
quorum conversatio in caelis est, unde et the just are spiritual, and that their citizen-
Christum dominum exspectant. ship is in heaven, from where they also ex-
pect Christ the Lord.
XXXIX Quia opus doctoris lectio sit atque XXXIX That the work of a teacher is read-
evangelii praedicatio, in quibus nocte ac ing and preaching the gospel, with which
die operabatur apostolus. the Apostle works night and day.
XL Quia psalmis hymnis et canticis spirita- XL That one should persist in psalms,
libus atque orationibus insisti debeat, tam hymns, spiritual songs and prayers, just as
pro invicem quam pro regibus atque omni- much for one another as for kings and all
bus hominibus. humans.
XLI Quia apostolus omnibus omnia factus XLI That the Apostle became everything
sit, ut omnes lucrifaceret, per quod omni- to everybody in order to win all, through
bus placuit; quem imitare oportet, ut sicut which he pleased all. And that they should
luminaria in conversatione sua luceant in- follow him, that they with their behavior
ter ceteros Christiani, quorum tale debet may shine as lights among other Chris-
esse opus qualis et sermo. tians whose deed should be as their word.
XLII Quia corpus ac sanguinem Christi, XLII That the body and blood of Christ,
quod est magum pietatis sacramentum, which is the great mystery of faith, has
manifestatum in carne, iustificatum in been revealed in flesh and justified in the
spiritu, si quis indigne sumpserit, corporis spirit, if someone takes it unworthily, he
ipsius sanguinisque sit reus. shall be guilty of his body and blood.
XLIII Quia scientia ac fide et sanctitatis XLIII That both the Apostle and they to
odore erant pleni tam apostolus quam illi whom he gave thanks were full of knowl-
quibus gratias referebat. edge and faith and a savor of holiness.
XLIV Quia per multimodam spiritus san- XLIV That spiritual gifts are distributed to
cti gratiam, prout oportuit, dona spirita- the saints according to necessity through
lia distributa sint sanctis ideoque debere the manifold grace of the holy spirit, and,
unumquemque in quo vocatus est perma- therefore, everyone should stay in the call-
nere et inferiores honorem evangelio coo- ing, in which he was called and the inferior
perantibus dare. should give honor to those who work with
them for the gospel.
XLV Quia episcopus inreprehensibilis esse XLV That a bishop should be blameless
debeat omnisque clerus pacificus iuvenalia and every cleric should be a peacemaker,
desideria fugiens, servans mandatum, pro- fleeing the lusts of youth, guarding what
bans potiora, corripiens errantem, docens he has been entrusted, approving the bet-
utilia; similiter senes et viduas esse debere. ter, rebuking the errant, teaching what is
beneficial; The old men and the widows
should be likewise.
XLVI Quia ecclesiastici non debeant ob XLVI That men of the church should not
suam defensionem publica adire iudicia go to official courts for their defense but
sed tantum ecclesiastica, nihilque inique only to ecclesiastic courts, that they should
iudicare ac duorum vel trium testimonio not judge unjustly but prove the case with
rem probare, quia sancti mundum et ange- the testimony of two or three, since saints
los iudicabunt. will judge the world and angels.
XLVII Quia firmiores in fide debeant in- XLVII That the strong in faith should feel
firmioribus conpati considerantes se ipsos, compassion for the weaker, considering
ne et ipsi temptentur. themselves, so that they may not be tempt-
ed as well.
XLVIII Quia in ordinibus ecclesiae elegerit XLVIII That God in the orders of the
deus primo apostolos, secundo prophetas, church has elected first apostles, next
tertio magistros. prophets, and third teachers.
IL Quia omne bonum eligendum sit et IL That every good thing should be cho-
cunctis virtutibus fraterna caritas praefe- sen, and that brotherly love should be con-
renda, redimendum tempus paxque et hu- sidered the highest of all virtues, that one
militas a Christianis sectanda. should redeem the time, and that Chris-
tians should follow after peace and humil-
ity.
L Quia vitandi sint, qui non secundum L That they who do not live according
apostoli traditionem vivunt, sed suo po- to the tradition of the apostle, but rather
tius ventri deserviunt; qui in novissimis TFSWFUIFJSPXOCFMMZ TIPVMECFBWPJEFEo
temporibus deterrimi sunt futuri. they who in the last days will be the worst.
LI Quia gravius delinquunt qui alios iudi- LI That they who judge others doing worse
cant ipsi deteriora facientes, vel certe par- things themselves commit a more seri-
ticipes peccantium sint hi qui peccantibus ous sin, and also that they who in any way
quoquo modo consentiunt. have pleasure in them that sin are partak-
ers with them.
LII Quia vel fuerint vel futuri sint pseudo- LII That there have been and also will be
apostoli et pseudoprophetae, per quos sec- false apostles and prophets, through which
tae, et satanas se transfiguret in angelum heresies exist, and that Satan transforms
lucis. himself into an angel of light.
LIII Quia multi recesserint ab apostolis LIII That many senseless talkers have
vaniloqui, per quos haereses exstiterint ad turned away from the apostles and that
errores.
264 Appendix I
through them heresies exist, leading to er-

ror.
LIV Quia conmendet eos qui secum conla- LIV That he commends they who work
borant in evangelio et omnes qui praesunt; with him in the gospel and they, who are
quorum, ut ait, nomina in libro vitae sunt leaders, whose names, as he says, are writ-
scripta. ten in the book of life.
LV Quia non per legem sed per Christi LV That the believers are not saved and
fidem et confessionem salventur ac iustifi- justified by the Law but through faith in
centur credentes, servitutis iugo et sexuum Christ and confession, being without the
diversitate carentes. yoke of bondage and the difference be-
tween the sexes.
LVI Quia praecipiat plebi, ut potestatibus LVI That he commands people to be sub-
subiecti sint et ut suis manibus operentur, ject to the ruling authorities and to work
uxores filios servos et servi dominos di- XJUI UIFJS IBOET o XJWFT DIJMESFO BOE
ligant, et mulieres in ecclesia taceant nec TFSWBOUT o BOE UIBU TFSWBOUT TIPVME MPWF
docere praesumant. the masters, and that women should keep
silent in the churches and not think that
they can teach.
LVII Quia incontinentibus nubere iubeat LVII That he orders them who cannot
et mulier per filiorum generationem sal- restrain themselves to marry and that a
vanda sit. woman is saved through childbearing.
LVIII Quia factis iustificentur credentes, LVIII That the believers are justified
non tantum sermonibus; non enim in ser- through deeds, not only in words; for the
mone est regnum dei, ait, sed in virtute. kingdom of God, is not in word but in
power.
LIX Quia caput viri sit Christus, vir autem LIX That the head of the man is Christ but
mulieris et quia operteat sine ira et discep- the head of the woman is the man, and that
tatione semper orare et mulieres ornatas it is necessary always to pray without anger
esse debere non monilibus sed conversa- or disagreement, and that women should
tione. be adorned not with necklaces but with
their conduct.
LX Quia gratias agat apostolus his qui ad LX That the Apostle gives thanks to them
elemosynam prompti sunt, alios ad hoc who are ready to bring alms, exhorting
opus exhortans. others to this work.
LXI Quia bonae vitae quorundam laico- LXI That the Apostle gives testimony to
rum et fidei atque humanitati eorum testi- the good life, faith and kindness of some of
monium reddat apostolus, quod refecerint the lay people because they have refreshed
vel ipsum vel sanctorum pauperes. him or the poor among the saints.
LXII Quia exprobret quorundam avari- LXII That Paul rebukes some for their
tiam Paulus dicens se ita evangelium pra- greed saying that he has preached the gos-
edicasse eis, ut eos non gravaret; debere pel to them in such a way that he should
tamen altario deservientes inde vivere, ut not be burdensome to them, but, still,
miles suis stipendiis. should they who tend the altar live from it,
as a soldier lives by his wages.
LXIII Quia cervices suas quidam pro apo- LXIII That some laid down their own necks
stolo supposuerint, quibus gratias agit non for the Apostle, to whom he gives thanks,
solum ipse sed et universae ecclesiae, quas and not only he, but all the churches that
etiam in domibus propriis susceperunt. they have received in their own houses.
LXIV Quia iustitiam dei, quae per Chri- LXIV That they who follow after the righ-
stum data est, ignorent hi qui iustitiam le- teousness of the Law are ignorant of the
gis sectantur; inpossibile namque erat legi righteousness of God, which was given
deservientibus sibi auferre peccata. UISPVHI$ISJTUoGPSJUXBTJNQPTTJCMFGPS
the Law to take away the sins of those who
served it.
LXV Quia duas leges dicat esse apostolus, LXV That the Apostle says that there
unam per Moysen quae carnalis est, aliam BSF UXP MBXT o POF HJWFO UISPVHI .PTFT
per fidem et gratiam Christi quae spiritalis which is carnal, the other given through
est, illam quidem destruens quia non iusti- the faith and grace of Christ, which is
ficat, hanc vero statuens quia salvat atque TQJSJUVBM o BCPMJTIJOH UIF POF CFDBVTF JU
sanctificat. does not justify but upholding the second
because it saves and sanctifies.
LXVI Quia in lege iudaica maledictum sit, LXVI That there is a curse in the Jewish law,
de quo nos Christus liberat factus ipse ma- from which Christ makes us free, having
ledictum. been made a curse himself.
LXVII Quia per spiritalem cordis in Chri- LXVII That the Apostle through the spiri-
sto circumcisionem propudiosam illam le- tual circumcision of the heart in Christ
gis destruat apostolus. abolishes the shameless circumcision that
is of the Law.
LXVIII Quia quae in veteri testamento vel LXVIII That the things that happened or
facta vel scripta sunt, in nostri figuram were written in the old covenant came in
contigerint. order to be an example for us.
LXIX Quia Abrahae fidem imitandam Iu- LXIX That the Apostle declares that the
daeis ponat apostolus, adprobans non ex faith of Abraham should be imitated by
266 Appendix I
operibus legis sed ex operibus fidei iusti- Jews, giving his approval to them who
ficari credentes, quos et Israhel dei nuncu- believe that they are justified not by the
pat. works of the law but by the works of faith,
whom he also calls the Israel of God.
LXX Quia gentes de Iudaeorum casu non LXX That the Gentiles should not boast
debeant gloriari; deus enim omnes homi- about the fall of the Jews; for God wants
nes vult salvos fieri, concludens omnia sub that all men be saved, confining everything
peccato, ut omnium misereatur; qui per under sin that he may have mercy on all,
Christum nos reconciliavit sibi; deus enim, He who has reconciled us to Himself; for
inquit, erat in Christo mundum reconci- God, he says, was in Christ reconciling the
lians sibi. world to Himself.
LXXI Quia cum se persecutorem eccle- LXXI That even if he accuses himself of
siarum fuisse accuset et minimum apo- having been a persecutor of the churches
stolorum esse dicat, raptum tamen usque and says that he is the least of the apostles,
ad tertium caelum se confitetur, ubi sine still he confesses that he was caught up to
dubio instructus est evangelio, quod non the third heaven, where he certainly was
ab homine sed a Chisto per revelationem instructed in Gospel, because he says that
spiritus doctum se esse dicit. he was not taught by a man but by Christ
through the revelation of the Spirit.
LXXII Quia dicat idem apostolus a deo se LXXII That the Apostle also says that he
gratiam apostolatus accepisse et Christum received the grace of apostleship from God
in se loqui et operari et quia spiritu dei and that Christ speaks and works in him,
agantur qui filii dei sunt, heredes quidem and that they who are led by the Spirit of
dei, coheredes autem Christi. God are the sons of God, heirs of God and
joint-heirs with Christ.
LXXIII Quia ibi evangelium praedicaverit, LXXIII That he has preached the gospel
ubi nullus apostolorum fuerat seque ad where none of the apostles had been, and
evangelizandum a Christo missum. that he was sent by Christ to preach the
gospel.
LXXIV Qui nihil minus fecerit aliis apo- LXXIV That he has not done less than the
stolis tam praedicatione quam signis; nam other apostles, both with regard to preach-
etsi inperitus sum, inquit, sermone sed ing and signs, for even if I am rude, he says,
non scientia. it is in speech and not in knowledge.
LXXV Quia gentium sit apostolus quibus LXXV That he is the Apostle of the Gen-
et evangelium praedicat, et quod veniens tiles, to whom he also preaches the Gospel,
Antiochiam reprehendit Petrum sibique and that coming to Antioch he rebuked
dextras dederint Iacobus et Iohannes et Peter, and James and John gave the right
Barnabae societatis. hands of fellowship to himself and Barn-
abas.
LXXVI Quia collegam habuerit Timo- LXXVI That he had Timothy as his fel-
theum et Epaphroditum coapostolum low worker and Epaphroditus as his fellow
atque conmilitonem aliosque adiutores apostle and fellow soldier and others as
sive ministros. helpers or assistants.
LXXVII Quia filios vocet eos quos verita- LXXVII That he calls sons those whom he
tis scientia inbuebat, in quibus apostolicae instructed in the knowledge of truth. Hav-
auctoritatis potestate usus de his quos ad ing used the apostolic authority against
paenitentiam contristaverat gratulatur. some whom he made sorry to effect their
repentance, he rejoices in them.
LXXVIII Quia praedicare potius quam LXXVIII That he was sent by Christ to
baptizare missus a Christo sit nosque in preach rather than to baptize, and that we
baptismo Christo esse consepultos, ut filii in baptism were buried in Christ, that we,
dei effecti in novitate vitae ambulemus, he- having been made sons of God, should
redes quidem dei coheredes autem Christi. walk in newness of life, heirs of God and
joint-heirs of Christ.
LXXIX Quia ob peccatorum inmensitatem LXXIX That the wicked men, because of
scelesti homines deterioribus traduntur the immensity of sins, are abandoned to
passionibus et quia non sponte creatura shameful passions, and that the creature
subiecta sit et a Christi caritate neque alia was not made subject from choice and that
creatura nos separet et evangelium creatu- another creature will not separate us from
rae sit praedicatum. the love of Christ and that the Gospel was
preached to the creature.
LXXX Quia ex parte scire et ex parte pro- LXXX That he said that he knows in part
phetare et per speculum illa quae futura and that he prophesies in part and that
sunt videre se dixerit, currens ad bravium he sees what will happen through a glass,
supernae vocationis dei. running for the prize of the high calling of
God.
LXXXI Quia Christiani in passionibus LXXXI That Christians should rejoice in

gaudere debeant, scientes donum dei esse their sufferings, knowing that it is the gift
quod credunt; nam pro Christo pati aeter- PG(PEUIBUUIFZCFMJFWFoGPSTVČFSJOHGPS
na merces erit. Christ will be an eternal reward.
LXXXII Quia corpora sanctorum in illa LXXXII That the bodies of the saints in the
generali resurrectione diversis meritorum general resurrection will put on the differ-
claritatibus induenda sint, ubi iam caro et ent glories of their merits, where flesh and
sanguis, idest ventris et libidinis opera non CMPPEoUIBUJTUIFXPSLTPGUIFCFMMZBOEPG
regnabunt. EFTJSFoOPMPOHFSXJMMSFJHO
LXXXIII Quia primitiae resurrectionis LXXXIII That Christ is of the first fruits of
Christus sit, deinde qui ipsius sunt, nunc resurrection, then they who are His, now
268 Appendix I
ipse super omnem principatum et potesta- He himself sits above all principality and
tem sedeat in patris dextera conlocatus. power, at the right hand of the Father.
LXXXIV Quia in corpore constitutos re- LXXXIV That he says that the dead to sin,
surrexisse dicat in baptismo eos qui pec- having been made alive with Christ, have
cato mortui convivificati sunt Christo et risen bodily in baptism and that they seek
quaerunt quae sursum sunt, non quae su- those things which are above, not things
per terram. on the earth.
LXXXV Quia iudicium dei erit iusto iu- LXXXV That the judgment of God will
dice Christo, ubi recipiet unusquisque be with Christ as the righteous judge,
secundum opera sua, conscientia ratio- when everyone will receive according to
nem etiam de cogitatione reddente, om- his deeds, and the conscience also giving
niumque criminum rei dei iudicantis ex- account of their thought, accused of all
perientur examen. crimes they will be examined by God the
judge.
LXXXVI Quia inhonorentur a deo qui non LXXXVI That they who do not honor God
honorificant deum et relinquantur deside- will be dishonored by Him and abandoned
riis suis gravius iudicandi. to their passions to receive a more severe
judgment.
LXXXVII Quia ante iudicii diem veniet fi- LXXXVII That before the day of judgment,
lius peccati qui intellegitur antichristus. the son of sin will come, who is known as
antichrist.
LXXVIII Quia iudicium in fine mundi LXXXVIII That the judgment in the end of
igne erit, quod et iram nominat; qui dies in the world will be in fire, which he also calls
adventu Iesu de caelis ut fur veniet in filios wrath; the day of the coming of the Lord
diffidentiae omnemque inpietatem. will come as a thief to the sons of disobedi-
ence and all impiety.
LXXXIX Quia praesens mundi huius feli- LXXXIX That the present happiness of this
citas non solum ut brevis sed ut nociva et world should be rejected not only as fleet-
malitiosa spernenda est et quia sapientia ing but also as harmful and evil, and that
eius stultitia sit, in quibus et nos aliquan- its wisdom is foolishness, in these things
do conversati, inquit, sumus; novissimam we also once walked, he says; but last to
vero destruendam mortem, cum iusti de be destroyed is death, when the just will
his qui nunc eos tribulant vindictam a do- have received recompense from the Lord
mino fuerint consecuti. regarding those who now trouble them.
XC Quia iusti cum deo patre et Christo re- XC That the just will reign with God the
gnaturi in aeternum sint, ubi corpus cor- Father and Christ in eternity, when the
ruptioni ultra subiectum non erit.
[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.] 269
body will no longer be subject to corrup-
tion.
3. Theodoret’s Arguments
[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters.

Text in PG 82.]
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG"o" Argument [of Romans]
Ποικίλην μὲν καὶ παντοδαπὴν ὁ θεῖος Through this letter, the divine Apostle
Ἀπόστολος διὰ τῶνδε τῶν γραμμάτων brings various teaching of different kinds.
προσφέρει διδασακαλίαν. Ἅπας δὲ τῆς But the aim of the entire letter is this: The
Ἐπιστολῆς ὁ σκοπός ἐστιν οὗτος. Τῆς mystery of the divine incarnation is to be
θείας ἐνανθρωπήσεως τὸ μυστήριον, τοῖς honored and worshipped by those who
μὲν εἰλικρινῶς πεπιστευκόσι σεπτόν ἐστι sincerely believe because, with great evi-
καὶ ἄγαν προσκυνητόν. Ἐναργῶς γὰρ ἡμᾶς dence, it shows us God’s love of mankind.
τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ διδάσκει φιλανθρωπίαν. Οἱ But they, who are surrounded by the dark
δέ γε τῆς ἀπιστίας τὴν ἀχλὺν περκείμενοι, night of unbelief, having not yet received
καὶ τοῦ νοεροῦ φωτὸς τὴν αἴγλην μηδέπω the light of reason, laugh at such things that
δεξάμενοι, γελῶσιν ἃ μηδὲ τῶν ἀγγέλων even the angelic nations have not been able
οἱ δῆμοι πρὸς ἀξίαν ὑμνῆσαι δεδύνηνται. to praise properly in their hymns. And this
Καὶ τοῦτο σαφῶς ὁ θεσπέσιος Ἀπόστολος the divinely inspired Apostle made clear
Κορινθίοις ἐπιστέλλων ἐδίδαξεν· »Ὁ λόγος to the Corinthians when he wrote: ‘For
γὰρ ὁ τοῦ σταυροῦ τοῖς μὲν ἀπολλυμένοις the preaching of the cross is foolishness to
μωρία ἐστὶ, τοῖς δὲ σωζομένοις δύναμις them that perish; but unto them that are
θεοῦ ἐστι«. Τοῦτο τοίνυν τὸ σωτήριον saved it is the power of God.’ Therefore,
κήρυγμα, Ῥωμαίοις γράφων, ἀναγκαῖον when writing to the Romans, he shows that
δείκνυσι, καὶ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις, Ἰουδαίοις the message of salvation is necessary, and
τε καὶ Ἕλλησι, λυσιτελὲς καὶ σύμφερον. that it is profitable and useful for all hu-
Οὗ δὴ χάριν πρὸ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων, mans, for Jews as well as for Greeks. There-
καὶ Ἕλληνας ἐξελέγχει, τὴν ἐντεθεῖσαν fore, first of all he proves the Greeks guilty:
τῇ φύσει παρὰ τοῦ πεποιηκότος τῶν They openly destroy the natural inborn
ἀγαθῶν καὶ τῶν ἐναντίων διάκρισιν power to discern good and evil that comes
ἄντικρυς διαφθείραντας, καὶ τῆς φύσεως from the creator and they have trans-
παραβεβηκότας τοὺς νόμους· καὶ μέντοι gressed the natural laws. But also the Jews
καὶ Ἰουδαίους, ἔγγραφον μὲν θείων oBMUIPVHIUIFZIBESFDFJWFEUIFUFBDIJOH
νόμων δεξαμένους διδασκαλίαν, ὄνησιν of the divine laws in written form, they did
δὲ ἐντεῦθεν οὐ βουληθέντας λαβεῖν, not wish to receive profit from it but be-
ἀλλὰ μείζοσι τιμωρίας ὑπευθύνους came subject to still greater punishments.
γεγενημένους. Μετὰ ταῦτα λέγει τὴν After this, he speaks about the coming of
τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ἐπιφάνειαν, our God and Savior, that it happened not
οὐκ ἐπὶ κρίσει καὶ τιμωρίᾳ τῶν for judgment and punishment of the trans-
παρανενομηκότων γεγενημένην, ἀλλὰ τῶν gressors of the law, but that it gave forgive-
270 Appendix I
ἁμαρτημάτων δωρουμένην τὴν ἄφεσιν, καὶ ness for the sins, announced that death will
τοῦ θανάτου τὴν λύσιν ὑπισχνουμένην, καὶ be abolished, and promised life eternal. He
τὴν αἰώνιον ἐπαγγελλομένην ζωήν. Ἐπειδὴ knew both the Jews, who were very loyal
δὲ καὶ Ἰουδαίους ᾔδει λίαν ἀντεχομένους to the Law, as well as those who suffered
τοῦ νόμου, καὶ τοὺς τὰ Μαρκίωνος καὶ from the diseases of Marcion and Valenti-
Βαλεντίνου νοσοῦντας, καὶ μέντοι καὶ nus, and the Manichees, who were strongly
Μανιχαίους, λίαν τούτου κατηγοροῦντας, accusing it. Thus, being completely sur-
καθάπερ ἄριστός τις στρατηγὸς πάντοθεν rounded by enemies, as an eminent gen-
ὑπὸ πολεμίων κυκλούμενος, καὶ τούτους eral he hits both and wins the trophy. Thus
βάλλει κἀκείνους, καὶ τὸ τρόπαιον the divine Apostle destroyed both the gang
ἵστησιν· οὕτως ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος καὶ τῶν of the heretics and the phalanx of the Jews
αἱρετικῶν τὸ στίφος, καὶ τῶν Ἰουδαίων τὴν through divine grace. For what does he do?
φάλαγγα διὰ τῆς θείας κατέλυσε χάριτος. )FEPFTOPUFYBMUUIF-BXJNNPEFSBUFMZo
Τί γὰρ ποιεῖ; οὔτε ἄγαν ἐπαίρει τὸν νόμον CFDBVTFPGUIFBSSPHBODFPGUIF+FXToCVU
διὰ τὴν Ἰουδαίων ἀναίδειαν, οὔτε πρόφασιν he does not offer the impious heretics an
κατηρογίας παρέχει τοῖς δυσσεβέσιν occasion to attack it, either. But he shows
αἱρετικοῖς. Ἀλλὰ δείκνυσι μὲν αὐτὸν τὸ that it taught what was necessary and that
δέον παιδεύσαντα, καὶ τὴν τῆς δικαιοσύνης it introduced the teaching of righteousness,
διδασκαλίαν προσενεγκόντα· κατορθῶσαι which could not be brought to perfection
δὲ ταύτην οὐ δυνηθέντα διὰ τὴν τῶν because of the weakness of those who re-
νομοθετηθέντων ἀσθένειαν. Εἶτα διδάσκει ceived it. Then he teaches that faith has re-
ὡς ἡ πίστις εἰς ἔργον ἤγαγε τὸν τοῦ νόμου alized the intention of the Law. For what
σκοπόν. Ἅπερ γὰρ ἐκεῖνος κατορθῶσαι μὲν UIF-BXXBOUFEUPQFSGFDUoCVUDPVMEOPUo
ἠθέλησεν, οὐκ ἴσχυσε δὲ, αὕτη διὰ τῆς τοῦ this faith has completed through the grace
παναγίου Πνεύματος ἐξετέλεσε χάριτος. of the All-Holy Spirit. Through all this, we
Διὰ τούτων δὲ πάντων μανθάνομεν, ὡς learn that God who created us always has
ἀεὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων προμηθούμενος cared for human beings exceedingly. First,
διετέλεσεν ὁ δημιουργήσας ἡμᾶς Θεός. He established through nature the power
Πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ ἐν τῇ φύσει τῶν ἀγαθῶν of discerning good from evil. Then, by
καὶ τῶν ἐναντίων τέθεικε τὴν διάκρισιν. means of the creation, He led those who
Εἶτα διὰ τῆς κτίσεως τοὺς βουληθέντας wanted it to piety. Even if they all did not
ἐποδήγησε πρὸς εὐσέβειαν. Εἰ γὰρ καὶ μὴ wish to see the truth, they who longed for
πάντες ἰδεῖν ἠθέλησαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν, ἀλλ᾽ it enjoyed what they longed for. In addi-
οὖν οἱ ταύτην ποθήσαντες ἀπήλαυσαν tion to these things, he also teaches us this:
ὧν ἐπόθησαν. Πρὸς δὲ τούτοις κἀκεῖνο That the God of all did not arrive at this
ἡμᾶς ἐκπαιδεύει, ὡς οὐκ ἐκ μεταμελείας plan of salvation through a change of mind,
ὁ τῶν ὅλων Θεὸς ἐπὶ ταύτην ἐλήλυθε as it were, but that it was announced be-
τῆς σωτηρίας τὴν μέθοδον· ἀλλ᾽ ἄνωθεν forehand through his divine prophets. He
αὐτὴν διὰ τῶν θείων προηγόρευσε also teaches us the reason for the rejection
προφητῶν. Διδάσκει καὶ τῶν Ἰουδαίων of the Jews, and he exhorts the believers
ἀποβολῆς τὴν αἰτίαν, καὶ τοῖς ἐξ ἐθνῶν from the Gentiles not to exalt themselves
πεπιστευκόσι παραινεῖ μὴ κατεπαίρεσθαι over them, encouraging them to go forth
τούτων· προτρέπων ἐκείνους προελθεῖν τῷ with the message. And he mixed the words
κηρύγματι. καὶ τῆς πρακτικῆς δὲ ἀρετῆς of doctrine with teaching on practical vir-
τὴν διδασκαλίαν τοῖς δογματικοῖς ἀνέμιξε tue, at the same time teaching the truth
λόγοις, ὁμοῦ καὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἐκπαιδεύων, and establishing orderly behavior. This is
καὶ τὸ ἦθος ῥυθμίζων. Ἡ μὲν οὖν ὑπόθεσις the argument of the letter. The exposition
τῆς ἐπιστολῆς ἐστιν αὕτη· ἀκριβέστερον δὲ section by section will teach us everything
πάντα ἡμᾶς ἡ κατὰ μέρος ἑρμηνεία διδάξει. more accurately.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG%o% Argument [of 1 Corinthians]
Κορινθίοις τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα πρῶτος The divinely inspired Paul first introduced
ὁ θεσπέσιος προσενήνοχε Παῦλος, the message of salvation to the Corinthi-
καὶ συχνὸν δὲ παρ᾿ αὐτοῖς διέτριψε ans, and he stayed there for a long time
χρόνον, τοῦτο τοῦ Δεσπότου διαῤῥήδην since the Lord had clearly ordered him.
παρεγγυήσαντος· »Λάλει« γὰρ, ἔφη πρὸς For ‘speak’, He said to him, ‘and do not be
αὐτὸν, »καὶ μὴ σιωπήσῃς· ἔστι γάρ μοι λαὸς silent: for I have many people in this city.’
πολὺς ἐν τῇ πόλει ταύτῃ«. Ἐνιαυτοῦ τοίνυν After one year and six months had passed,
καὶ μηνῶν ἓξ διεληλυθότων, αὐτὸς μὲν εἰς he went away to other cities to preach. But
ἑτέρας ἐξεδήμησε πόλεις τοῦ κηρύγματος they were eager in sophistic debate and in
χάριν. Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τὴν σοφιστικὴν ἔριν their love of honor. They were divided into
καὶ φιλοτιμίαν ἐζήλωσαν. Εἰς πολλὰς many parties as they established eloquent
γὰρ συμμορίας διῃρέθησαν, ἐλλογίμους men as their teachers, each continued to
ἄνδρας προστησάμενοι διδασκάλους, marvel at their own teacher and loved to
καὶ ἕκαστοι τὸν οἰκεῖον διετέλουν debate with each other about him. And
θαυμάζοντες, καὶ πρὸς ἀλλήλους περὶ one of those who were boasting of their
τούτων φιλονεικοῦντες. Εἷς δὲ τούτων smooth speech even dared to commit the
τῶν επ᾽ εὐγλωττίᾳ σεμνυνομένων, καὶ most serious crime. For he was sleeping
παρανομίαν μεγίστην ἐτόλμησε· τῇ γὰρ with his stepmother, and the people who
μητρυιᾷ συνευνάζετο. Οἱ δὲ τῆς τούτου CFMPOHFE UP IJT QBSUZ PWFSMPPLFE UIJT o
συμμορίας τοῦτο μὲν παρεώρων, μόνην they were only praising his eloquence! Be-
δὲ τὴν εὐγλωττίαν εὐφήμουν. Οὗ δὴ cause of this, the divine Apostle begins his
χάριν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος ἀρξάμενος letter with accusing the supposed wisdom
τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς, τῆς νομιζομένης σοφίας and showing that the preaching stripped
κατηγορεῖ, καὶ δείκνυσι τὸ κήρυγμα ταύτης of all eloquence has the greatest power. He
μὲν γεγυμνωμένον, μεγίστην δὲ δύναμιν rebukes those who have quarrels about
ἔχον. Ἐπιμέμφεται δὲ καὶ τοῖς ἀμφισβητοῦσι other matters and use secular officials to
μὲν πρὸς ἀλλήλους περὶ πραγμάτων judge between them. He forbids also the
ἑτέρων, βιωτικοῖς δὲ ἄρχουσι δικασταῖς acceptance of offerings to idols, suggesting
κεχρημένοις. Ἀπαγορεύει δὲ καὶ τὴν τῶν that some of them even dared to do that. In
εἰδωλοθύτων μετάληψιν, αἰνιττόμενος the following, he gives advice on the gifts
ὡς καὶ τοῦτο παρά τινων ἐτολμᾶτο. Ἐν of both virginity and widowhood. And he
δὲ τῷ μεταξὺ, καὶ περὶ παρθενίας καὶ also holds a long speech on spiritual gifts,
χηρείας συμβουλεύει τὰ πρόσφορα· teaching about the difference between
καὶ μέντοι καὶ περὶ τῶν πνευματικῶν them. And he orders them to use the gift
χαρισμάτων μακροὺς ἀποτείνει λόγους, of tongues not because of love of honor but
τὴν τούτων διδάσκων διαφορὰν, καὶ when they need it. He brings them also the
παρεγγύων τῷ χαρίσματι τῶν γλωττῶν teaching on the resurrection, since some
μὴ κατὰ φιλοτιμίαν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ χρείαν, probably tried to persuade them not to
272 Appendix I
κεχρῆσθαι. Προσφέρει δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ τὴν receive any word about the resurrection
περὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως διδασκαλίαν, τινῶν, of the body. And he also put other things
ὡς εἰκὸς, πείθειν αὐτοὺς πειρωμένων τὸν in the letter (in order not to extend this by
περὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τῶν σωμάτων μὴ mentioning everything), things that both
προδέχεσθαι λόγον. καὶ ἄλλα δέ τινα, ἵνα were useful to them and bring benefit to all
μὴ καθ᾽ ἕκαστον λέγων μηκύνω, τοῖς humans. But he did not use many words
πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἐνέθηκε γράμμασι, κἀκείνοις on doctrine, since he was with them for
ὀνησιφόρα, καὶ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις not a short period of time and thus com-
ὠφέλειαν πραγματευόμενα. Περὶ μέντοι pletely educated them with regard to what
τοῦ δόγματος οὐ πολλοῖς ἐχρήσατο they should think. Besides, the wonderful
λόγοις, ἐπειδήπερ οὐκ ὀλίγον παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς Apollos arrived after him and strength-
διατρίψας χρόνον, ἀκριβῶς αὐτοὺς ἅπερ ened the apostolic teaching. He imitated
δεῖ φρονεῖν ἐξεπαίδευσε, καὶ ὁ θαυμάσιος the best physician and brought an antidote
Ἀπολλὼς μετ᾽ αὐτὸν ἀφικόμενος τὴν for each illness. Stephanas, Fortunatus and
ἀποστολικὴν διδασκαλίαν ἐκράτυνεν. Achaicus carried the letter, having been
Ἄριστον τοίνυν ἰατρὸν ἐμιμήσατο, καὶ τοῖς sent from the Corinthians to Paul, as he
πάθεσι κατάλληλα προσενήνοχε φάρμακα. teaches us in the end. He sent the blessed
Διηκόνησαν δὲ τοῖς γράμμασι Στεφανᾶς, 5JNPUIZUPUIFNoCVUOPUXJUIUIFMFUUFSo
καὶ Φουρτουνᾶτος, καὶ Αχαϊκὸς, παρὰ τῶν and this he made clear himself, for he said:
Κορινθίων πρὸς αὐτὸν ἀποσταλέντες, ὡς ‘If Timothy come, see that he may be with
ἐν τῷ τέλει διδάσκει. τὸν γὰρ μακάριον you without fear.’
Τιμόθεον ἀπέστειλε μὲν πρὸς αὐτοὺς, οὐ
μὴν μετὰ ἐπιστολῆς, καὶ τοῦτο δῆλον αὐτὸς
πεποίηκεν· ἔφη γάρ· »Ἐὰν ἔλθῃ Τιμόθεος,
βλέπετε ἵνα ἀφόβως γένηται πρὸς ὑμᾶς«.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 376BC) Argument [of 2 Corinthians]
Πολλὴν μὲν ἐκ τῆς προτέρας Ἐπιστολῆς οἱ The Corinthians reaped a rich harvest
Κορίνθιοι ὄνησιν ἐκαρπώσαντο· ηὔξησαν from the previous letter, and men who
δὲ αὐτῶν τὴν ὠφέλειαν καὶ οἱ πάντα ἄριστοι were the most eminent and admirable in
καὶ ἀξιάγαστοι, πρῶτος μὲν Τιμόθεος, every respect increased the benefit; first
μετὰ δὲ τοῦτον ὁ Τίτος. Ἀμφότεροι γὰρ Timothy and, after him, Titus. For both
πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἀπεστάλησαν. Ἀλλὰ πάλιν were sent to them. But, again, some of the
τινὲς τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων, τὴν believers from the Jews embracing life un-
νομικὴν ἀσπαζόμενοι πολιτείαν, πάντοσε der the Law and, going around everywhere,
περινοστοῦντες, τὴν ἀποστολικὴν accused the apostolic teaching and called
διδασκαλίαν διέβαλλον, ἀποστάτην the divinely inspired Paul an apostate and
καὶ παράνομον τὸν θεσπέσιον Παῦλον a lawbreaker, as they were ordering every-
ἀποκαλοῦντες, καὶ φυλάττειν ἅπασι τὸν one to follow the Law. And this was exactly
νόμον παρεγγυῶντες· ταὐτὸ δὲ τοῦτο καὶ what they had done in Corinth. Therefore,
ἐν Κορίνθῳ δεδράκασι. Γράφει τοίνυν ὁ the divine Apostle writes, having already
θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, ἤδη τὴν Μακεδονίαν arrived in Macedonia as he had promised.
κατειληφὼς κατὰ τὴν ὑπόσχεσιν, καὶ And first he composes an apology as he
πρῶτον μὲν ἀπολογίαν ὑφαίνει ὡς μηδέπω had not yet come to them, not because he
παραγενόμενος, οὐκ ἐπειδὴ τὴν ὑπόσχεσιν had broken his promise. For he had prom-
οὐ ἐπέρανεν· ὑπέσχετο γὰρ πρῶτον μὲν ised that he would first see the Macedo-
Μακεδόνας ὁρᾶν, μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα πρὸς nians and after that come to them. Thus he
αὐτοὺς παραγίνεσθαι· ἔφη δὲ οὕτως ἐν τῇ spoke in the previous letter: ‘I will come to
προτέρᾳ· »Ἐλεύσομαι δὲ πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ὅταν you when I shall pass through Macedonia:
Μακεδονίαν διέλθω· Μακεδονίαν γὰρ for I do pass through Macedonia. And it
διέρχομαι· πρὸς ὑμᾶς δὲ τυχὸν παραμενῶ, may be that I will stay, and even spend the
ἢ παραχειμάσω, ἵνα ὑμεῖς με προπέμψητε winter with you, so that you may send me
οὗ ἐὰν πορεύσωμαι«. Οὐ τοίνυν παρὰ τὰς off wherever I may go.’ Therefore, he did
ὑποσχέσεις τι δέδρακεν. Ἀλλ᾽ ἐν Ἐφέσῳ not do anything against his promises. But
μελλήσας, τῆς βραδύτητος τὰς αἰτίας when he was delayed in Ephesus he informs
διδάσκει. Ἀξιοῖ δὲ φειδοῦς καὶ τὸν τὴν them about the reason for the delay. He
παρανομίαν ἐκείνην τολμήσαντα. Εἶτα considers even the man who had commit-
συγκρίνει τὴν Παλαιὰν τῇ Καινῇ, οὐκ ted that crime worthy to be spared. Then
ἐκείνην ἀτιμάζων, ἀλλὰ ταύτην δεικνὺς he compares the Old Testament with the
ὑπερέχουσαν. Μετὰ ταῦτα τοὺς οἰκείους New, not degrading the former, but show-
πόνους ἀναριθμεῖται οὐ φιλοτιμίας ing that the latter is superior. After that, he
πάθει δουλεύων, ἀλλὰ τῶν ἐξαπατώντων numbers his own toils, not because he is a
διελέγχων τὸ ψεῦδος. Προτρέπει δὲ slave of the desire to be honored but be-
καὶ τῆς τῶν ἁγίων θεραπείας φροντίσαι, cause he is refuting the lie of the deceivers.
τῇ Μακεδόνων μνήμῃ παραθήγων εἰς He exhorts them to be concerned about
φιλότιμον χορηγίαν. Τίθησι δὲ καὶ τὸν τῶν the care of the saints. He encourages them
οἰκείων παθημάτων κατάλογον, τοῦτον to donate ambitiously by mentioning the
εἶναι χαρακτῆρα διδάσκων τῶν κηρύκων Macedonians. He also places a catalogue of
τῆς ἀληθείας. Αὕτη μὲν οὖν τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς his sufferings, teaching that this is the hall-
ἡ ὑπόθεσις· τὸν δὲ νοῦν τῶν γεγραμμένων mark of the messengers of the truth. This is
ἀκριβέστερον ἡ κατὰ μέρος ἑρμηνεία the argument of the letter. The exposition
διδάξει. section by section will teach us everything
more accurately.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG#o" Argument [of Galatians]
Ἀνήροτον μὲν καὶ ἄσπαρτον τῶν Γαλατῶν The thrice-blessed Paul cultivated the race
τὸ γένος ὁ τρισμακάριος ἐγεώργησε of the Galatians when it was unplowed and
Παῦλος, καὶ τὰ τῆς εὐσεβείας ἐν αὐτῷ unsown, and he sowed the seeds of piety
κατέβαλε σπέρματα· αὐξανομένων δὲ in it. When they had grown and carried a
τούτων, καὶ βαθὺ δεικνύντων τὸ λήϊον, rich crop, some believers from the Jews ar-
ἀφικόμενοί τινες τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων rived, and they were eager to sow beside
πεπιστευκότων, τὰ περιττὰ τοῦ νόμου it the unnecessary matters of the law. They
παρασπείρειν ἐσπούδαζον, τοὺς boasted of having the most divine apostles,
θειοτάτους ἀποστόλους, Πέτρον, καὶ Peter, James, John, and all the others, as
Ἰάκωβον, καὶ Ἰωάννην, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους teachers, and imprudently asserted that
ἅπαντας διδασκάλους ἔχειν αὐχοῦντες, καὶ they did what the apostles had decided.
τὰ τούτοις δοκοῦντα ποιεῖν νεανιευόμενοι, They slandered the divinely inspired Paul,
τὸν δὲ θεσπέσιον διαβάλλοντες Παῦλον, saying that he was not deemed worthy of
274 Appendix I
καὶ φάσκοντες μήτε τῆς Δεσποτικῆς being taught by the Lord, that he had be-
αὐτὸν ἠξιῶσθαι διδασκαλίας, καὶ τῶν come a disciple of the apostles, that he de-
ἀποστόλων μαθητὴν γεγενημένον, τὸν stroyed the rule of the teaching and that he
τῆς διδασκαλίας διαφθείρειν κανόνα, καὶ against their decision was a transgressor of
παρὰ τὸν ἐκείνων ὅρον παραβαίνειν τὸν the Law. By saying such things, they per-
νόμον. Ταῦτα καὶ τὰ τούτοις προσόμοια suaded many of the Galatians to embrace
λέγοντες, πολλοὺς ἔπεισαν τῶν Γαλατῶν life under the law and receive circumci-
τὴν νομικὴν πολιτείαν ἀσπάσασθαι, καὶ sion. Therefore, when the Apostle learned
τὴν περιτομὴν καταδέξασθαι. Μαθὼν this, he wrote this letter. He demonstrates
τοίνυν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, τήνδε γέγραφε the falsity in the slanderous statements ut-
τὴν Ἐπιστολήν· τῶν δὲ κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ tered against him and shows that life un-
γεγενημένων διαβολῶν διελέγχων τὸ der the Law is useless after grace has come.
ψεῦδος, καὶ τὴν κατὰ νόμον πολιτείαν μετὰ First, he relates matters pertaining to him,
τὴν χάριν περιττὴν ἀποφαίνων. Πρῶτον δὲ teaching that also he received the call
τὰ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἐξηγήσατο, διδάσκων ὡς from above and that he was not won over
καὶ αὐτὸς τῆς ἄνωθεν τετύχηκε κλήσεως, through human teaching but by the voice
οὐκ ἀνθρώπων διδασκαλίᾳ πεισθεὶς, ἀλλ᾽ of the Lord. He says this not to degrade the
ὑπὸ τῆς Δεσποτικῆς φωνῆς. Ταῦτα δὲ apostles but to cure the disease that had
λέγει, οὐ τὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων σμικρύνων, erupted with beneficial medicines. For he
ἀλλὰ τὴν ἐπισκήψασαν νόσον προσφόροις calls himself a miscarriage, and the least
θεραπεύων φαραμάκοις. Ὅτι γὰρ ἔκτρωμα of the apostles. And he names himself the
καλεῖ ἑαυτὸν, καὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων ἔσχατον, first of sinners, a blasphemer, a persecutor
καὶ τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν πρῶτον, καὶ βλάσφημον and an injurious person. They who read
ὀνομάζει, καὶ διώκτην, καὶ ὑβριστὴν, ἴσασιν his letters know that. But here, to remove
οἱ τοῖς ἐκείνου γράμμασιν ἐντυγχάνοντες. the damage they had received, he is forced
Ἀλλ᾽ ἐνταῦθα τὴν γεγενημένην βλάβην to reveal matters pertaining to him, both
ἀποσκευαζόμενος, γυμνῶσαι τὰ καθ᾽ refuting the lies of those who try to destroy
ἑαυτὸν ἠναγκάσθη, καὶ τῶν διαφθείρειν τὸ the Gospel and curing the illness of those
Εὐαγγέλιον πειρωμένων τὴν ψευδολογίαν who were subjected to them.
ἐλέγχων, καὶ τῶν ἐκείνοις ὑποταχθέντων
θεραπεύων τὸ πάθος.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG"o% Argument [of Ephesians]
Τινὲς τῶν προηρμηνευκότων τὸν θεῖον Some of the previous interpreters of the
Ἀπόστολον, ἔφασαν τὸν θεσπέσιον divine Apostle have said that the divinely
Ἰωάννην τὸν εὐαγγελιστὴν πρῶτον inspired John first delivered the message
παραδεδωκέναι τοῖς Ἐφεσίοις τὸ σωτήριον of salvation to the Ephesians. Others have
κήρυγμα· τινὲς δὲ ἄλλους μέν τινας εἰρήκασι said that somebody else did it, and that the
πεποιηκέναι, τὸν δὲ θειότατον Παῦλον divinely inspired Paul wrote the letter to
μηδέπω τοὺς Ἐφεσίους τεθεαμένον, τήνδε them when he had not yet seen them. But
τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν πρὸς αὐτοὺς γεγραφέναι. the history of the apostolic acts teaches
Ἀλλ᾽ ἡ τῶν ἀποστολικῶν Πράξεων us neither. We will more clearly learn the
ἱστορία τούτων ἡμᾶς οὐδέτερον διδάσκει. truth if we may recall that story. For when
Σαφέστερον δὲ μαθησόμεθα τὴν ἀλήθειαν, a discussion about the Law began in An-
εἰ τῆς διηγήσεως ἐκείνης ἀναμνησθείημεν. tioch, the most divine Barnabas and Paul
Ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ γὰρ, τῆς περὶ τοῦ νόμου were sent to the holy apostles. Having re-
ζητήσεως γενομένης, ἀπεστάλησαν ceived the solution to the strife and carried
πρὸς τοὺς ἁγίους ἀποστόλους οἱ the letter about it back, they again reached
θειότατοι Βαρνάβας καὶ Παῦλος, καὶ τῆς Antioch. Evidently, the divinely inspired
ἀμφισβητήσεως τὴν λύσιν δεξάμενοι, καὶ Paul had at that time made the agreements
τὰ περὶ ταύτης κομισάμενοι γράμματα, with the leading apostles that he treats
κατέλαβον πάλιν τὴν Ἀντιόχειαν. Δῆλον in the letter to the Galatians: ‘And when
δὲ ὡς κατὰ τουτονὶ τὸν καιρὸν, καὶ τὰς James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to
πρὸς τοὺς κορυφαίους τῶν ἀποστόλων be the pillars, perceived the grace that was
ἐποιήσατο συνθήκας, περὶ ὧν ἐν τῇ πρὸς given unto me, they gave to me and Barn-
Γαλάτας ὁ θεσπέσιος ἔφη Παῦλος· »καὶ abas the right hands of fellowship; that we
γνόντες τὴν χάριν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὴν δοθεῖσάν should go to the Gentiles, and they unto
μοι, Ἰάκωβος, καὶ Κηφᾶς, καὶ Ἰωάννης, οἱ the circumcision.’ From this, it is easy to
δοκοῦντες στῦλοι εἶναι, δεξιὰς ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ see that the divine apostle John had not yet
καὶ Βαρνάβᾳ κοινωνίας, ἵνα αὐτοὶ μὲν εἰς left Judea. After the return from Jerusalem,
τὴν περιτομὴν, ἡμεῖς δὲ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη«. Ἐξ ὧν a contention about the blessed Mark arose
ῥᾴδιον κατιδεῖν, ὡς οὐδέπω καταλελοίπει between the holy apostles Barnabas and
τὴν Ἰουδαίαν ὁ θεῖος ἀπόστολος Ἰωάννης. Paul. He took Mark with him and sailed
Μετὰ μέντοι τὴν ἀπὸ τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων off to Cyprus, while the most divine Paul
ἐπάνοδον, τῆς περὶ τοῦ μακαρίου Μάρκου went with Silas through Syria and Cilicia
φιλονεικίας τοῖς ἁγιοίς ἀποστόλοις and reached Lycaonia. There, having cir-
γεγενημένης, Βαρνάβᾳ καὶ Παύλῳ, ὁ cumcised the eminent Timothy, he set out
μὲν τὸν Μάρκον λαβὼν, εἰς τὴν Κύπρον to Phrygia and Galatia, sowing the seeds of
ἐξέπλευσεν, ὁ δὲ θειότατος Παῦλος piety. For the Holy Spirit, he says, forbade
μετὰ τοῦ Σίλα τὴν Συρίαν καὶ Κιλικίαν them to preach the word in Asia. Then,
περινοστήσας, εἰς τὴν Λυκαονίαν ἀφίκετο· having passed through Mysia they tried to
ἐκεῖ δὲ τὸν πάντα ἄριστον περιτεμὼν bring the message of salvation even to the
Τιμόθεον, εἰς τὴν Φρυγίαν καὶ Γαλατίαν Bithynians. Again, they were prevented by
ἐξώρμησε, τῆς εὐσεβείας κατασπείρων the Divine Spirit. When they had reached
τὰ σπέρματα· ἐκώλυσε γὰρ αὐτοὺς, φησὶ, Troas, they were called to Macedonia by
τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον λαλῆσαι τὸν λόγον grace. Then, having brought the ray of
ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ. Εἶτα τὴν Μυσίαν διελθόντες knowledge of the divine to Macedonia and
ἐπειράθησαν καὶ Βιθυνοῖς προσενεγκεῖν τὸ to the Athenians and to the Corinthians,
σωτήριον κήρυγμα, καὶ πάλιν ὑπὸ τοῦ θείου they came to Ephesus. With the Apostle
Πνεύματος ἐκωλύθησαν. Τὴν δὲ Τρωάδα were Aquila and Priscilla. The blessed Luke
καταλαβόντες, εἰς τὴν Μακεδονίαν teaches that he went into the synagogue
ὑπὸ τῆς χάριτος προσεκλήθησαν. Εἶτα and spoke with the Jews and that he, when
μετὰ τὴν Μακεδονίαν καὶ Ἀθηναίοις καὶ asked to stay with them, did not yield but
Κορινθίοις τῆς θεογνωσίας τὴν ἀκτῖνα sailed off for Judaea. It is therefore very
προσενεγκόντες, εἰς τὴν Ἔφεσον ἦλθον· clear that the city of the Ephesians had not
συνῆν δὲ τῷ Ἀποστόλῳ καὶ Ἀκύλας καὶ yet enjoyed the message of salvation. For
Πρίσκιλλα. Διδάσκει τοίνυν ὁ μακάριος the divine Apostle would never have left
Λουκᾶς, ὡς εἰσελθὼν εἰς τὴν συναγωγὴν them behind and gone to the synagogue of
διελέχθη τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις, καὶ παρακληθεὶς the Jews. And the rest of the story teach-
276 Appendix I
αὐτοῖς συνδιατρίψαι οὐκ εἶξεν, ἀλλ᾽ εἰς es us this with greater clarity: For having
τὴν Ἰουδαίαν ἀπέπλευσεν. Εὔδηλον returned from Judaea, he found twelve
τοίνυν ὡς οὐδέπω τῶν Ἐφεσίων ἡ πόλις people in Ephesus who had received ba-
κατὰ τὸν καιρὸν ἐκεῖνον ἀπολελαύκει sic instruction, but not the grace of the
σωτηρίου κηρύγματος. Οὐ γὰρ ἂν τοὺς Divine Spirit, as they knew only the bap-
πιστοὺς καταλελοιπὼς ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος tism of John. Having baptized them, he
ὥρμησεν εἰς τὴν τῶν Ἰουδαίων συναγωγήν. stayed two years there, in the same place
καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς δὲ τῆς ἱστορίας τοῦτο διδάσκει teaching the Ephesians the doctrines that
σαφέστερον. Ἐπανελθὼν γὰρ πάλιν ἀπὸ bring salvation. And first he spoke in the
τῆς Ἰουδαίας εὗρέ τινας ἐν Ἐφέσῳ τὸν synagogues. Since the Jews were wont to
ἀριθμὸν δυοκαίδεκα, κατηχηθέντας μὲν, speak against him, he gave his instruc-
τοῦ δὲ θείου Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν οὐ tions in the Hall of Tyrannus. In this city,
δεδεγμένους, τὸ δὲ Ἰωάννου βάπτισμα even the surface of his garments drove out
μόνον ἐπισταμένους. Τούτους τοίνυν diseases, and the evil spirit leaped on the
βαπτίσας, δύο κατὰ ταυτὸν ἔτη διέτριψεν sons of Sceva and cried: ‘Jesus I know, and
αὐτόθι, παιδεύων τοὺς Ἐφεσίους τὰ Paul I know; but who are you?’ In this city,
σωτήρια δόγματα. καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἐν ταῖς books of magic were burned, of which they
συναγωγαῖς διελέγετο· ἐπειδὴ δὲ συνήθως counted the price and found it to be fifty
ἀντέλεγον Ἰουδαῖοι, ἐν τῇ Τυράννου thousand pieces of silver. Thus, the history
σχολῇ τὰς διατριβὰς ἐποιεῖτο. Ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ of the Acts teaches us clearly that it was not
πόλει, καὶ ὁ χρὼς τῶν ἱματίων αὐτοῦ τὰς the divine John who first brought the mes-
νόσους ἐξήλασε, καὶ τοῖς Σκευᾶ υἱέσιν ὁ sage of salvation to them, but the divinely
δαίμων ἐφαλλόμενος ἐβόησε· »τὸν Ἰησοῦν inspired Paul. The letter itself teaches us
γινώσκω, καὶ τὸν Παῦλον ἐπίσταμαι, that he also wrote the letter after these
ὑμεῖς δὲ, τίνες ἐστέ;« Ἐν ταύτῃ καὶ τὰ τῆς things happened. For towards the end, he
γοητείας ἐνεπρήσθη συγγράμματα, ὧν τὴν says: ‘But that you also may know my af-
τιμὴν συνεψήφισαν, καὶ εὗρον ἀργυρίου fairs, and how I do, Tychicus, a beloved
μυριάδας πέντε. Ὅτι μὲν οὖν οὐχ ὁ θεῖος brother and faithful minister in the Lord,
Ἰωάννης αὐτοῖς πρῶτος προσενήνοχε shall make known to you all things: Whom
τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ θεσπέσιος I have sent unto you for the same purpose,
Παῦλος, σαφῶς ἡμᾶς ἐδίδαξεν ἡ τῶν that you might know my affairs, and that
Πράξεων ἱστορία. ὅτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν he might comfort your hearts.’ The blessed
μετὰ ταῦτα γέγραφεν, αὐτὰ διδάσκει τὰ Tychicus he sent from Rome, and this he
γράμματα. Πρὸς γὰρ τῷ τέλει φησίν· »ἵνα teaches in the second letter to Timothy. For
δὲ εἰδῆτε καὶ ὑμεῖς τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμὲ, ὅ τι πράσσω, he has said: ‘Do your best to visit me soon,
πάντα ὑμῖν γνωρίσει Τυχικὸς ὁ ἀγαπητὸς for Demas has deserted me for the love of
ἀδελφὸς, καὶ πιστὸς διάκονος ἐν Κυρίῳ, the present world, and has gone to Thes-
ὃν ἔπεμψα πρὸς ὑμᾶς εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο, ἵνα salonice, Crescens to Galatia, Titus to Dal-
γνῶτε τὰ περὶ ἡμῶν, καὶ παρακαλέσῃ τὰς matia. Luke alone is with me. Get hold of
καρδίας ὑμῶν«. τὸν δὲ μακάριον Τυχικὸν Mark and bring him along, for he is helpful
ἀπὸ τῆς Ῥώμης ἀπέστειλε, καὶ τοῦτο to me in service.’ And he added: ‘I have sent
ἐν τῇ πρὸς Τιμόθεον δευτέρᾳ διδάσκει. Tychicus to Ephesus.’ He teaches us clearly
Εἰρηκὼς γάρ· »Σπούδασον ταχέως ἐλθεῖν in this letter that he wrote this letter as his
πρός με· Δημᾶς γάρ με ἐγκατέλιπεν last one: ‘For I am already on the point of
ἀγαπήσας τὸν νῦν αἰῶνα, καὶ ἐπορεύθη being sacrificed; the time of my departure
εἰς Θεσσαλονικὴν, Κρήσκης εἰς Γαλατίαν, has drawn near.’ Thus, having preached to
Τίτος εἰς Δαλματίαν· Λουκᾶς ἐστι μόνος the Ephesians, he traveled a second time to
μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ· Μάρκον ἀναλαβὼν ἄγε μετὰ Macedonia and Achaea, and from there to
σεαυτοῦ· ἔστι γὰρ χρήσιμος εἰς διακονίαν«· Judea. Therefore, he reached Rome after he
ἐπήγαγε· »Τυχικὸν δὲ ἀπέστειλα εἰς had stayed in Ephesus. Writing from Rome,
Ἔφεσον.« Ὅτι δὲ ἐσχάτην ταύτην ἔγραψε he showed that he had sent Tychicus to
τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν, σαφῶς ἐν αὐτῇ διδάσκει· Ephesus. And Tychicus was the carrier of
»Ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπένδομαι, καὶ ὁ καιρὸς τῆς the letter to the Ephesians. Therefore it has
ἐμῆς ἀναλύσεως ἐφέστηκεν«. Ὁ τοίνυν clearly been shown that he wrote the letter
Ἐφεσίοις κηρύξας, τὸ δεύτερον εἰς τὴν after he had preached the Gospel to them.
Μακεδονίαν καὶ τὴν Αχαΐαν ἐξόρμησε, The first part of the letter contains teach-
κἀκεῖθεν εἰς τὴν Ἰουδαίαν. Εἶτα τῇ Ἐφέσῳ ing of the divine message, the second part,
χρησάμενος τὴν Ῥώμην κατέλαβεν. ethical exhortation.
Ἐκεῖθεν δὲ γράφων ἐδήλωσεν ὡς Τυχικὸν
ἀπέστειλεν εἰς Ἔφεσον· Τυχικὸς δὲ τῶν
πρὸς Ἐφεσίους γραμμάτων διάκονος.
Δέδεικται ἄρα σαφῶς, ὡς προκηρύξας
αὐτοῖς τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον οὕτως ἔγραψε
τὴν Ἐπιστολήν. τῆς δὲ Ἐπιστολῆς τὰ μὲν
πρῶτα περιέχει διδασκαλίαν τοῦ θείου
κηρύγματος, τὰ δὲ τελευταῖα παραίνεσιν
ἠθικήν.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG$o" Argument [of Philippians]
Ἀπὸ τῆς θείας χάριτος κυβερνώμενος ὁ The divine Apostle came to Macedonia
θεῖος ἀπόστολος ἀπὸ μὲν τῆς Τρωάδας from Troas, guided by divine grace. He
εἰς Μακεδονίαν ἀφίκετο· πρώτοις δὲ brought the divine Gospel first to the Phi-
Φιλιππησίοις τὸ θεῖον προσενήνοχεν lippians and he confirmed the gospel by
Εὐαγγέλιον, ἐβεβαίωσε δὲ καὶ working miracles. For there he cast out a
θαυματουργίαις τὸ κήρυγμα. Ἐκεῖ γὰρ καὶ false divining demon from a girl. There,
τὸν ψευδόμαντιν ἔκ τινος κόρης ἐξήλασε when he stayed in prison with Silas, having
δαίμονα· ἐκεῖ σὺν τῷ Σίλᾳ τὸ δεσμωτήριον his hands and feet bound, he was praising
οἰκήσας, καὶ πεδηθεὶς χεῖράς τε καὶ πόδας, God throughout the night. And He who
καὶ πάννυχος διετέλεσε τὸν θεὸν ἀνυμνῶν. was praised shook the prison and freed
Ὁ δέ γε ὑμνούμενος ἔσεισε μὲν τὸ all the prisoners of their fetters. Through
δεσμωτήριον, ἔλυσε δὲ τὰ τῶν πεπεδημένων a most brilliant light He revealed his own
ἁπάντων δεσμά· διὰ δέ τινος λαμπροτάτου coming. These things moved the keeper
φωτὸς τὴν οἰκείαν ἐδήλωσεν ἐπιφάνειαν. of the prison to approach salvation. And
Ταῦτα καὶ τὸν δεσμοφύλακα προσδραμεῖν he, with all his house, enjoyed the light
τῇ σωτηρίᾳ κατήπειξεν· ἀπήλαυσε δὲ σὺν of knowledge of the divine. Before this,
αὐτῷ καὶ πᾶς ὁ οἶκος τοῦ τῆς θεογνωσίας the seller of purple had come into his
φωτός. Πρὸ δέ γε τούτων ἡ πορφυρόπωλις net. Therefore the Philippians appeared
εἴσω τῆς τούτου σαγήνης ἐγένετο. Θερμοὶ as ardent lovers of piety. Evidence of their
τοίνυν οἱ Φιλιππήσιοι τῆς εὐσεβείας great zeal for the divine is that they not
278 Appendix I
ἀπεφάνθησαν ἐρασταί. Τεκμήριον δὲ only served the divine Apostle when he

τῆς περὶ τὰ θεῖα προθυμίας αὐτῶν, τὸ μὴ was present but also sent money both to
μόνον παρόντα θεραπεῦσαι τὸν θεῖον Thessalonice and Corinth for his bodily
Ἀπόστολον, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἰς Θεσσαλονίκην, sustenance. And they did the same thing
καὶ εἰς Κόρινθον πέμψαι χρήματα, εἰς τὴν when he arrived in Rome. For they sent
τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ ἐπιμέλειαν. Ταυτὸ the blessed Epaphroditus, who was en-
δὲ τοῦτο δεδράκασι καὶ ἡνίκα τὴν Ῥώμην trusted with the care of their souls, to the
κατέλαβε. τὸν γὰρ μακάριον Ἐπαφρόδιτον, very great city of Rome, as they did not fear
ὃς τῶν ψυχῶν αὐτῶν ἐπιστεύθη ἐπιμέλειαν, the fierceness of Nero. Because of this he
εἰς τὴν μεγίστην ἐκείνην ἀπέστειλαν wrote the letter, praising their readiness
πόλιν. οὐ δείσαντες τὸ θηριῶδες τοῦ in love and exhorting them to do what is
Νέρωνος. Διὰ τούτου ταύτην γέγραφε appropriate. Most of all, he orders them
τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν, καὶ τὴν τῆς ἀγάπης αὐτῶν to flee the deception of the believers from
ἀποδεχόμενος προθυμίαν, καὶ παραινῶν the Jews, as they attempt to defend the Law
τὰ προσήκοντα. Μάλιστα δὲ αὐτοῖς and try to destroy the message of salvation.
παρεγγυᾷ φεύγειν τὴν ἐξαπάτην τῶν ἐξ
Ἰουδαίων μὲν πεπιστευκότων, συνηγορεῖν
δὲ πειρωμένων τῷ νόμῳ, καὶ διαφθείρειν
ἐπιχειρούντων τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG"o# Argument [of Colossians]
Κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν καιρὸν Ἐφεσίοις καὶ The divine Apostle wrote to the Ephesians
Κολασσεῦσιν ἔγραψεν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, and to the Colossians at the same time, and
τῷ θαυμασίῳ Τυχικῷ διακόνῳ τῶν used the wonderful Tychicus as the letter
γραμμάτων χρησάμενος. Ἔγραψε δὲ ἀπὸ carrier. He wrote from Rome when he had
τῆς Ῥώμης, ἤδη τὸν πρῶτον διαφυγὼν already escaped the first danger. The proo-
κίνδυνον· καὶ δηλοῖ τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς τὸ emium of the letter makes this clear: For he
προοίμιον. Κοινωνὸν γὰρ τῶν γραμμάτων made the thrice-blessed Timothy co-writer
τὸν τρισμακάριον Τιμόθεον ἐποιήσατο· of the letter. When he had his first fight be-
ἡνίκα δὲ τὸν πρῶτον ἔσχε, ἐπὶ Νέρωνος, fore Nero, nobody of his friends was with
ἀγῶνα, οὐδεὶς αὐτῷ τῶν γνωρίμων συνῆν. him. And this he has showed himself in
καὶ τοῦτο αὐτὸς δεδήλωκεν ἐν τοῖς πρὸς the letter to Timothy: ‘At my first defense,
Τιμόθεον γράμμασιν· »Ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ μὲν no one stood by my side.’ And now when
ἀπολογίᾳ οὐδείς μοι συμπαρεγένετο«. he was near the end of his life, Timothy did
καὶ ὅτε δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸ ἦν λοιπὸν τοῦ βίου not live in Rome, but rather in Asia. And
τὸ τέρμα, οὐκ ἐν τῇ Ρώμῃ διῆγεν ὁ θεῖος the second letter written to him teaches us
Τιμόθεος, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ. καὶ this with greater clarity. For he said: ‘For I
τοῦτο διδάσκει σαφέστερον ἡ πρὸς αὐτὸν am already on the point of being sacrificed;
γραφεῖσα δευτέρα Ἐπιστολή. Εἰρηκὼς γὰρ· the time of my departure has drawn near.’
»Ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπένδομαι, καὶ ὁ καιρὸς A little later, he says: ‘Do your best to visit
τῆς ἐμῆς ἀναλύσεως ἐφέστηκε«· μετ᾽ me soon.’ And he adds: ‘Bring with you
ὀλίγα φησί· »Σπούδασον ἐλθεῖν πρός με the cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus,
ταχέως«. Εἶτα ἐπάγει· »τὸν φελώνην, ὃν and the books, especially the parchments.’
ἀπέλιπον ἐν Τρωάδι παρὰ Κάρπῳ, ἄγαγε Some say that the divine Apostle had not
μετὰ σεαυτοῦ, καὶ τὰ βιβλία, μάλιστα τὰς yet seen the Colossians when he wrote the
μεμβράνας«. Τινὲς μέντοι φασὶ μηδέπω letter to them and they try to establish this
τοὺς Κολασσαεῖς τεθεαμένον τὸν θεῖον through these words: ‘For I would that you
Ἀπόστολον γράψαι πρὸς αὐτοὺς τὴν knew what great conflict I have for you,
Ἐπιστολὴν, καὶ τοῦτο συνιστάνειν ἐκ and for them at Laodicea, and for as many
τῶν ῥητῶν ἐκείνων ἐπιχειροῦσι· »Θέλω as have not seen my face in the flesh.’ But
γὰρ ὑμᾶς εἰδέναι ἡλίκον ἀγῶνα ἔχω περὶ they should have understood the sense of
ὑμῶν, καὶ τῶν ἐν Λαοδικείᾳ, καὶ ὅσοι οὐχ these words. For he wants to say ‘I am not
ἑωράκασι τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐν σαρκί«. only very much concerned about you, but
Ἔδει δὲ συνιδεῖν τῶν ῥητῶν τὴν διάνοιαν. also about them who have not seen me.’
Βούλεται γὰρ εἰπεῖν, ὅτι Οὐ μόνον ὑμῶν, For if he only were worried about those
ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν μὴ τεθεαμένων με πολλὴν who had not seen him, he would not at
ἔχω φροντίδα. Εἰ γὰρ τῶν μὴ ἑωρακότων all be concerned about those who had en-
αὐτὸν μόνον τὴν μέριμναν περιέφερε, joyed both the sight of him and his teach-
τῶν ἀπολαυσάντων αὐτοῦ τῆς θέας καὶ ing! And one should interpret the follow-
τῆς διδασκαλίας οὐδεμίαν ἔχει φροντίδα. ing in this sense: ‘What great conflict’, he
Κατ᾽ ἐκείνην γὰρ τὴν διάνοιαν τοῦτό εστι says ‘I have for you, and for them at La-
νοῆσαι· »Ἡλίκον« γὰρ, φησὶν, »ἀγῶνα ἔχω odicea, and for as many as have not seen
περὶ ὑμῶν, καὶ τῶν ἐν Λαοδικείᾳ, καὶ ὅσοι my face in the flesh.’ It is therefore clear
οὐχ ἑωράκασι τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐν σαρκί«. that he did not say this about them, but he
Δῆλον τοίνυν, ὡς οὐ περὶ αὐτῶν τοῦτο ἔφη, put it there because he wanted to confirm
ἀλλὰ βεβαιῶσαι τὰ κατ᾽αὐτοὺς βουληθεὶς his relationship to them by saying: ‘I have
ἐκεῖνο τέθεικεν, ὅτι οὐ μόνον ὑμῶν, ἀλλὰ great concern not only for you but also for
καὶ τῶν μηδέπω τεθεαμένων με πολλὴν them who have not yet seen me.’ And the
ἔχω φροντίδα. Ἐδίδαξε δὲ ἡμᾶς καὶ ὁ thrice-blessed Luke taught us in Acts that
τρισμακάριος Λουκᾶς ἐν ταῖς Πράξεσιν, ὡς he at that time traveled through Phrygia
κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν καιρὸν διῆλθε τὴν Φρυγίαν and the Galatian land. The city of Colossae
καὶ τὴν Γαλατικὴν χώραν. τῆς δὲ Φρυγίας lies in Phrygia. Its chief city and neighbor
αἱ Κολασσαί· Μητρόπολις δὲ αὐτῆς καὶ is Laodicea. How could he have been able
γείτων, ἡ Λαοδίκεια. Πῶς τοίνυν οἷόν τε not to bring the divine Gospel to these cit-
ἦν αὐτὸν ἀφικόμενον εἰς τὴν Φρυγίαν, τὸ ies when he arrived in Phrygia? And no
θεῖον αὐταῖς μὴ προσενεγκεῖν Εὐαγγέλιον; one might say that he was prevented from
Οὐδὲ εἴποι τις ἂν, ὡς ὑπὸ τῆς θείας doing this through divine grace. Concern-
ἐκωλύθησαν χάριτος τοῦτο πρᾶξαι. Περὶ ing Asia and Bithynia, the blessed Luke
μὲν γὰρ τῆς Ἀσίας καὶ τῆς Βιθυνίας εἶπεν ὁ said that the Holy Spirit prevented them.
μακάριος Λουκᾶς κεκωλυκέναι αὐτοὺς τὸ But concerning Phrygia, he said no such
Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον. περὶ δέ γε τῆς Φρυγίας thing. But let everyone understand this as
οὐδὲν τοιοῦτον ἔφη. Ἀλλὰ τοῦτο μὲν ὡς he wishes! It does not make a difference
βούλεταί τις νοείτω· οὐδὲ γὰρ δογμάτων in doctrine whether one says this thing
ποιεῖ διαφορὰν τὸ οὕτως ἢ ἐκείνως εἰπεῖν. or the other. The argument of the letter is
Ἡ δὲ ὑπόθεσις τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς ἐστὶν αὕτη· this: Some of the believers from the Jews
Τινὲς τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων deceived them and made them observe the
ἐξηπάτησαν, καὶ παρεσκεύασαν τούτους unnecessary matters of the Law. Therefore
φυλάττειν τοῦ νόμου τὰ περιττά. Γέγραφε the divine Apostle wrote to them, teaching
τοίνυν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, διδάσκων ὡς that the Lord Christ has become for us the
280 Appendix I
τῆς σωτηρίας ἡμῖν ὁ Δεσπότης Χριστὸς procurer of salvation. And he shows that
γεγένηται χορηγός. Δείκνυσι δὲ καὶ τὸ τῆς the mystery of the plan transcends all hu-
οἰκονομίας μυστήριον πάντα λογισμὸν man thought and that we will be sharers of
ὑπερβαῖνον ἀνθρώπινον, καὶ ὅτι κονιωνοὶ the kingdom of Christ and that the legal
τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ βασιλείας ἐσόμεθα, καὶ observances are not beneficial to the per-
ὅτι τοῖς τελείοις αἱ νομικαὶ παρατηρήσεις fect.
οὐ πρόσφοροι.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 628C) Argument [of 1 Thessalonians]
Ἡ Θεσσαλονίκη πρωτεύει μὲν τῆς Thessalonice was the chief city of Mace-
Μακεδονίας· ἐδέξατο δὲ προθύμως τὸ donia. It had eagerly received the message
σωτήριον κήρυγμα. Ὁ δὲ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος of salvation. And the divine Apostle laid
καὶ ἐνταῦθα κατέπηξε τὰ τῆς εὐσεβείας the foundations of piety also there. Some
θεμέλια, ἀντιλεγόντων μὲν Ἰουδαίων καὶ Jews were opposing it and openly fighting
προφανῶς πολεμούντων· ἀνόνητα δὲ against it, but their toil was in vain. For the
πονούντων. ὑπερέπλει γὰρ τῶν κυμάτων Gospel sailed above the waves. When the
τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον. Τὰς τούτων ἐκκλίνας divinely inspired Paul had escaped their
ἐπιβουλὰς ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος, ἀπὸ plots, he came to Beroea from Thessalonice,
μὲν τῆς Θεσσσαλονίκης εἰς τὴν Βέροιαν and from Beroea he sailed to Athens. As he
ἦλθεν, ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς Βεροίας εἰς τὰς Ἀθήνας was constantly caring for his converts, he
ἀπέπλευσε. τῶν δέ γε πεπιστευκότων sent the thrice-blessed Timothy from Ath-
διηνεκῶς περιφέρων τὴν μέριμναν, τὸν ens to Thessalonice, in order to confirm
τρισμακάριον Τιμόθεον ἀπὸ τῶν Ἀθηνῶν and strengthen them and to show that they
εἰς τὴν Θεσσαλονίκην ἐξέπεμψεν, ὥστε were stronger than the schemes brought
αὐτοὺς ἐρεῖσαι καὶ κρατῦναι, καὶ τῶν by the opponents. When he came back he
παρὰ τῶν ἐναντίων προσφερομένων praised the invincibility of their faith but
μηχανημάτων δεῖξαι δυνατωτέρους. said that they needed advice on the teach-
Οὗτος ἐπανελθὼν ἐπῄνεσε μὲν τὸ τῆς ing regarding some discussions that had
πίστεως ἄμαχον, ἔφη δὲ δεῖσθαι αὐτοὺς arisen among them. Therefore he wrote
διδασκαλίας τινὸς παραινέσεως περί τι- the letter. First he praises the firmness of
νων ζητημάτων παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς κινουμένων. their faith, and then he exhorts them to ex-
Γέγραφε τοίνυν τὴν ἐπιστολὴν, πρῶτον μὲν pect the resurrection of the dead but not
αὐτῶν τὸ στεῤῥὸν τῆς πίστεως εὐφημῶν, to pay overly much attention to the time
ἔπειτα προσμένειν τῶν νεκρῶν τὴν of the coming of the Lord. And he also
ἀνάστασιν παραινῶν, τῆς δὲ τοῦ κυρίου brought them exhortation with ethical
παρουσίας μὴ πολυπραγμονεῖν τὸν καιρόν. teaching. The exposition section by section
Προσενήνοχε δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ τῆς ἠθικῆς will teach us these things more accurately.
διδασκαλίας παραίνεσιν. Ἀκριβέστερον δὲ
ταῦτα ἡ κατὰ μέρος ἑρμηνεία διδάξει.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 657AB) Argument [of 2 Thessalonians]
Γνοὺς ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος τὴν ἐκ When the divine Apostle learned that the
τῶν προτέρων γραμμάτων τοῖς Thessalonians had profited from the pre-
Θεσσαλονικεῦσιν ἐγγινομένην ὠφέλειαν, vious letter and that they nobly had en-
καὶ ὅτι χαλεπῶς ὑπὲρ τῆς πίστεως dured the assaults of the opponents when
πολεμούμενοι φέρουσι γενναίως τῶν they were under heavy attack for the sake
ἐναντίων τὰς προσβολὰς, καὶ δευτέραν of faith, he wrote them also a second let-
αὐτοῖς Ἐπιστολὴν γέγραφε, παραθήγων ter, inciting courage and comforting them
εἰς ἀνδρείαν, καὶ τῇ τῶν μελλόντων ἐλπίδι with the hope of the things to come. Be-
ψυχαγωγῶν. Ἐπειδὴ δὲ καὶ πεῖσαί τινες cause some had tried to persuade them to
αὐτοὺς ἐπειράθησαν, ὡς ἐνέστηκεν ὁ τῆς believe that the time of the end had drawn
συντελείας καιρὸς, τὸν Ἀπόστολον ταῦτα near, asserting that the Apostle had said so.
λέγοντες εἰρηκέναι· καὶ περὶ τούτων And he wrote about these things, teach-
ἐπέστειλε, τὰ προσήκοντα διδάσκων, ὡς ing them what was appropriate; that the
δεῖ πρότερον ὀφθῆναι τὸν τῆς ἀληθείας enemy of truth first must appear, referring
ἐχθρὸν, τὸν Ἀντίχριστον λέγων· εἶθ᾽ οὕτω to the Antichrist, then our God and Savior
γίνεσθαι τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν will come. He also gave useful exhortation
ἐπιφάνειαν. Παρῄνεσε δὲ καὶ τοῖς τὸν to those who preferred a leisurely life. We
ἀργὸν βίον προαιρουμένοις τὰ πρόσφορα. will understand the meaning of every part
Ἑκάστου δὲ τούτων τὴν διάνοιαν ἐκ τῆς of this from the exposition of the words.
τῶν ῥητῶν ἑρμηνείας εἰσόμεθα.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG$o# Argument [of Hebrews]
Θαυμαστὸν οὐδὲν δρῶσιν οἱ τὴν They who suffer from the Arian disease
Ἀρειανικὴν εἰσδεξάμενοι νόσον, κατὰ do not act admirably; raging against the
τῶν ἀποστολικῶν λυττῶντες γραμμάτων, apostolic letters, separating the letter to
καὶ τὴν πρὸς Ἑβραίους Ἐπιστολὴν the Hebrews from the rest and calling it
τῶν λοιπῶν ἀποκρίνοντες, καὶ νόθον a bastard. For they, who use their tongue
ταύτην ἀποκαλοῦντες. Οἱ γὰρ κατὰ τοῦ against our God and Savior, what would
Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν τὰς γλώττας they not dare to do against his benevolent
κινοῦντες, τί οὐκ ἂν τολμήσαιεν κατὰ and impressive heralds of truth? For this is
τῶν εὔνων αὐτοῦ καὶ μεγαλοφώνων τῆς a word of the Lord: ‘If they have persecut-
ἀληθείας κηρύκων; αὐτοῦ γάρ ἐστι τοῦ ed me, they will also persecute you.’ They
Δεσπότου φωνή· »Εἰ ἐμὲ ἐδίωξαν, καὶ ὑμᾶς should, if nothing else, at least respect the
διώξουσιν«. Ἔδει δὲ αὐτοὺς, εἰ καὶ μηδὲν length of time in which the nurslings of
ἕτερον, τοῦ χρόνου γοῦν αἰδεσθῆναι τὸ the church have continued to read this let-
μῆκος, ἐν ᾧ τήνδε τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν ἐν ταῖς ter in the assemblies. From the time when
Ἐκκλησίαις ἀναγινώσκοντες διετέλεσαν the churches of God became partakers in
τῆς Ἐκκλησίας οἱ τρόφιμοι. Ἐξ οὗ γὰρ τῶν the apostolic letters, from that time they
ἀποστολικῶν γραμμάτων αἱ τοῦ Θεοῦ have continued to reap the benefit also
μετέλαχον Ἐκκλησίαι, ἐξ ἐκείνου καὶ τῆς of the letter to the Hebrews. If this is not
πρὸς Ἑβραίους Ἐπιστολῆς τὴν ὠφέλειαν enough to persuade them, they should cer-
καρποῦνται. Εἰ δὲ μηδὲ τοῦτο ἱκανὸν πεῖσαι tainly be persuaded by Eusebius the Pales-
αὐτοὺς, Εὐσεβίῳ γοῦν ἔχρην πεισθῆναι τῷ tinian, whom they call a defender of their
Παλαιστινῷ, ὃν τῶν οἰκείων δογμάτων own doctrines. For also he admitted that
ἀποκαλοῦσι συνήγορον. Καὶ οὗτος γὰρ τοῦ this letter was by the most divine Paul, and
θειοτάτου Παύλου τήνδε τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν he said that all the people of the past held
282 Appendix I
ὡμολόγησεν εἶναι, καὶ τοὺς παλαιοὺς the same opinion regarding this letter. But
ἅπαντας ταύτην περὶ αὐτῆς ἔφησεν they, having said good-bye to everything,
ἐσχηκέναι τὴν δόξαν. Ἀλλ᾽ οὗτοι πᾶσιν fight without shame against the truth, as
ἐῤῥῶσθαι φράσαντες, ἀναίδην πρὸς τὴν they cannot endure the splendor of the
ἀλήθειαν διαμάχονται, τῆς ἀποστολικῆς apostolic theology with which he adorned
θεολογίας, ᾗ τὸ προοίμιον κατεκόσμησε, the prooemium. Since they were not able
τὴν αἴγλην οὐ φέροντες. Ἀντιλέγειν γὰρ οὐ to refute what is said openly about the di-
δυνάμενοι πρὸς τὰ διαῤῥήδην περὶ τῆς τοῦ vinity of the only begotten, they dared to
Μονογενοῦς εἰρημένα θεότητος, πᾶσαν reject the entire letter, even if its doctrines
ἐκβάλλειν ἐτόλμησαν τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν, and the other ideas are closely related to
καίτοι καὶ τῶν δογμάτων, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων the other letters. They use as a pretext for
ἐνθυμημάτων, πολλὴν συγγένειαν πρὸς their accusation that the apostolic name is
τὰς ἄλλας ἐχόντων Ἐπιστολάς. Πρόσχημα not found in the prooemium. They should
δὲ τῇ κατηγορίᾳ περιτιθέασι τὸ μὴ τὴν have considered that he was appointed
ἀποστολικὴν προσηγορίαν ὁμοίως apostle of the believers from the Gentiles
ἐγκεῖσθαι τῷ προοιμίῳ. Ἔδει δὲ αὐτοὺς and not of those from the Jews. For the
συνιδεῖν, ὡς τῶν ἐξ ἐθνῶν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τῶν Lord said to him: ‘Make haste, and get
ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων ἀπόστολος quickly out of here. For they will not re-
ἐκεχειροτόνητο. καὶ γὰρ ὁ Κύριος πρὸς ceive your testimony concerning me. De-
αὐτὸν ἔφη· »Σπεῦσον, καὶ ἔξελθε τὸ τάχος part! For I will send you far away to the
ἐντεῦθεν· οὐ γὰρ μὴ προσδέξονταί σου τὴν Gentiles.’ And he made such agreements
μαρτυρίαν τὴν περὶ ἐμοῦ. Πορεύου, ὅτι εἰς also with others. ‘For James’, he says, ‘and
ἔθνη μακρὰν ἐξαποστελῶ σε«. Τοιαύτας δὲ Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars,
καὶ πρὸς τοὺς ἄλλους ἐποιήσατο συνθήκας. gave to me and Barnabas the right hand
»Ἰάκωβος« γὰρ, φησὶ, »καὶ Κηφᾶς, of fellowship; they should go unto the cir-
καὶ Ἰωάννης, οἱ δοκουντες στῦλοι εἶναι, cumcision, and we to the Gentiles.’ In this
δεξιὰς ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρνάβᾳ κοινωνίας, manner he spoke when he wrote to the Ro-
ἵνα αὐτοὶ μὲν εἰς τὴν περιτομὴν, ἡμεῖς δὲ εἰς mans: ‘Inasmuch as I am the apostle of the
τὰ ἔθνη«. Οὕτω καὶ Ῥωμαίοις ἐπιστέλλων Gentiles, I magnify my office.’ For this rea-
ἔφη· »Ἐφ᾽ ὅσον εἰμὶ ἐγὼ ἐθνῶν ἀπόστολος, son; when he is writing to those from the
τὴν διακονίαν μου δοξάσω«. Τούτου δὴ Gentiles he both prefixed his name and the
χάριν τοῖς μὲν ἐξ ἐθνῶν πεπιστευκόσιν apostolic honor, as a teacher writing to his
ἐπιστέλλων, καὶ τὴν προσηγορίαν disciples. But when writing to the Hebrews,
προστέθεικε, καὶ τὴν ἀποστολικὴν ἀξίαν whose care was not entrusted to him, he
προστέθεικεν, ὡς διδάσκαλος μαθηταῖς rightly brought them the teaching stripped
ἐπιστέλλων. Ἑβραίοις δὲ γράφων, ὧν οὐκ of his honors. They were cared for by the
ἐνεχειρίσθη τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν, γυμνὴν τῶν other apostles. The exposition of the letter
ἀξιωμάτων εἰκότως τὴν διδασκαλίαν section by section will teach us with great-
προσήνεγκεν. Ὑπὸ γὰρ τὴν τῶν ἄλλων er clarity that the letter is full of spiritual
ἀποστόλων προμήθειαν ἐτέλουν. Ὅτι grace and that it does not give any cause
δὲ τῆς πνευματικῆς χάριτος ἀνάπλεως for the existing slandering. The argument
ἡ Ἐπιστολὴ, καὶ οὐδὲ τὴν τυχοῦσαν of the letter is this: They who suffered from
παρέχουσα διαβολῆς ἀφορμὴν, ἡ κατὰ the disease of unbelief gave them all kinds
μέρος ἑρμηνεία διδάξει σαφέστερον. Ἡ of troubles. Writing to the Thessalonians,
δὲ ὑπόθεσις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς ἐστιν αὕτη· the divine Apostle mentioned their suffer-
Τοὺς ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότας οἱ ings: ‘For you’, he says, ‘became followers
τὴν τῆς ἀπιστίας περικείμενοι νόσον, of the churches of God in Judaea. For you
πολλοῖς καὶ παντοδαποῖς περιέβαλλον have also suffered like things of your own
ἀλγεινοῖς. Τούτων δὲ τῶν παθημάτων tribesmen, just as they have of the Jews.’
καὶ Θεσσαλονικεῦσιν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος And when he wrote to the Hebrews, he
ἐπιστέλλων ἐμνήσθη. »Μιμηταὶ γὰρ«, φησὶν, added also this: ‘And you took joyfully the
»ἐγενήθητε τῶν Ἐκκλησιῶν τοῦ Θεοῦ τῶν spoiling of your goods.’ And the blessed
οὐσῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ· τὰ γὰρ αὐτὰ καὶ Luke teaches that before the call, the di-
ὑμεῖς ἐπάθετε ὑπὸ τῶν ἰδίων συμφυλετῶν, vine Paul was destroying the church, enter-
καθάπερ κἀκεῖνοι ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων«. καὶ ing into the houses and dragging men and
αὐτοῖς δὲ γράφων καὶ τοῦτο προστέθεικε· women he committed them to prison. Not
»καὶ τὴν ἁρπαγὴν τῶν ὑπαρχόντων only did the unbelievers dare to do these
ὑμῶν μεθ᾽ ἡδονῆς κατεδέξασθε«. καὶ ὁ things to the converts, but they also ridi-
μακάριος δὲ ἡμᾶς διδάσκει Λουκᾶς, ὡς culed them as people believing persistently
πρὸ τῆς κλήσεως ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος in a dead man and as people who had left
ἐλυμαίνετο τὴν Ἐκκλησίαν, κατὰ τοὺς the Law that was given by God. Therefore,
οἴκους εἰσπορευόμενος, σύρων τε ἄνδρας the divine Apostle immediately, in the
καὶ γυναῖκας παρεδίδου εἰς φυλακήν. Οὐ prooemium, shows that He was greater
μόνον δὲ ταῦτα κατὰ τῶν πεπιστευκότων than all the prophets. Then, beginning to
οἱ ἀπιστοῦντες ἐτόλμων, ἀλλὰ καὶ speak of His divinity, he declares that He
ἐκωμῴδουν, ὡς ἀνθρώπῳ τεθνεῶτι is eternal, co-eternal with the Father, and
πιστεύειν ἀνασχομένους, καὶ τὸν ὑπὸ the creator of all things. Then, having com-
Θεοῦ δεδομένον καταλελοιπότας νόμον. pared Him with the angels, he focuses on
Τούτου δὴ χάριν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος the divine Scripture that openly teaches
εὐθὺς ἐν τῷ προοιμίῳ τῶν προφητῶν that He is Son and God, while they are ser-
αὐτὸν ἁπάντων ἀποδείκνυσι κρείττονα. vants and creatures. From here, he shows
Εἶτα τῆς θεολογίας ἀρξάμενος, ἀΐδιον that the things that were given from the
ἀποφαίνει, καὶ τοῦ Πατρὸς συναΐδιον, καὶ Lord Christ are greater than the things that
τῶν ἁπάντων δημιουργόν. Ἔπειτα τοῖς were brought through Moses. For he gave
ἀγγέλοις παρεξετάσας, τὴν θείαν εἰς μέσον the Old Covenant, but He the New, which
φέρει Γραφὴν, διαῤῥήδην διδάσκουσαν ὡς was promised through the prophets of old.
ὁ μὲν ἔστιν Υἱὸς καὶ Θεὸς, οἱ δὲ λειτουργοὶ And he promised to give Palestine, but He
καὶ ποιήματα. Ἐντεῦθεν δείκνυσιν ὡς τῶν the Kingdom of Heaven. He compares the
διὰ Μωσέως παραχθέντων μείζονα τὰ priesthood after the order of Melchisedec
παρὰ τοῦ Δεσπότου δεδομένα Χριστοῦ. with the Levitic, and shows that it is supe-
Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἔδωκε τὴν Παλαιὰν Διαθήκην· rior. In addition to this, he shows that the
ὁ δὲ τὴν Καινὴν, ἣν διὰ τῶν παλαιῶν OVSTMJOHTPGQJFUZoCPUIUIPTFCFGPSFUIF
προεπηγγείλατο προφητῶν. καὶ ὁ μὲν -BXBOEUIPTFVOEFSJUoXFSFBENJSBCMF
ὑπέσχετο δώσειν τὴν Παλαιστίνην· ὁ δὲ He speaks both of the sufferings and the
τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν. Συνκρίνει δὲ courage of those people, anointing them
καὶ τῇ Λευιτικῇ ἱερωσύνῃ τὴν κατὰ τάξιν before the dangers. Then, having men-
Μελχισεδὲκ, καὶ δείκνυσι τὴν ὑπεροχήν. tioned his own struggles, exhorted them to
πρὸς τούτοις καὶ τοὺς πρὸ νόμου καὶ stand bravely till the end, and added moral
τοὺς ἐν νόμῳ τῆς εὐσεβείας τροφίμους exhortation to the doctrines, he ended the
διὰ πίστεως ἀποφαίνει περιβλέπτους letter. He wrote it in the Hebrew language.
284 Appendix I
γεγενημένους. Λέγει δὲ αὐτῶν καὶ τὰ They say that it was translated by Clement.
πάθη καὶ τὴν ἀνδρείαν, τούτους πρὸς Now, let us begin the exposition!
τοὺς κινδύνους ἀλείφων. Εἶτα τῶν οἰκείων
αὐτοὺς ἀναμνήσας ἀγώνων καὶ στῆναι
μέχρι τέλους ἀνδρείως παρακαλέσας,
καὶ τοῖς δογματικοῖς καὶ ἠθικὴν συνάψας
παραίνεσιν, πεπλήρωκε τὴν Ἐπιστολήν.
Γέγραφε δὲ αὐτὴν τῇ Ἑβραίων φωνῇ.
ἑρμηνευθῆναι δὲ αὐτήν φασιν ὑπὸ
Κλήμεντος. Ἡμεῖς δὲ λοιπὸν τῆς ἑρμηνείας
ἁψώμεθα.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 788A) Argument [of 1 Timothy]
Λυκαὼν ὁ τρισμακάριος Τιμόθεος The thrice-blessed Timothy was a Lyca-

ἦν. Καταλιπὼν δὲ καὶ πατρίδα, καὶ onian. Having left his homeland, his house
οἰκίαν, καὶ τοὺς γεγεννηκότας, εἵπετο and his parents, he followed the Apostle,
τῷ Ἀποστόλῳ, πάντων ὁμοῦ τὴν σὺν preferring life with him before everything
αὐτῷ διαγωγὴν προαιρούμενος. Τούτῳ else. The divine Paul entrusted Asia to his
τῆς Ἀσίας τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν ἐνεχείρισεν care. Therefore he writes to him, first ex-
ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος. Γράφει τοίνυν horting him to make silent those who try
αὐτῷ, πρῶτον μὲν τοὺς τἀναντία to teach opposite doctrines. Then he teach-
διδάσκειν ἐπιχειροῦντας ἐπιστομίζειν es him about the arrangement of ecclesias-
παρακαλῶν· εἶτα τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς tical service, showing both the characters
αὐτὸν λειτουργίας ἐκπαιδεύων τὴν τάξιν· of the sacred orders and also of the other
ἔπειτα καὶ τῶν ἱερατικῶν, καὶ μέντοι καὶ orders of society. He predicted also the de-
τῶν ἄλλων ταγμάτων τῆς πολιτείας τοὺς structive seeds of the hated heretics. And
χαρακτῆρας ὑποδεικνύς. Προηγόρευσε he exhorted him to do what befits a man
δὲ καὶ τῶν δυσωνύμων αἱρετικῶν τὰ who has been entrusted with the care of
ὀλέθρια σπέρματα. Παρῄνεσε δὲ καὶ αὐτῷ souls.
ποιεῖν ἅπερ προσήκει ποιεῖν τὸν ψυχῶν
κηδεμονίαν πεπιστευμένον.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 832A) Argument [of 2 Timothy]
Ἀπὸ τῆς Ῥώμης τὴν δευτέραν τῷ From Rome, the divine Apostle wrote the
τρισμακαρίῳ Τιμοθέῳ γέγραφεν Ἐπιστολὴν second letter to the thrice-blessed Timo-
ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, παρ᾽ αὐτὸ λοιπὸν ὢν thy, being now close to the end of his life.
τοῦ βίου τὸ τέλος. καὶ τοῦτο δεδήλωκεν And this he shows himself when he writes
αὐτὸς ὡδὶ γεγραφώς· »Ἐγὼ ἤδη σπένδομαι, this: ‘For I am already on the point of being
καὶ ὁ καιρὸς τῆς ἐμῆς ἀναλύσεως sacrificed; the time of my departure has
ἐφέστηκεν«. Ἐπέστελλε δὲ αὐτῷ, drawn near.’ He wrote to him, inciting him
παραθαρσύνων εἰς τοὺς περὶ τῆς εὐσεβείας for the battles about faith and exhorting
ἀγῶνας, καὶ φέρειν γενναίως τοὺς ὑπὲρ τῆς him to endure the dangers for the sake of
πίστεως κινδύνους παρακαλῶν. Ὑπέδειξε faith with courage. And he also showed the
δὲ καὶ τῶν ἀγώνων τὰ ἆθλα. Προείρηκε prizes of the battles. And he predicted re-
δὲ καὶ περί τινων, τὸ μὲν πρόσχημα τῆς garding some that they will carry the guise
εὐσεβείας περικειμένων, ἀλλότριον δὲ τῆς of piety but prefer a life different from that
ἐπαγγελίας βίον προαιρουμένων. of the promise.
ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 857B) Argument [of Titus]
Οὐκ ἠπειρώταις μόνοις ἀλλὰ καὶ Not only did the divine Apostle bring the
νησιώταις ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος τὴν teaching of salvation to people who were
σωτήριον διδασκαλίαν προσήνεγκε, καὶ living on the mainland but also to those on
πρὸς τοῖς ἄλλοις καὶ τὴν Κρήτην (νῆσος the islands, and, in addition to the others,
δὲ αὕτη μεγίστη) τῷ φωτὶ τῆς θεογνωσίας also Crete, the largest island, he illuminat-
κατηύγασε. Τὰ δὲ τῆς εὐσεβείας καταπήξας ed with the light of knowledge of the divine.
θεμέλια, τῷ τρισμακαρίῳ Τίτῳ τὴν λοιπὴν After he had laid the foundations of piety,
οἰκονομίαν ἐπίστευσεν, ὃν πολλαῖς he entrusted the future administration to
εὐφημίαις ἐν τοῖς πρὸς Κορινθίους the thrice-blessed Titus, to whom he had
ἐταινίωσε γράμμασι. Γράφει δὲ αὐτῷ, given much praise in the letter to the Cor-
πρῶτον μὲν διδάσκων ὁποίους εἶναι δεῖ inthians. He writes to him, first teaching
τοῦ τὴν θείαν λειτουργίαν πεπιστευμένους. him how they should be who have been
Εἶτα καί τινων ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων entrusted with the divine service. Then he
κατηγορεῖ, παραφθείρειν ἐπιχειρούντων also accuses some of the believers from the
τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα. Μέμνηται δὲ καὶ Jews who were trying to destroy the mes-
τῆς θείας οἰκονομίας, τὴν ταύτης αἰτίαν sage of salvation. He remembers also the
ἐπιδεικνύς. divine plan, showing the reason behind it.
ȊȆȅĬǼȈǿȈ PG$ Argument [of Philemon]
τῶν πεπιστευκότων ὁ Φιλήμων ἐτύγχανεν Philemon was one of the converts. Co-
ὤν· πόλιν δὲ εἶχε τὰς Κολασσάς. καὶ lossae was his hometown, and his house
ἡ οἰκία δὲ αὐτοῦ μέχρι τοῦ παρόντος remains to the present day. His servant,
μεμένηκε. Τούτου οἰκέτης Ὀνήσιμος Onesimus by name, had stolen something
τοὔνομα, ὑφελόμενός τι καὶ ἀποδρὰς, εἴσω and run away, and came into the apostolic
τῶν ἀποστολικῶν δικτύων ἐγένετο. ᾬκει nets. At that time the divinely inspired
δὲ κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν τὸ ἐν Ῥώμῃ Paul stayed in prison in Rome. There he
δεσμωτήριον, ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος. Ἐκεῖ deemed him worthy of the baptism of sal-
τοίνυν τοῦτον τοῦ σωτηρίου βαπτίσματος vation, and, having written this letter, sent
ἀξιώσας, ἀπέστειλε τῷ δεσπότῃ τήνδε him back to his master. He who did not
γεγραφὼς τὴν Ἐπιστολήν. Ὁ δὲ οἰκέτου neglect a runaway slave, a scoundrel and a
δραπέτου, καὶ μαστιγίου, καὶ λωποδύτου thief, but deemed him worthy of salvation
μὴ ἀμελήσας, ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς πνευματικῆς UISPVHI TQJSJUVBM JOTUSVDUJPO o XPVME IF
αὐτὸν διδασκαλίας ἀξιώσας τῆς σωτηρίας, ever have neglected anyone?
τίνος ἂν ἠμέλησε πώποτε;
286 Appendix I
4. Theophylact’s Arguments
[Theophylact: Arguments of the Letters of Paul.

Text in Migne, PGo>
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Ῥωμαίους Ἐπιστολῆς Argument of the Letter to the Romans
(PG 124: 336AB)
Ἡ συνεχὴς ἀνάγνωσις τῶν θείων Γραφῶν The continuous study of the sacred scrip-
εἰς τὴν γνῶσιν αὐτῶν ἄγει· ἀψευδὴς γὰρ tures leads to an understanding of them.
ὁ εἰπών· »Ζητεῖτε καὶ εὑρήσετε, κρούετε For he who said this was without lie:
καὶ ἀνοιγήσεται ὑμῖν«. καὶ τῶν Ἐπιστολῶν ‘Seek and you will find, knock and it will
τοίνυν τοῦ μακαρίου Παύλου τὰ μυστήρια be opened to you’. Thus, we will learn
μαθησόμεθα, συνεχῶς αὐταῖς καὶ ἐμμελῶς the mysteries also from the Letters of the
ἐντυγχάνοντες· τῶν γὰρ ἄλλων ἁπάντων blessed Paul, if we read them continu-
ἐπλεονέκτησε τῷ τῆς διδασκαλίας λόγῳ. ously and diligently. Because he was above
καὶ εἰκότως· ἐπειδὴ γὰρ περισσότερον all the others with regard to the word of
πάντων ἐκοπίασε, δαψιλεστέραν καὶ τὴν UFBDIJOHoBOEXJUIHPPESFBTPO#FDBVTF
τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐπεσπάσατο χάριν. καὶ οὐ his toil was more abundant than that of the
μόνον ἀπὸ τῶν Ἐπιστολῶν τοῦτο δῆλον, others, he received a richer grace from the
ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν Πράξεων. Ἑρμῆς γὰρ Spirit. And this is clear not only from the
ἐνομίσθη παρὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις, διὰ τὸ τοῦ Letters but also from the Acts. For he was
λόγου καταρχεῖν. Πρόκειται δὲ ἡμῖν Πρώτη considered to be Hermes by the unbeliev-
ἡ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους, οὐκ ἐπειδὴ πρώτη αὕτη ers, because of his excellence of speech.
ἐγράφη· καὶ γὰρ πρὸ αὐτῆς εἰσὶν αἱ πρὸς As the first letter, that to the Romans lies
Κορινθίους δύο. καὶ πρὸ τούτων αὖ ἡ before us, not because it was written first.
πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς, ἐν ᾗ περὶ τῆς εἰς For the two letters to the Corinthians are
τὰ Ἰεροσόλυμα πεμπομένης διακονίας prior to this. And, again, before those
ἐπαινῶν αὐτοὺς αἰνίττεται· ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡ πρὸς are the letter to the Thessalonians, where
Γαλάτας προτέρα ἐστὶ ταύτης τῆς πρὸς he, praising them, refers to the collection
Ῥωμαίους. τῶν μέντοι ἄλλων Ἐπιστολῶν which was sent to Jerusalem. But also the
προτέρα αὕτη, ἡ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους, φημί. letter to the Galatians is earlier than this
Πῶς οὖν πρώτη τέτακται; Ὅτι παρὰ τῇ to the Romans. Still, this letter, to the Ro-
Γραφῇ ἡ τοιαύτη τάξις οὐκ ἀναγκαία. καὶ mans, is before the other letters. Why is
γὰρ καὶ οἱ δώδεκα προφῆται, οὐκ ἐφεξῆς it then placed first? Because in Scripture,
ὄντες ἀλλήλους κατὰ τοὺς χρόνους, ἀλλὰ there is no need to follow such a sequence:
πολλῷ διεστηκότες ἀλλήλων, ὅμως ἐν τῇ The Twelve Prophets, who did not follow
τῶν βιβλίων τάξει ἐφεξῆς εἰσι κείμενοι. each other chronologically but were liv-
Γράφει δὲ Ῥωμαίοις ὁ Παῦλος οἷα δὴ χρέος ing in quite different periods still appear
ἔχων λειτουργὸς εἶναι Χριστοῦ, καὶ ὡς as a continuous sequence in the order of
προκαθημένοις τῆς οἰκουμένης. Ὁ γὰρ the books. And Paul writes to the Romans
<ćFPQIZMBDU"SHVNFOUTPGUIF-FUUFSTPG1BVM5FYUJO.JHOF 1(o> 287
τὴν κεφαλὴν ὠφελῶν καὶ τὸ λοιπὸν σῶμα as one who is by necessity the servant of
ὠφέλησε. Christ, writing to them as if they were the
most eminent of the inhabited world. For
he who supports the head, supports the
whole body as well.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Κορινθίους Πρώτης Argument of the First Letter to the Corin-
Ἐπιστολῆς (PG 124: 560BC) thians
Ἡ Κόρινθος πολλῷ πλούτῳ καὶ σοφίᾳ Corinth, flourishing with much wealth and
κομῶσα, ἐπίστευσε μὲν τῷ Χριστῷ, wisdom, believed in Christ, but, after it
πλὴν μετὰ τὸ πιστεῦσαι ἐκινδύνευε had come to believe, was in danger of fall-
Χριστοῦ ἐκπεσεῖν. Οἵ τε γὰρ πλούσιοι ing. For the rich founded their own orders,
ἰδίας συμμορίας ἐποιήσαντο καὶ οἱ and so did the wise. Having elected teach-
σοφοὶ αὖ ἰδίας· καὶ διδασκάλους ἑαυτοῖς ers for themselves, they accused Paul of be-
χειροτονήσαντες, τὸν Παῦλον ὡς πένητα ing poor and uneducated. Moreover, one
καὶ ἰδιώτην διέβαλλον. Ἀλλὰ καί τις ἐν of them had been in a relationship with his
αὐτοῖς τῇ μητρυιᾷ ἐμίγη· καὶ τὰ εἰδωλόθυτά step-mother, and some were eating food
τινες ἤσθιον, ἀπὸ γαστριμαργίας· καὶ ἐν PČFSFEUPJEPMToCFDBVTFPGUIFJSHMVUUPOZ
ταῖς ὑπὲρ χρημάτων φιλονεικίαις παρὰ And in disputes over money they were
τοῖς Ἕλλησι δικασταῖς ἐκρίνοντο. καὶ judged in the courts of the Greeks. And
τὰς κόμας ἔτρεφον οἱ ἄνδρες, καὶ ἐν ταῖς the men let their hair grow, and they were
ἐκκλησίαις ἤσθιον, μὴ μεταδιδόντες τοῖς eating in the assembled church, not giv-
δεομένοις. καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς χαρίσμασι δὲ μέγα ing anything to people in need. And they
ἐφρόνουν· καὶ ὁ περὶ ἀναστάσεως λόγος were thinking highly of the gifts of grace,
ἐχώλευε παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς. Ταῦτα δὲ ἐσφάλλοντο and their teaching about the resurrection
ἀπὸ τῆς ἔξωθεν σοφίας. Αὕτη γὰρ τοῖς was deficient. In these things they wavered
πάντα αὐτῇ πιστεύουσι τῶν κακῶν πάντων because of the wisdom that came from
μήτηρ. Γράφει τοίνυν ὁ Παῦλος τῇ πόλει, the external world. For, to everyone who
πάντα ταῦτα διορθούμενος. Ἐπεὶ δὲ μεῖζον trusts her in all things, she is the mother of
πάντων ἦν, τὸ σχίσματα εἶναι ἐν Ἐκκλησίᾳ, all evils. Therefore, Paul writes to the city,
τοῦτο δὲ ἀπὸ ὑψηλοφροσύνης ἐτίκτετο· correcting it with regard to all these mat-
τὴν ὑψηλοφροσύνην πρώτην ἀναιρεῖ· ἐν ters. Since the divisions in the church were
ταύτῃ γὰρ ὑψηλότερα διδάσκειν ᾤοντο. greater than anywhere and this was born
Διὸ καὶ οὕτως ἄρχεται. of their pride, he first takes it away. For
through this they were thinking that they
were teaching higher things. Therefore, he
also begins as follows…
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Δευτέρας πρὸς Κορινθίους Argument of the Second Letter to the Cor-
Ἐπιστολῆς (PG 124: 796AB) inthians
Δευτέραν πρὸς Κορινθίους προστίθησιν The blessed Paul offers the Corinthians a
Ἐπιστολὴν ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος, διότι second letter because he had in the first let-
ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ μὲν ἐπηγγείλατο ἐλθεῖν ter promised to visit them, but delayed the
288 Appendix I
πρὸς αὐτοὺς, ἐμέλλησε δὲ, ἅτε τοῦ visit, since the Spirit occupied him with
Πνεύματος εἰς ἕτερα αὐτὸν ἀσχολοῦντος more urgent matters and temptations were
ἀναγκαιότερα, καὶ πειρασμῶν αὐτῷ placed before him. Therefore, he needed to
ἐπιτεθέντων. Ἔδει τοίνυν ἀπολογήσασθαι apologize for the long delay. And because
περὶ τῆς βραδύτητος μακρᾶς γενομένης· of this, he composes this second letter,
καὶ διὰ τοῦτο δευτέραν ταύτην Ἐπιστολὴν apologizing with giving the reasons why
συντίθησιν, ἀπολογούμενος ὑπὲρ ὧν he had waited. At the same time, it was
ἐμέλλησεν· ἅμα δὲ καὶ βελτίους αὐτοὺς necessary to approve of them for having
ἐκ τῆς πρώτης Ἐπιστολῆς γενομένους improved and to give them praise. For just
ἔχρην ἀποδέξασθαι, καὶ ἐπαινέσαι. as he accused sinners, so it was necessary
Ὥσπερ γὰρ ἁμαρτάνουσιν ἐνεκάλει, οὕτω to praise those who had been corrected.
διορθωθέντας ἐπαινέσαι ἔδει. Διὸ οὐδὲ Therefore this letter is not polemical, ex-
καταφορικωτέρα ἐστὶν ἡ Ἐπιστολὴ, εἰ cept for small sections near the end, and
μὴ ἄρα ὀλίγα αὐτῆς μέρη τὰ πρὸς τῷ these are for those of the Jews who were
τέλει, καὶ ταῦτα διὰ τοὺς ἐξ Ἰουδαίων arrogant and were accusing him of being
ἀλαζονευομένους, καὶ διαβάλλοντας uneducated and not worthy of mention.
αὐτὸν ὡς ἰδιώτην καὶ οὐδενὸς ἄξιον λόγου.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Γαλάτας Ἐπιστολῆς Argument of the Letter to the Galatians
(PG 124: 953AC)
Πολλοῦ τὸ προοίμιον γέμει θυμοῦ, καὶ The prooemium, and almost the entire let-
πᾶσα σχεδὸν ἡ Ἐπιστολὴ· τὸ γὰρ ἀεὶ ter, is full of great anger. For to always be
ἐπιεικεύεσθαι τοῖς μαθηταῖς ἐπιπλήξεως mild towards disciples who need rebuke is
δεομένοις, οὐ διδασκάλου. Τοῦτο καὶ ὁ not the work of the teacher. This the Lord
Κύριος ποιεῖ· τόν τε γὰρ Πέτρον μακαρίσας, does also: For having blessed Peter, then
εἶτα καὶ ἐπιτιμᾷ· καὶ τοὺς μαθητὰς δὲ he also reproached him, and he called
ἀσυνέτους ἀποκαλεῖ. καὶ Παῦλος μὲν οὖν the disciples senseless. And Paul also cer-
καὶ πρὸς ἄλλους μὲν γράφων, αὐστηρότητι tainly used austerity, as he did towards the
κέχρηται, ὥσπερ οὖν πρὸς Κορινθίους· Corinthians, but most of all towards these
μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς Γαλάτας τούτους. Galatians. The reason is this: Some people
Ἡ δὲ αἰτία τοιαύτη· Οἱ ἐξ Ἰουδαίων of the Jews had become believers, at the
πιστεύσαντες, ἅμα μὲν τοῦ πατρῴου same time holding onto the Law of their
νόμου ἐχόμενοι, ἅμα δὲ διδάσκαλοι ancestors and desiring to be teachers, they
εἶναι ὀρεγόμενοι, ἐδίδασκον Γαλάτας, taught the Galatians that it was necessary
ὅτι δεῖ περιτέμνεσθαι, καὶ Σάββατα καὶ to be circumcised and observe the Sab-
νουμηνίας τηρεῖν· τοὺς γὰρ περὶ Πέτρον bath and new moon festivals, since those
μὴ κωλύειν ταῦτα. καὶ ἀληθῶς γε οὐκ around Peter did not forbid these things.
ἐκώλυον οὗτοι, οὐχ ὡς δογματίζοντες, And, in truth, they did not forbid it, not
ἀλλ᾽ ὡς συγκαταβαίνοντες τῇ ἀσθενείᾳ because they were teaching it, but because
τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων, οἷς καὶ they were giving a concession to the weak-
ἐκήρυττον. Ὁ δὲ Παῦλος ἔθνεσι κηρύττων, ness of the believers of the Jews, to whom
οὐ χρείαν εἶχε τῆς συγκαταβάσεως they preached. But Paul, as he was preach-
ταύτης. Ὅτε γοῦν ἐν χρείᾳ γέγονεν, καὶ ing to the Gentiles, did not need to make
αὐτὸς συγκατέβη, καὶ περιέτεμε μὲν τὸν this concession. But when it was neces-
Τιμόθεον, ἡγνίσατο δὲ αὐτὸς κατὰ τὸν sary, even he yielded and he circumcised
νόμον. Ἀλλ᾽ οἱ ἀπατεῶνες οὐ λέγοντες Timothy and he purified himself according
τὰς αἰτίας, δι᾽ ἃς καὶ οἱ περὶ Πέτρον καὶ to the Law. But the impostors, not giving
αὐτοὶ ταῦτα ἐποίουν, παρελογίζοντο τοὺς the reasons why they and those around
ἀφελεστέρους, καὶ αὐτὸ μέντοι τοῦτο εἰς Peter did these things, were deceiving the
διαβολὴν Παύλου προέφερον, τὸ ποτὲ simple ones, and they even brought this as
μὲν περιτέμνειν, ποτὲ δὲ ἀναιρεῖν τὴν a charge against Paul, that he sometimes
περιτομὴν, καὶ ἄλλοτε ἄλλα κηρύσσειν· practiced circumcision, sometimes abol-
καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶσιν, ὡς οὐ δεῖ Παύλῳ πείθεσθαι, ished circumcision, preaching different
ὃς οὔτε Χριστὸν εἶδεν, οὔτε αὐτοῦ ἐστι things at different times, and, in addition
μαθητὴς, ἀλλὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων· τοὺς δὲ to all this, that one should not obey Paul,
περὶ Πετρον ὡς αὐτόπτας προσδέχεσθαι. who had not seen Christ or been a disciple
Διὰ ταῦτα τοίνυν διακαὴς τὴν ψυχὴν, of Christ, but of the Apostles. But they
συντίθησι τὴν Ἐπιστολήν· καὶ πρῶτόν γε around Peter should be accepted as eyewit-
πρὸς ἐκεῖνο ἀποτείνεται, ὃ ἐκεῖνοι ἔλεγον nesses. Being enraged in his soul because
διορύττοντες αὐτοῦ τὴν ὑπόληψιν, ὅτι of these things, he composes the letter.
οἱ μὲν ἄλλοι τοῦ Χριστοῦ, αὐτὸς δὲ τῶν And first he addresses what they said who
ἀποστόλων ἐστι μαθητής· διὸ καὶ οὕτως XFSF VOEFSNJOJOH IJT SFQVUBUJPO o UIBU
ἄρχεται. the others were disciples of Christ but he
himself a disciple of the apostles. Therefore
he also begins as follows…
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Εφεσίους Ἐπιστολῆς Argument of the Letter to the Ephesians
(PG 124: 1033AB)
Ἔφεσος μητρόπολις μέν ἐστι τῆς Ἀσίας· Ephesus was the chief city of Asia. It hon-
ἐσέβετο δὲ τὴν Ἄρτεμιν, ἧς καὶ ναὸς ἦν ἐν ored Artemis, and her largest and most
αὐτῇ κάλλιστος καὶ μέγιστος, τιμώμενος, beautiful shrine was found there, honored
καὶ παρὰ πάντων μὲν Ἑλλήνων, μάλιστα by all Greeks, but especially by Ephesus
δὲ παρὰ τῆς Ἐφέσου, ὥστε καὶ νεωκόρον itself, so that the city also was called “the
τῆς Ἀρτέμιδος λέγεσθαι ταύτην, ὡς worshipper of Artemis”, as it is written in
ἐν ταῖς Πράξεσι γέγραπται. Ἐν Ἐφέσῳ Acts. In Ephesus, John the evangelist stayed
δὲ ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς Ἰωάννης τὰ πολλὰ for a long time, and, having been in exile,
διέτριψεν, ἐξορισθεὶς ἐκεῖσε, ἔνθα καὶ he also ended his life there. And Paul left
τελευτᾷ. καὶ Τιμόθεον ἐκεῖ κατέλιπεν ὁ Timothy there as a teacher. The most fa-
Παῦλος διδάσκαλον· τῶν τε φιλοσόφων mous philosophers lived in this city. Since
οἱ μάλιστα ἀνθήσαντες ἐν ταύτῃ διῆγον. the city was so religious and had a multi-
Ἐπεὶ οὖν δεισιδαίμων τε ἦν οὕτως ἡ πόλις, tude of wise people, Paul spends great ef-
καὶ οὕτω σοφοῖς ἐκόμα, πολλῇ σπουδῇ fort in writing to them, and he entrusted to
κέχρηται Παῦλος πρὸς τοὺς τοιούτους them deeper and higher thoughts, as they
γράφων, καὶ τὰ βαθύτερα δὲ τῶν νοημάτων were already educated. He writes the let-
καὶ ὑψηλότερα αὐτοῖς ἐπίστευσεν, ἅτε ter, which is full of sublime thoughts, from
κατηχημένοις ἤδη. Γράφει δὲ τὴν τῶν Rome, as a prisoner. We also need to be
ὑπερόγκων νοημάτων ταύτην γέμουσαν very attentive in order to understand the
Ἐπιστολὴν ἀπὸ Ῥώμης δεδεμένος. Δεῖ mysteries contained in it.
290 Appendix I
οὖν καὶ ἡμῖν πολλῆς τῆς προσοχῆς πρὸς

κατανόησιν τῶν ἐν ταύτῃ μυστηρίων.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Φιλιππησίους Argument of the letter to the Philippians

Ἐπιστολῆς (PG"#o"
Οἱ Φιλιππήσιοι ἀπὸ πόλεώς εἰσι μιᾶς τῶν ἐν The Philippians are from one of the Philip-
Μακεδονίᾳ Φιλίππων, οὕτω καλουμένης pian cities in Macedonia, so called from
ἀπὸ τοῦ οἰκιστοῦ, ὑπὸ μητρόπολιν τότε its founder, and they were paying tribute
Θεσσαλονίκην τελοῦντες. Πολλὰ δὲ to Thessalonice, which was then the chief
αὐτοῖς χρηστὰ ὁ Παῦλος μαρτυρεῖ. Ἐν city. Paul bears witness to their many good
δεσμοῖς δὲ ὢν ἔγραψε τὴν Ἐπιστολήν· deeds, writing the letter to them while in
μετὰ γὰρ τὴν πρώτην ἀπολογίαν, ἧς prison. For after his first defense, which is
ἐμνήσθη ἐν τῇ πρὸς Τιμόθεον, αὖθις ἐδέθη. mentioned in the letter to Timothy, he was
Ἦσαν δὲ οἱ Φιλιππήσιοι δι᾽ Ἐπαφροδίτου again arrested. The Philippians had sent
πέμψαντες αὐτῷ τὰ πρὸς τὴν χρείαν· ἅμα him what he needed through Epaphrodi-
δὲ καὶ γνῶναι θέλοντες τὰ κατ᾽ αὐτόν. tus; at the same time they also wanted to
Ἐπεὶ δὲ εἰκὸς ἦν αὐτοὺς θορυβηθῆναι know his affairs. Since it was reasonable
ἀκούσαντας ὡς ἐδέδετο ὁ διδάσκαλος, to expect that they were troubled having
αὐτὸ τοῦτο γράφει αὐτοῖς, διδάσκων ὅτι heard that their teacher was in prison, he
τὰ δεσμὰ οὐ θορυβεῖν αὐτοὺς ὀφείλει, writes even this to them; that they should
ἀλλὰ χαρὰν προξενεῖν, διὰ τὸ ὑπὲρ not trouble themselves, but rather rejoice,
Χριστοῦ εἶναι. Συμβουλεύει δὲ αὐτοῖς because this was for the sake of Christ. He
καὶ περὶ ὁμονοίας καὶ ταπεινοφροσύνης. also gives them advice about concord and
Καθάπτεται δὲ καὶ τῶν Ἰουδαίων, τῶν ἐν humility. He also speaks disparagingly
προσχήματι Χριστιανισμοῦ τῷ δόγματι of those Jews who under the pretext of
λυμαινομένων, καὶ κύνας αὐτοὺς καλεῖ, Christianity were making havoc with their
καὶ κακοὺς ἐργάτας. Διαλέγεταί τε αὐτοῖς teaching, and he calls them dogs and wick-
πολλὰ περὶ ἠθῶν. Μέμνηται δὲ συνετῶς ed workers. And he speaks much to them
καὶ τῶν πεμφθέντων χρειωδῶν. Φαίνεται about morals. He also wisely mentions the
δὲ μετὰ τιμῆς αὐτοῖς διαλεγόμενος· καὶ things they have sent to meet his needs,
γὰρ πολλὴν ἀρετὴν ἐπεδείξαντο καὶ and he appears to speak honorably with
ἐπιτηδειότητα εἰς τὴν πίστιν. Ἐνταῦθα ἦν ἡ them, for they had shown great virtue and
πορφυροπῶλις· ἐνταῦθα ὁ ἀρχισυνάγωγος zeal for faith. There was the woman who
ἐπίστευσεν· ἐνταῦθα ὁ Παῦλος μαστιχθεὶς was selling purple. There, the chief ruler of
μετὰ τοῦ Σίλα καθείρχθη· ἐνταῦθα ὁ the synagogue believed. There, Paul, hav-
δεσμοφύλαξ ἀπὸ ἑνὸς σημείου προσῆλθε ing beaten together with Silas, was put in
Χριστῷ μετὰ τῆς οἰκίας ὅλης· ἐνταῦθα οἱ prison. There, because of one sign, the
στρατηγοὶ ἐφοβήθησαν τὸν Παῦλον, καὶ keeper of the prison came unto Christ
ἠξίωσαν ἐξελθεῖν· καὶ ὅλως λαμπρὰν ἔσχε with his entire house. There, the magis-
τὸ κήρυγμα τὴν ἀρχήν· καὶ ταῦτα ἀπὸ τῶν trates were terrified of Paul and asked him
Πράξεων μανθάνομεν. Προσμαρτυρεῖ δὲ to leave. And in every way, the preaching
αὐτοῖς ὁ Παῦλος οὐ μόνον πίστιν ὀρθὴν had a brilliant beginning, and these things
καὶ κινδύνους, ἀλλὰ καὶ εὐμετάδοτον we learn from Acts. And Paul testifies not
only to their right faith and the dangers,
προαίρεσιν. Ὧν ἕνεκεν ἁπάντων σφόδρα but also to their willingness to share. And
φιλῶν αὐτοὺς καὶ τιμῶν φαίνεται. for the sake of all these things he seems to
love and honor them exceedingly.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Κολοσσαεῖς Ἐπιστολῆς Argument of the Colossians

(PG 124: 1205AB)
Πᾶσαι μὲν αἱ Ἐπιστολαὶ Παύλου ἅγιαι, All the letters of Paul are holy, but especial-
μάλιστα δὲ αἱ δεδεμένου αὐτοῦ πεμπόμεναι, ly those he sent from prison. As if he were
ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ ἀρτιστεὺς ἐν τῷ μεταξὺ σφαγὰς a victor setting up the trophies in the midst
καὶ τρόπαια ἱστῶν, ἐπέστελλεν. Οἶδε δὲ καὶ of the slaughter he sent them. He knows
αὐτὸς τοῦτο μέγα ὂν καὶ πρὸς φιλοτιμίαν. also himself that this is something great
τῷ γὰρ Φιλήμονι γράφων φησίν· »Ὃν which deserves honor. For when writing to
ἐγέννησα ἐν τοῖς δεσμοῖς μου«. Τοῦτο Philemon he says: ‘he, whom I have begot-
δὲ εἶπεν, ἵνα καὶ ἡμεῖς, μὴ ἀσχάλλωμεν ten in my bonds’. This he said that we also
πρὸς τὰ δεινὰ, ἀλλὰ καὶ φιλοτιμώμεθα. should not be grieved when we face hor-
Πολλαὶ μὲν οὖν εἰσι τοιαῦται, ἥ τε πρὸς rors, but rather seek honor. There are many
Ἐφεσίους, καὶ ἡ πρὸς Φιλήμονα, καὶ ἡ letters of this kind, that to the Ephesians,
πρὸς Τιμόθεον, καὶ ἡ πρὸς Φιλιππησίους, to Philemon, to Timothy and to the Philip-
καὶ αὕτη δὲ ἡ πρὸς Κολοσσαεῖς, ἐν δεσμοῖς pians, and this, the letter to the Colossians
ὄντος ἐστάλη. Ὥσπερ δὲ Ῥωμαίους μὴ was sent while he was in chains. As he
ἰδὼν καὶ Ἑβραίους, ὅμως ἔγραψεν· οὕτως wrote to the Romans without having seen
οὐδὲ τούτους ἰδὼν γράφει. Παρὰ τούτοις them, so he even wrote to the Hebrews. In
δ᾽ ἦν καὶ Φιλήμων καὶ Ἄρχιππος, ὃς καὶ this way he writes to these, without having
δοκεῖ μοί τινα Ἐκκλησίαν ἐγκεχειρίσθαι. seen them. With them were both Philemon
Γράφει δὲ καὶ Κολοσσαεῦσιν ἐπὶ τοιαύτῃ BOE "SDIJQQVT UP XIPTF DBSF o JU TFFNT
ὑποθέσει· Πονηρόν τι δόγμα αὐτοῖς UPNFoBDIVSDIIBECFFOFOUSVTUFE)F
ἐνεπολιτεύετο· ᾤοντο γὰρ, οὐ διὰ τοῦ writes also to the Colossians for the follow-
Υἱοῦ, ἀλλὰ δι᾽ ἀγγέλων προσαχθῆναι ing reason: An evil doctrine was current
τῷ Θεῷ καὶ Πατρὶ, ἄτοπον οἰόμενοι τὸν among them. For they believed that they
Υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ πιστεύειν ἐν ἐσχάτοις were led to God the Father not through the
καιροῖς φανῆναι, ὅπου γε ἐν τῇ Παλαιᾷ Son, but through angels, deeming it wrong
πάντα δι᾽ ἀγγέλων ἐγένοντο. Εἶχον δὲ to believe that the Son of God would ap-
καὶ παρατηρήσεις πολλὰς Ἰουδαϊκὰς καὶ pear in the last times, while in the Old Tes-
Ἑλληνικὰς, ἡμέρας παρατηρούμενοι, καὶ tament everything happened through an-
καιροὺς, καὶ βρώματα. Ἃ δὲ πάντα δεόμενα gels. They also practiced many Jewish and
διορθώσεως, ἐκίνησε τὸν ἀπόστολον πρὸς Greek observances, observing days and
τὸ γράψαι ταύτην τὴν Ἐπιστολήν. seasons and foods. All these things, which
needed correction, moved the Apostle to
write this letter.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Δευτέρας πρὸς Argument of the Second Letter to the Thes-
Θεσσαλονικεῖς Ἐπιστολῆς (PG 124: salonians
"o"
292 Appendix I
Δευτέραν πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς ποιεῖται τὴν The blessed Paul writes a second letter to
Ἐπιστολὴν ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος διὰ ταύτην the Thessalonians for this reason: For he
τὴν αἰτίαν· Προέγραψεν γὰρ αὐτοῖς ἐν τῇ had written to them in the previous letter
προτέρᾳ Ἐπιστολῇ, ὅτι ἐσπούδαζεν αὐτοὺς that he was eager to see them, and since he
ἰδεῖν, καὶ ἐπειδὴ οὐκ ἔτυχε τοῦ ἐφετοῦ, did not achieve what he had desired, not
μηκέτι στέγων, ἔπεμψε Τιμόθεον, καὶ διὰ being able to endure it, he sent Timothy
τούτων πάντων τὸν πόθον ἐδήλωσεν, ὃν to them, and through all these things he
εἶχεν, ὥστε παραγενέσθαι πρὸς αὐτούς. showed his longing to come to them. Since
Ἐπεὶ οὖν οὐκ ἔφθασεν ἀπελθεῖν καὶ it did not happen that he could leave and
καταρτίσαι τὰ ὑστερήματα αὐτῶν τῆς perfect that which was lacking in their
πίστεως, τούτου χάριν τὴν δευτέραν faith, he gives them this letter in order
προστίθησιν Ἐπιστολὴν, τὸ ἔλλειμμα to compensate for his presence through
τῆς παρουσίας διὰ τῶν γραμμάτων writing. For that he did not leave and go
ἀναπληρῶν. Ὅτι γὰρ οὐκ ἀπῆλθε πρὸς to them is clear from the following: In the
αὐτοὺς, δῆλον ἐντεῦθεν· Ἐν μὲν τῇ πρώτῃ first letter, he had refrained from writing
Ἐπιστολῇ περὶ τοῦ πότε ἔσται ἡ τοῦ about when the coming of the Lord would
Κυρίου παρουσία, ὑπερέθετο γράψαι, ὡς happen, as this matter was not necessary
οὐ χρειῶδες ὂν αὐτοῖς τοῦτο · νυνὶ δὲ περὶ for them. But now he writes about it. He
τούτου γράφει. Οὐκ ἂν δὲ νῦν ἔγραψεν, would not have written now, if he had
εἴ γε αὐτὸς παρεγένετο. Γράφει δὲ περὶ come to them. And he writes about this
τούτου τοῦ ζητήματος ἀναγκαίως. Τινὲς question out of necessity. For some cor-
γὰρ λυμεῶνες ἤδη ἔλεγον παρεῖναι τὴν τοῦ ruptors said that the coming of Christ had
Κυρίου παρουσίαν, καὶ, τὸ χαλεπώτερον, already happened, and what was more se-
ἐπλάττοντο καὶ ῥήματά τινα, ὡς ἀπὸ τοῦ rious, they had also fashioned some words,
Παύλου λεχθέντα, καὶ Ἐπιστολὰς ὡς παρ᾽ as spoken by the Apostle, and some letters
ἐκείνου γραφείσας. Ταῦτα δὲ ἐπενοήσατο as written by him. These things the devil
ὁ διάβολος, ἵνα ἐκλύσῃ τοὺς πιστεύοντας. devised in order to destroy the believers.
Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οἱ πιστεύοντες, εἰς μεγάλην The believers had the hope of resurrection
εἶχον παράκλησιν τὴν τῆς ἀναστάσεως as a great consolation as they expected
ἐλπίδα, ἅτε προσδοκῶντες καὶ αὐτοὶ τοὺς both that they would receive a reward for
μισθοὺς ἀπολαβεῖν τῆς ἀρετῆς, καὶ τοὺς their virtue and that they would see their
θλίβοντας αὐτοὺς ἰδεῖν ἀπολαύοντας ἀξίας oppressors receive the punishment they
κολάσεως, ὑπέβαλε τοὺς ὑπουργοὺς αὐτοῦ deserved. Therefore, he put his servants up
διδάσκειν, ὅτι ἐνέστηκεν ἡ κρίσις καὶ ἡ to teach that the judgment and the coming
παρουσία τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἵνα δείξωσιν ὅτι οὐκ of Christ were present, so that they would
ἔσται λοιπὸν ἀντίδοσις, οὐδὲ δικαστήριον show that there would be no coming re-
καὶ κόλασις, κἀντεῦθεν τῶν μὲν ἁγίων τὰς ward, or judgment, or punishment, and
ἐλπίδας θραύσωσι, τοὺς δὲ ἐχθροὺς τοῦ from this they would shatter the hope of
κηρύγματος θρασυτέρους ἐργάσωνται, the saints and would make the enemies of
ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν Χριστὸν ψευδῆ ἐλέγξωσιν, the preaching bolder. They would even ex-
εἰπόντα σημεῖά τινα τῆς αὐτοῦ παρουσίας pose Christ as a liar, He who said that some
μέλλειν ἔσεσθαι· ὧν μὴ προγινομένων, signs would accompany his coming. These
τῆς δὲ ἀναστάσεως, ὡς αὐτοὶ ἐπλάνων, signs had not happened, although, as they
ἐκβάσης. προδήλως ὁ Κύριος ψευδὴς falsely asserted, the resurrection had al-
ἐδείκνυτο. Διὰ ταῦτα Παῦλος τὴν ready taken place. Thus the Lord would
Ἐπιστολὴν γράφει, καὶ λέγει περὶ τῆς have had been exposed as a liar. Because
παρουσίας τοῦ Κυρίου, τὸν μὲν καιρὸν of these things, Paul writes the letter, and
αὐτὸν οὐκ ἀποκαλύπτων, τὸ δὲ σημεῖον he speaks about the coming of the Lord,
αὐτῆς δηλῶν, τὸν Ἀντίχριστον. Παρακαλεῖ not revealing the time itself, but showing
δὲ αὐτοὺς σφόδρα τεταριχουμένους ὑπὸ its sign, the antichrist. And he comforts
τῶν παθῶν. καὶ τέλος, δίδωσιν αὐτοῖς them as they are much disturbed by their
σημεῖα δι᾽ ὧν ἐπιγνώσονται τὰς γνησίας desires. And in the end, he gives them
αὐτοῦ Ἐπιστολάς. signs through which they can recognize
his genuine letters.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον πρώτης Argument of the First Letter to Timothy
Ἐπιστολῆς (PG 125: 9AB)
Τῶν τοῦ Παύλου μαθητῶν ὁ Τιμόθεος ἦν, Timothy was one of Paul’s disciples and he
καὶ οὕτω τις εὐδόκιμος, καὶ τῷ Παύλῳ was so approved by Paul and closely asso-
προστετηκὼς, ὥστε καὶ περιτμηθῆναι ciated with him that he even was elected
ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἑλέσθαι δι᾽ οἰκονομίαν, to be circumcised by him because of the
καὶ ταῦτα τοῖς ἄλλοις τὴν περιτομὴν economy of salvation, and this even if he
ἀποκηρύσσοντος, καὶ Πέτρῳ δὲ αὐτῷ forbade others to practice circumcision
ἀντιστάντος περὶ αὐτῆς. καὶ Παῦλος and opposed Peter in this matter. And ev-
δὲ αὐτὸς πολλαχοῦ μαρτυρεῖ τῷ ἀνδρὶ erywhere, Paul testifies to the great virtue
τούτῳ πολλὴν τὴν ἀρετήν. Τούτῳ γράφει of this man. And now he writes to him be-
νῦν περὶ πολλῶν ἀναγκαίων. Ζητήσειε cause of many urgent matters. One might
δ᾽ ἄν τις, Τί δήποτε οὔτε Σίλᾳ, οὔτε δὲ ask the question: ‘Why did he not write to
Κλήμεντι, οὔτε Λουκᾷ, οὔτε ἄλλῳ τινὶ Silas, or to Clement, or to Luke, or to any
τῶν συνόντων αὐτῷ, πολλῶν ὄντων, other of those who were associated with
γράφει, ἀλλὰ Τιμοθέῳ καὶ Τίτῳ μόνοις; καὶ IJNoTJODFUIFSFXFSFNBOZoCVUPOMZUP
ἔστιν εἰπεῖν, ὅτι ἐκείνους μεθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ ἔτι Timothy and Titus?’ And it is possible to
περιῆγε, τούτοις δὲ Ἐκκλησίας ἐνεχείρησεν. answer that he still was taking those people
Ἔδει οὖν τούτους διὰ γραφῶν παρακαλεῖν, along with him, while to these he had en-
καὶ τὰ πρακτέα ἐξηγεῖσθαι. Εἰ δὲ ζητοίης, trusted communities. If you ask: ‘Why did
Τί δήποτε μὴ πρότερον ἐτελείωσε τούτους he not first make them perfect in divine
ἐν πάσῃ τῇ θείᾳ σοφίᾳ, καὶ τότε εἰς τὸ wisdom, and then appoint them to teach?
διδάσκειν κατέστησεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐγχειρίσας But instead he entrusted to them the task
αὐτοῖς τὴν διδασκαλίαν, πάλιν γράφει καὶ of teaching and yet he writes and educates
καταρτίζει; μάθε πρῶτον μὲν, ὅτι οὐδεὶς UIFN :PVTIPVMEĕSTUMFBSOUIBUOPCPEZ
τέλειος, κἂν διδάσκαλος καταστῇ, ἀλλὰ is perfect even if he has been appointed
καὶ οὗτος δεῖται ἐν πολλοῖς ὁδηγίας as a teacher, but he also needs guidance
ἀπὸ τῶν τελεωτέρων· ἄλλως τε καὶ τῆς in much from those who have reached a
Ἐκκλησίας ἄρτι συνισταμένης οὐ ῥᾴδιον higher degree of perfection than him. And,
ἦν τὸν ἐπίσκοπον πάντα αὐτὸν διὰ τοῦ as the church was newly founded, it was
λόγου αὐτοῦ διατυποῦσθαι. Ἔπειτα σκόπει not easy for him to educate the bishop
διὰ πάσης τῆς ἐπιστολῆς, ὅτι οὐ τοιαύτη in all things through his word. Therefore,
ἐστὶν ἡ πρὸς τὸν Τιμόθεον διδασκαλία, οἵα consider through the entire letter that the
teaching that Timothy receives is not such
294 Appendix I
ἡ πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς, ἀλλ᾽ οἵα διδασκάλῳ as a disciple receives, but such as is proper
πρέπει. for a teacher.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον δευτέρας Argument of the Second Letter to Timothy
Ἐπιστολῆς (PG$o"
Τί δήποτε καὶ δευτέραν ἐπιστέλλει τῷ Why does he send a second letter to Timo-
Τιμοθέῳ Ἐπιστολήν; Εἶπεν ἐν τῇ προτέρᾳ· thy? He said in the first: ‘I hope to come
»Ἐλπίζω πρός σε ἐλθεῖν τάχιον«. Οὐκ to you shortly’. This did not happen, for he
ἐξεγένετο δὲ τοῦτο· κατείχετο γὰρ παρὰ was detained by Nero. Therefore, he com-
τοῦ Νέρωνος. Παραμυθεῖται οὖν αὐτὸν forts him through a letter, compensating
διὰ γραμμάτων ἀντὶ τῆς παρουσίας, ἴσως for his presence, as he perhaps is troubled
τεθλιμμένον καὶ διὰ τὴν ἀπουσίαν, καὶ διὰ by his absence and because of the burden
τὸ βάρος τῆς ἀρχῆς. καὶ οἱ μεγάλοι γὰρ of the office. Also the great ones slacken
πρὸς κυβέρνησιν Ἐκκλησίας ὀκλάζουσι, in the steering of the church, being sub-
πολλοῖς βαπτιζόμενοι κύμασι πάντοθεν, merged by waves from all sides, especially
καὶ μάλιστα τότε, ὅτε πανταχοῦ πόλεμοι. when there are conflicts in every quarter.
Καλεῖ δὲ αὐτὸν καὶ πρὸς ἑαυτόν. Πρὸς γὰρ And he asks him to come to him, for he
τῷ τέλει ἤδη ἦν. was already near the end.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Τίτον Ἐπιστολῆς (PG Argument of the Letter to Titus
125: 141AB)
Τῶν Παύλῳ συνόντων δοκιμώτατος ὁ Since Titus was the most blameless of
Τίτος ὢν, ἐπίσκοπός τε τῆς Κρήτης μεγάλης all those associated with Paul, he had
οὔσης, δι᾽ αὐτὸ τοῦτο κεχειροτόνητο, been elected bishop of the large island of
καὶ τοσούτων ἐπισκόπων κρίσιν καὶ Crete for this very reason and had been
χειροτονίαν ἐπετράπη. καὶ τὰ ἐλλείποντα entrusted with authority to judge and or-
δὲ ἀναπληρῶσαι, ὡς δοκιμώτατος πάντως dain so many bishops. And through this
προστάττεται διὰ ταύτης τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς, letter, which Paul writes before he is put
ἣν γράφει Παῦλος αὐτῷ πρὶν ἢ δεθῇ καὶ into prison and without fear, he is, as the
ἐν ἀδείᾳ ὤν. Οὐδαμοῦ γὰρ πειρασμῶν most blameless, ordered to perfect what
ἐνταῦθα μέμνηται. Ὅθεν δοκεῖ μοι καὶ is lacking. For here he does not anywhere
πρότερον εἶναι τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον· ἐκείνην mention temptations and, because of this,
γὰρ πρὸς τῷ τέλει ὢν ἔγραψε. Συνεχῶς δὲ it seems to me to be earlier than the letter
μνημονεύει ἐνταῦθα τῆς χάριτος, δι᾽ ἧς to Timothy, for that letter he wrote when
ἐσώθημεν, ἱκανὴν τοῦτο εἰδὼς παράκλησιν. he was near the end. Throughout this let-
Ὁ γὰρ ἀναμνησθεὶς τίς ὢν πρότερον, ter, he reminds him of the grace, through
τίνων ἠξιώθη μετὰ ταῦτα δωρεῶν καὶ which we were saved, knowing that this a
χάριτος, σπουδάσει πάντως μὴ παροργίσαι sufficient comfort. For he who is reminded
τὸν εὐεργέτην. Ἀποτείνεται δὲ καὶ πρὸς of whom he was before, and of what gifts
Ἰουδαίους. Εἰ δὲ ὁλόκληρον τὸ γένος and what grace he was deemed worthy to
ὑβρίζει, μὴ θαυμάσῃς. Οὐ γὰρ ὡς ὑβριστὴς, receive, will certainly be eager not to pro-
ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἐραστὴς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ζηλωτὴς voke his benefactor. He also attacks the
τοῦτο ποιεῖ, ὥσπερ καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς μυρία Jews. Even if he fiercely attacks the entire
ἠλοιδόρει τοῖς Γραμματεῦσιν, οὐχ ὑπὲρ race, you should not wonder: For he did
ἑαυτοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι τοὺς ἄλλους ἀπώλλυον. not do that as a criminal, but out of love
Βραχεῖαν δὲ ποιεῖ τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν, ἵνα and zeal of God, just as Christ in countless
κἀντεῦθεν τοῦ Τίτου μάθωμεν. Ὁ τοιοῦτος XBZTDVSTFEUIFTDSJCFToOPUGPSIJTPXO
γὰρ οὐ δεῖται πολλῶν λόγων, ἀλλ᾽ οἷον sake, but because they were corrupting
ὑπομνήσεώς τινος. others. He makes the letter short that also
from this fact we may learn from Titus: For
such a man does not need many words, but
only some reminding.
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Φιλήμονα Ἐπιστολῆς Argument of the letter to Philemon

(PG#o"
Οὔτε δοῦλον οὔτε δεσπότην ὁ Χριστὸς Christ rejects neither slave nor master
προσιόντας αὐτῷ ἀποβάλλεται. Εἷς γάρ when they come unto him. For he is the
ἐστι Δεσπότης πάντων αὐτὸς, μᾶλλον δὲ one master of all, or better: their father.
πατήρ. καὶ τοῦτο δῆλον μὲν καὶ ἐξ ἄλλων And this is evident from many other things
πολλῶν, καὶ ἐκ ταύτης δὲ τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς, ἐν but especially from this letter, in which
ᾗ Φιλήμων μὲν ὁ δεσπότης, Ὀνήσιμος δὲ ὁ Philemon is the master, Onesimus the
οἰκέτης· ἀμφότεροι, ἵνα μηδὲν εἴπω πλέον, slave. Both, to say the least, were loved
ἀγαπητοὶ Παύλου. Ὁ μὲν οὖν Φιλήμων by Paul. Philemon was an admirable man
καὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς θαυμαστός τις ἦν ἀνὴρ, even from the beginning, though a Phry-
Φρὺξ μὲν τὸ γένος, πιστὸς δὲ τὸν τρόπον, gian by birth, he showed himself as a be-
καὶ ταῖς χρείαις τῶν ἁγίων κοινωνῶν, liever in his conduct, supporting the needs
καὶ ἐλεημοσύνας ποιῶν. Ὀνήσιμος δὲ of the saints and giving alms. But Onesi-
δραπέτης μὲν τὰ πρῶτα· καὶ γὰρ κλέψας mus began as a fugitive slave. For he stole
χρήματα ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας τοῦ Φιλήμονος, money from the house of Philemon and
ἀπέδρα. Γενόμενος δὲ ἐν Ῥώμῃ, διήκουσε ran away. He arrived in Rome and listened
Παύλου, καὶ κατηχηθεὶς παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ to Paul. Having been instructed by him
βαπτισθεὶς ἐν δεσμοῖς ὄντος, θαυμάσιός τις and baptized in prison, he also appeared as
καὶ αὐτος γέγονεν. Οὐχ ὅσιον οὖν κρίνας ὁ an admirable person. The Apostle, consid-
Ἀπόστολος λυπεῖσθαι τὸν Φιλήμονα ἐπὶ τῇ ering it unholy that Philemon was grieved
τοῦ Ὀνησίμου κακουργίᾳ τε καὶ φυγῇ, καὶ because of the crime and escape of Onesi-
θέλων καθαρίσαι τὴν πληγὴν τῆς καρδίας mus and wanting to cleanse the wound of
αὐτοῦ, ἣν ἐπὶ τῷ δούλῳ ἐδέξατο, ἀποπέμπει his heart, which he had received because
τοῦτον πρὸς αὐτὸν μετὰ καὶ τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς of his slave, sent him back to him with this
ταύτης, παραθετικὴν αὐτὴν ποιήσας. Φασὶ letter, having written it as a commenda-
δέ τινες μὴ χρῆναι ταύτην συναριθμεῖσθαι tory letter. Some say that this should not
ταῖς λοιπαῖς, ἅτε ὑπὲρ εὐτελοῦς οὖσαν be counted among the other letters since
πράγματος· ἀλλ᾽ ὅρα πόσα ἐκ ταύτης τὰ it is about a slight matter. But see how
χρήσιμα. Πρῶτον μὲν παιδεύει ἡμᾶς καὶ many the benefits of this letter are! First,
ὑπὲρ τῶν δοκοῦντων εὐτελῶν σπουδάζειν. he teaches us to be eager also in matters
»Μὴ καταφρονήσατε γὰρ«, φησὶν ὁ XIJDIBQQFBSTMJHIUA'PSEPOPUEFTQJTFo
Κύριος, »ἑνὸς τῶν μικρῶν«. Δεύτερον δὲ, TBZTUIF-PSEoPOFPGUIFMJUUMFPOFT/FYU
ὅτι εἰ δοῦλος οὕτως ἰταμὸς καὶ κακοῦργος if a slave so bold and crafty was converted,
296 Appendix I
ὑπέστρεψεν, οὐ χρὴ ἀπογινώσκειν ἑαυτῶν, we should not feel despair about ourselves,
καὶ μάλιστα ἐν ἐλευθερίᾳ ἀνατραφέντων. who indeed were raised in freedom. Third,
Τρίτον, ὅτι οὐ χρὴ προφάσει εὐλαβείας that we should not use religion as a pretext
δούλους ἀποσπᾶν τῶν δεσποτῶν μὴ to separate slaves from their masters, if the
βουλομένων. Τέταρτον, ὅτι οὐ χρὴ ἡμᾶς masters do not want it. Fourth, we should
ὑπερφρονεῖν τῶν δούλων ἐναρέτων ὄντων, not despise virtuous slaves, nor should we
οὐδὲ ἐπαισχύνεσθαι αὐτοὺς, ὁπότε Παῦλος be ashamed of them, since Paul calls On-
καλεῖ τέκνον τὸν Ὀνήσιμον. Τίς γοῦν ἐστιν esimus his child. Who, then, is he who will
ὁ ἀπαξιῶν ταύτην ταῖς λοιπαῖς συναριθμεῖν, consider this letter, which is full of useful
τοσαύτης ὠφελείας γέμουσαν; things, unworthy of being counted among
the rest?
Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Ἑβραίους Ἐπιστολῆς Argument of the Letter to the Hebrews
(PG"o$
Ἐθνῶν μὲν ἀπόστολος ἦν ὁ μακάριος The blessed Paul was the apostle of the
Παῦλος, καθὰ δὴ καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν τῇ πρὸς Gentiles, as he also says himself in the Let-
Ῥωμαίους φησίν. Οὐ γὰρ ἠνέσχοντο ter to the Romans. For the Hebrews could
ἂν αὐτοῦ Ἑβραῖοι κηρύσσοντος αὐτοῖς, not have beared to listen to his preach-
ἅτε δὴ ἀπεχθανόμενοι αὐτῷ πλέον ἢ ing to them, since they hated him more
τοῖς ἄλλοις, ὡς διὰ τῆς ἀθρόας αὐτοῦ than others since he through his sudden
μεταβολῆς ἄμαχον δεικνύντι τὴν τοῦ conversion had shown that the power of
Χριστοῦ δύναμιν, τὴν οὕτω σφοδρὸν Christ could not be defeated, having won
διώκτην ἑλκύσασαν. Σημεῖον γὰρ μέγα over even so vehement a persecutor. For
τῆς ἀληθείας τοῦ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς κηρύγματος, the fact that Paul, the most fervent follower
τὸ Παῦλον τὸν θερμότατον ζηλωτὴν τοῦ of the Law, suddenly came unto Christ is a
νόμου ἐξαίφνης Χριστῷ προσελθεῖν. Διὰ great sign of the truth of the message we
τοῦτο ἐκθύμως ἐπολέμουν αὐτῷ, καὶ believe in. Therefore, they fought against
οὐδὲ φωνῆς ἂν ἠνέσχοντο. Ἀλλὰ καὶ οἱ ἐξ him in anger, and they could not even bear
Ἑβραίων πιστεύσαντες, οὐδὲ οὗτοι πάνυ τι to listen to his voice. But the Hebrews who
προσεῖχον αὐτῷ, ἅτε τοῦ νόμου ἀπάγοντι had become believers did not pay much
παντελῶς, καὶ τὴν περιτομὴν λύοντι. Πλὴν attention to him either, as one who was
εἰ καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἀπεστάλη κήρυξ, ὅμως completely leading people away from the
καὶ πρὸς Ἑβραίους γράφει. Ὥσπερ γὰρ οὐκ Law and abolishing circumcision. But even
ἐπετράπη μὲν βαπτίζειν, ἐβάπτιζε δὲ ὅμως, if he were sent as a messenger to the Gen-
οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδὲ ἐκωλύθη· οὕτω καὶ Ἑβραίοις tiles, still he writes also to the Hebrews. For
ἐκ περιουσίας ἐπιστέλλει. καὶ γὰρ σφόδρα just as he had not been given the task of
αὐτῶν ἐκήδετο, ὑπὲρ ὧν καὶ ἀνάθεμα baptizing, he still baptized, since it was not
γενέσθαι ηὔχετο. τοῖς ἐν Παλαιστίνῃ δὲ, forbidden to him. Thus, he also writes a
καὶ ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις ἐπιστέλλει. Οὗτοι letter to the Hebrews out of his abundance.
γὰρ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀπίστων Ἑβραίων καὶ τὰ For he was very much worried about them
ὑπάρχοντα διηρπάγησαν, καὶ μυρίαις oIFDPVMEFWFOXJTIUIBUIFIJNTFMGXFSF
κακώσεσιν ὑπεβλήθησαν. Ὅθεν καὶ τῆς accursed for their sake. He writes to them
πρὸς τούτους ἐλεημοσύνης σφόδρα who are in Palestine and in Jerusalem. For
φροντίζει, καὶ Κορινθίους καὶ Μακεδόνας their goods had been stolen from them by
εἰς τοῦτο διεγείρων. καὶ πρὸς τὸν Πέτρον τὸ the unbelieving Hebrews, and they went
κήρυγμα διελόμενος, τοὺς ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ through countless evils. For this reason he
πιστοὺς Ἑβραίους πένητας κοινοὺς is very much concerned about the alms to
ποιεῖται. Ἀναγκαίως οὖν τούτοις γράφει, them, encouraging the Corinthians and
παραμυθούμενος αὐτοὺς καταπίπτοντας· the Macedonians for this purpose. And
σφόδρα γὰρ ἦσαν τεταριχευμένοι ταῖς having divided the preaching with Peter,
παρὰ τῶν ἰδίων συμφυλετῶν κακώσεσιν, he includes the poor Hebrew believers in
ἅτε καὶ αὐτονομουμένων ἐν Ἰεροσολύμοις. Jerusalem in the fellowship. Thus, he writes
καὶ ἐξουσίαν ἐχόντων καὶ κρίνειν καὶ to them out of necessity, comforting those
φυλακίζειν οὓς ἂν ἐθέλοιεν. καὶ τοῦτο δὲ who are in distress. For they were deeply
αὐτὸς ἐμφαίνει λέγων· »Τὰς παρειμένας troubled because of the evils brought upon
χεῖρας, καὶ τὰ παραλελυμένα γόνατα them by their own countrymen, since they
ἀνορθώσατε«. Ἅτε γὰρ Ἰουδαῖοι ὄντες, were autonomous in Jerusalem and they
καὶ μαθόντες ὅτι οἱ πατέρες αὐτῶν παρὰ had power to judge and imprison whom-
πόδας ἀπελάμβανον τὰ ἀγαθὰ, σφόδρα ever they wished. This he makes clear to
κατέπιπτον, ὡς μήπω τυχόντες ἀνέσεως. them, saying: ‘Lift up the hands which hang
Διὸ καὶ πολλὰ περὶ πίστεως διαλέγεται down, and the feeble knees!’ For since they,
ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ Ἐπιστολῇ, καὶ τῶν ἐξ αἰῶνος as they were Jews, had learned that their
ἁγίων, ὡς μήπω ἀπολαβόντων τὰ ἀγαθὰ, ancestors had received benefits during
δύο κατασκευάζων· ἓν μὲν, τὸ δεῖν φέρειν their lifetime, they were deeply distressed
πάντα γενναίως τὰ συμπίπτοντα· ἕτερον as they had not yet found rest. Therefore he
δὲ, τὸ πάντως προσδοκᾶν τὴν ἀμοιβήν. Οὐ also speaks much about faith in this letter
γὰρ περιόψεται Κύριος τοὺς ἀπ᾽ αἰῶνος and about the sanctuary that exists from
ἁγίους · ὥστε τότε καὶ ὑμεῖς ἀπολήψεσθε. eternity. Since they have not yet received
Ποιεῖται δὲ πολὺν λόγον καὶ περὶ τῆς the benefit, he prepares them in two ways:
Παλαιᾶς, καὶ περὶ τῆς Καινῆς, καὶ δείκνυσι First, that one should bear anything that
τὸν νόμον οὐκέτι σεμνόν· εἰ γὰρ καὶ ὁ happens with dignity. And second, that
ναὸς ἔτι συνειστήκει, ἀλλ᾽ οὖν αἰνίττεται one should always expect compensation.
ὅτι ἄχρι καιροῦ ἔσται τινὸς, καὶ ὅτι τὰ For the Lord will not neglect those who are
ἡμέτερα ἀληθῆ. Γράφει δὲ τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν holy from eternity. Therefore, at that time
ἀπὸ Ἰταλίας. Πρεσβυτέρα δὲ αὕτη τῆς you also will receive. He composes a long
πρὸς Τιμόθεον Ἐπιστολῆς. Ἐν ἐκείνῃ μὲν speech both about the old and about the
γὰρ ἐνδείκνυται ὅτι τέλος ἔχει αὐτῷ ἡ ζωή. new covenant, and shows that the Law is
»Ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη«, φησὶ, »σπένδομαι, καὶ ὁ no longer valid. For even if the temple still
καιρὸς τῆς ἐμῆς ἀναλύσεως ἐφέστηκεν«. were standing, he indicates that it will last
Ἐν ταύτῃ δὲ ἐπαγγέλλεται τοῖς Ἑβραίοις, until a certain time, and that what belongs
ὅτι ὄψεται αὐτούς. »Γινώσκετε γὰρ«, φησὶ, to us is true. He writes the letter from Italy,
»τὸν ἀδελφὸν Τιμόθεον ἀπολελυμένον· and this letter is earlier than the Letter to
μεθ᾽ οὗ, ἐὰν τάχιον ἔρχηται, ὄψομαι Timothy. For in that letter he shows that
ὑμᾶς«. Εἰκὸς δὲ τοῦτο ἐκβῆναι. καὶ γὰρ his life is near to the end: ‘For I am already
δύο μὲν ἔτη ἐποίησεν ἐν Ῥώμῃ δεδεμένος, on the point of being sacrificed’, he says,
εἶτα ἀφείθη, ὡσπεροῦν καὶ αὐτὸς δηλοῖ, ‘and the time of my departure has drawn
λέγων »ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ μου ἀπολογίᾳ οὐδείς near.’ But in this letter, he promises the
μοι συμπαρεγένετο«· καὶ, »Ἐρρύσθην ἐκ Hebrews that he will see them. ‘Know that
στόματος λέοντος«, τοῦ Νέρωνος δηλαδή. the brother Timothy is set at liberty, with
298 Appendix I
Εἶτα εἰς τὰς Σπανίας ἐλθὼν, ἐκεῖθεν ἴσως whom, if he come shortly, I will see you.’
εἶδε καὶ τοὺς Ἑβραίους, εἶτα εἰς Ῥώμην Probably, this did happen. For he was held
ἦλθεν αὖθις, ὅτε καὶ ὑπὸ Νέρωνος ἀνῃρέθη. two years as a prisoner in Rome, then he
was released, as he also says himself: ‘At my
first defense no one stood by my side’, and
‘I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion’,
Nero, of course. Then, having traveled to
Spain, thereupon he perhaps saw also the
Hebrews. Then he came to Rome again at
the time he was killed by Nero.
VI. Appendix II
Parainesis as an Ancient Genre-Designation:
The Case of the ‘Euthalian Apparatus’ and the ‘Affiliated Argumenta’
David Hellholm and Vemund Blomkvist
1. What is a Genre-Designation?
A Genre-Designation must at least fulfil the following requirements:
(1) It must be a suppositio materialis expression;

(2) It must designate not just one text but a series of related texts;
(3) It must consequently constitute an abstraction by means of a substitution on meta-
level.
Ad (1) The first known although not fully developed theoretical reflection upon the dif-
ferentiation between a suppositio formalis and a suppositio materialis statement is found
in Augustine’s short dialogue De magistro, in which he teaches his son, Adeodatus, about
various functions of language.1 Not only theologians but also philosophers of language
have scarcely bothered to read this philosophical dialogue or reflect upon its importance
for the literary analysis of philosophical and biblical writings, in spite of Augustine’s
reputation as being one of the most important semioticians in the ancient world.2 For-
tunately, classically trained linguists like Professor Eugenio Coseriu have done so and
rightly pointed out its importance.3 In this early dialogue Augustine in the same year
as his 18 year old son died (AD 389) points out that, for instance, the Latin verbum just
as, e.g., flumen “is” a word and that it “means” word, while flumen certainly also “is” a
word but does not “mean” word but river.4 Thus, already in antiquity there was not only a
practical but also a theoretical awareness of the difference between object-language and
meta-language.
1 Text and German trans.: C. J. Perl 1974, E. Schadel 1975 and B. Mojsisch 1998.
2 E. Coseriu o
3 See the remarks and additional bibliography by J. Albrecht in Coseriu 2003, 122 and 147.
4FFDIBQUFSTo FTQ Coseriu o FTQoidem 1988, 15. In his deliberations Au-
gustine does not, however, distinguish clearly between “class” and “individual”, i.e., between “appellativa”
and “names”, see Coseriu 2003, 131. For instance, the term προσηγορία can refer either to a “class,” i.e.
designate an “appellativum” or refer to an “individual”, i.e., a “name”, see the ancient texts referred to below
in note 238.
300 Appendix II
In the medieval scholastics this understanding was fully developed and the terms
used were suppositio formalis versus suppositio materialis,5 or in modern terms “usage of
a word instead of something else” versus “usage of a word instead of itself ”.6 Thus, that
a sign is a supposition for something means that it is a substitute for that thing,7 be it an
object outside of the text (formal substitution) or the text itself as object (material substi-
tution). The philosopher Willard Quine coined the terms “use” versus “mention”,8 which
has become the common terminology in English for this kind of linguistic distinction.
This means therefore that we have to differentiate between “object-text on the suppositio
formalis level and “meta-text” on the suppositio materialis level.9 It is, furthermore, neces-
saary to distinguish between text-internal and text-external meta-levels.
Since David Hellholm has discussed these questions extensively in his contribu-
tion to the Festschrift for Lars Hartman,10 we will on this occasion only briefly summa-
rize some of the various text-internal as well as text-external meta-levels in view of the
suppositio materialis function:
(a) The narrative text-level over against the discourse-level in the Gospels (text-in-
ternal meta-level);
(b) The Genre-designation Gospel, Romance, Apocalypse, Administrative Letter or
Apologetic Letter, Parable et cetera (text-internal or text-external meta-levels). In the case
of text-external meta-levels, the text designated is present in the mind of the author at the
moment of encoding and in the mind of the reader/listener at the moment of decoding.11
The genre-designations function as deictica12 or more precisely as text-deictica.13
5 See hereto, e.g., Coseriu o $G BMTP W. Kneal/M. Kneal o J. Pinborg/S.
Maier-Oeser o
6 G. Klaus 1975, 1193.
7 Cf. A. Vedberg 1968, 182.
8 W. V. Quine 1951, § 4. See further J. Lyons o BOEKl. Heger 1992, 6: “Eine Illustration zu
diesen Unterarten [sc. the various kinds of linguistic possibilities] sowie zu der prinzipiellen Iterierbarkeit
der Gegenüberstellung von mention and use biete[t] der Kalauer ‚ein Hund hat je vier Beine, Buchstaben
und Kasus‘”.
9 See, e.g., A. Menne 1980, 64, who also refers to the rubrics in the medieval liturgical handbooks; J. M.
Bocheńsky/A. Menne oCoseriu 1994, 86. Further also P. Hellwig 1984, 16: “Die Relation
Metatext zu Objekttext liegt vor, wenn ersterer über letzteren handelt.”
10 Hellholm oXJUISFGFSFODFT
11 This is an analogy to what Karl Bühler called “Deixis am Phantasma” in his Sprachtheorie from
1934/1978, 121ff.: “Wenn der Psychologe irgendwo auf Leistungen im Bereich des sogenannten unmittel-
baren Behaltens stößt, dann forscht er nach ähnlichen Leistungen im Bereich des nicht mehr unmittelba-
ren, sondern mittelbaren Behaltens, d. h. im Bereich der ausgewachsenen Erinnerungen und der konstruk-
tiven Phantasie … Wir wollen diesen dritten Modus des Zeigens [in addition to demonstratio ad oculos
(Greek: δεῖξις ὑπ᾽ ὀμμάτων) and anaphora] die Deixis am Phantasma nennen” (ibid., 123); cf. W. Raible
1972, 235; idem oLyons o FTQM.-E. Conte 1992, 151 and 158: “La Deixis
am Phantasma est le mode d’indication in absentia.
12 Cf. Bühler o
13 Cf. See R. Harweg 1979a, 167: “… als Textdeiktika, d. h. als Deiktika, deren Deixisobjekt ein Textsegment
ist”; idemC oi<%>JF%FJYJTEFSBeschriftungen (7)”; Raible 1972, 217: “Deixis am Text, also
eine Deixis auf Metatext-Ebene”; also Conte oi-BEFJYJTUFYUVFMMFOFTUQBTBVNÐNFOJWFBV
TVS MF NÐNF QMBO RVF MFT BVUSFT FTQÒDFT EF MB EFJYJT 4B GPODUJPO FTU méta-textuelle (italics ours)”; cf.
Hellholm o
What is a Genre-Designation? 301
(c) Designations of text-parts within a Church-Order like Didaché: “This is the
way of Life” (ἡ μὲν οὖν ὁδὸς τῆς ζωῆς ἐστιν αὕτη), “This is the way of Death” (ἡ δὲ τοῦ
θανάτου ὁδός ἐστιν αὕτη) et cetera or within New Testament letters the rubrics or meta-
formulations regarding certain text-parts, e.g., introduced by περὶ (δέ) + genitive of the
noun, for instance, περὶ δὲ τοῦ βαπτίσματος κτλ. (Did 7:1; text-internal meta-level); περὶ
δὲ ὧν ἐγράψατε κτλ. (1 Cor 7:1; text-external and -internal meta-levels,14 i.e. on the one
hand deixis am Phantasma and on the other demonstratio ad oculos/ad aures or anaphora
respectively.15)
Ad (2) One cannot establish a genre or stipulate a genre-designation by means of one

text alone, since here the question of what is typical or essential, that is, invariant, for a
group of texts is pertinent, not what is peculiar or accidental, that is, variant, in a single
text.16 A good illustration of the differences between analyses of generic texts and analysis
of a text-manifestation is the different interest in form-criticism on the one hand and
redaction-criticism on the other.17
Ad (3) As a substitution the genre-designation has to function on a different abstraction-

level than the genus proximum on the one hand and the species proxima on the other. With
Porphyry and Boethius a genre can be defined as the genus proximum + the differentia
specifica or more correctly the differentiae specificae (made up of text-syntactical, text-
semantic and text-pragmatic differences!).18 A tentative definition of parainesis as sug-
gested by the Paraenesis-project group would look as follows:19
14 See M. M. Mitchell oHellholm o FTQo$GBMTPN. A. Dahl 2000a,
7, who speaks of “Leitsätze” in connection with the text-delimitation of Ephesians.
15 See Bühler 1934/78, 105, 123, 125. Anaphora constitutes the relationship within the linguistic context;
deixis constitutes the relationship to the situational context”, cf. Raible oHeger 1976,
227; Hellholm 1980, 49; H. Stammerjohann (ed.) 1975, 29, 81.
16 See the references in Hellholm 1991, 142.
17 This was pointed out already by Hellholm in his dissertation: Hellholm 1980, 72. Few, if any, NT-scholars
have taken notice of this methodological distinction. Cf. however, already E. Gülich/W. Raible 1975,
160: “Bei einer solchen Thematisierung in Bezug auf das Textganze ist zu unterscheiden zwischen dem
Textganzen qua Textsorte und dem Textganzen qua Textvorkommen.”
18 Notice that the plural as regards the differences is found already in Aristotle: ἐπειδὴ ὁ ὁρισμὸς ἐκ γένους
καὶ διαφορῶν ἐστιν (“Since the definition is composed of genus and differentiae”; TopCo &Y-
tensive deliberations on these questions are found in Hellholm’s contribution to the Anaheim SBL-Collo-
quium on Apocalypticism: Hellholm o
19 The genus proximum (paraclesis) was not determined by the Paraenesis-group; it is our own stipulation
and as such open to discussion; cf. W. Übelacker o XIFSFparaclesis is defined as the wider
concept which includes parainesis; further also note 165 below. See furthermore C. J. Bjerkelund 2013,
251: “… παρακαλεῖν … has the dual function of ‘ask’ and ‘exhort’, and which of these meanings is ‘heard’
by the addressees depends largely on the writer’s authority.” Also 255: “We should note that his (sc. Paul’s)
exhortations do not seek to introduce anything new, but simply to persuade the communities to hold fast
to what he has established there.” See further O. Schmitz/G. Stählin o FTQ BOE
M. Konradt 2003, 38: 1 Thessalonians as “parakletische[r] Brief ”. Regarding the definition of parainesis,
see also D. Aune 1987, 191 and esp. W. T. Wilson oXJUIGVSUIFSSFGFSFODFTi*ODPOUSBTUXJUI
protreptic speech paraenesis does not introduce a significant quantity of new information or call upon the
audience to pursue a different or unaccustomed way of life. Nor does it address a specific or occasional
decision, like advice. Most often, paraenetic texts contain a host of materials and ideas already familiar
to the audience, but present them in such a way that they serve the text’s special aims, which are typically
302 Appendix II
Definitio potest fieri per genus proximum et differentias specificas20
syntactics:
concise injunction
semantics:
shared and articulated world-view (of
genus proximum: differentiae
Paraenesis = + contrasts);
Paraklesis specificae
pursuit or avoidance of moral practices
pragmatics:
benevolent reminder to insiders without
admittance of disagreement
definiendum definiens
2. Parainesis — paraineo — parainetikos as Genre-Designation
2.1. A short History of parainesis as Genre-Designation
In his important monograph entitled “Paränese und Neues Testament” from 1996 Profes-
sor Wiard Popkes in the first sentence rightly states: “Begriffsbestimmungen erfolgen
durch die Geschichte”, 21 that is, they are conventions as the linguist Wolfgang Raible has
pointed out.22
The question, however, is: when does the history of the generic concept parainesis
begin, or more precisely in view of the limited scope of our deliberations: when does the
history of the concept parainesis as genre-designation begin?23
As the references in Popkes’ first chapter clearly show “(ist) der Wortstamm parain- …
in der antiken Literatur durchaus häufig anzutreffen” and covers a broad variety of mean-
encouragement, admonition, or consolation”. In view of the definitions of contrast in Ps-Libanios (quoted

below on page 340) it is most plausible that the verb (οὐκ) ἐπιδέχομαι should be translated “(not) admit”
as in Malherbe’sUSBOTMBUJPO oo<> BOEOPUiBOUJDJQBUFwBTJOJOUIFTVHHFTUFEEFĕOJUJPO
by the Paraenesis-group. In our illustration we have therefore chosen to render the Greek verb with the
English verb “admit” or noun “admittance.”
20 Notice the variation of the classical Definitio fit … differentiam specificam. With regard to the former varia-
tion, potest fieri, see W. Welte 1974, 107 s.v. Definition; see further Hellholm oXJUIOPUF
7 and more recently W. Gast o8JUISFHBSEUPUIFMBUUFSWBSJBUJPO differentias specificas, see
note 18 above.
21 Popkes 1996, 9. See also A. Grözinger o$PNQBSFUIFJNQPSUBOUBOBMZTJTPGUIFPSJHJOBOE
later development of the genre “Historiette” in France from 1657 onwards by F. Nies o
22 Raible oi(BUUVOHTOPSNFOTJOEBMTP,POWFOUJPOFO TJFLPOTUJUVJFSFO.PEFMMF EJFEVSDI
Konvention Geltung haben” (ibid., 326).
23 For the history of the concept paraenesis in the 20th century, see Popkes o
Parainesis — paraineo — parainetikos as Genre-Designation 303
ings.24 Popkes correctly observes that there are only a few examples that can be said to
DPOTUJUVUFBHFOSFEFTJHOBUJPO BOEUIPTFUIBUQPTTJCMZEPFYJTUBSFEJTNJTTFEoSJHIUMZPS
XSPOHMZoPOWBSJPVTHSPVOETOPOUZQJDBM TJOHVMBSPSFYDFQUJPOTetc.
More problematic are the following statements both of which will be scrutinized in
our presentation: (a) “Die Kirchenväter … bringen zur Geschichte der Wortverwendung
nicht viel”.25 However, in Geoffrey W. H. Lampe’s A Patristic Greek Lexicon under the
word-group παραιν- the noun παραίνεσις is at least listed “perh. as title of philosophi-
cal work … Epiph. haer. 32.4”, and the adjective παραινετικός is, among other possi-
bilities, listed as “hortatory, of a type of literature τὸ π[αραινετικὸν] εἶδος Clem. paed.
1.1 … Isid. Pel. epp. 3.84 …; πρὸς παρθένους π.[αραινετικὸς] [sc. λόγος] Gr. Naz. carm.
1.2.3 tit.”26 (b) Regarding the technical usage in the Church Fathers Popkes concludes
by stating: “Eine Gattungsbezeichnung ist nicht gemeint, sondern nur eine ‚literari-
sche Darstellungsform‘”.27 Unfortunately, however, no explanation of what “literarische
Darstellungsform” means and how it is to be distinguished from “Gattung” is provided.28
John Chrysostom obviously uses the lexeme παραίνεσις in a technical sense. As an exam-
ple we refer here only to the newly discovered manuscript Μονὴ Λείμωνος 27 of Oratio
2. The oration is divided into three sections just as Oratio 4. The first part deals with juda-
J[JOH$ISJTUJBOTXIPSVOBXBZUPUIF+FXT WBoWB UIFTFDPOEoBOEVOUJMOPX
NJTTJOHoQBSUJTEJSFDUFEEJSFDUMZBHBJOTUUIF+FXT WBoWC XIJMFUIFUIJSEQBSUJT
EJSFDUFEEJSFDUMZUPUIF$ISJTUJBOTXIPBSFSVOOJOHUPUIF+FXT WCoWB ćJTUIJSE
section begins by designating the first part indirectly as the first paraenesis (cf. Οὕτω δὴ
καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ νόμου λογιστέον· [n.b. the verbal adjective!]120vb; “In
this way we should indeed think regarding Christ and regarding the law”), as the third
QBSUJTDBMMFEUIFϢϣϱϰтϮϟɀϟϮϟцϫϣϯϧ϶"UUIFCFHJOOJOHPGUIFUIJSETFDUJPOoBOEPOMZ
IFSFoɀϟϮϟцϫϣϯϧ϶JTVTFEUISFFUJNFT PODFJODPOOFDUJPOXJUIUIFWFSCϢϧϭϮϦьϯϟϯϦϟϧ
(“set on the right path”; cf. CAP on 1 Corinthians). In addition, two other technical terms
are used at the beginning of this third section, viz., ἐπιτίμησις and συμβουλή. That this
third section contains an apotropaic sense is spelt out directly in the meta-sentence which
is at the same time a substition on abstraction-level: Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ταῦτα εἶπον νῦν, ἵνα
μηκέτι ταῦτα γένηται (128v; And for this reason I have now said this, in order that this
may not happen again”)29;
24 Popkes 1996, 13.

25 Popkes 1996, 20. Cf. mutatis mutandis the “confident denials of Pauline rhetorical proficiency made on
the basis of a supposed lack of patristic corroboration or, indeed, allegedly uniform patristic counter-
evidence to the conclusion that Paul knowingly drew upon rhetorical techniques” made recently by a few
scholars, and its rebuttal by Mitchell o FTQUIFHJWFORVPUBUJPOGSPNQ
26 G. W. H. Lampe 1968, 1017; we should note that Gregory of Nazianz’s Πρὸς παρθένους παραινετικός [sc.
Λόγος] is a title!
27 Popkes 1996, 21.
28 The expression ‘literarische Darstellungsform’ is borrowed from L. R. Stachowiak 1983, 178. Similarly
also M. Reiser 2001, 187 note 271.
29 Introduction, text and translation in W. Pradels/R. Brändle/M. Heimgartner o0O+PIO
Chrysostom’s use of parainesis as genre-designation, see further below in the treatment of Galatians,
note 98.
304 Appendix II
As far as we can judge from the examples just quoted the word-group parain- in some
instances at least was used as genre-designation,30 that is, not only of entire texts but also
of text-segments.31 This judgement will be decisively substantiated by the material we are
going to present below.
2.2. The Evidence from Euthalius
The most illuminating text in regard to the question of paraenesis as Genre-Designation

in the Early Church is, as far as we can discern, the “Euthalian Apparatus” and its af-
filiated “Argumenta” (PGo 32 The Euthalian apparatus is found in hundreds
of medieval manuscripts of the New Testament. It provides help for the reader of the
Pauline Letters and the Apostolos (that is Acts and the Catholic Letters), in the form of
prologues, lists of chapters and Old Testament quotations. Although the manuscript evi-
dence is mainly from medieval times, the bulk of the material is much older. The terminus
a quo is apparently the middle of the fourth century.33
Euthalius, the obscure auther or rather editor of the material, is often referred to as
bishop or deacon of Sulci.34
The main parts of the apparatus are prologues (πρόλογοι), lection lists (ἀναγνώσεις),
chapters (κεφάλαια), and quotation lists (μαρτυρίαι). Most enigmatic is the division of
the New Testament text into lections, since this division of the text into larger units does
not seem to correspond to any known liturgical practice. Secondary additions consist,
inter alia, of the so called “argumenta” (ὑποθέσεις), which are summaries in the form
of continuous texts. According to Nils Alstrup Dahl parts of the “apparatus” are likely to
have “survived for hundreds of years independently of the more comprehensive Euthalian
Apparatus. The so-called ‘argumenta’ (ὑποθέσεις) are the clearest example of this”.35
Parts of the apparatus were included in Erasmus’ edition of the New Testament (1516,
repr. 1986) and in the Complutensian Polyglot o -BUFS USBOTNJTTJPO PG UIF
apparatus as part of popular Bible editions was largely neglected. In some cases it was
supplanted by new material. Luther’s Vorreden may thus be viewed as representing the
genre of the ancient argumenta.36
30 See already Quintilian, Inst. 9.2.103: exhortatio, παραινετικόν as figura, schema.

31 Cf. 1T%FNFUSJVT ͔ъɀϭϧ ͽɀϧϯϰϭϩϧϨϭцoRVPUFECFMPXJOOPUF125.
32 We are indebted to the late Professor emeritus Nils Alstrup Dahl for drawing our attention to the relevance
of the Euthalian material for the question of parainesis as genre-designation (see DahlE o
Regarding the textual tradition, see Dahl, ibid., 231f.; for a bibliography, see ibid o4FFBMTPUIF
JNQPSUBOU :BMF EJTTFSUBUJPO CZ L. Ch. Willard from 1970 written under the supervision of Dahl [now
Willard 2009 with updated bibliography].
33 Dahl 2000d, 231; regarding the date of the chapter-lists, see below page 306. [See now the discussion by
Blomkvist above on pp. 121o142].
34 See Dahl 2000d, 231.
35 Dahl 2000d, 233. [See now the discussion by Blomkvist above on pp. 142o194].
36 Cf. S. Strohm o
The whole apparatus was published with Latin translation by Lorenzo Zacagni (Rome
1698). This translation is reprinted along with the Greek text in Migne’s Patrologia Graeca
(PGo 37
The evidence for a technical usage of παραινέω, παραίνεσις and παραινετικός in the
Euthalian tradition that we can present in our contribution are taken from two of the
different streams of traditions, viz., the chapter-lists of the “Apparatus” and the “Argu-
menta” section. In all instances the suppositio materialis statements are mainly text-ex-
ternal expressions, and so in two different ways: (a) In the ancient manuscripts the Eu-
thalian headings are text-external communications vis-à-vis the Pauline and other New
Testament texts as such, but at the same time text-internal in so far as they refer to those
texts immediately following upon the Euthalian headings (cf. demonstratio ad oculos /
ad aures); (b) In the PG-edition the circumstances are different; here only the Euthalian
headings have been printed and yet they constitute text-external communications, this
time since the New Testament texts are not supplied but simply presupposed as recollec-
tion (cf. deixis am Phantasma).38
Even in the prologue (PROL), to be precise, at the transition from the first part deal-
ing with Paul’s life and work from his birth as a Hebrew in Tarsus until his death as a
$ISJTUJBOJO3PNF "o" UPUIFTFDPOEQBSUQSPWJEJOHHFOFSBMTUBUFNFOUTBCPVU
1BVMTJOEJWJEVBMMFUUFST "o" XFSFBEBCPVU1BVMTNPSBMɀϟϮϟϧϫтϯϣϧ϶UISPVHI
his teaching as well as through his letters:
Before this time, the blessed one, Paul the Apostle, had already given many exhorations
concerning both life and virtue (παραινέσεις ὑπέρ τε βίου καὶ ἀρετῆς) and he had ex-
plained many things concerning what humans ought to do (πολλὰ περὶ τῶν πρακτέων τοῖς
ἀνθρώποις). Moreover, throughout the text of the fourteen letters, he had described the en-
tire citizenship (πολιτεία) of man. (701A)
Immediately after this transitory remark formulated on the one hand as a suppositio for-
malis expression and on the other as a suppositio materialis statement, both of which
emphasize Paul’s ethical injunctions (“life and virtue,” “human praxis” and “social con-
duct”), the fourteen letters of Paul (including Hebrews) are dealt with in succession
"o" 39 We turn now to the evidence first from the chaper-lists and then from
the argumenta.
2.2.1. Evidence from the Chapter-Lists (CAP)
In the “Prologue” of the “Euthalian Apparatus” the redactor Euthalius brings a program-
matic statement that deals with the revision of chapters and testimonies. There we read:
37 See now the treatment of the Euthalian tradition by V. Blomkvist in this volume.
38 See above text and references ad and in notes 11o15. Further in refinement of Bühler’s concept of “Ver-
TFU[VOH o TFFFTQConte o XIPEJTUJOHVJTIFTCFUXFFOiEÏQMBDFNFOU
(idéal) du sujet dans un autre espace” and “2. déplacement (idéal) d’un objet dans l’espace imaginaire du
MPDVUFVSw JUBMJDTPVST *OUIFDBTFPGUIF&VUIBMJBOUFYUJO1(oXF PGDPVSTF IBWFUPEPXJUI
a real displacement of the object.
39 See DahlE o
306 Appendix II
In what follows in respect to each letter concisely we shall first place (προτάξομεν) a brief
survey of the chapters (κεφάλαια) which was laboriously created by one of the wisest of our
fathers, a Christ-lover (φιλόχριστος) … .(708 A)
As Professor Dahl points out, Euthalius here explicitly states “that he is indebted to his
highly appreciated Christian ‘father’ (possibly Pamphilus, [Eusebius’ master and adopted
GBUIFS BOEIFBEPGUIFMJCSBSZPG$BFTBSFB.BSJUJNB o"%40]), who in his edition
had accounted for the number of chapters (CAP) in each letter”.41 If the “wise father” is
indeed to be identified with Pamphilus, the chapter-list will go as far back as to the latter
part of the third century.
Most instances where the lexemes παραινέω, παραίνεσις and παραινετικός or
προτροπή, ἀποτροπή as well as παράκλησις are used technically as substitutions on meta-
level on first and second grades in the chapter-lists will be presented and briefly com-
mented upon.
In scrutinizing the Pauline letters, including Hebrews, and the Catholic epistles, we
shall not follow the order in the chapter lists (which is the same as in the canonical or-
der42 with the exception of Hebrews that is placed before 1 Timothy43), but begin with the
letters in which the term παραίνεσις occurs followed by περί-phrases indicating the con-
tent (Romans, Ephesians); thereafter we shall deal with the letters in which παραίνεσις
occurs, but where the content is expressed by means of cum genitivo rei constructions
(1 Thessalonians, Philippians, Colossians); then we shall turn to letters, where the lex-
eme παραίνεσις is missing, but substituted by other lexemes like προτροπή, ἀποτροπή
or παράκλησις, and where the content is expressed by means of prepositional phrases
or cum genitivo rei constructions (Galatians, 2 Corinthians, 2 Thessalonians); next we
shall consider a singular text which uses the lexeme διόρθωσις followed by a series of
περί-phrases (1 Corinthians); thereafter we shall deal with texts in which a mixture of
lexemes and constructions is used (Pastoral epistles: 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy and Titus);
after the Pauline letters we turn to Hebrews, which in the Euthalian tradition is regarded
as a Pauline letter and placed before the Pastoral epistles;44 here the terminology varies
(προτροπή, ἐπιτίμησις παράκλησις) as do the constructions (infinitive, prepositional as
well as cum genitivo rei); we shall further examine the two Catholic epistles where horta-
tory terminology is present: in 1 Peter we encounter παραίνεσις in combination with two
περί-phrases; in James we again encounter παραίνεσις but here without any statement of
content; finally we shall consider the short remark about Paul’s παράκλησις in his letter
to Philemon.
40 C. Markschies, 2000, 214, and A. J. Carriker 2003, passim FTQo

41 Dahl 2000d, 240.
42 See DahlC oidemD oD. Trobisch o):(ĮĺįĹĲ 1995, 59ff.
43 See also the introduction to the argumenta-edition in 745; Dahl 2000d, 259: “It opens with the words,
‘This book contains’ (τάδε ἔνεστιν), followed by a list of the fourteen letters of Paul: ἡ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους κτλ.
$o% w
44 See the quotation from the prologue (701A) and the references in the corresponding note above page 305.
(A) ćFTFDPOEQBSUPGUIFDIBQUFSMJTU $"1#o$ PGRomans runs as follows:
Παραινέσεις περὶ ἀρετῆς πρὸς θεὸν καὶ Exhortations about virtue before God
(12:1)
ἀνθρώπους. and people.
Ἐν αἷς περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἀλλήλους Among these: about concord with
(12:3)
ὁμονοίας. one another.
Περὶ τῆς πρὸς θεὸν λατρείας. (12:10) About worship of God.
Περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἀντικειμένους About forbearance over against
(12:14)
ἀνεξικακίας. adversaries.
Περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἄρχοντας ὑποταγῆς. (13:1) About subordination under rulers.
Περὶ σωϕροσύνης καὶ πραότητος. (14:1) About prudence and gentleness.
Περὶ τῆς ἐν βρώμασιν καὶ ἡμέραις About a peaceful attitude regarding
(14:13)
ἀμάχου διανοίας. food and observance of days.
Περὶ μιμήσεως τῆς Χριστοῦ ἀνεξικακίας. About imitation of the forbearance of
(15:1)
Christ.
Περὶ τῆς λειτουργίας αὐτοῦ, τῆς ἐν About his [sc. Paul’s] service in the East
(15:15)
Ἀνατολῇ καὶ Δύσει. and West.
Here we can make the following observations:

(a) The chapter-list divides the letter to the Romans into two major sections: The
first section (at 1:1?) is introduced by the formulation: Εὐαγγελικὴ διδασκαλία (CAP
749C) followed by a series of subdivisions introduced by περί + genitive of the noun. Di-
rectly after the series of 13 περί-sentences, the second section (at 12:1) is introduced by
παραινέσεις περὶ ἀρετῆς πρὸς θεὸν καὶ ἀνθρώπους and likewise followed by a series of,
in this case, six subdivisions introduced by περί + genitive of the noun. Two additional
περί-phrases (at 15:1 and 15:15) are in the printed editions independent chapters and ap-
parently not considered part of the paraenesis.
Zacagni provided his Latin translation with divisions indicated by Roman numerals,45
according to which the paraenetic sections in Romans begins in 12:1 but ends already in
14:23, since the text-sequences 15:1ff. and 15:15 receive separate numerals.46 See, however,
under (b) below.
The lection-list to Romans (LECT 716) divides the text into five lections. The fourth
OPUBCMZCFHJOTBUBTJOUIFDIBQUFSMJTU CVUo<JOPVSWJFX>DPOUSBSZUPUIFDIBQUFSMJTU
<TFFCFMPXVOEFS C >oFOETBU TJODFUIFĕęIMFDUJPOCFHJOTBU
(b) In a chapter-list giving an outline of the text under consideration,47 in this case
Romans, the words introducing each of the two sections both stand in a suppositio
45 The division into chapters and verses in our translation are throughout according to Zacagni’s latin trans-
lation. We use the preposition “at” when referring to Zacagni’s divisions in his translation of the Greek text.
46 The reader should note that the περί-phrases of the first part of Romans are considered separate chapters,
XIJMFJOUIFQBSBFOFUJDQBSU o UIFɀϣϮцQISBTFTEFTDSJCFTVCTFDUJPOTPGPOFDPNQSFIFOTJWF
chapter. This is the disposition according to the printed editions, beginning with Zacagni. There are, how-
ever, variations within the manuscripts: “There is one variation in which all the chapters, including those
which Zacagni found described as subdivisions in his manuscripts, are consequtively numbered trough-
out” (Willard 1970, 71 [= 2009, 52]).
47 Cf. Dahl 2000d, 257: “… the chapters (CAP) are table of contents …,” i.e. a text-external table of contents.
308 Appendix II
materialis position and no doubt constitute substitutions on meta-level. That this in fact
is the case is substantiated by another observation that should not be overlooked, viz.,
that contrary to the normal usage in Greek all περί-sentences follow upon each other
asyndetically.48 This fact is evidently due to the circumstance that originally the κεφάλαια
were “headings” to corresponding texts in the minuscules; later they were edited with-
out the adherent texts.49 That the introductory sentence παραινέσεις περὶ ἀρετῆς πρὸς
θεὸν καὶ ἀνθρώπους constitutes a substitution on meta-level over against the following
περί-sentences is also indicated by the relative construction ἐν αἷς referring to the plural
παραινέσεις as correlate. This indicates in our opinion that the various sections intro-
duced by περί are meta-sentences or rubrics although on a lower level of abstraction than
the overarching substitutions: εὐαγγελικὴ διδασκαλία and παραινέσεις respectively. This,
however, speaks in favour of taking also the last two περί-sentences as part of the parae-
netic section, in spite of our reservation above under (a).
(c) A quick look in modern commentaries confirms approximately the ancient di-
vision of Romans as well as its genre-designation: most notably so in J. A. Fitzmyer’s
DPNNFOUBSZGSPNi*%PDUSJOBM4FDUJPOy o w i**)PSUBUPSZ4FDUJPOy
o w50 Other commentators who divide the text differently are in agreement that
in 12:1 a hortatory section begins.51 Vielhauer, who, in following Dibelius’ definition of
paraenesis, distinguishes between general exhortation and admonition in specific situa-
UJPOT DIBSBDUFSJ[FTDIBQUFSToBTQBSBFOFTJT XIJMFIFEFQJDUToBTBENPOJ-
tion to unity.52 Similarly Eduard Lohse , who distinguishes beween “Allgemeine Paränese”
o BOE i4QF[JFMMF 1BSÊOFTFw o 53 This distinction, however, is not
made in the chapter-list to Romans.
In her monograph, Angelika Reichert, in carrying out her “communicative-function-
BMBOBMZTJTwPG3PNBOT BMTPEFTJHOBUFoBTiUIFTFDPOENBJOTFDUJPO zweiter
Hauptteil) of the letter. The addressees remain the same throughout the entire section.54
Thus, as regards this textpart, she dismisses the notion of the difference between general
and actual exhortation and develops the idea of a Pauline “Modell einer nach außenwir-
48 Cf. J. Blomqvist 1981, 69: “In Greek, a grammatical rule forbids asyndetical juxtaposition of sentenc-
es. Every sentence must open with a particle that indicates its relationship to the preceding sentence.
Omission of the particle is allowed only under clearly defined circumstances”. For exceptions, see J. D.
Denniston YMJJJoYMWJ
49 See the deliberations above ad note 38.
50 J. A. Fitzmyer 1993, XIf., 637ff.; so also, e.g., A. Nygren 1947, 411ff.; W. G. Kümmel 1973, 268; J. Jervell
1973, 18, 218ff.; O. Michel 1978, 8, 365ff.; Bjerkelund 1967, 116, 156ff., 168, esp. 170f.; E. Käsemann
1974, VI, 311ff.; H. Schlier 1977, X, 15f., 349ff.; U. Wilckens 1982, 1ff.; J. D. G. Dunn 1988, X, 705ff.; E.
Lohse 2003, 10, 332f.; further H. D. Betz oooPopkes oR.
E. Brown 1997, 560, 572f.
51 E.g., H. Lietzmann ČoW. Schmithals 1988, 417ff., who lets a new second letter
to the Romans begin in 12:1 allows it to end in 15:30. [R. Jewett 2007 divides the Probatio-section of
3PNBOTJOUPGPVSQSPPGT PGXIJDIoNBLFTVQUIFGPVSUIBOEMBTUPOF>
52 Ph. Vielhauer 1975, 176, 180; so also U. Schnelle 2002, 136; H.-J. Klauck 1998, 229.
53 Lohse 2003, 339; so also Konradt oJ. Barclay oFNQIBTJ[FTUIFTQFDJĕD3P-
NBOTJUVBUJPOPGUIFBENPOJUJPOTHJWFOJO3PNo
54 A. Reichert G 3FHBSEJOH3PNoBTUIFCFHJOOJOHPGUIFTFDPOEQBSUPG3PNBOT TFF
already Reichert o
kenden Gemeinde der ‚starken‘,”55 which implies that the addressees should “das Model
als ganzes auf sich … beziehen, also ihre eigene Gemeinschaft nach diesem Modell …
verstehen”.56 The function of this main section reaches its goal in the “Prägung der Adres-
satenschaft zu einer selbständigen und nach außen hin ausstrahlenden Gemeinde.”57 The
juxtaposition according to Dr. Reichert is not between general and actual exhortation but
rather between model and its application.
(B) "OFRVBMMZJOTUSVDUJWFFYBNQMFJTUIFTFDPOEQBSUPGUIFDIBQUFSMJTU $"1#o$ PG

Ephesians which runs as follows.
Παραίνεσις Exhortation
περὶ ἀγάπης ἑνωτικῆς, εἰ καὶ τὰ about unifying love, even if the gifts
χαρίσματα διῄρηται πρὸς (4:1) of grace are distributed to the
ὠϕέλειαν κοινήν. common benefit.
Περι σωϕροσύνης καὶ δικαιοσύνης About prudence and righteousness,
(4:17)
ποιούσης ἡμᾶς θεοειδεῖς. making us God-Like
Περὶ τοῦ ζῆν ἐπαξίως τοῦ ἁγιασμοῦ, About living worthy of the
ἔργοις τὴν κακίαν ἐλέγχοντας, μὴ sanctification, rebuking evil with
λόγοις· πνεύματι πληρουμένους (5:3) works not with words, and being
διὰ ψαλμῶν, μὴ οἴνῳ. filled with the Spirit through
hymns, not with wine.
Διάταξις οἰκετικῶν καθηκόντων Regulation of domestic rules for
ἀρχομένοις καὶ ἄρχουσι κατὰ those who are ruled and for those
(5:22)
Χριστόν. who rule in accordance wih
Christ.
Ἐν σχήματι ὁπλίσεως περὶ τῆς κατὰ In the figure of preparing for battle,
(6:10)
Χριστὸν δυνάμεως. about the power of Christ.
The following observations can be made:

(a) Also in this case parainesis serves as a text-delimitating substitution on meta-level
with regard to (segments of) the second part of Ephesians o 58 The first part is
not so clearly defined as in Romans, since no overarching lexeme or syntagma is provided
for the first three chapters of Ephesians.59 This part of the chapter-list is made up of three
περί-phrases, and two εὐχή-phrases: The first εὐχή-phrase is constructed with περί, while
the second is constructed with ὑπέρ. This ambiguity led Nils Alstrup Dahl to conclude
55 Reichert o DIBQUFS

56 Ibid., 257.
57 Ibid., 312.
58 4FFBMTPćFPEPSFUVTPG$ZSSIVT DB"%o ͔Ѯ϶ϢсͽɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶ϰпϪсϫɀϮҀϰϟɀϣϮϧтϳϣϧϢϧϢϟϯϨϟϩцϟϫ
τοῦ θείου κηρύγματος, τὰ δὲ τελευταῖα παραίνεσιν ἠθικήν (“The first part of the letter [sc. to the Ephe-
sians] contains teaching of the divine message; the second part, ethical parainesis; PG 82.401 fin.).
59 Theodoretus of Cyrrhus in the quotation given in the previous note, however, terms the first part of Ephe-
sians διδασκαλία. It is furthermore worth noticing what he says about Paul’s activity in Ephesus: ἐν τῇ
Τυράννου σχολῇ τὰς διατριβὰς ἐποιεῖτο (“he began to deliver his diatribes in the hall of Tyrannos; PG
82.401).
310 Appendix II
that “in the list of chapters [to Ephesians] no attention is given to the division into two
lections either”.60
In the lection-list, however, we encounter a clear division into two parts of Ephesians
(LECT 717B):
In the letter to the Ephesians there are two lections, ten chapters, six testimonies and 312
lines.
The first lection (1:3–3:21) has five chapters etc.
The second lection (4:1–6:20) has five chapters etc.
Dahl rightly makes the following comment: “The lections and the line numbers they (sc.
the summaries) provide are thus a kind of meta-information”.61 We are therefore inclined
to believe that the singular form παραίνεσις in the chapter-list of Ephesians is to be taken
as a generic delimitation-marker of the text-segment that constitutes the paraenesis-part
of the letter.
(b) This conclusion is substantiated by means of the three περί-sentences and the one
διάταξις-sentence and the subsequent περί-phrase, all of which follow upon the first part,
which is made up of three περί-sentences and one εὐχὴ περί-phrase and one εὐχὴ ὑπέρ-
phrase. Also here, as in the chapter-list to Romans, the περί-phrases follow upon each
other asyndetically. One should, however, not disregard the difference between the three
περί-sentences following upon the substitution on the first meta-level, and the διάταξις-
sentence introducing a sub-division of the παραίνεσις-section, viz. the so called “rules for
UIFIPVTFIPMEw o 62 Depending upon the evaluation of the relationship between
the περί-sentences and the διάταξις-phrase, that is, either as co-ordinate or as superior
entities, the “household code” can either be regarded as part of the paraenesis-section or
as an independent text-sequence on the same level as the parainesis-sequence.63 The fact
that the lexeme διάταξις here is not followed by περί-phrase(s) but by a cum genitivo rei
construction speaks in favor of a coordination with the preceding περί-phrases, and thus
BTVCPSEJOBUJPOVOEFSɀϟϮϟцϫϣϯϧ϶0OUIFPUIFSIBOE XFIBWFoBTXFXJMMTFFCFMPXo
cum genitivo rei constructions in other chapter-lists following directly upon the lexeme
παραίνεσις. However, in view of the internal structure of the chapter-list to Ephesians
with the last περί-phrase following almost directly upon the διάταξις-phrase, the first
alternative seems preferable.64
60 Dahl 2000d, 245; so also Bjerkelund 1967, 180ff.

61 Dahl 2000d, 242f.
62 Cf. the similar arrangement in the chapter-list to Colossians (CAP 768) and the treatment below on page
314f. Regarding the history of the “household code,” see G. StreckerC o U. Wagener 1994,
o BOEJ. Woyke 2000. A preliminary definition is provided by Woyke 2000, 18: “[P]aränetische Form
(a), in der in Aufreihung (b) bestimmte Personengruppen (c) zu konkretem Verhalten (d) anderen bestimm-
ten Personengruppen gegenüber (c) im Kontext einer hierarchischen Struktur (f) angehalten werden” (italics
original).
63 The same problem in modern interpretations is addressed and summarized in Woyke o
“Haustafel-Schema” vs. “paränetische Untergattung”; further, pp. 26, 38. Regarding the question of “gen-
FSBMwPSiBDUVBMwiIPVTFIPMEBENPOJUJPOw TFFoBOE XIFOUIFiIPVTFIPMEDPEFwJTTBJEUPIBWFB
“Charakter einer usuellen postbaptismalen Paränese” (48; italics original).
64 H. von Lips 1994,265: “Es soll daran folgende These entfaltet werden: die ‚Haustafel‘ hat ihren festen Ort
JOOFSIBMCEFSVSDISJTUMJDIFO1BSÊOFTF XJFTJFEJF#SJFGFCF[FVHFOoVOEEJFTF(FNFJOTBNLFJUJTUXJDI-
tiger, als es die Differenzen der einzelnen Haustafeln im Detail sind. Die Haustafel stellt innerhalb eines
(c) Again a quick look in modern commentaries confirms the ancient division of
Ephesians as well as its genre-designation: Practically all commentators agree that Ephe-
TJBOTGBMMTJOUPUXPQBSUT BEPDUSJOBMQBSUJOoBOEBIPSUBUPSZQBSUJOo8F
quote only Dahl from his Studies in Ephesians: “Ein erster, deskriptiver)BVQUUFJMw o
3:21) followed by “ein zweiter, präzeptiver)BVQUUFJMw o 65 Within the paraenetic
section there are different opinions as to where the “house-hold code” begins: Dahl opts
on formal grounds for a beginning at 5:15 with its thematic guiding principle (Leitsatz):
βλέπετε οὖν ἀκριβῶς πῶς περιπατεῖτε μὴ ὡς ἄσοφοι ἀλλ᾽ ὡς σοφοί66 Others reckon — as
CAP 764C [;BDBHOJ>XJUIBCFHJOOJOHBUUBLJOHoBTiFJOF;VTBNNFO-
fassung des bisher Gesagten”, although recognizing the new beginning in v. 15 by means
of the inferential particle οὖν and the closing usage in Ephesians by means of “das die
Paränese beherrschende Verb περιπατεῖν”.67
(C) In the chapter-list (CAP 772) to 1 Thessalonians we find the following:

Παραίνεσις σωϕροσύνης, δικαιοσύνης, Exhortation to moderation, justice, in
ὡς ἐπὶ κρίσει, φιλαδελφίας, regard to judgment, to brotherly
(4:2)
ἐργασίας ἰδιοπράγμονος. love, to minding one's own
business.
Here we can observe a different outline than in the previous two cases:
(a) As was the case in the chapter-list to Ephesians also here there exists no over-
arching lexeme or syntagma delimiting the section before the appearance of the lexeme
parainesis in chapter 4:2.68 Prior to the use of παραίνεσις only the technical term εὐχή
is used for the section beginning in 3:2 and after the paraenetic section two suppositio
materialis expressions are being used: διδασκαλία in regard to 4:13ff., and εὐχή in regard
QBSÊOFUJTDIFO 4DIFNBT EBT WFSTDIJFEFOF -FCFOTCFSFJDIF VNGBU (FNFJOEF o )BVT o ½ČFOUMJDILFJU

einen eigenen Topos dar.”
65 Dahl 2000a, 10f.; so also Bjerkelund 1967, 180ff.; Schlier 1963, 7, 16, 177ff.; Vielhauer 1975, 204;
A. Lindemann 1985, 70ff.; Gnilka 1990, VIIf., 29ff., 193ff.; P. Pokorný 1992, VIf., 47ff., 159ff.; Hübner
1997, X, 198ff.; E. Best 1998, 353ff.; U. Luz 1998a, 150ff.; Klauck 1998, 239; Brown 1997, 621, 623f.;
similarly R. Schnackenburg 1982, 5, 19, 160ff.; M. Bouttier 1991, 18f., 167ff. A. T. Lincoln 1990,
xliiiff.: This structure, however, is not reflected in the outline of Lincoln’s commentary. Popkes 1996, 97f.
EJTUJOHVJTIFT CFUXFFO i%JF 5BVG1<BSÊOFTF> o w BOE i%JF )BVTUBGFM o w "DDPSEJOH UP U.
Schnelle UIFQBSBFOFUJDTFDUJPOTPGUIFMFUUFSDPSQVTFOEJOBOEoBTUIFi4DIMV-
paränese” constitutes the first part of the letter postscript; so also G. Sellin 1996, 291f.: “Die Paränese
o TUFMMU EBOO EJF exhortatio [V o EBS y &QI o TUFMMU WPS EFN CSJFĘJDIFO 4DIMV
o EJFperoratio dar”. [Idem 2008, 7, 52, 306ff.]
66 Dahl 2000a, 6 and 11: “Mahnungen zu einem weisen Wandel, unter Danksagung im Namen Jesu, leiten
[VFJOFS)BVTUBGFMIJOàCFS o wTJNJMBSMZSchlier 1963, 242ff: “Mit V. 15 beginnt ein neuer und
nach vorne weisender Abschnitt, der wie der kaum markierte Übergang von V. 20 zu V. 21 zeigt, im ge-
XJTTFO4JOOFEJFTPHFOBOOUF)BVTUBGFM o FJOMFJUFUw JCJE BOESchnackenburg 1982, 236ff.:
i$ISJTUMJDIFT(FNFJOEFMFCFO o wGnilka 1990, 263ff.; Lincoln 1990, 338.
67 So, e.g., Strecker 1989b, 349ff.; Hübner 1997, 238; further Bouttier 1991, 238ff.; Pokorný 1992, 211ff.;
Best 1998, 502 and 519ff.; Lindemann 1985, 99ff.; Luz 1998a, 167ff.
68 In a review article of A. J. Malherbe 2000 published in The Review of Biblical Literature 9 (2004): § 3.1. M.
M. Mitchell draws attention to the fact that Theodoretus of Cyrrhus “uses the term only with reference to
ćFTTow PG 82.503: προσενήνοχε δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ τῆς ἠθικῆς διδασκαλίας παραίνεσιν; “And he has
added for them also advice/exhortation about ethical teaching”; her trans.).
312 Appendix II
UPČ5XPɀϣϮцTFOUFODFTEFMJNJUUIFTFDUJPOoBOEo$POTFRVFOUMZPOMZ
oJTDIBSBDUFSJ[FEBTDPOTUJUVUJOHBQBSBFOFUJDTFDUJPOćFDIBQUFSMJTUHJWFTOP
JOEJDBUJPOUIBUUIFQBSBFOFUJDTFDUJPODPOUJOVFTTPBTUPJODMVEFBMTPoSBUIFSUIF
virtues mentioned there are viewed as part of the preparation (εὐτρεπίζεσθαι) for the
Parousia of Christ; the reason being that this section is framed by two sections dealing
XJUIUIFDPNJOHPG$ISJTUoBOEo
The lection-list (LECT 717) treats 1 Thessalonians as one lection only.
(b) Here the formulation with regard to the object of exhortation is not given by
means of περί-phrases but mainly in form of a cum genitivo rei construction.69
(c) In modern commentaries there is unanimous agreement that the paraenetic sec-
UJPOCFHJOTBUoCVUOPVOBOJNJUZBTUPXIFSFJUFOET.PTUDPNNFOUBUPSTMFUUIF
paraenesis end at 5:2270 or 5:2471, thus beginning approximately at the same place as in
CAP 772 but encompassing a much larger section than the one designated there. Profes-
sor $BSM+#KFSLFMVOE IPXFWFS BSHVFTUIBUUIFQBSBFOFTJTTFDUJPOCFHJOTJOoBOE
ends in 4:12 just as CAP 772; interestingly enough he also terms the following two peri-
copes “Belehrungen àCFS EJF "VGFSTUFIVOH o VOE EJF 1BSVTJF o w72 This
corresponds with the chapter-list’s designation of these two sections as διδασκαλία: first
περὶ τῆς τοῦ θανάτου καταλύσεως κτλ. and second περὶ τοῦ αἰφνιδίως ἥξειν Χριστόν κτλ.
(D) The chapter-list (CAP 765) of Philippians is structured in similar ways as the list just
analysed.
Παραίνεσις τῆς κατὰ θεὸν ὁμονοίας, καὶ Exhortation to concord according to the
τῆς ἐνθέου ζωῆς. […] (1:27) will of God, and to a life inspired
by God. […]
Παραινέσεις ἴδιαί τινων, καὶ κοιναὶ Exhortations, specific ones for some and
(4:1)
πάντων. common ones for all.
The lexeme παραίνεσις occurs twice.
69 Cf. LSJ 1966, 1310.

70 Thus Vielhauer 1975, 84ff.: “Seltsam scheint …, daß die einzige lehrhafte Partie des Briefes, die Beleh-
SVOHàCFSEBT4DIJDLTBMWFSTUPSCFOFS$ISJTUFO oJOEJF1BSÊOFTFFJOHFCFUUFUJTU"CFSEBTCFEFVUFU
daß der Akzent nicht auf der Belehrung über eschatologische Ereignisse, sondern auf der Tröstung für die
Gegenwart liegt” (ibid., 86). Similarly Malherbe 2000, 261: “Paul conveys more doctrinal information
here than he has heretofore done in chap. 4, and his purpose may therefore appear to be didactic rather
than paraenetic. However, the information is provided for reasons that have to do with conduct.” … “He
concludes with an exhortation that they comfort each other (v 18), which thus forms an inclusio to the
pericope that began with a concern for his readers’ grief (v 13).” J. Lambrecht 2000, 172 structures the
UFYUBTGPMMPXTioJOUSPEVDUPSZQBSBFOFTJTBoQBSBFOFTJTCoĕOBMEFTUJOZPG$ISJTUJBOT
BoQBSBFOFTJTCoĕOBMEFTUJOZPG$ISJTUJBOTBoQBSBFOFTJToFTDIBUPMPHJDBM
wish-prayer.” Contrary to Vielhauer and Malherbe he concludes by insisting that “all paraenesis in 1 Thes-
salonians serves an eschatological purpose” (ibid., 172f.). See further Konradt 2003, 121f., 128ff., 181.
71 So, e.g., E. von Dobschütz 1909/74, 154ff.; T. Holtz 1986, 149ff.; B. C. Johanson 1987, 72ff.
72 Bjerkelund JUBMJDT o %) TFF GVSUIFS UIF EJTDVTTJPO JO JCJE o "MUIPVHI J.
HolmstrandXJUIPVUBSHVNFOUBUJPOSFHBSEToBTBVOJUIF XIFOUVSOJOHUPo OFWFSUIF-
MFTTXSJUFTi1BVMJTOPXNPWJOHGSPNFYIPSUBUJPO o UPJOGPSNBUJPOyw G TJNJMBSMZ
also E. Reinmuth 1998a, 136ff.; Klauck 1998, 277; see the comments by Vielhauer and Malherbe quoted
above in note 70.
Also in CAP 765 can we observe a similar, although not identical, structure as in the
chapter-list to 1 Thessalonians (CAP 772):
(a) Here too there are no overarching lexemes delimiting entire sections of the letter.
Instead there are three substitutions on meta-level encompassing text-sequences of a par-
tial character: εὐχαριστία (1:3), διήγησις (1:12),73 and παραίνεσις/παραινέσεις that occur
twice (1:27 and 4:1). The two περί-phrases are in this case not sub-descriptions under the
first parainesis heading but rather characterisations of independent sub-texts (2:19 and
3:1). The first paraenesis section extends from 1:27 to 2:18 while the second reaches from
4:1 to 4:9.
The lection-list (LECT 717) divides the letter in two lections but does so at 3:1, which
does not coincide with any of the delimitations based on the lexeme forms παραίνεσις/
παραινέσεις.
(b) ćFGPSNVMBUJPOXJUISFHBSEUPUIFPCKFDUPGFYIPSUBUJPOTJToBTJOEJDBUFEBCPWFo
not given by means of περί-phrases but mainly in the form of a cum genitivo rei construc-
tion, which is also the case in CAP 772 (for 1 Thessalonians) as we just saw.
(c) Among modern commentators Wolfgang Schenk and Gordon Fee make the same
UFYUEFMJNJUBUJPOPGUIFQBSBFOFUJDTFDUJPOoBT$"174 Bjerkelund states that
“auffallend ist hier, dass mit 1,27 kein neuer Abschnitt einsetzt”.75 Regarding the second
paraenetic section Schenk’s and Nikolaus Walter’s source critical operation cuts the text
into several fragments.76 Fee recognizes that a new section of appeal begins at 4:1 but
lets it end already at 4:3.77 However, /JMT " %BIM UBLFT UIF FOUJSF TFDUJPO o BT BO
“exhortation to a common decency”78 as does Jonas Holmstrand, who states that “there is
a fairly clear new start in 4:1, marked by the lengthy address ἀδελφοί μου ἀγαπητοὶ καὶ
ἐπιπόθητοι, χαρὰ καὶ στέφανός μου … ἀγαπητοί and the change of mood to a second
person plural imperative”.79 Bjerkelund further observes that “der einzige p[arakalô]-Satz
dieses Schreibens … sich im letzten Kapitel dieses Briefes (findet): ‚Die Euodia ermahne
ich und die Syntyche ermahne ich, dass sie eines Sinnes seien in dem Herrn … [4,2]‘”.80
Due to literary critical division of the text Vielhauer limits the second paraenetical text-
73 So also among modern interpreters R. Brucker 1997, 293: “… (Phil 1,12) weckt für antike Ohren die
Erwartung einer ‘Erzählung’ (διήγησις/narratio)”.
74 W. Schenk 1984, 165ff., esp. 226; G. Fee G oVielhauer 1975, 157; Klauck 1998, 240.
Brucker oTUSVDUVSFToEJČFSFOUMZ WJ[BTUIFpropositio o BOEBTQBSUPGUIF
probatio o E. Lohmeyer Č ČSFDLPOToBTBUSBOTJUPSZQBTTBHFUPUIFGPM-
MPXJOHNBKPSTFDUJPOoTJNJMBSMZBrown 1997, 484.
75 Bjerkelund 1967, 175; cf. also Holmstrand Č XIPEPFTOPUQMBDFUIFFYIPSUBUJPOo
POUIFĕSTUMFWFMPGEFMJNJUBUJPOUIBUHPFTGSPNo CVUSBUIFSPOUIFUIJSEMFWFMQSFDFEFECZo
since “[t]he new beginning at 1:27 is … relatively weakly marked in purely quantitative terms, and also in
qualitative terms, since μόνον is a modifying adversative particle and as such links the new section rela-
tively closely to the preceding one”.
76 Schenk 1984, 250ff.; N. Walter 1998, passim.
77 Fee JCJE o
78 N. A. Dahl BOEGVSUIFSJCJE oTPBMTPLohmeyer 1953/74, 163ff.; similarly Schnelle 2002,
157; Brown UBLFToBTUIFFYIPSUBUPSZQBSU
79 Holmstrand IPXFWFS oJTTFFOBTUIFGPVSUIBOEiDPODMVEJOHFYIPSUBUJPOwPGUIFFOUJSF
FYIPSUBUPSZQBSUUIBUTUSFUDIFTGSPNo JCJE
80 Bjerkelund 1967, 175.
314 Appendix II
TFRVFODF UP o81 Walter, who divides Philippians into three letters, limits the first
QBSBFOFUJDQBSUUPo82 regarding the second, Walter like Schenk carries out a source
DSJUJDBMPQFSBUJPOBDDPSEJOHUPXIJDIo Walter) or 4:3, 8f. (Schenk) belong to letter
$ BOEo o 8BMUFS PSo Schenk) to letter B; this, of course, prevents any
meaningful comparison with the chapter-list in the Euthalian Apparatus.83
(E) Similarly structured is also the chapter-list (CAP 768) for Colossians.
Παραίνεσις καθάρσεως, ἁγιασμοῦ, Exhortation to purification, sanctification,
ϕιλανθρωπίας, ϕιλοθεότητος, love of men, love of God, love of
(3:5)
ϕιλομαθίας, ψαλμῳδίας, εὐϕήμου learning, singing of psalms, life in
εἰς θεὸν διαγωγῆς εὐχαριστίας. praise of God and thanksgiving.
Here we notice the following peculiarities:

(a) In regard to this chapter-list too there are no overarching lexemes delimiting en-
tire sections of the letter. Instead, as in the chapter-list of Philippians (CAP 765), there
are three substitutions on meta-level encompassing text-sequences of a partial character:
εὐχαριστία (1:3), εὐχή (1:9), and παραίνεσις (3:5). Other sub-sections are introduced by
means of περί-, or ὅτι-phrases. The paraenetic section thus begins at 3:5 and ends at 3:16,
since a new section termed τὰ πρὸς οἰκείους ὁμονοητικῶς is said to begin in 3:17 (sic!).
ćJTJTJOUSJHVJOH TJODFUIFTPDBMMFEiSVMFTGPSUIFIPVTFIPMEw o TFFNTnot to be
considered a part of the paraenesis but a separate section in itself.84
As is the case in the lection-list for Ephesians, so also in the lection-list for Colossians
(LECT 717) the text is divided into two lections:
In the letter to the Colossians there are two lections, ten chapters, six testimonies and 208
lines.
The first lection (1:1–3:16) has five chapters etc.
The second lection (3:17–4:18) has one chapter etc.
Astonishingly, the second lection that has only one chapter begins not as expected from
the chapter-list at 3:5 (paraenesis) but at 3:17 (household code)! We are nonetheless in-
clined to believe that the singular form παραίνεσις in the chapter-list of Colossians is to
be taken as a generic delimitation-marker of the limited text-segment that constitutes the
paraenetic part of the letter.
(b) As is the case in the chapter-list for 1 Thessalonians (CAP 772), so also here the
formulation with regard to the object of exhortation is not given by means of περί-phrases
but in form of a cum genitivo reiDPOTUSVDUJPOUIFGPMMPXJOHiIPVTFIPMEDPEFwJToBTXF
KVTUTBXoEJČFSFOUMZJOUSPEVDFEBOEUIVTDMFBSMZTFUBQBSUGSPNUIFparainesis section in
a more distinct way than in the corresponding outline in the chapter-list to Ephesians.
(c) Many modern commentaries divide the body of Colossians into two parts, most
notably Eduard Lohse: “I. Theological Instruction: The Universal Lordship of Christ”
o BOEi**ćF)PSUBUPSZ4FDUJPOćF3VMFPG$ISJTUJOUIF-JGFPGUIF#FMJFWFSTw
81 Vielhauer GTPoBMUIPVHISFDLPOJOHXJUIUIFJOUFHSJUZPGUIFMFUUFSoBMTPKlauck 1998,
240.
82 Walter 1998, 50ff.; so also Schnelle 2002, 157 under the assumption of the letter’s integrity.
83 Schenk 1984, 242ff., 250ff.; Walter 1998, 90ff.
84 See the references above in notes 62, and 64.
o 85PSBT.JDIBFM8PMUFSoXJUIJOBSIFUPSJDBMBOBMZTJT partitio, argumentatio
and peroratio oQMBDFTUIFexhortatio o EJSFDUMZBęFSUIFperoratio o 86 There
is, however, no unanimity with regard to the beginning of the paraenetic section:87 in
2:20,88 in 3:1,89 or in 3:5 as CAP 768,90 and there is no agreement as to the ending of the
paraenetic section either: in 4:6 as -PITFoDPOUSBSZUPIJTPWFSBMMBOBMZTJToBOEPUIFST
declare,91 or in 4:1 as Ulrich Luz postulates.92 Here the chapter-list is also vague. Quite dif-
ferently is the composition pictured by Walter T. Wilson, who according to the model of
Seneca’s Epistolae Morales 16 divides Colossians into three major parts, all with the term
QBSBFOFTJTJOUIFUJUMFi$PMPTTJBOTo 4FDUJPO* DPOTUJUVUFTQBSBFOFUJDBďSNBUJPO
o 4FDUJPO** QBSBFOFUJDDPSSFDUJPO BOEo 4FDUJPO*** QBSBFOFUJDFYIPSUB-
UJPO XJUIoBOEoGPSNJOHUIFUFYUTFQJTUPMBSZGSBNFXPSLw93
The “household code” is intercalated into the paraenetic section and encompasses
oBDDPSEJOHUPNPTUDPNNFOUBSJFT94 The abrupt placement of the “house-hold
code” in Colossians has led not a few scholars to reckon it as a gloss.95 The separation
between the paraenetic section and the household code in CAP is a further indication of
the abruptness of its placement within the letter to the Colossians.
85 Thus E. Lohse 1971, vii, 132; similarly E. Schweizer 1976, 130; Lindemann 1983, 5, 52ff.; Pokorný 1987,
133ff.
86 Wolter 1993, 7f., 170ff.; affirmative also Hübner 1997, 97.
87 Cf. Bjerkelund 1967, 180: “Kol ist dagegen (sc. contrary to Ephesians) nicht so distinkt in seiner Struktur.
In diesem Brief ist es bedeutend schwieriger zu entscheiden, wo denn nun eigentlich die Paränese beginnt.
… Wenn man mit Paränese dasselbe meint wie .%JCFMJVT EBOOJTUFTCFSFDIUJHU o BMTEFOFJHFOUMJ-
chen paränetischen Abschnitt des Briefes anzusehen”.
88 Thus Gnilka 1991, 7f., 155ff.; cf. also A. Standhartinger 1999, 78f. note 75: “… Formal ist ein Einschnitt
bei 3,1 oder 3,5 nicht zu rechtfertigen, da die Imperative ab 2,8 strukturprägend sind …”.
89 L. Hartman ioDPOTUJUVUFTBOPWFSBSDIJOHJOUSPEVDUJPOUPUIJTTFDPOEQBSUDPODFSOJOH
life in Christ” (trans. —DH); similarly also Lohse 1971, 132ff.; Schweizer 1976, 130ff.; Vielhauer 1975,
191; Lindemann 1983, 5, 52ff.; Pokorný 1987, VIII, 133ff.; Schnelle 2002, 338; Klauck 1998, 242.
90 Thus already J. B. Lightfoot 1879/1959, 127f.; so also Hübner 1997, 97ff, 101ff.: “Kol 3,1–4 ist kein parä-
netischer Text” (97; author’s italics); Luz 1998b, 226ff.; see also above note 87.
91 Lohse JCJE oTPBMTPVielhauer 1975, 191; Schweizer 1976, 130, 171ff.; Gnilka 1991, 227ff.;
Wolter o ČHartman 1985, 177ff.; Pokorný 1987, VIII, 133, 156; Schnelle 2002, 338;
Klauck 1998, 242; Brown 1997, 600, 602.
92 Thus LuzC XIPSFHBSEToBTBi4DIMVQBSÊOFTFwXJUIJOUIFi#SJFGTDIMVw o
93 W. T. Wilson o
94 E.g., Lohse 1971, 154ff.; Schweizer 1976, 159ff.; Lindemann 1983, 63ff.; Hartman 1985, 159ff.;
Pokorný 1987, 148ff.; Gnilka 1991, 203ff.; Wolter 1993, 192ff.; Hübner 1997, 109ff.; Luz 1998b, 232ff.;
von Lips 1994, 275: “Bemerkenswert bleibt, daß die gleiche Abfolge der drei Lebensbereiche in allen in
Frage kommenden Briefen demnach der Haustafel einen festen Ort innerhalb der Paränese zuweist. Dar-
VNFSàCSJHFOTJDIÃCFSMFHVOHFO XJFTJFFUXB[V,PMoBOHFTUFMMUXFSEFO XBSVNEJF)BVTUBGFM
ausgerechnet an dieser Stelle stehe,” However, Popkes 1996, 94, distinguishes, as far as larger units are
concerned, between “Tauf-P[aränese]” and “Haustafel”; cf. also Woyke’s interpretation of the “houshold
code” as “post-baptismal Paraenesis,” see above note 63.
95 See the discussion in Standhartinger o FTQČBOEG4UBOEIBSUJOHFSSFDPHOJ[FTUIF
BCSVQUOFTTCVUDPODMVEFTCZTUBUJOHUIBUi.&MÊUTJDI,PM o OJDIUFJOEFVUJHBMTTFLVOEÊSF(MPTTF
erweisen” (ibid., 261).
316 Appendix II
(F) An example of a chapter-list in which overarching lexemes are missing is the one
$"1o UPGalatians.
Ὑπογραϕὴ τῆς κατὰ πνεῦμα ἐλευθερίας. Description of freedom according to the
(5:1/13)
Spirit.
Ἀποτροπὴ ἀπὸ τῶν ἑλκόντων ἐπὶ τὴν Warning against those dragging
περιτομήν, καὶ προτροπὴ πρὸς men to circumcision, and
νέαν ζωὴν τὴν ὑπὸ πνεύματι. encouragement to a new life
under the Spirit.
Among the many peculiarities in this chapter-list the following are important for our
purpose:
(a) In this case the technical term parainesis is missing as is any technical terminol-
ogy delimiting the entire section prior to the paraenetic one. However, other less encom-
passing technical terms, that is substitutions on meta-level, of an epistolary and rhetorical
nature are used for sub-sections in the first part of Galatians such as exordium (προοίμιον
[1:6]) and narratio (διήγησις [1:12: διήγησις τῆς ἑαυτοῦ μεταστάσεως ἀπὸ Ἰουδαισμοῦ
κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν]). Still further sub-sections are indicated by means of two περί- and
seven ὅτι-phrases until we encounter the sub-title “Description (ὑπογραφή) of freedom
according to the Spirit”. The manuscripts used by Zacagni indicate that this section begins
only at 5:13. This delimitation, however, is questionable, since the “description of freedom
(ἐλευθερία)” can equally well refer to 5:1 where the Galatian text reads: τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς
Χριστός ἠλευθέρωσεν. The next section then is made up negatively of “warning against
ЋɀϭϰϮϭɀуЋɀшy UIPTFESBHHJOHNFOUPDJSDVNDJTJPOwHJWFOJOo BOEQPTJUJWFMZ
of “encouragement to (προτροπὴ πρός …) a new life” given in 5:13ff.96 This interpreta-
tion is preferable over against Zacagni’s delimitation of the ἀποτροπή- and προτροπή-
phrases, which are said to begin only in 6:11. As we will see below, precisely these two
technical terms (ἀποτροπή and προτροπή) are used in connection with parainesis by
Ps-Libanios in his Epistolimaioi Characteres, where they are said to constitute two parts
of παραίνεσις.97 Thus, contrary to the previously discussed chapter-lists, the one to Gala-
UJBOT $"1o EPFTOPUQSPWJEFBOZPWFSBSDIJOHsubstitutions on meta-level while
instead quite a few subordinate “substitutions” on the next hierarchical level are given.98
96 Cf. also Dahl 2000d, 265: “While these words (sc. ἀποτροπή and προτροπή) may be used in connec-
tion with specific actions that ought to be done or avoided, they may also be used, as in modern biblical
research, for paraenesis in the form-critical sense that has become particularly common due to Martin
Dibelius’ studies”.
97 See the quotation from Ps-Libanios below page 340.
98 As M. M. Mitchell has shown, the overarching characterisation of Galatians by John Chrysostom in his
commentary is ἀπολογεῖσθαι/ἀπολογία (2001, 349f.). Παραίνεσις is indeed used by Chrysostom as a
genre-designation but on a lower hierarchical level: “… Chrysostom describes the function of the final
verse of the letter (Gal 6:18): ‘on account of this he [sc. Paul] concluded the exhortation with a prayer’ [Διὰ
ϰϭѼϰϭϰуϫɀϟϮϟцϫϣϯϧϫϣЯϳѯϨϟϰтϨϩϣϧϯϣ>*UJTOPUDMFBSUPXIBUUIFUFSNɀϟϮϟцϫϣϯϧ϶IFSFSFGFSTo PS
o PSQFSIBQTUIFXIPMFMFUUFS CFDBVTF+PIOEPFTOPUJOEJDBUFJU JOEJSFDUDPOUSBTUUPUIFFYQMJDJU
scope of the apologetic references cited above).” (ibid. 353 and see further ibid. 354 note 90; see also above
note 29).
The lection-list divides the letter into two lections, but the second lection starts al-
ready at 3:15 and thus gives no indication as to whether a paraenetic section is intended
or not.
(b) In addition to what has just been said about the περί- and ὅτι-sentences on a lower
level of abstraction in the first part and the sub-indicators (ἀποτροπὴ ἀπό …; προτροπὴ
πρός …) of the second part of the letter, it should be noted that they are all asyndetically
constructed as in the chapter-lists previously discussed.
(c) There is no general agreement among modern commentators as to where in Ga-
latians the paraenetic section begins. Among recent commentators Hans Dieter Betz and
a few others99 let the exhortatio-section begin already in 5:1 just as we understand CAP
761 to do, while 'SBOÎPJT7PVHBBOENPTUPUIFSTTFFUIFTFDUJPOoBTi"VČPSEFSVOH
und Ausführung der These des Briefes: Die Adressaten sollen in der Freiheit bleiben” and
consequently let the paraenetic section begin in 5:13 just as Zacagni does, who, however,
uses “description” (ὑπογραφή) and not “exhortation” (παραίνεσις).100 Dieter Kremen-
EBIMUFSNToPeroratiooTFDPOEExordiumoParaenesis.101 Bjerkelund
points out that no παρακαλῶ-phrase is to be found in Galatians and further that the only
one that comes close to a παρακαλῶ-phrase in regard to content and function is 4:12.102
+POBT)PMNTUSBOEJOIJTTVNNBSZSFHBSEToBTiUIFGPVSUIBOEMBTUNBKPSTFDUJPO
of the Letter to the Galatians”, within which “a lengthy paraenetic section (5:13b-6:10)” is
inserted; in his arrangement of the text, however, Holmstrand lets the fourth major sec-
tion begin already in 4:12 which he names “Exhortation”.103 John Barclay and Matthias
Konradt both stresses that “these verses are not an independent or dispassionate account
of Christian ethics tacked on to the end of an argumentative letter, but a continuation and
completion of the argument.”104
(G) In the chapter-list (CAP 760) to 2 Corinthians we find another example of a chapter-
list which lacks an overarching lexeme or syntagma but merely provides a general indica-
tion of the content: ὁ πᾶς λόγος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ περί τε ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ περὶ Κορινθίων
99 H. D. Betz ooidem 1979, 22f., 253ff.: “The parenetical section of Galatians can be
subdivided into three parts. Each of these parts is recognizable by its restatement of the ‘indicative’ of
TBMWBUJPO o CFHJOT XJUI UIJT SFTUBUFNFOU B BOE DPOUBJOT B XBSOJOH BHBJOTU UBLJOH VQ UIF
ZPLFPGUIF+FXJTI5PSBIBOEBDDFQUJOHUIFSJUVBMPGDJSDVNDJTJPO oCFHJOTBHBJOXJUIUIJTSF-
TUBUFNFOU BOEDPOUBJOTBXBSOJOHBHBJOTUDPSSVQUJPOCZUIFAĘFTI oCFHJOTXJUIBĕOBM
restatement of the ‘indicative’ of salvation (5:25a) and contains a series of gnomic sentences forming the
positive exhortation.” Similarly T. W. Martin 1995, 454: “Paul’s exhortation in 5:1 … describes the agita-
tors’ pre-Christian state, not the Galatians’”; cf. also W. Schmithals 1988, 418f.; Brown 1997, 468, 473; B.
Gärtner 1998, 26; Koester 2000, 125; Popkes 1996, 88.
100 F. Vouga 1998, 127ff.; J. L. Martyn 1997, 468: “For three reasons 5:13 is the far more likely answer”: (a)
5:1 is the conclusion of the section begun at 4:20; (b) 5:2 signals a new turn in the argument; (c) “Most im-
QPSUBOU UIFSFBSFOPJNQFSBUJWFBOEIPSUBUPSZWFSCTJOo XIFSFBTBOVNCFSPGTVDIWFSCTQVODUVBUF
UIFMBUUFSQBSUPGow$GBMTPR. Bring 1958, 262ff.; Vielhauer 1975, 112; Schlier 1962, 241ff.; J.
Becker 1998, 83ff.; Klauck 1998, 237.
101 D. Kremendahl 9o9* o o
102 Bjerkelund 1967, 177.
103 Holmstrand 1997, 193f. and 199ff.
104 J. Barclay 1988, 143; Konradt o4PBMTPHellholm 2003, 173.
318 Appendix II
καὶ τῶν ψευδαποστόλων. Nevertheless, a substitution on meta-level of the second degree

that reflects paraenetic language is provided and reads:
Προτροπὴ πρὸς ἐπίδοσιν χρημάτων τοῖς Encouragement to give money to the
ἁγίοις, καὶ τιμὴν τῶν διὰ τοῦτο (8:1) saints, and to respect those
ἐρχομένων. coming for this purpose.
We can make the following observations in regard to this admonition:

(a) In the chapter-list of 2 Corinthians we encounter the following substitutions on
meta-level: εὐχαριστία, ἀποδοχή, παρασκευή, διήγησις in addition to seven περί-phrases.
The term παραίνεσις does not occur, but precisely at the beginning of the collection-
chapters, that is, in chapter 8 the term προτροπή is used. The next text-delimitation oc-
curs only at 10:1, that is directly following upon the two collection-chapters 8 and 9; the
delimitation marker here is another substitution on meta-level, namely, διήγησις, which
means that the two collection-chapters 8 and 9 evidently are taken as a unity. In view of
the usage of lexemes it is especially illuminating to observe that the chapter-list ignores
the Pauline usage in 10:1 of the verbs παρακαλέω and δέομαι.105
(b) A sub-division is indicated not at 9:1 but at 8:16, where Titus’ and others’ mission
is mentioned: Ἐν ᾧ περὶ τῆς Τίτου ἀποστολῆς, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πρὸς αὐτούς.
(c) In his commentary on 2 Corinthians 8 and 9 Hans Dieter Betz interprets the
function of the exemplum of the churches in Macedonia and their activities as an “in-
direct appeal” to the addressees.106 This functional characterization comes close to the
one given in CAP 760 (προτροπή) but contrary to Euthalius’ understanding of the two
collection-chapters as one unit.107 Betz divides the two collection-chapters into separate
letters, one to Corinth and the other to the churches in Achaia.108 Margaret Mitchell also
divides the two into separate letters but regards chapter 8 as the first letter following upon
1 Corinthians and chapter 9 as the very last in Paul’s correspondence with the Corinthian
Church.109 Once more it becomes clear that ancient and modern text-delimitations and
-descriptions are rather congruent especially as far as paraenesis is concerned.
(H) In the chapter-list (CAP 773) to 2 Thessalonians we find yet another example of a list
lacking overarching lexemes or syntagmata but nevertheless providing substitutions on
meta-level of the second degree reflecting paraenetic language. In full it reads as follows:
Εὐχαριστία τῆς κλήσεως. (2:13) Thanksgiving for the calling.
Ἐν ᾧ προτροπὴ ἐπὶ ὑπομονῇ. In which (there is) encouragement to
(2:15)
steadfastness.
Εὐχὴ πρὸς θεὸν καὶ Χριστὸν περὶ Prayer to God and Christ for their
(2:16)
στηριγμοῦ αὐτῶν. sustenance.
105 Cf. Bjerkelund o D. Lührmann 1986, 302; L. Aejmelaeus o
106 Betz 1985, 41f.; so also V. P. Furnish 1984, 398, 408f.; cf. H. Windisch 1924/70, 243: “ethisch-religiöse
Paränese”.
107 Thus also Furnish, ibid., 41ff., 429ff.
108 Betz JCJE BOEo$GBMSFBEZWindisch, ibid., 286ff.
109 Mitchell o FTQo
Παράκλησις εὐχῆς ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ Exhortation to prayer for him [sc. Paul]
(3:1)
ἔργου. and his work.
Ἐν ᾧ εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν In which (there is) prayer for them
(3:5) [sc. the Thessalonians] to obtain
εἰς ἀγάπην θεοῦ. the love of God.
Προτροπὴ ἐργασίας, καὶ παραιτήσεως Encouragement to work and refusal to
τῶν ἀργῶν καὶ περιέργων. (3:6) have dealings with idle and vain
people.
Εὐχὴ περὶ εἰρήνης τῆς παρὰ θεοῦ. (3:16) Prayer for peace from God.
The complicated structure of this outline in the chapter-list is in need of a detailed com-
ment:
(a) As in most outlines of Pauline letters in the Euthalian chapter-lists there are no
overarching substitutions on meta-level of a first degree (that is παραίνεσις) in this list
either. Differently, however, from other lists with substitutions on meta-level of a second
degree (προτροπή and/or ἀποτροπή), we here encounter two προτροπή-sentences (2:15
and 3:6), between which one παράκλησις-phrase (3:1) is inserted. Intercalated among
these are further three εὐχή-phrases (2:16, 3:5, and 3:16). This, of course, makes it dif-
ficult to determine whether the chapter-list actually reckons with one continuous parae-
netic section or not, and if not, where the paraenesis actually begins. Of importance is
further the observation that in CAP 773 the first προτροπή-phrase at 2:15 is regarded as
a sub-section of the εὐχαριστία-section beginning at 2:13, while the second προτροπή-
phrase at 3:6 is an independent clause.
(b) The two προτροπή-phrases are differently constructed: the first in form of a prep-
ositional phrase in 2:15, the second in form of a cum genitivo rei construction in 3:6 as is
also the case with the παράκλησις-phrase at 3:1.
(c) The difficulty in determining the extension of the paraenetical sequence(s) is
also reflected in modern commentaries. According to Ernst von Dobschütz and Eckhart
Reinmuth the paraenetic section ending the letter-body begins in 3:1 and ends in
3:16/18,110 and according to Philipp Vielhauer the admonitions start in 3:6 and end in
3:16.111 Most interesting in view of the chapter-list’s usage of the two προτροπή-phrases
(2:15 and 3:6), however, is the fact that, as an exception among commentators, Wolfgang
5SJMMJOH WJFXT o BT POF JOUFHSBUFE IPSUBUPSZTFRVFODF112 He furthermore ob-
serves the singular “Verbindung von Ermahnung und Gebetswunsch”, which in this
form does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament.113 Willi Marxsen does not give
a structural analysis of the text as a whole and consequently does not explicitly see one
110 E. von Dobschütz 1909/74, 305ff.; E. Reinmuth 1998b, 185ff.

111 Vielhauer 1975, 90 .
112 W. Trilling i%JF;VTBNNFO[JFIVOHEFS"CTDIOJUUFJO o[Veinem dritten Teil im Brief
ist ungewöhnlich und bisher nicht vorgeschlagen und praktiziert worden”. Although Malherbe 2000,
359 and 439ff. is of the same opinion as Trilling that the (Malherbe: second) exhortation section begins at
2:15 there is, as far as we can see, no reference to Trilling. Malherbe, however, ends the paraenetic section
XJUIBOEUFSNTUIFTFDUJPOoi$PNNBOETw JCJEBOEČ
113 Trilling, ibid., 126.
320 Appendix II
unitary sequence of a hortatory character.114/FWFSUIFMFTTIFUFSNToi7FSTDIJF-

EFOF&SNBIOVOHFOw oi%JFu6OPSEFOUMJDIFOAwBOEDIBSBDUFSJ[FTUIJTTFDUJPOBTi&S-
NBIOVOHw BOEĕOBMMZoi;VTBNNFOGBTTVOHEFS&SNBIOVOHFOw115 The complexity
of the structure of 2 Thessalonians becomes evident also in the outlines given by Udo
Schnelle in his Introduction,116 and Hans-Josef Klauck in his overview of ancient letter-
writing and the New Testament.117 Both divide the text at 2:13 as does CAP 773.
(I) Astonishing in view of the assessment by modern commentators118 is the realization

that none of the substitutions on meta-level on the first or even on the second level that
we have encountered so far (παραίνεσις or προτροπή, ἀποτροπή respectively) is to be
found in the chapter-list to 1 Corinthians (CAP 753, 756).119 We can furthermore discern
that the lexeme παρακαλέω that is used in 1:10, 4:16, and 16:15 does not occur in the
chapter-list and that a delimitation in the chapter-list is made only at 1:10 without using
any technical terminology120. However, after the introductory notice:
Περὶ πλειόνων καὶ διαϕόρων ἡ Επιστολὴ (1:10) Regarding the many and various sins
διόρθωσιν ἔχουσα τῶν Κορινθίοις among the Corinthians this letter
ἡμαρτημένων. brings corrections. (incipit)
and the generic characterization of the exordium by means of the phrase μετὰ τὸ
προοίμιον, there follows a series of altogether 23 περί-phrases and one κατά-phrase. It
is in our opinion conceivable that the term διόρθωσις121 here is used either as a stronger
variant of the commonly used terms for exhortation covering the entire First letter to
the Corinthians or as a different epistolary genre-designation likewise encompassing the
intact letter. The last option is all the more likely, since διόρθωσις here occurs in direct
connection with ἡμαρτημένα as is the case also in Ps-Demetrios, Τύποι Ἐπιστολικοί in
the description of “The censorious letter type” (no. 6 Ἐπιτιμητικός”).122 Compare also the
usage of the verb παραινέω in the previous letter-type called “The consoling type” (no. 5
114 W. Marxsen 1982, 102: “Da der Verfasser seit 2:13 seine Ausführungen nicht nach einem bestimmten
1MBOHFTUBMUFUVOEEJF"VTMFHVOHWPO o[FJHUF EBFSTFJOF(FEBOLFOFSTUCFJN/JFEFSTDISFJCFO
entwickelt, erweist sich jede Gliederung als nachträglich an das Ganze herangetragen”.
115 Marxsen, ibid., 89ff., 98ff., 102f.
116 Schnelle i o %BOLGàSEJF&SXÊIMVOHEFS(FNFJOEF .BIOVOHVOE'àSCJUUF o
Spezielle Anweisungen”.
117 Klauck Gi$;XFJUFS)BVQUUFJM%BOL .BIOVOH (FCFU o w
118 H. Conzelmann oS. K. Stowers 1986, 96; W. Schrage 1991, 87ff.; Schnelle 2002, 80; Klauck
1998, 232.
119 Only in the Argumenta-section is παραινετικοὶ λόγοι used, but only for a single verse; see, however, below
page 338. Cf. Lindemann 2000, 15ff.: The theme is the ἐκκλησία and its οἰκοδομή.
120 Regarding the usage of παρακαλέω in 1 Corinthians, see Bjerkelund 1967, 141ff. and D. Lührmann
o Thiselton o<$GMitchell oSFKFDUJOHBOPWFSBSDIJOHSIFUPSJ-
cal labelling is among others now also D. Zeller oDGIPXFWFS UIFRVPUBUJPOGSPNMitchell in
note 127 below].
121 The term διόρθωσις (correctio) is also used in ancient rhetoric, but there primarily as a part of the παρρησία,
licentia, i.e. as a kind of self-correction on the part of the orator, see J. Martin 1974, 279f.; H. Lausberg
o<ffo>H. F. Plett 2001, 59f.
122 Malherbe 1988, oTFFRVPUBUJPOCFMPXJOOPUF125.
Παραμυθητικός).123 On the other hand διορθοῦσθαι is used together with παραίνεσις
also in John Chrysostom, Oratio 2, 127vb.124
8IFOEJTDVTTJOHUIFPVUMJOFJOUIFDIBQUFSMJTUUP3PNBOT $"1$o$ XF
observed that the first part was introduced by the overarching substitution on meta-level,
εὐαγγελικὴ διδασκαλία and the second part by the “substitution” παραινέσεις. We are
inclined to believe that the term διόρθωσις in the incipit of the chapter-list to 1 Corin-
thians is used technically and thus stands in a suppositio materialis position constitut-
ing an overarching substitution on meta-level designating the whole letter as a “letter of
correction”.125 If so, a different designation is consciously applied in the Euthalian Appa-
ratus to the letter-genre of 1 Corinthians as a whole than to the various sub-sections of
other Pauline or Deutero-Pauline letters in the chapter-lists.126 Worth noticing is the fact
that in the chapter-lists no other letter, except for 1 Corinthians, has been provided with a
genre-designation entitling the letter in its entirety. One should perhaps not be surprised
at the lack of general paraenetic language in this chapter-list, since 1 Corinthians deals
with actual and not virtual problems in the congregation.127 An appealing suggestion in
this regard is made by Hans Dieter Betz, when he asks ,“Is the reason for the application
of διόρθωσις the fact that the παραίν-[terminology] in 1 Cor is mostly ‘cultic regulations’
rather than moral admonitions? If so, this observation would show the exegetical bril-
liance of Euthalius.”128 [Here “cultic regulations” is set up against “moral admonitions”
while Mitchell sets deliberative rhetoric as advice about specific matters in opposition to
moral exhortation as being a universal application.]
(J) The chapter-lists to the Pastoral Epistles (CAP 781, 784, 785, 788) contain the follow-
ing evidence:
Παραγγελία περὶ πιστῆς, καὶ Instruction about faithful service with
(1 Tim
εὐσυνειδήτου διακονίας, ἧς a good conscience, (a service)
1:18)
ἄνευ κίνδυνος. without which there is danger
123 Malherbe o

124 For John Chrysostom, Oratio 2, see above note 29.
125 $G 1T%FNFUSJPT ͽɀϧϰϧϪϥϰϧϨч϶ Ϣт Гϯϰϧϫ ғГϲ҈ЌϪϟϮϰфϪϟϯϧ ɀϮϭϡϣϡϭϫшϯϧ Ϫϣϰ҈ГɀϧɀϩфϬϣϵ϶ ϡϮϟϲшϪϣϫϭ϶ o
“The censorious form is that written with rebukes on account of errors that have already been commit-
ted” (G Ћϩϩ҈ЗϰϧϡϣϢϱϫϟϰшϫГϯϰϧϫСрϯϣϵ϶ϰϱϳϣѴϫϰчϡϣϡϭϫч϶ɀϩϥϪϪтϩϥϪϟɀϮч϶ϢϧшϮϦϵϯϧϫϡпϮ
ЋϡϟϡыϫϟЯϰч϶ϟХϰϧϭ϶ϡϣϫфϯѬϰϭѼϪуϡϣϡϭϫтϫϟϧoi/FWFSUIFMFTT UIFUSFTQBTTUIBUIBTPDDVSSFEDBOTUJMMCF
set right. For if you aim at correcting your behavior, you yourself will be responsible for its not happening
(again) as it did before” (oUFYUBOEUSBOTMalherbe 1988, modified). [Here διόρθωσις is not
used with regard not to “self-correction” as in rhetoric-semantic figures (see above note 121) but explicitly
to corrections of others!]
126 Cf. also Mitchell 1991, 50: “The presence of this type of argumentation (sc. the use of παραδείγματα) is
fully consonant with our other arguments that 1 Corinthians is a piece of deliberative argumentation, and
not general paraenesis”.
127 See further Mitchell 1991, 52f.: “A bare bones distinction between paraenesis and deliberative rhetoric
which is followed in this study … is that deliberative rhetoric contains advice about specific matters and
incidents, wheras paraenesis is more general moral exhortation which is of universal application. … I
argue that 1 Corinthians should be understood as the former: an argument which contains specific advice
for one particular church situation … and not general church teaching unrelated to concrete life-situa-
tions in that church.”
128 E-mail to David Hellholm from 13.12.2002. See also above note 119.
322 Appendix II
Παραγγελία ϕοβερὰ περὶ καθαρᾶς (1 Tim Fearful command about pure

ὑπακοῆς ἄχρι τέλους. 6:11/13) obedience until the end.
Ἔπαινος τῆς Τιμοθέου πίστεως, καὶ Praise of Timothy's faith, and
προτροπὴ ὑπομονῆς κατὰ τὸ (2 Tim 1:1) encouragement to be steadfast,
πρέπον τῇ χάριτι … as befits grace …
Προτροπὴ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ μιμήσεως ἐξ Encouragment to imitate him
(2 Tim
ἐναντίου τοῖς ϕαύλοις, ἐν in obedience to God, in
3:10)
ὑπακοῇ θεοῦ. opposition to evil men.
Παραινέσεις ὡς δεῖ παραινεῖν καθ᾿ Exhortations on how he shall give
ἡλικίαν ἑκάστοις. (Tit 2:2) advice to everybody according
to their age.
Περὶ δούλων, ὡς ἂν καὶ αὐτοὶ On servants, how they also can
τῆς Χριστοῦ χάριτος ἀξίως (Tit 2:9) serve in a way worthy of the
δουλεύοιεν. grace of Christ.
Περὶ ἀρχόντων ὑπακοῆς On obedience to rulers, as befits
(Tit [2:15,]
πρεπούσης τῇ ἐπιεικείᾳ τοῦ the gentleness of Christ.
3:1)
Χριστοῦ.
Παραίνεσις περὶ τοῦ ἐκκλίνειν τοὺς Advice on how to evade seditious
(Tit 3:9/10)
ἐριστικοὺς ζητητάς. inquirers.
When dealing with the Pastoral Epistles it turns out to be advantageous to analyse the
three letters together.
(a) In none of the chapter-lists to these letters do we find any overarching lexemes
or syntagmata delimiting entire sections of the letters. The most peculiar observation,
however, is the difference in use of terminology: CAP 781/784 to 1 Timothy uses neither
παραίνεσις nor προτροπή or ἀποτροπή but instead applies παραγγελία, which we trans-
late “instruction” in 1:18 and “command” in 6:11/13. CAP 785 to 2 Timothy uses only
προτροπή, which we translate “encouragement”, while Titus uses neither of the previous
lexemes but indeed the noun παραίνεσις in the plural as well as in the singular and also
the verb παραινέω. We translate the noun with “exhortation” or “advice” and the verb
with “to advise”.
Noteworthy in regard to 1 Timothy (CAP 781, 784) is firstly that the letter is charac-
terized by means of inclusio as ὁδηγία (guidance), which, however does not seem to be
a genre-designation, and secondly the fact that as in the chapter-lists’ treatment of other
Pauline letters, so also in the list to 1 Timothy no notice is taken of the term παρακαλέω,
on the one hand, which is used in the letter itself (1 Tim 1:3a, 2:1 and 5:1). This is prob-
ably to be explained by the fact that these occurrences are clearly suppositio formalis ex-
pressions in 1 Timothy. On the other hand the noun παρραγγελία (in 1:18; not however
in 1:5, where it refers to the duty of the emissary) and the verb παραγγέλλω (in 6:13; but
not in 1:3b, 4:11, 5:7 and 6:17, all of which refer to the duties of the emissary) are both
taken up in the chapter-list by the noun παραγγελία.129 Thus, the only two instances taken
up in the chapter-list (CAP 781, 784) by means of the lexeme παραγγελία are those in
129 Regarding the differentiation of the hortatory language used in 1 Tim, see B. Fiori o M.
Wolter oA. Merz 2004, index, s.v.“Paränese”.
which “Paul” is instructing or commanding his disciple Timothy as the addressee of his
letter. This speaks in favour of taking the two παραγγελία-phrases in the chapter-list as
inclusive markers and hence as suppositio materialis statements. Consequently we must
reckon with the possibility that the author of the chapter-list has consciously made a dis-
tinction between the παραγγελία- / παραγγέλλω-phrases respectively as well as phrases
that the author of 1 Timothy in his letter uses in regard to his exhortation to Timothy, that
is, as suppositio materialis expressions of the first degree on the one hand, and those that
express the emissaries’ own exhortations over against church members and adversaries,
that is, in some cases as suppositio materialis statements of the second degree or in other
cases as suppositio formalis expressions on the other hand.
In the chapter-list to 2 Timothy (CAP 785) the term προτροπή is used twice. Neither
προτροπή nor ἀποτροπή are found in the NT, but as we already observed they are often
used in the chapter-lists of the Euthalian Apparatus on a second level of delimitation.
The προτροπή-sentences at 2 Tim [1,1/1,3 and 3,10] are as far as we can judge suppositio
materialis expressions. Their extension is debatable and depends on the interpretation of
their relationship with the περί-sentences. In both cases these προτροπή-sentences are
directed to Timothy in connection with the Apostle’s praise of his disciple. This explains
why only the term προτροπή and not ἀποτροπή or παραίνεσις is being used in the chap-
ter-list to 2 Timothy. In spite of the fact that the imperatives ἔλεγξον and παρακάλεσον
are used in the author’s instruction to Timothy’s own injunction vis-à-vis his church
members (2 Tim 4:2).130 One should note, however, that Timothy’s teaching task as laid
out in this passage is made up of a series of imperatives functioning on the suppositio
formalis level only.
In the chapter-list to Titus (CAP 788) we encounter for the first time in the lists to the
Pastoral Epistles the term παραίνεσις. At 2:1/2 the plural παραινέσεις is used (in Titus the
verbs λαλεῖν and εἶναι, and the noun διδασκαλία are used) followed by two περί-phrases:
the first regarding “servants/slaves” (2:9; in Titus the infinitive forms ὑποτάσσεσθαι and
εἶναι are used; in Tit 2:15 an anaphoric substitution on abstraction-level131 is provided
by means of the demonstrative pronoun ταῦτα in combination with the verbs λαλεῖν,
παρακαλεῖν and ἐλέγχειν) and the second regarding “rulers” (3:1; in Titus ὑποτάσσεσθαι,
πειθαρχεῖν and εἶναι are used following the imperative to Titus ὑπομίμνῃσκε). Then at
3:9/10 the singular form παραίνεσις is being used in regard to “seditious inquirers”. In
Tit 3:8b we encounter another anaphoric substitution on abstraction-level (περὶ τούτων)
probably referring to “all that is included in the previous section of the letter, since the
concern is with good deeds and not just with doctrine”.132 This judgment would coincide
with the delimitation in CAP 788 as recounted below. There is no doubt that the term
παραινέσεις / παραίνεσις here is used in a suppositio materialis sense, although on differ-
ent levels. Two phenomena need to be accounted for: firstly, the usage of παραίνεσις in
this letter, and secondly, the switch from plural to singular. As far as the use of παραίνεσις
is concerned it can best be explained by the fact that in the very letter to Titus encour-
130 Cf. L. R. Donelson 1986, 190.
131 Hereto, see Hellholm 1980, 86f. with reference esp. to Raible o o GVSUIFS
Hellholm oDGBMTPI. H. Marshall 1999, 296f.: “ταῦτα refers backwards to the preceding
instructions” (297).
132 Marshall 1999, 330.
324 Appendix II
agement as well as dissuasion are mentioned, which means that neither προτροπή nor
ἀποτροπή would be adequate while the overarching lexeme certainly is.133 With regard
to the switch from plural to singular it is pertinent to observe that the first exhortations
to Titus are admonitions to him to exhort “everybody according to their age” (ὡς δεῖ
παραινεῖν καθ᾽ἡλικίαν ἑκάστοις; cf. Tit 2:1, 15; 3:1, 8). This is then followed by the two
περί-phrases concerning Titus’ admonition of the “servants/slaves” and of the “rulers”.
The advice formulated in singular on the other hand is directed to Titus himself and his
own actions vis-à-vis the “seditious inquirers” (cf. Tit 3:9/10ff.); the singular form of the
lexeme παραίνεσις used in the chapter-list is a substitute both for the noun νουθεσία
and the verb παραιτέομαι in the letter to Titus itself, which is an indication of the wide
range of meaning of παραίνεσις in the chapter-lists of Euthalius. Contrary to the usage of
παραγγελία in the chapter-list to 1 Tim, where, as we saw, only the direct admonition to
Timothy is taken up, here in the chapter-list to Titus, both the direct admonition to Titus
as well as his admonitions to others are listed as παραίνεσις and παραινέσεις respectively.
(b) The assumption that in the CAP to 1 Timothy the παραγγελία-phrases function
as substitutions on meta-level is substantiated by the fact that the first παραγγελία-phrase
in 1:18 is followed by a series of 13 περί-phrases, one ὅτι- and one κατά-phrase that make
up the entire section until the second παραγγελία-phrase occurs at the end of this chap-
ter-list at 6:11/13 reaching till v. 16, since in the chapter-list a new section entitled ὁδηγία
begins at 6:17, where the imperative παράγγελε addressing Timothy’s duty to command
the rich occurs. This sustains our analysis given above under (a)!
The extensions of the προτροπή-phrases as substitutions on meta-level in 2 Timothy
are difficult to estimate: The περί-phrases following upon each of the προτροπή-phrases
can either be independent or subordinate. In favour of taking them to encompass only
limited text-sequences is the fact that both sentences are directed to the praise of Timo-
thy, which corresponds well with the extant text of 2 Timothy. This would mean that the
περί-phrases actually are independent and not subordinate to the προτροπή- and thus
FODPNQBTTJOHPOMZoBOEoSFTQFDUJWFMZ
The extension of the παραινέσεις-sentence as substitutions on meta-level in the chap-
ter-list to TitusJTDMFBSMZEFMJNJUFEUPUIFUFYUTFRVFODFoCZNFBOTPGUIFJOTUSVD-
UJPOT UP 5JUVT JO SFHBSE UP IJT PXO BENPOJUJPOT UP DIVSDI NFNCFST o QBSUMZ UISPVHI
the ὡς δεῖ παραινεῖν-sentence, partly through the two following περί-sentences. Here
the chapter-list clearly indicates the subordination of the two περί-sentences under the
παραινέσεις-substitution. The παραινέσεις-sentence as substitutions on meta-level, which
begins according to the manuscript Palatinus at 3:9, but according to the manuscript
Cryptoferratensis at 3:10 (both pursuant to Zacagni; see further the discussion under (a)
above and under (c) below), comes to an end at 3:11, since in the text of the letter to Titus
QFSTPOBMJOTUSVDUJPOTBSFHJWFOJOoUIJTJTDMFBSFOPVHIBMUIPVHIOPJOEJDBUJPOT
hereto are given in CAP 788.
(c) Benjamin Fiori rightly points out that “the Pastoral letters speak the language
of exhortation from start to finish”.134 Just as the Apostle exhorts and commands, “the
133 This is so in spite of the fact that just as in Epictetus, Diss. 2.26.4 (προτρεπτικὸς καὶ ἐλεγκτικός), both
encouragement (παρακαλεῖν) and refutation (ἐλέγχειν) are used in Tit 1:9, see Donelson 1986, 190 and
further the quotation below in note 248.
134 B. Fiori 1986, 14; see also Popkes 1996, 98.
Pauline emissaries are to do the same”.135 This, however, applies mainly to 1 Timothy and
Titus while 2 Timothy is directed only to Timothy himself.136 This fact in itself presup-
poses the possibility of the existence of suppositio materialis statements of various degrees
as well as suppositio formalis expressions in the catalogue of chapter-lists to the Pastoral
Epistles.
With regard to 1 Timothy an inclusion established by 1:18 and 6:20 is advocated
by Michael Wolter, who after having observed the parallelism states that “beide Ver-
TFVNSBINFOEBT$PSQVTEFTHFTBNUFO#SJFGFTVOECJOEFOCFJEF5FJMF o VOE
o [VTBNNFOw137 A similar structural analysis is provided by Jürgen Roloff, who
in his commentary writes: “Die namentliche Anrede des Adressaten (V18) setzt, indem
sie die erneuten Namensnennung im Briefschluß (6:20 …) entspricht, ein semantisches
(MJFEFSVOHTTJHOBM o VOE G CJMEFO EFNOBDI EFO 3BINFO EFT FJHFOUMJDIFO
Briefcorpus”.138 This is also the opinion of Lorenz Oberlinner in his commentary.139 Peter
G. Bush in his note on the structure of 1 Timothy goes one step further and argues on
MFYJDPHSBQIJDBMHSPVOETGPSoBOEo oBBTDPOTUJUVUJOHBOinclusio.140
Already Martin Dibelius and Hans Conzelmann in their commentary saw 1:18 as not
referring back to what precedes but rather to what follows and indeed to “the epistle as
a whole”.141 In all these analyses 1:18 is understood as a substitution on meta-level just as
is the case in CAP 781. As to the ending of the letter corpus the modern commentators
differ from CAP 784; in particular the παραγγέλλω-phrase in 6:13 is for the most part ig-
nored. The reason for the difference between the chapter-list and modern commentators
are probably due to the modern commentators’ neglect of the distinction made in CAP
781, 784 between suppositio materialis indicators on the first and on the second level of
communication.142 Luke T. Johnson regards 1 Timothy as fitting “the form of royal cor-
respondence called the mandata principis … letter.”143 This characterization, however, is
disputed by Margaret M. Mitchell.144
135 B. Fiori 1986, ibid.; furthermore Wolter 1988, 145: “… die paränetische Kommunikationsstruktur von 1.
Tim und Tit (ist) durch Anweisungen bestimmt, in denen die Adressaten aufgefordert werden, bestimmte
Verhaltensnormen an die betreffenden Gruppen weiterzugeben ….”
136 See Wolter 1988, 143; further Weiser 2003, 34: “Dem Eigencharakter des 2 Tim unter den Pastoralbrie-
fen entspricht auch die ihm eigene Kommunikationsstruktur. Ergehen in den beiden anderen Briefen die
Ermahnungen so, dass sie durch die Amtsträger Timotheus und Titus an die Glieder der Gemeinde wei-
tervermittelt werden sollen, so werden sie hier vorwiegend an den Adressaten Timotheus gerichtet, damit
er sich selbst am Vorbild und an der Lehre des Apostels orientiere.”
137 Wolter 1988, 118f.; citation from p. 118.
138 J. Roloff 1988, 100.
139 L. Oberlinner 1994, 50.
140 P. G. Bush 1990, 153f.
141 M. Dibelius/H. Conzelmann 1972, 32. Differently Marshall who takes 1:18 as referring back to the
“original instruction to Timothy” (1999, 408); so also L. T. Johnson 2001, 184.
142 On this distinction, see Hellholm GBOEo#BTJDBMMZSJHIUBQQSPBDIFTBSFUPCFGPVOEJO
Fiori 1986, 14 and Wolter 1988, 145f. Neither monograph, however, gives a structural analysis of any of
the Pastoral letters. Cf. also Marshall 1999, 325.
143 Johnson 2001, 97, 129f. with references to C. B. Welles 1934.
144 See the critique by Mitchell oBTXFMMBTJOIFSSFWJFXJOJR o
326 Appendix II
In modern commentaries on 2 Timothy we note first that Dibelius/Conzelmann re-

HBSEoBTUIFiBDUVBMQBSFOFTJTw145BOEOBNFoBiTVNNBSZFYIPSUBUJPOw 146
labeled “Amtsträgerparänese” by Alfons Weiser.147 This understanding corresponds in
part to an interpretation of the προτροπή-phrases in the chapter-list as superior sub-
stitutions on meta-level over against the περί-phrases. Oberlinner does not see the en-
UJSFMFUUFSBTQBSBFOFUJDFJUIFS CVUMJNJUTUIFĕSTUBENPOJUPSZTFRVFODFUPo148 The
TFDPOEBENPOJUPSZTFDUJPOFODPNQBTTFToBDDPSEJOHUPIJNKVTUBTJO$"1
according to our interpretation.149 This understanding corresponds mainly to an inter-
pretation of the περί-phrases in the chapter-list as equal substitutions on meta-level to
the προτροπή-phrases. Luke T. Johnson regards 2 Timothy as “our most perfect example
from antiquity of the personal paraenetic letter.150 Alfons Weiser gives a specified charac-
erization of 2 Timoty as a whole as “ein testamentarisches Mahnschreiben in Form eines
Freundschaftsbriefes.”151 In addition he strangely enough declares paraenesis to be not,
as generally perceived, a literary genre but rather a “setting in life”: “Der ‚Sitz im Leben‘
derartiger Texte ist die Paränese.”152
The commentaries on Titus differ as to the labeling of text-sequences as parae-
netic or admonitory. The section beginning with 2:1/2 is termed “regulations” by
Dibelius/Conzelmann,153 “teaching” by Jerome D. Quinn,154 I. Howard Marshall,155 and
“Anweisungen” by Oberlinner.156 Where this text-sequence ends is a matter of dispute:
Dibelius/$PO[FMNBOOBDLOPXMFEHFUIBU MJLF5JNoBOE5JN iTFU<T>
off the paragraph and at the same time … connect[s] the exhortation to the situation”.157
Marshall calls 2:15 a “recapitulation” and states that 2:15 “forms an inclusio with 2.1”158
BOEUFSNTUIFXIPMFUFYUTFRVFODFi5FBDIJOHGPSUIFDIVSDIo)PXCFMJFWFSTBSFUPSFMBUF
to one another”.159ćFUFYUTFRVFODFoBJTMBCFMFEi(FOFSBM&YIPSUBUJPOT#BTFEPO
History of Salvation” by Dibelius/$PO[FMNBOO XIJMF UIF TFRVFODF Co JT OBNFE
145 Dibelius/Conzelmann 1972, 107.

146 Dibelius/Conzelmann o
147 Weiser 2003, 267. Cf. Merz 2004, index, s.v. “Amtsträgerparänese”.
148 Oberlinner o%JČFSFOUMZvon Lips o Wolter 1988, 215f., and Weiser 2003,
XIPBTTVNFUIBUoDPOTUJUVUFTBDPIFSFOUVOJU
149 Oberlinner o%JČFSFOUMZWolter XIPBSHVFTUIBUUIFTFRVFODFoJTDPIFS-
ent and represents a separate text-unit.
150 Johnson 2001, 97.
151 Weiser 2003, 40 (his italics).
152 Weiser 2003, 36 (his italics).
154 J. D. Quinn 1990, ix, 116.
155 Marshall 1999, 24.
156 Oberlinner 1996, V, 101.
158 Marshall 1999, 297.
159 Marshall 1999, 24; similarly Oberlinner 1996, 139: “Mit den drei Imperativen kommt der Text zum
Abschluß, der, mit dem Imperativ λάλει in 2,1 beginnend, die Rolle des Gemeindeleiters nach zwei Rich-
tungen hin beschrieben hat: …”; cf. ibid., 160.
“Exhortations and Warning about Heretics”.160 Quinn delimits the text likewise with-
out labeling it “exhortation”.161 0CFSMJOOFSUBLFTWB CBTQBSUPGUIFQFSJDPQFo
not, however, calling it “exhortation” but rather “Letzte Bekräftigung der Autorität des
Vorstehers”.162 .BSTIBMMUFSNToi3FDBQJUVMBUJPOIPXUPEFBMXJUIUIFSFDBMDJUSBOUw
JOTQJUFPGUIFGBDUUIBUoBTXFTBXoIFJOUFSQSFUTɀϣϮхϰϭъϰϵϫJOCBTSFGFSSJOHUPUIF
entire preceding section of the letter body.163 We have thus observed that there are simi-
larities as well as dissimilarities in the delimitation of the text-sequences in the chapter-
list to Titus and in modern commentaries; this is most noticeable in regard to the labeling
although there are great dissimilarities between modern interpreters as well. L. T. John-
son regards not only 1 Timothy but also Titus as fitting “the form of royal correspondence
called the mandata principis … letter.”164
(K) In the chapter-list to Hebrews (CAP 777) we encounter the following relevant phrases:
Προτροπὴ σπουδάσαι εἰς τὴν Encouragement to be zealous for the rest
(4:1)
προδηλουμένην κατάπαυσιν. that has been foretold.
Επιτίμησις ὡς ἔτι δεομένοις εἰσαγωγῆς. Rebuke for still being in need of basic
(5:1)
instruction.
Ἐν ᾧ προτροπὴ εἰς ἐπίδοσιν, ὡς οὐκ In which (there is) an encouragement
οὔσης ἀρχῆς δευτέρας. (5:11) to progress, as there is no second
beginning.
Παράκλησις σὺν ἐπαίνῳ. (6:1) Admonition with praise.
Μαρτυρίαι περὶ τῆς μόνης καθάρσεως, Testimonies about the only cleansing, and
(10:5)
καὶ προσαγωγῆς πρὸς θεόν. access to God.
Ἐν αἷς προτροπὴ τῆς ἐν πίστει In which (there is) an encouragement
(10:19)
προόδου. to progress in faith.
Προτροπὴ σπουδῆς κατὰ ϕόβον τῆς Encouragment to virtue, in fear of the
(10:26)
ἐγγιζούσης κρίσεως. coming judgment.
In dealing with the letter to the Hebrews we can note the following:
(a) In the Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Ἑβραίους ἐπιστολῆς Παύλου the overarching syntagma
at the very begining is θεολογία Χριστοῦ. This statement seems to constitute a substitu-
tion on meta-level for the entire letter, but even so it probably does not constitute a genre-
designation, since θεολογία is open to a range of meanings, and thus not precise enough
to designate a genre. Παραίνεσις does not occur in the chapter-list to Hebrews but instead
παράκλησις is used once (at 6:9) and the positive lexeme προτροπή no less than four
times (at 4:1, 6:1, 10:19 and 26), while the corresponding negative term ἀποτροπή is miss-
ing; instead the equally negative term ἐπιτίμησις occurs once (at 5:11). Two other lexemes
are used as substitutions, namely μαρτυρίαι (at 10:5) and εὐχή (at 13:20). Noteworthy
is the lack of a generic lexeme at 10:1, since here it simply says: περὶ φιλαδελφίας καὶ
160 Dibelius/Conzelmann 1972, 147 and 151 respectively.
161 Quinn 1990, 233: “True and False Instruction”.
162 Oberlinner 1996, 180.
163 Marshall 1999, 325 and 330 respectively.
164 See above notes 143 and 144.
328 Appendix II
φιλοξενίας. This is obviously a substitution on meta-level but hardly a genre-designation.

We can furthermore notice that in the chapter-list attention is primarily paid to the posi-
tive encouragements in Hebrews with only one rebuke being brought to the adddressees,
and this because they are still in need of basic instruction.165
(b) The first substitution through θεολογία is followed by four ὅτι-phrases before a
series of προτροπή-, ἐπιτίμησις-, and παράκλησις-phrases are given followed by a mix-
ture of ὅτι- and περί-phrases. Next we encounter the only μαρτυρία-phrase, which is
followed by the last two προτροπή-phrases of which the last is followed by one ὅτι- and
nine περί-phrases before the final εὐχή-phrase ends this chapter-list. On two occasions
the content of προτροπή is given by means of the verb σπουδάζω and its derivates, in the
first instance by the aorist infinitive σπουδάσαι (at 4:1) and in the last instance by the
cum genitivo rei σπουδῆς (at 10:26). Of the two remaining προτροπή-phrases, one is fol-
lowed by a prepositional phrase (at 6:1) the other by a cum genitivo rei construction (at
10:19). The ἐπιτίμησις-phrase also uses the cum genitivo rei construction (at 5:11). Most
interesting is the fact that the προτροπὴ σπουδῆς-phrase at 10:26 is followed by nine
ɀϣϮцQISBTFTTQFDJGZJOHUIFiFODPVSBHFNFOUUPWJSUVFwHJWFOJOUIFTFDUJPOo
(c) Reflecting medieval and older interpretations the formulation by Hans Hübner
seems characteristic of the Pauline influence on the interpretation of the structure of
Hebrews: “Mit Hebr 10,18 ist der eigentlich theologische Teil des Briefes abgeschlossen.
Was nun folgt, hat vornehmlich paränetischen Charakter.”166 A different and among most
modern commentators frequently favored understanding is advocated by Gerd Theißen
when he writes, “Der Brief läßt sich im großen und ganzen in darstellende und paräne-
tische Teile gliedern.”167 A more complex structure, combining the two previously men-
tioned analyses, is provided by Harold W. Attridge, who divides the whole letter into
iĕWFEJTUJOHVJTIBCMFNPWFNFOUTwi*o$ISJTUFYBMUFEBOEIVNJMJBUFE BTVJUBCMF
)JHI1SJFTUwi**o$ISJTUGBJUIGVMBOENFSDJGVMwi***oćFEJďDVMUEJT-
DPVSTFwi*7o&YIPSUBUJPOUPGBJUIGVMFOEVSBODFwi7o$PODMVE-
ing exhortations.” Commenting upon his analysis Attridge states that “there is a close
relationship between movement I and II on the one hand and IV and V on the other. The
first two develop, in a somewhat circuitous fashion, the major features of the text’s chris-
tological position and, at least in a preliminary way introduce a key paraenetic theme.
The final two movements are both primarily paraenetic and are involved with applica-
165 Cf. Theodoretus of Cyrrhus, where Hebrews is characerized as follows: Εἶτα τῶν οἰκείων αὐτοὺς
ἀναμνήσας ἀγώνων καὶ στῆναι μέχρι τέλους ἀνδρείως παρακαλέσας, καὶ τοῖς δογματικοῖς καὶ ἠθικὴν
συνάψας παραίνεσιν ɀϣɀϩфϮϵϨϣϰуϫ ͽɀϧϯϰϭϩфϫoi)FSFNJOEFEUIFNPGUIFJSTUSVHHMFT FYIPSUFEUIFN
to stand bravely until the end, and attached ethical paraenesis to the dogmatics, then he completed the
letter” (PG 82.544). Notice the distinction made here between παράκλησις and ἠθικὴ παραίνεσις.
166 Hübner 1995, 57. So also all the mdieval and older commentaries mentioned in H. Feld o
and W. Übelacker 1989, 43.
167 G. Theissen 1969, 93 [italics ours]. Similarly already Windisch 1931, 8; Dibelius 1942/65, 176; R.
Gyllenbergo o FTQGW. Nauck 1960, 203; O. Michel 1966, 26; so also J. Thurén
oW. G. Kümmel 1973, 343; H. Braun 1984, 1; H. Hegermann 1988, 3; &(SÊFS o
1997, VII, 9f.; Conzelmann/Lindemann 1995, 396. Cf. below regarding 1 Peter ad note 179. Differently
Schenke/Fischer G XIP EJWJEF UIF UFYU JOUP UISFF TFDUJPOT i 1SÊMVEJVN <o> y
)BVQUUFJM<o>y1PTUMVEJVN<o>yw
tions of and inferences from the preceding doctrinal exposition.”168 Common to most
DPNNFOUBUPSTJTUIFDIBSBDUFSJ[BUJPOPGUIFMBTUMBSHFSUFYUTFRVFODF o
as the ”Exhortation to faithful endurance” (so Attridge) or as the “parakletische Paränese”
(so Erich Gräßer; similarly Hans-Friedrich Weiß). This judgment is in accord with the
EFTDSJQUJPOPGoJO$"1BTɀϮϭϰϮϭɀуϯɀϭϱϢѮ϶
The overarching designation of the entire epistle to the Hebrews is among most com-
mentators based on the self-designation of the letter as λόγος τῆς παρακλήσεως (13:22)169
Otherwise, however, 7JFMIBVFS XIP o JO GPMMPXJOH %JCFMJVT o DIBSBDUFSJ[FT UIF FOUJSF
writing as “Mysterienrede.”170 Remarkable and noteworthy is the fact that this self-des-
JHOBUJPOBTϩшϡϭ϶ϰѮ϶ɀϟϮϟϨϩфϯϣϵ϶JTJOOPXBZSFĘFDUFEJO$"1 IFSFoBTXFTBX
FBSMJFSoUIFFQJTUMFJTSBUIFSEFTJHOBUFEBTϦϣϭϩϭϡцϟ͗ϮϧϯϰϭѼ171 The reason for that is
perhaps the circumstance that the paracletic encouragement in Hebrews is not primarily
in regard to ethics but rather in regard to endurance in faith.
(L) In the chapter-list to 1 Peter $"1o XFFODPVOUFSUIFGPMMPXJOHMFYFNF

Παραίνεσις πρεσβυτέροις περὶ ἐπισκοπῆς Advice to elders about care for the flock.
(5:1)
τοῦ ποιμνίου.
Ἐν ᾧ περὶ κοινῆς πάντων πρὸς In which (he writes) about the
ἕκαστον ταπεινοϕροσύνης εἰς common humility of all towards
(5:6)
νίκην τὴν κατὰ τοῦ διαβόλου. one another, in order to vanquish
the devil.
As far as the chapter-list to this letter is concerned, we can make the following observa-
tion:
(a) No lexeme or syntagma is rendered at the beginning, which means that no genre-
designation of the text as a whole is provided. The list begins abruptly by means of a series
of eleven περί-phrases followed by one ὅτι-sentence. Only thereafter do we encounter the
one and only παραίνεσις-phrase (at 5:1) followed by one εὐχή-phrase (at 5:9). Only the
last two comprise substitutions on meta-level and can be said to constitute genre-designa-
tions. Noteworthy is here the fact that the only instance where CAP 681 uses παραίνεσις
is at 5:1, where in 1 Peter the paraenetic injunction is explicitly directed towards the
presbyters and not the readers in general. Of special interest is to note that in Zacagni’s
168 H. W. Attridge TFFGVSUIFSo
169 This self-designation is accepted by most modern commentators, e.g. Michel 1966, 27, 541f.; Theissen
1969, 13; Braun 1984, 481; Hegermann o Übelacker o Č Attridge
1989, 14; H.-F. Weiss o GGrässer 1997, VII, although he regards 13:22 as a “Postscrip-
tum von fremder Hand” (409f.); Schnelle 2002, 414, 418; A. Vanhoye 1963/1976, 221: “Le genre du
QSFNJFS o FTUDMBJSFNFOUJOEJRVÏQBSMFW RVJOPUPOTMF EVGBJUNÐNFRVJMMFEÏTJHOF UFOE
à s’en distinguer: il s’agit d’un λόγος παρακλήσεως, c’est-à-dire d’un discours d’exhortation (cf. Act 13,15),
nous dirons un sermon-FHFOSFEVTFDPOE o oDFTUFODPSFMFWRVJOPVTMBUUFTUFo FTUDFMVJ
d’un court billet d’envoi.”
170 Vielhauer 1975, 242f.; Dibelius 1942/65, 163; similarly also Schenke 1973, 422; cf. already Dahl 1951,
401: “The relation of the doctrinal and the paraenetic (hortatory) section of the Epistle has been the sub-
ject of much discussion. Whether the main emphasis should be placed on the one or the other, however, is
a futile question. The doctrine leads to the exhortion, the exhortations are based on doctrine.”
171 On Hebrews, see further Walter Übelacker’s contribution to the volume on Early Christian Paraenesis
in Context o
330 Appendix II
Latin translation his chapter four begins at 2:13 with the rubric: Περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἄρχοντας
ὑποταγῆς, καὶ φιλαδελφίας καὶ θεοσεβείας. This section encompasses four sub-sections
and ends at 3:22, since a new fifth chapter begins at 4:1. Consequently, the “social- and
household codes” found in 1 Peter 2:13ff. are in CAP 681 not subsumed under any ge-
neric heading like paraklesis or paraenesis.
(b) The παραίνεσις-phrase is followed by two περί-phrases in which the presbyters
are advised to care for the flock by means of encouraging humility of all towards one
another.
(c) Although the composition of 1 Peter is disputed, most commentators agree that
there are two major breaks in the letter corpus:172 first between 2:10 and 2:11 and then
between 4:11 and 4:12. Philipp Vielhauer delimits the extent text into two major parts: “I.
Teil: Das christliche Heil und die Pflichten der Christen 1,o,11”; this section is divided
into two sub-sections of which the first (1:o:10) is designated “Erwählung und Heilung”,
while the second (2:1o:11) is designated “Paränese”; within the second sub-section
there are two “christologische Einlage(n)”; “II. Teil: Aktualisierende Wiederholung der
Paränese 4,1o,11”.173 Already E. Richard Perdelwitz had arrived at a similar conclusion
regarding the text-delimitation and proposed the hypothesis, that the text-part 1:o:11
originally was a “baptismal sermon”, to which the author had appended an “admoni-
tory writing” consisting of the text-part 4:1o:14.174 This hypothesis was earlier favoured
by quite a few scholars and recently renewed and somewhat modified by Vielhauer and
following him Wiard Popkes.175 Modern commentators disputing Perdelwitz’ tradition-
historical analysis, recognize the close connections between the two paraenetic text-parts
2:11o4:11 and 4:12o5:11 in spite of the fact that they divide the text into three text-parts.176
The text-linguistic arguments for this delimitation has been given recently especially by
Leonhard Goppelt, Birger Olsson, Reinhard Feldmeier, and Paul J. Achtemeier.177 Thus,
the most common delimitations today divide the letter corpus of 1 Peter into three sec-
tions (1:o:10; 2:1o:10/11; 4:11/1o:11), where the major part is dominated by the
two paraenetic sections each with its own emphasis.178 As with regard to Hebrews also in
regard to 1 Peter an alternative disposition have been suggested, e.g., by Ernest Gordon
Selwyn, who proposes a structure with alternating “doctrinal” and “hortatory” sections.179
172 Differently, e.g., Kümmel 1973, 368; N. Brox 7**o7*** oJ. H. Elliott o
173 Vielhauer 1975, 581; cf. L. Goppelt 1978, 155, 157, 294f.
174 E. R. Perdelwitz FTQoTJNJMBSMZB. H. Streeter o BOEF. W. Beare 1947/70, 14.
175 Most notably by H. Preisker in H. Windisch/)1SFJTLFS o BOEF. L. Cross 1954; for cri-
tique of Preisker’s hypothesis that in 1 Peter an early Christian baptismal worship service is encoded in
XSJUJOH o BOEUIFOTVQQMFNFOUFEXJUIBĕOBMTFSWJDFPGUIFDPOHSFHBUJPO o TFFFTQE.
Lohse 1973b, 308f. For Vielhauer and Popkes, see below note 183.
176 Thus the scholars referred to below in notes 177 and 178. Schnelle 2002, 451f. also divides 1 Peter into
three sections but does so somewhat differently than the majority of interpreters.
177 Goppelt 1978, 155, 295; B. Olsson 1982, 105, 175f., 201; idem 1995, 841; R. Feldmeier 1992, 134ff., 148;
[idem *9o9 o>Conzelmann/Lindemann 1995, 412; Achtemeier 1996, 169, 304.
178 In addition to the literature mentioned in the preceding note, the division of 1 Peter into three major parts
oSFDLPOJOHXJUINBKPSCSFBLTBęFSBOEoJTGBWPVSFEBNPOHPUIFSTCZK. H. Schelkle 1963, VII,
68, 122; W. J. Dalton oD. L. Balch oA. Reichert 1989, 108, and in his
rhetorical analysis also by L. Thurén 1990, 92.
179 E. G. Selwyn o$GBCPWFBEOPUF167.
In modern commentaries the first instance where 1 Peter uses παρακαλῶ (2:11) is
taken account of in the text-delimitation as we just saw; the second time the lexeme is
used (5:1), however, it does not play any role in modern macro-analyses. This is probably
due to the circumstance that the paraenetic injunction here is explicitly directed towards
the presbyters and not towards the readers in general as is the case in 2:11 as well as in 4:12
(where, however, the lexeme παρακαλῶ is missing!). It is noteworthy to recognize that
the only instance where CAP 681 uses παραίνεσις is in fact at 5:1; here, however, we can
make the same observation as we have done in our investigation throughout, namely that
in the Euthalian chapter-lists the terms παρακαλῶ/παράκλησις consistently are replaced
by παραινέω/παραίνεσις. The third time παρακαλῶ appears in 1 Peter but not taken up
in CAP 681 (5:12) will be dealt with below.
1 Peter as a whole is often characterized as a “paraenetic/hortatory letter”.180 As in
Hebrews (λόγος τῆς παρακλήσεωςo181) in this letter too the author at the end of
his writing gives an indication as to how he wants his readers to understand his letter;
this is clear, when in the epistolary postscript he writes: δι᾽ ὀλίγων ἔγραψα παρακαλῶν
καὶ ἐπιμαρτυρῶν ταύτην εἶναι ἀληθῆ χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ εἰς ἣν στῆτε (5:12). Regardless of
whether this writing originally was a literary unity182 or a composite letter183 this is the
final self-characterization of the extant First Letter of Peter.184 As is the case in regard to
Hebrews so also here it is astonishing to notice that there is no indication at all of this
self-description in CAP 681.185
(M) The chapter-list to James (CAP 677) contains the following lexemes:
Ὅτι οὐκ ἐν ἀνθρώπῳ, ἀλλ᾿ ἐν θεῷ That the steps of man are ordered by God,
τὰ διαβήματα ἀνθρώπου (4:13) not by man.
κατευθύνεται.
Εν ᾧ περὶ πλεονεξίας πλουσίων καὶ In which (he writes) about the avarice
τῆς ἐν κόσμῳ τρυϕῆς αὐτῶν, καὶ of the rich and their luxury in the
(5:1)
περὶ δικαιοκρισίας θεοῦ. world, and about the righteous
judgment of God.
Περὶ μακροθυμίας καὶ ὑπομονῆς (5:10 About steadfastness and endurance of
παθημάτων, καὶ περὶ ἀληθείας. or 5:6) sufferings, and about truth.
Παραινέσεις ἰδικαὶ ἑκάστῳ προσήκουσαι Special exhortations proper to every one
(5:12)
μετὰ πίστεως. with faith.
180 Thus Elliott 2000, 11; so also Stowers 1986, 96f.; T. W. Martin oPopkes 1996, 102.
181 See above ad note 169.
182 Thus must recent commentators as, e.g., Brox oGoppelt oOlsson o
Reichert o Feldmeier 1992, 200f.; idem 2005, 20f.; Achtemeier o Elliott
o4PBMTPKümmel 1973, 371.
183 So Vielhauer 1975, 584f.; thus also Popkes 1996, 104 note 303.
184 Brox 1979, 18; Goppelt 1978, 349; Olsson 1982, 192f.; Achtemeier 1996, 352; Elliott 2000, 877; cf.
also Vielhauer 1975, 583, and Klauck 1998, 257.
185 On 1 Peter see further Karl Olav Sandnes’ contribution to the volume on Early Christian Paraenesis in
Context o
332 Appendix II
Ὅτι διακονητέον τῇ τοῦ πλησίου That we should care for the salvation
(5:19)
σωτηρίᾳ. of our neighbor.
A survey of the chapter-list to the epistle of James reveals the following characteristics:
(a) Also in the chapter-list entitled Ἔκθεσις Κεφαλαίων τῆς καθολικῆς Ἰακώβου
Ἐπιστολῆς we find no overarching lexeme or syntagma that could constitute an overall
genre-designation of the epistle as such. The list begins abruptly with four asyndetic περί-
phrases succeeded by two ὅτι-phrases upon which two asyndetic περί-phrases follow;
then we encounter alternately two ὅτι-phrase and two περί-phrases followed by another
περί-phrase before the only παραίνεσις-phrase appears; the series ends with a final ὅτι-
phrase.While the five ὅτι-phrases and the only παραίνεσις-phrase are all asyndetic in na-
ture there are five καὶ περί-phrases in conjunction with as many asyndetic περί-phrases in
this chapter-list. In Zacagni’s Latin translation the last major section begins at 4:13, which
means that the παραίνεσις-section only constitutes the third sub-section of this last main
part. Peculiar in this list is the expression παραινέσεις ἰδικαί (at 5:12), which we under-
stand to mean “special exhortations” that are markedly befitting to believers. Does this
mean that the preceding text-sequences in James are hereby implicitly characterized as
“general exhortations” for believers? That these “special exhortations” should be proper to
believers and believers only, while the preceding text-parts are primarily for unbelievers
is precluded in view of the biblical text as well as in view of CAP 677 which begins with
the words “About steadfastness and firm faith … (Περὶ ὑπομονῆς καὶ πίστεως ἀδιακρίτου
κτλ.).” Or is the text-sequence prior to 5:12 to be conceived of as doctrinal in opposition
to the paraenetic text-part, here termed παραινέσεις ἰδικαί? In view of the content of the
chapter-list as well as of the biblical text of James this alternative can in our opinion be
ruled out; furthermore, in contrast to the cases in Hebrews and 1 Peter, in James there
is no indication either at the beginning or at the end as to its author’s understanding of
its literary genre. Thus, in the Euthalian chapter-list to James the entire letter seems only
indirectly at the most to be characterized as paraenetic. Directly, however, the syntagma
παραινέσεις ἰδικαί designates a sub-sequence of the epistle, namely 5:12o18. In spite of
the formulation in the plural, it seems likely that we here have to do with a suppositio
materialis formulation, thus forming a generic designation.
(b) The question left open in section (a) is difficult to answer, particularly in view of
the fact that neither do we find any περί-phrases nor any cum genitivo rei constructions,
which means that no indication of the content of the “special exhortations” is provided.
oćFĕOBMὅτι-clause is not a summary of the special paraenesis! Only those addressed
are mentioned, namely ἑκάστῳ μετὰ πίστεως. This is different from the chapter-list to
Hebrews, where o as we saw oUIFπροτροπὴ σπουδῆς was followed by nine περί-phrases
specifying the “encouragement to virtue”.
(c) In his influential commentary on James, Martin Dibelius concluded that the “let-
ter” of James can be designated “in allen seinen Teilen als Paränese”.186 By paraenesis Dibe-
lius and his followers mean “a text which strings together admonitions of general ethical
186 M. Dibelius/H. Greeven FNQIBTJTPSJHJOBM GVSUIFSoDibelius/Greeven 1976, 3; fur-
UIFSo4JNJMBSMZWindisch/Preisker 1951, 3; F. Mussner 1987, 23; Kümmel 1973, 360; Vielhauer
oSchenke/Fischer 1979, 230f.; Schrage 1980, 6; 1989, 286; Lohse 1973a, 301: “Hand-
büchlein christlicher Ethik; ibid., 306: “[K]leines Enchiridion für die Frage des christlichen Alltags.”
content.”187 In recent times Dibelius has been criticized both for his conceptual definition
of paraenesis188 as well as for his interpretation of James as lacking continuity in thought
(Kontextverbot189) and relatedness to the situation of the “letter” (Situationsverbot190):191
(1 "TUPUIFHFOSF UIFSFJT BTXFKVTUTBX JOUIFFYUBOUMFUUFSPG+BNFToDPOUSBSZUP)F-
CSFXTBOE1FUFSoOPJOEJDBUJPOBTUPIPXUIFBVUIPSXBOUTIJTSFBEFSTUPVOEFSTUBOE
his letter. As a result Hubert Frankemölle can come to the conclusion that it is typical for
James, “daß bis zum letzten Vers nicht die Gattung, sondern das Thema vorherrschend
ist; diese gattungsmäßige Leerstelle ist um des angezielten Handlungszieles willen sicher-
lich gewollt,”192 and Wiard Popkes can assert that “Gattungsmäßig ist Jak ein Gebilde sui
generis”.193 (2) Regarding the lacking continuity of thought, scholars who define James as
“λόγος προτρεπτικός”194 acknowledge that the writing is a coherent functional discourse
and not just a collection of diverse subjects loosely combined.195 This has led not a few
commentators to attempt an analysis of the structure of James according to rhetorical,
thematic, or didactic concepts, mostly delimiting the text into three parts exclusive of the
prescript (e.g. 1:o8 as exordium; 1:1o:6 as letter corpus; 5:o0 as epilogue).196 Oth-
ers have abstained from structuring the text hierarchically.197 Among the critics of Dibe-
lius, Wiard Popkes approaches James differently than those scholars who delimit the text
into macro-structural units, when he, for “methodological reasons”, abstains from a for-
mal macro-analysis; at the same time, however, Popkes options for a diachronic as well as
synchronic investigation.198 (3) Concerning the lack of situational relatedness it was again
Popkes following others,199 who most seriously challenged Dibelius’ view and proposed a
“mirror-reading” of the text in order to establish the situation of the addressees.200 Hereby,
he maintains that socio-historical factors cannot be separated from theological-congre-
187 See the previous note.

188 Se especially Popkes o o'VSUIFSKl. Berger 1984, 147; M. Tsuji oH.
Frankemölle 1994a, 65.
189 Thus the formulation by Ch. Burchard 1980a, 27; idem 2000, 13
190 Popkes 1986, 33; idem 2001, 45; Burchard 2000, 13.
191 Kl. Kürzdörfer oF. O. Francis oW. Wuellner o
192 H. Frankemölle 1994a, 70 (italics ours).
193 Popkes 2001, 56 (italics original).
194 E. Baasland 1988, 3654; L. T. Johnson 1995, 20, 24.
195 Frankemölle 1994a, 71f.; R. P. Martin YDWJJJoDJW Johnson o Tsuji o
Konradt o Burchard o
196 So, e.g., FrankemölleB oKonradt oBurchard oR. Hoppe
2001b, 362.
197 So notably Dibelius/Greeven 1964 and 1976; Conzelmann/Lindemann 1995, 404f.; Schnelle 2002,
436.
198 Popkes o oTJNJMBSMZBMSFBEZMussner 1987, 58f.
199 Popkes o oidem oJ. B. Souček oE. Trocmé o
BurchardC oidem 2000, 6; FrankemölleB o o
200 Popkes 2001, 7, 17, 66.
334 Appendix II
gational concerns. James is to be characterized as a circulatory letter to Christians in the

diaspora (Diasporabrief201) with the aim of promoting ethical conduct for neophytes.202
The textdelimitation given in Zacagni’s edition, where the last larger text-sequence
begins at 4:13, has no corresponence in modern critical investigations regardless of
whether they reckon with a well structured text or not. In those cases where commenta-
tors abstain from a hierarchical structuring of the text a new section is said to begin at
5:13 or 5:12.203 A few commentators propose a different tripartite delimitation, where
the last major text-sequence encompasses 4:1o5:20.204 In most cases, however, 5:o0 is
regarded as a major concluding unit, and this is true among those advocating a hierar-
chical macro-structural delimitation205 as well as among those denying any hierarchical
macro-structure.206 The sub-section in CAP 677 beginning with παραινέσεις ἰδικαί is set
at 5:12 and ends at 5:18 where a new sub-section begins. In modern studies only a few
authors who deny any macro-structural arrangement delimit the text at 5:12 or 5:13.207 In
other cases the text-sequence 5:12/1o0 is regarded as a sub-section either of the text-
sequence 4:o:20208or 5:o0.209 In any case, modern interpreters do divide the text at
PSFJUIFSPOBTVQFSJPSMFWFMPSoMJLFUIF&VUIBMJBODIBQUFSMJTUoPOBTVCPSEJOBUF
level.
(N) The chapter-list to Philemon (CAP 789) is very short:

Ἔπαινος Φιλήμονος καὶ εὐχαριστία ὑπὲρ (v. 4) Praise of Philemon and thanksgiving for
αὐτοῦ. him.
Σύστασις Ὀνησίμου φυγάδος οἰκέτου, (v. 10) Commendation of Onesimus, a runaway
καὶ παράκλησις ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ slave, and an appeal for him, as
σωθέντος διὰ πίστεως. he has been saved through faith.
The complete but brief text in the chapter-list to Philemon is given above.
(a) The short chapter-list to Philemon has only two double entries: the ἔπαινος- and
εὐχαριστία-phrase for Philemon at v. 4 and the σύστασις- and παράκλησις-phrase at v. 10.
The second term used at v. 10 is παράκλησις, which in so far is unusual as the Pauline verb
201 Popkes 2001, 46, 69; so also Tsuji oK.-W. Niebuhr oHoppeB o
One should note, however, that “Diasporabrief ” is not a genre but a subordinary text-type (under the
ordinary text-type “letter”); cf. Hellholm 1980, 25: “Abstraktionsprinzip”, since the semantic content and
the pragmatic function can vary. This is at least hinted at by Burchard 2000, 9 and Popkes 2001, 47.
202 Popkes 2001, 59, 69; cf. 13: The role of the author “ist weniger die des Lehrers (trotz 3,1) als die des Er-
ziehrs und Mahnrufers.” Similarly M. Klein 1995, 39: “[E]ine brieflich eingefaßte theologische Mahnrede.”
Differently Windisch in Windisch/Preisker 1951, 3; Mussner 1987, 24; Kümmel 1973, 360: “parae-
netic didaché.”
203 At 5:13: Windisch/Preisker 1951, 2; Mussner 1987, VIII, 216f. At 5:12: Johnson 1995, ix, 325f.
204 Thus Vouga oBOER. P. Martin WJJoWJJJ DJJJoDJW
205 Vielhauer 1975, 568; FrankemölleB oidemC oKlein 1995, 39f.; Tsuji
1997, 93f.; Konradt 1998,313f.; Burchard 2000, X, 12f.; Hoppe 2001b, 362.
206 So Dibelius/Greeven 1964, 5, 287f.; and 1976, viii, 241f.; Schnelle 2002, 436f.; Popkes 2001, X, 58, 314f.
207 See above note 203.
208 See above note 204.
209 See above notes 205 and 206.
παρακαλῶoXIJDIJTVTFEBMTPJOUIJTWFSTFJO1IJMFNPOois elsewhere in the chapter-
lists replaced by the verb παραινέω or the noun παραίνεσις210 In view of the double usage
of παρακαλῶ in v. 9 and 10 in Philemon,211 it is surprising to discern that in CAP 789 the
first occurrence is neglected. In view of the controversial interpretation of the status of
Onesimus in recent scholarship,212 it is of interest to notice that in the chapter-list he is
unmistakably depicted as a “runaway slave” (φυγὰς οἰκέτης).213
(b) The παράκλησις-phrase is followed by a causal participle construction.
(c) The letter to Philemon is generally recognized not to be a private letter only214
but one directed also to the house-church assembled in Philemon’s house.215 The genre
of this letter is debated: it is either a “letter of recommendation”216 or a “petitionary
letter”.217 When structuring the letter to Philemon most commentators delimit the text
formally into four major sections: Prescript (vv. o); Prooimion (vv. o); Letter Corpus
(WW‫ڀ‬o0/21); Postscript (vv. 21/2o5).218 The delimitation according to the Euthalian
chapter-list (σύστασις … καὶ παράκλησις) takes place not as expected at v. 8 but instead at
210 A likely explanation is to be found in the commentary by Hübner 1997, 33: “An unserer Stelle meint
dieses Verb allerdings mehr das Bitten als die Ermahnung”. [So also now P. Müller o et
passim.]
211 [Conduplicatio, see Wolter 1993, 261; cf. Müller 2012, 109.]
212 See firstly Lohse 1968, 263; idem 1971, 187; P. Stuhlmacher 1975, 2o4; Vielhauer 1975, 171, 173; P.
T. O’Brien 1982, 266f.; Gnilka 1982, 2f.; M. Leutzsch 1994, 166 note 16; Koester 2000, 139; R. Kieffer
2001, 34f.: considering Onesimus to have been a “slave who had run away to Paul”; secondly P. Lampe
1985, 13o37; idem 1998, 206; R. M. Rapske 1991, 18o03, esp. 197; Wolter 1993, 22o35, esp. 230;
J. D. G. Dunn 1996, 301ff.; Hübner 1997, 33f.; Fitzmyer 2000, 18, 2o3; [P. Müller o>:
not denying that Onesimus was a slave but that he was a fugitive slave; and thirdly A. D. Callahan 1993,
35o76: denying that Onesimus was a slave altogether but the brother of Philemon. As to Callahan’s
questionable treatment of John Chrysostom’s view, see M. M. Mitchell 1995, 13o48.
213 LSJ 1966, 1959, s.v. φυγάς: “one who flees from his country, either voluntarily, runaway, fugitive, or by legal
sentence, exile”. See now with documentation, P. Arzt-Grabner 2003, 101f.
214 So G. Bornkamm 1969, 100; Vielhauer 1975, 171; Schenke/Fischer 1978, 154; Koester 2000, 138;
Walter 2002, 220.
215 So Bjerkelund 1967, 118f.; Lohse 1968, 264, 267f.; Gnilka 1982, 10; Leutzsch 1994, 74, 167; Hübner
1997, 28; Schnelle 2002, 169; Kieffer 2001, 33; [P. Müller 2012, 72f.]
216 So Ch.-H. Kim 1972, 12o28; Conzelmann/Lindemann 1988, 223, and Arzt-Grabner o
194.
217 So Bjerkelund oi#FUSBDIUFUNBOOÊNMJJDIEFO1IJMFNPOBMT(BO[FT TPMJFHUJINXJFGSà-
her erwähnt trotz Verwand[t]schaft mit den Empfehlungsschreiben nicht die Struktur der Empfehlungs-
schreiben, sondern die εὐχαριστῶ-παρακαλῶ-Struktur zugrunde” (123), Gnilka 1982, 10; Wolter 1993,
236f.; Conzelmann/Lindemann 1995, 252; Lampe 1998, 216; Fitzmyer 2000, 24; [P. Müller 2012, 74:
“am ehesten dem Bittbrief.”].
218 Thus Lohse 1968, 263; idem 1971, 187; Stuhlmacher 1975, 24; Vielhauer 1975, 170; O’Brien 1982,
268; Wolter 1993, 237; Conzelmann/Lindemann 1995, 252; Schnelle 2002, 169; Fitzmyer 2000, 41;
similarly N. R. Petersen 1985, 85. Differently Hübner oio1SÊTLSJQUyo%JF%BOLTB-
HVOHyo%FSu'BMMA0OFTJNPTyo1PTUTLSJQU(SàFVOE'SJFEFOTXVOTDIwTJNJMBSMZKieffer
2001, 33. Arzt-Grabner Gi#SJFGBOGBOH 7o #SJFGDPSQVT 7o #SJFGTDIMV 7o w
[1.àMMFS i7o&JOHBOHTUFJM"CTFOEFS "ESFTTBUFOVOE8VOTDIo7o3àDLCMJDL &SGBISVO-
HFOo7o%JF"OHFMFHFOIFJUEFT0OFTJNVTo7o#FTVDITBOLàOEJHVOHo7o"CTDIMVTT
Grüße und Wunsch.”]
336 Appendix II
W XIJDIoBTUIFUFYUJO$"1JOEJDBUFToFWJEFOUMZIBTUPEPXJUIUIFDIBQUFSMJTUT
focus on Onesimus (v. 10) and not on Philemon (v. 8).219
Having scrutinized the evidence in the chapter-lists in the Euthalian Apparatus for
genre-designations pertaining to hortatory language in the Pauline, Deutero-Pauline,
and Catholic letters, we can conclude that on the first level of abstraction we have recog-
nized the usage of παραίνεσις, while on the second level of abstraction two lexemes were
used προτροπή and ἀποτροπή. We have furthermore detected a divergence between the
genre-designation παραίνεσις for sections of letters that are usually termed paraenetic in
a more general and universal sense in modern scholarship220 and the genre-designation
διόρθωσις for the more actual and concrete criticism in 1 Corinthians.221 This may be
taken as an indication of a conscious differentiation between exhortations of a general
character and admonitions in specific situations.
2.2.2. Evidence from the Affiliated Argumenta
The argumenta are, in contrast to the chapter and lection lists, continuous texts. Each
argument is primarily a summary of one biblical book. Sometimes the argument includes
traditions about the author and/or the place and date of composition. These texts were
at an early stage appended to the Euthalian apparatus, but they are also attested indepen-
dently, as part of the pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae.222
The vocabulary of the argumenta is often clearly dependent upon the texts they de-
scribe. It is therefore noteworthy that the author uses a great number of verbal forms not
found in the biblical texts. These verbs mostly refer to speech acts. In his discussion of the
apparatus to the Pauline Letters, Professor Dahl has pointed out that this terminology is
similar to the terms used in the ancient epistolographical handbooks and that it mainly
focuses on what the author does through his writing.223
(A) The Gospels

It is evident that the style of the argumenta at some points is very close to that of the
chapter lists. Possibly, the author(s) had such lists at his/their disposal. The summaries
are also quite selective. Large portions of the text are ignored, while some well-known
passages are emphasized, and sometimes quoted. The noun παραίνεσις does not occur
in the argumenta. The verbal (and sometimes the adjectival) forms are used in its place.
219 This is also the case in the analysis of this letter as a “letter of recommendation” by Kim 1972, 127f. and
Arzt-Grabner 2003, 190f.
220 So Dibelius 1933/71, 239; Vielhauer 1975, 50; Mitchell oS. K. Stowers 1986, 93; Aune
1987, 191; Wolter 1988, 133f.; idem 1993, 171 with references to Isokrates, Ad Nicoclem 6 and 41 as well
as Nicocles.
221 See the citation from Mitchell 1991, 52f. and Betz 2002 in notes 127 and 128 respectively.
222 This work contains summaries of all biblical books. It may for linguistic reasons be considered the ultimate
source of the Euthalian argumenta. In the following, we will quote the argumenta as part of the Synopsis.
All the quotations are after the text in Migne, Patrologia Graeca, vol. o
223 See DahlE o
(a) In the summary of Matthew, the verb παραινέω occurs once:
θεραπεύει πολλοὺς, κάθηται εἰς τὸ ὄρος. καὶ He heals many, sits down on the mountain
λέγει τοὺς μακαρισμοὺς, καὶ ἐπάγει· Ὑμεῖς and speaks the macarisms, and he adduces:
ἐστε τὸ ἅλας, καὶ, Ὑμεῖς ἐστε τὸ ϕῶς τοῦ :PVBSFUIFTBMU BOE :PVBSFUIFMJHIUPGUIF
κόσμου. Παραινεῖ αὐτοῖς περὶ τοῦ βίου. Εἶτα world. He gives them advice on how to live.
ἐπιτείνει τὰς ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ἐντολάς. Then he strengthens the ordinances of the Law.
Ἔνθα καὶ περὶ τοῦ δεξιοῦ ὀϕθαλμοῦ λέγει, Here he speaks also about the right eye and
καὶ περὶ κενοδοξίας, καὶ περὶ ϕιλοχρηματίας, about empty pride and about avarice and
καὶ τοῦ μὴ μεριμνᾷν περὶ τροϕῆς, καὶ τοῦ μὴ about not caring for food and not judging
κρίνειν τὸν πλησίον. your neighbor.
Εἶτα ϕησι· μὴ βάλητε τοὺς μαργαρίτας ὑμῶν Then he says: Do not throw your pearls before
ἔμποσθεν τῶν χοίρων. Προτροπὴ περὶ τοῦ the swine. Encouragement to pray, parable
αἰτεῖσθαι· παραβολὴ περὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ· περὶ about the same. About the narrow road, and
τῆς στενῆς ὁδοῦ, καὶ περὶ ψευδοπροϕητῶν, about false prophets and those who do not
καὶ τῶν μὴ ϕυλασσόντων τὰς ἐντολάς. keep the precepts. Here the parable of the
Ἔνθα ἡ παραβολὴ περὶ τῆς ἐπὶ πέτραν house built on rock.
οἰκοδομηθείσης οἰκίας. )FHPFTEPXOGSPNUIFNPVOUBJO .BUUo
Κατέρχεται ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄρους. (PG 28.385B)
The verb παραινεῖ hardly refers to a larger part of the Sermon on the Mount as the equiva-
lent of a genre-designation. The context favours the interpretation that the clause παραινεῖ
ϟЯϰϭѴ϶ɀϣϮхϰϭѼϠцϭϱPOMZSFGFSTUPo BTϣЧϰϟГɀϧϰϣцϫϣϧϰп϶ГϫϰҁϫшϪѾГϫϰϭϩр϶JT
a summary of 5:17ff. [We should, however, observe that the lexeme προτροπή is used in
order to encourage praying.]
(b) Παραινέω or its cognates do not occur in the argumenta to Mark or John. The
Farewell Discourses in John are not considered paraenetic or protreptic, but are treated
as prophetic speeches.
(c) In the summary of Luke the verb first occurs in the description of the Sermon on
the Plain:
Λέγει τοὺς μακαρισμούς. Ταλανίζει τοὺς He speaks the beatitudes. He rebukes the rich
πλουσίους καὶ τοὺς γελῶντας. Παραινεῖ περὶ and those who laugh. He gives them advice
ἀγάπης, περὶ τοῦ μὴ ἀμύνεσθαι τὸν πλησίον. about love, about not defending themselves
Περὶ φιλανθρωπίας. Περὶ τοῦ μὴ κρίνειν, καὶ against their neighbor, about kindness, about
μεταδίδοναι. (PG 28.393D) OPUKVEHJOHBOEBCPVUTIBSJOH -Lo
͑ϟϮϟϧϫϣѴIFSFTFFNTUPSFGFSUPUIFXIPMFQBTTBHFoćJTVTBHFJTOPUWFSZEJČFSFOU
from the modern form-critical understanding of parainesis.
In the three other instances, however, the ancient and modern commentators would
probably not use the same terms:
Ἀνέδειξεν ἑβδομήκοντα μαθητὰς, καὶ πέμπει He elected seventy disciples, and he sent them
αὐτοὺς ἀνὰ, δύο, παραινέσας μηδὲν βαστάσαι. out two by two, having adviced them not to
(PG 28.396C) carry anything. (Luke 10:1ff)
Παραινεῖ εἰσελθεῖν διὰ τῆς στενῆς θύρας. He exhorts them to enter the narrow gate.
(PG 28.397B) (Luke 13:24ff)
338 Appendix II
Παραινεῖ πάντων τῶν οἰκείων καταϕρονεῖν, He exhorts them to despise all their relatives,
καὶ αὐτῷ ἀκολουθεῖν. (PG 28.397B) BOEUPGPMMPXIJN -VLFo
The examination of the argumenta to the gospels brings no certain evidence that παραινέω
is used in a specific generic sense. We now turn to the NT letters.
(B) The Pauline Letters

In general, the summaries of the Letters in the Synopsis are more elaborated than the
Gospel summaries discussed above. The terminology is more varied and the style has a
stronger rhetorical flavour.224 The most important distinction in this section of the Syn-
opsis is between letters to (1) recipients who were personally unknown to Paul, and (2)
those he had met before. For the first group of letters, various generic terms are used (Ro-
NBOTϢϧϢϟϯϨϟϩϧϨф&QIFTJBOTo$PMPTTJBOTϨϟϰϥϳϥϰϧϨф)FCSFXTЋɀϭϢϣϧϨϰϧϨфćF
second group receives no fixed designation, but is referred to with various forms of the
verb ὑπομιμνήσκω. The words παραινέω and παραινετικός are used in connection with
both groups. Romans and Ephesians belong to the διδασκαλικαὶ ἐπιστολαί, while 1 Cor-
inthians and Galatians belong to the second group:
Μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα παραινετικοὺς λόγους After that, having taught paraenetic words for
εἰς τὰ ἤθη διδάξας, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. the sake of morals, he ends the letter. (Roman
(PG 28.416A) o
Καὶ εἰς τὸ τέλος παραινετικοὺς λόγους εἰς And in the end he writes paraenetic words for
τὰ ἤθη γράϕει, καὶ περὶ λογίας τῆς εἰς τοὺς the sake of morals, and he gives commands
ἁγίους παραγγέλλει, καὶ οὕτω τελειοῖ τὴν concerning the collection to the saints, and
ἐπιστολήν. (PG 28.416D) thus he ends the letter. (1 Cor 15:58)
Καὶ οὕτω πάλιν εἰς τὰ ἤθη παραινέσας καὶ And thus, having again exhorted and taught
διδάξας, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐτιστολήν. (PG 28.417D) for the sake of morals, he ends the letter. (Gal
5:13ff)
Εἶτα παραινετικοὺς λόγους ἀνδράσι καὶ Next, he places hortatory words in the letter,
γυναιξὶ, πατράσι καὶ τέκνοις, κυρίοις καὶ to husbands and wives, to fathers and children,
δούλοις τίθησιν ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ. (PG 28.420B) UPNBTUFSTBOETMBWFT &QIo
The following observations can be made:

(a) In contrast to the chapter and lection lists, it is here often difficult to decide pre-
cisely to what text-parts the summaries refer. In the summary of Romans, it is clear that
the παραινετικοὶ λόγοι begin with 12:1, as ταῦτα refers to the preceding summary of Rom
oćFTVNNBSZEPFTOPUTUBUFXIFSFUIFMFUUFSDMPTJOHCFHJOTćFPUIFSargumenta
offer similar problems. In the text on 1 Corinthians, the paraenetic words can only cor-
respond to a single verse (15:58), as Nils Alstrup Dahl has pointed out. Dahl suggests that
the author at this point is influenced by the notion that the Pauline letters normally ended
with paraenesis.225
224 The difference in language may reflect the different character of the biblical texts themselves, or it may
indicate that the Synopsis is a composite work.
225 Dahl 2000d, 265.
(b) We further note the stereotypical language. The prepositional phrase εἰς τὰ ἤθη
occurs regularly, often in connection with παραινέω/παραινετικός.226 This phrase also
occurs in combination with two other verbs: προτρέπω and συμβουλεύω. These verbs are
also used for passages that modern commentators label paraenetic.227 It is hardly possible
to distinguish between these verbs in this context.228 The Synopsis uses a rich and flexible
language, and the shift may occur only for the sake of variation. In fact, the most stable
expression related to the hortatory passages is the phrase εἰς τὰ ἤθη.229
(C) The Catholic Letters

The argumenta to the Catholic Letters also distinguish between letters to known and
unknown recipients. James and 1 Peter are classified as διδασκαλικαὶ ἐπιστολαί and
παραινέω with its cognates do not occur. All the other summaries, with the exception of
3 John, contain the verb παραινέω:
Καὶ εἰς τὰ ἤθη παραινέσας ὀλίγα … And having given a few exhortations for the
(PG 28.408B) sake of morals … (1 Pet 3:8ff)
παραινεῖ μὴ ἐκπίπτειν τοῦ σκοποῦ τῆς πίστεως, And he exhorts them not to depart from the
καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. goal of faith, and thus he ends the letter (2 Pet
(PG 28.409A) o
Παραινεῖ δὲ διὰ ὅλης τῆς ἐπιστολῆς μὴ Throughout the letter, he exhorts the belivers
ἀθυμεῖν τοὺς πιστεύοντας τῷ Κυριῷ, εἰ in the Lord not to be disheartened, if they are
μισοῦνται ἐν τῷ κοσμῷ ἀλλὰ χαίρειν, ὅτι τὸ hated in the world, but to rejoice, because the
μῖσος τοῦ κόσμου δείκνυσι τοὺς πιστεύοντας hatred of the world shows that the believers
μεταβεβηκέναι ἀπὸ αὐτοῦ τοῦ κόσμου, have passed over from this world and that
καὶ εἶναι λοιπὸν τῆς οὐρανίου πολιτείας. they from now on belong to the heavenly state.
(PG 28.409D) (1 John)
Παραινεῖ πάλιν περὶ ἀγάπης, καὶ ἵνα μείνωσιν He exhorts them about love and to remain in
ἐν τῇ διδαχῇ τῇ παραδοθείσῃ αὐτοῖς. the teaching that has been handed down to
(PG 28.412A) UIFN +PIOo
Εἶτα παραινεῖ εἰς τὰ ἤθη. Next he exhorts them for the sake of morals.
(PG 28.412D) (Jud 20ff?)
The quotations above show that the terms employed for the description of the Catholic
Letters is similar to the terms used to describe the Pauline Letters. The word παραινεῖ can
be used for a very short passage (2 Pet, 2 John), or to characterize the tendency of a whole
226 See also the references to Theodoretus of Cyrrhus above in notes 58, 68 and 165.
227 On Philippians: καὶ προτρεψάμενος πάλιν εἰς τὰ ἤθη αὐτοὺς, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν (28:420D), on Colos-
sians: καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τὰ ἤθη συμβούλευσας, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν (28:421B) and on Hebrews: Εἶτα πάλιν εἰς
τὰ ἤθη προτρεψάμενος καὶ τούτους, καὶ ἀποδεξάμενος αὐτῶν τὴν διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν ὑπομονὴν, καὶ πείσας
τιμᾷν τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν (28:425A). Note that the verb τελειόω in almost all in-
stances occurs with παραινέω, προτρέπω and συμβουλεύω.
228 Cf. Schrage 1991, 77 with note 265: “Seneca kann unter den genera monitionum z.B. neben monitio
(= παραίνεσις), consolationes, dissuasiones, adhortationes, obiurgationes und laudationes verstehen (Ep.
94,39), aber auch praecepta (95,34 …)”. Schrage refers also to Stowers 1986, 93.
229 Cf. John Chrysostom, Oratio 2, where in the paraenetic section (WCoWB UIFSFCVLFPGUIPTF$ISJT-
tians who are running to the Jews is cast in moral terms by means of examples from the realm of family
FUIJDT FH .BUUo&QI 4FFUIFCJCMJPHSBQIJDBMSFGFSFODFBCPWFJOOPUF29.
340 Appendix II
letter (1 John!). In this last example, the word seems to have a general sense, and not to
denote any specific genre.
The originally independent Argumenta are further evidence that the words παραινέω/
παραινετικός could be used in a manner similar to the modern concepts. The argumenta
do, however, differ from the chapter-lists in terminology: παραινέω and προτρέπω appear
almost as synonyms. Παραινέω is in the argumenta not a technical/rhetorical term with
a fixed meaning. The verb can also be used for exhortation or advice in many different
contexts, as the Gospel summaries show.230 It is worth noting that the use of the terms
παραινέω / παραινετικός in the argumenta is restricted to the summaries of Matthew,
Luke and the letters.
2.3. Evidence From Ps-Libanios or Ps-Proclos
In the Epistolimaioi Characteres from the 4th to the 6th century which in one manuscript
is ascribed to Ps-Libanios, in another to (Ps-)Proclos231 we find the following defini-
tion of the literary type of paraenesis according to the text and translation in Abraham
J. Malherbe’s Ancient Epistolary Theorists.232 The translation has been improved in ac-
cordance with our understanding of ἐπιστολή as belonging to the “communication form
letter”, which form-critically and text-linguistically constitutes a “text-type”; the suitable
features (χαρακτῆρες) are then appropriated to the forty-one different προσηγορίαι233,
which form-critically and text-linguistically constitute “letter-genres” or “Briefsorten”.234
The paraenetic type/form (παραινετικὴ [προσηγορία]) is that in which we exhort someone
by urging him to pursue something or to avoid something. Paraenesis is divided into two
parts, encouragement (προτροπή) and dissuasion (ἀποτροπή). Some also call it the advisory
type/form (συμβουλευτικὴ [προσηγορία]), but do so incorrectly, for paraenesis differs from
advice (παραίνεσις γὰρ συμβουλῆς διαφέρει). For paraenesis is hortatory speech that does
not admit (οὐκ ἐπιδεχόμενος) of a counter-statement …. But advice is advisory speech that
does admit (ἐπιδεχόμενος) of a counter-statement … (68f. [5]).235
230 The different translations of the terms are indirect evidence of this. Sometimes the context makes the
rendering “give advice” impossible.
231 See the introduction by Malherbe o
232 Malherbe o$GSchrage 1991, 87ff.
233 Notice that Ps-Libanius makes a clear distinction between χαρακτήρ (“style”) and προσηγορία (“form/
genre”) (66.12 [3]).
234 See esp. K. Ermert 1979, 66f.; further W. G. Müller o$GBMTPBjerkelund 1967, 55ff.
235 Cf. the similar distinction between the symbouleutic and paraenetic genres by the Byzantine lexicog-
rapher Ammonius in his Lexicon of Synonyms entitled Περὶ ὁμοίων καὶ διαφόρων λέξεων, where he
states: συμβουλὴ παραινέσεως διαφέρει. συμβουλὴ μὲν γάρ ἐστιν εἰσήγησις ἀντιλογίαν ἐπιδεχομένη διὰ
τὸ ἄδηλον τοῦ ἐκβησομένου· καὶ γὰρ ἐάν τις συμβουλεύσῃ πόλεμον, ἀμφίβολον εἰ συμφέρει· διὸ καὶ ἔχει
τὸ ἐνιστάμενον. παραίνεσις δέ ἐστι συμβουλὴ ἀντίρρησιν οὐκ ἐπιδεχομένη διὰ τὸ ἐξ αὐτῆς λεγόμενον
ɀϟϫϰҀ϶ЪϪϭϩϭϡϣѴϯϦϟϧЋϡϟϦшϫ и϶ϣХϰϧ϶ɀϟϮϟϧϫтϯϣϧϯϵϲϮϭϫϣѴϫ҇ЮɀϣϮГϯϰхϫиϪϭϩϭϡϥϪтϫϭϫЋϡϟϦшϫoi"E-
vice differs from paraenesis, because advice is a proposal that admits of a counter-statement, as the out-
come of the matter is unclear. Because, if someone advises (us) to go to war, it is doubtful whether it will
bring success. Therefore, it is also open to objection. Paraenesis, on the other hand, is advice that does
not admit of a counter-statement, because what it says is universally acknowledged as something good, as
As the preceding as well as subsequent characterisations in the Epistolimaioi Charac-
teres clearly indicate, the above given quotation is in fact also a generic definition of the
text-form/genre “Paraenesis”.236 At the beginning Ps-Libanios divides the letters, i.e. the
text-type “letter” with each letter’s appropriate characteristic feature (ὁ ἐπισταλτικὸς
χαρακτήρ237) first of all into προσηγορίαι (designations/titles/appellativa/types238), of
which the παραινετική is one (66,10 [3]). Before listing the forty-one types (66,14 [4] he
brings a substitution on meta-level when he declares: “The following are all the types [or
forms] (προσηγορίαι) to which the epistolary character (χαρακτήρ) is appropriated”.239
After having characterized the content and illocutionary function respectively of all the
aforementioned epistolary types/forms240 ( <>o <> 1T-JCBOJPTDPODMVEFTCZ
means of a substitution on abstraction-level,241 when stating: “These, then (οὖν), are all
the types/forms (προσηγορίαι) into which the letter [as text-type] is divided” (72,7 [46]).
Then follows a section on “character/style” (χαρακτήρ), which comes to an end by means
of another substitution on abstraction-level, when it is stated: “Having said this about the
epistolary character/style … (τοσαῦτα μὲν περὶ ἐπιστολιμαίου χαρακτῆρος εἰρηκώς …;
74,1 [51])”. At the end of his specific deliberations on character/style in regard to episto-
lary types/forms he continues his definitions by means of another substitution on abstrac-
tion-level, this time, however, kataphorically:242
These are the aforementioned letters: The paraenetic letter …(74, 9f. [51]).
(εἰσὶ δὲ αἱ προταγεῖσαι ἐπιστολαὶ αὗται. παραινετικὴ [sc. ἐπιστολή] …).
Thereafter follows a repetition of the list of forty-one types, now, however, provided with
significant additional information of the characteristics/styles appropriate for each of
someone who exhorts (us) to be prudent, which is acknowledged to be a good thing” (Kl. Nickau 1966,
s.v. συμβολή no. 455; this text is referred to and translated into German by Kremendahl 2000, 141f. with
OPUFTFFGVSUIFSJCJE o
236 One should notice that the definition of the paraenetic type/form/genre is the first and by far the most
elaborated of all the forty-one letter forms in Ps-Libanius encompassing as much as a total of twelve lines.
237 See LSJ 1966, 1977, s.v. 4 and 5; Lampe 1968, 1513 s.v. 4.
238 See LSJ 1966, 1512 s.v.; Lampe 1968, 1170 s.v.: “D. appellation, designation, title; 1. in gen. of designations
of letters … ἡ ‘εὐαγγέλιον’ π. Or. Jo. 1.5 (7; p.9.23; M.14.32C).” Further, see above all the formulation in
Ps-Libanios 67 [3]: “It (sc. the letter [as a text-type]) is divided into a great number of types/forms/genres
(παμπόλλους προσηγορίας), for the fact that a letter is designated by that single name (προσγορεύεται
ἑνικῷ ὀνόματι [s.c. ἐπιστολή, i.e. the text-type]) does not mean that all letters commonly so called are of
one style and one type/form/genre (εἷς τίς ἐστι χαρακτὴρ καὶ μία προσηγορία). As I have said, they dif-
fer from one another.” Cf. furthermore Dionysios Thrax, Ars grammfQ o ͋ъϮϧϭϫϪсϫϭеϫ
ἐστι τὸ τὴν ἰδίαν οὐσίαν σημαῖνον, οἶον »Ὅμηρος«, »Σωκράτης«. Προσηγορικὸν δέ ἐστι τὸ τὴν κοινὴν
οὐσίαν σημαῖνον, οἷον »ἄνθρωπος«, »ἵππος« (A proper name is that which designates the individual char-
acter, e.g., ‘Homer’, ‘Socrates’. An appellativum is that which designates the universal character, e.g., ‘man’,
‘horse’”; our trans.). Quoted from K. Hülser 1987, 632, no. 564; see moreover Scholia in Dionysios Thrax p.
o o o HülseroOPTo*OBEEJUJPO TFFBCPWFOPUF
4.
239 The characters are features of the text-type letter. Only some of the features are appropriate to each type or
form of letter.
240 “Type”, not “style” as trans. in Malherbe 1988, 69, 71, 73 throughout the text: from the context one has to
supplement the adjectives with προσηγορία not with χαρακτήρ!
241 On “substitutions on abstraction level”, see Hellholm 1980, 86f. with reference esp. to Raible 1972, 150f.,
oGVSUIFSHellholm 1995, 20f.
242 Cf. Hellholm 1980, 30 with references.
342 Appendix II
the types/forms mentioned earlier and now listed anew. Thus, Ps-Libanios distinguishes
between ἐπιστολή as “text-type”, προσηγορία as “letter-form or -genre” and χαρακτήρ
as “characteristic or stylistic feature”. The phrase “paraenetic letter” (παραινετικὴ [sc.
ἐπιστολή]) is consequently a suppositio materialis expression or more precisely a substitu-
tion on meta-level designating the specific generic form of the letter.
In Ps-Libanios (68,3 [5] quoted above) we notice also the technical use of the two
subordinate lexemes προτροπή and ἀποτροπή that was discussed in connection with
the chapter-list especially in regard to Galatians,243 where the expected overarching term
paraenesis is missing.
Of interest is further also the fact that the lexemes προτροπή and ἀποτροπή were
used not only in ancient epistolography but also in ancient rhetoric as the example from
Ps-Aristotle’s Auctor ad Alexandrum shows; there the author, probably Anaximenes of
Lampsakos, knows within the framework of the πολιτικοὶ λόγοι244 not only of two or
three genera (γένη): the iudicial (τὸ δικανικόν) and the deliberative (τὸ δημηγορικόν),
possibly also the demonstrative (τὸ ἐπιδεικτικόν), but within these also of seven species
(εἴδη): τὸ προτρεπτικὸν, τὸ ἀποτρεπτικόν, τὸ ἐγκωμιαστκόν, τὸ ψεκτικόν, τὸ κατηγορικόν,
τὸ ἀπολογητικόν, τὸ ἐξεταστικόν.245 The deliberative genre is according to Aristotle fur-
thermore divided into the protreptic and the apotreptic speech: “The deliberative kind is
either hortatory or dissuasive; for both those who give advice in private and those who
speak in the assembly invariably either exhort or dissuade”.246 This is also attested by Ps-
Demetrios in his Τύποι Ἐπιστολικοί, where we concerning “the advisory type” read:247
It is the advisory type when, by offering our own judgment, we exhort (someone to) some-
thing or dissuade (him) from something ….
(Συμβουλευτικὸς δέ ἐστιν, ὅταν τὴν ἰδίαν γνώμην προφερόμενοι προτρέπωμεν ἐπί τι ἢ
ἀποτρέπωμεν ἀπό τινος. …)
In comparison with Ps-Libanius the terminology in Ps-Demetrius is characteristically
EJČFSFOUi5FYUUZQFw XIJDIoBTGBSBTXFDBOEJTDFSOoIBTOPMFYJDBMJ[BUJPOJO1T-JCB-
nius, is labeled τρόπος in Ps-Demetrius (30,25); “letter-form or -genre”, which is called
προσηγορία in Ps-Libanius (66,6 [1]. 10 [3]. 14 [3]; 72,7 [46]; 74,3 [51], is named τύπος
or γένοςJO1T%FNFUSJVT o BOE iMFUUFSTUZMFw XIJDIJTDBMMFE
χαρακτήρ in Ps-Libanius (66,1 [1]. 12 [3]. 15 [4]; 72,6 [45]. 13 [46]‚ 74,1 [51]; cf. also
Demetrius, De Elocutione 16,2; 18,38, and Philostratus of Lemnos, De Epistulis 42,2.9), is
named εἶδος or ἰδέα in Ps-Demetrius (30,3 and 30,8.26; so also in Philostratus of Lem-
nos; De Epistulis 42,9). It is important to observe that, in spite of the differences between
243 See above page 12f.
244 The ἴδιαι ὁμιλίαι, i.e. the private speeches of different genera, were not treated in the Greek and Latin
rhetorical handbooks, see J. Engels 1996, 706f.
245 Ps-Aristotle, Auctor ad Alexandrum*oCo oDGBMTPQuintilian, Inst, 3.4,9. See further
Engels 1996, 707f.; Cf. Ch. Rapp 2002a, 211: “Die Rhetorik für Alexander repräsentiert den Stand der
Rhetorik, den Aristoteles vorgefunden haben muss: Sie behandelt ausführlich die Redeteile und ordnet die
verschiedenen rhetorischen Mittel den einzelnen Teilen zu. Sie unterscheidet sieben Arten der Rede und
führt eine Gliederung der verschiedenen Beweismittel ein.”
246 Aristotle, Ars rhetorica* Co͓ϱϪϠϭϱϩѮ϶ϢсϰчϪсϫɀϮϭϰϮϭɀуϰчϢсЋɀϭϰϮϭɀф҇ЋϣхϡпϮϨϟх
οἱ ἰδίᾳ συμβουλεύοντες καὶ οἱ κοινῇ δημηγοροῦντες τούτων θάτερον ποιοῦσιν. (Text and trans. LCL) Cf.
further Rapp 2002b, 258.
247 See Malherbe 1988, Ps-Demetrios, Τύποι Ἐπιστολικοί 36,19f. [11]; trans. modified.
Conclusion 343
the treatises, the terminology within each treatise (with the exception of Philostratus of
Lemnos) is consistent. This is a clear indication of the fluctuation in antiquity with regard
to technical terminology,248 and should be a warning, not to subsume everything under
the label “style” as is so often being done. A proper differentiation is required, if one wants
to achieve a correct understanding of how the ancient theoreticians conceived of the text-
type “letter”, its different forms/genres and their different styles.
Finally, it should be mentioned that in Ps-Demetrius the verb παραινέω is used as
a characterization of the consoling letter form/genre (παραμυθητικὸς [τύπος]), when in
34.18 [5] it is said: “… and exhort yourself just as you would exhort someone else (καὶ
καθὼς ἄλλῳ παρήνεσας, σεαυτῷ παραίνεσον).249 Here, however, the word is clearly used
in a suppositio formalis sense.
3. Conclusion
As indicated above a suppositio materialis expression in form of a substitution on meta-
level can constitute a genre-designation as is the case with rubrics like Gospel, Apoca-
lypse, Romance, Administrative Letter et cetera.250 This is evidently the case for the usage
of παραίνεσις in the “Euthalian Apparatus” and in the “Argumenta” for more than one
text-sequence in the Pauline or Deutero-Pauline and Catholic letters; in addition, this
is all the more likely to be so when the delimitations occur at the same location, where
in these letters (the Pauline and Deutero-Pauline letters) a new section is introduced by
means of the verb παρακαλῶ (οὖν), and modern commentators form-critically allow for
a paraenetic section to begin. Thus, neither is it true that the Church Fathers “nicht viel
bringen”, nor that “keine Gattungsbezeichnung” is intended.251 As for entire letters, it is
important to notice that a suppositio materialis expression is to be found only on two oc-
DBTJPOT NPTUMJLFMZBTBEFTJHOBUJPOGPS$PSJOUIJBOToIFSF IPXFWFS OPUBTɀϟϮϟцϫϣϯϧ϶
but as διόρθωσις252oBOEJO)FCSFXT XIFSFϦϣϭϩϭϡцϟ253 is being used. Thus, no single
/FX 5FTUBNFOU MFUUFS BT TVDI o QPTTJCMZ XJUI UIF DPOKFDUVSBM FYDFQUJPO PG +BNFT254 is
characterized as paraenetic; but only sections are so designated.
0GDPVSTF OPUJOBMMJOTUBODFTXIFSFɀϟϮϟцϫϣϯϧ϶oɀϟϮϟϧϫтϵoɀϟϮϟϧϫϣϰϧϨш϶PDDVS
are these terms used as reference to text-internal or text-external sequences on meta-
levels; often they are referring to text-external realities on the object-level or formulated in
the words of Professor Dahl: “While these words may be used in connection with specific
248 See also with regard to the terminology used in Epictetus and in the Pastoral epistles, Donelson 1986,
190: “The fluidity of this terminology is no hindrance to making parallels with other diatribes, since no
one adhers strictly to technical terminology in Hellenistic parenesis. Epictetus certainly does not limit
himself to προτρεπτικός and ἐλεγκτικός.” Further, cf. above note 133.
249 Malherbe 1988, Ps-Demetrios, Τύποι Ἐπιστολικοί 34,18 [5].
250 One should observe, however, that not all suppositio materialis expressions are generic; see, e.g., the ex-
amples given above on page 301 section (c).
251 See above note 17 and note 19.
252 See above the chapter-list ad 1 Corinthians (page 320f.).
253 However, the characterization of Hebrews as θεολογία Χριστοῦ is most likely not a genre-designation, see
our remarks above to the chapter-list ad Hebrews (page 327ff.).
254 See the discussion above to the chapter-list ad James (page 331ff.).
344 Appendix II
actions that ought to be done or avoided, they may also be used, as in modern biblical
research, for paraenesis in the form-critical sense ….”255
Finally, it is pertinent to point out that the singular παραίνεσις and the plural
παραινέσεις, or παραινετικοὶ λόγοι as we have analysed these terms here, quite often
function, especially in the chapter-lists as “nominal indicators” (definitio exprimens quid
nominis) of a literary genre or form and not as “real indicators” (definitio exprimens quid
rei).256 To give a “real definition” of παραίνεσις, built upon the evidence in the Euthalian
tradition, would go far beyond the limited scope of our presentation here and will have
to wait till some other time.257
255 Dahl 2000d, 265.

256 The distinction between “nominal” and “real definitions” was known already to Plato and Aristotle, see
Plato, who favors a “real definition”: Soph. 218c: δεῖ δὲ ἀεὶ παντὸς πέρι τὸ πρᾶγμα αὐτὸ μᾶλλον διὰ λόγων
ἢ τοὔνομα μόνον συνωμολογῆσθαι χωρὶς λόγου. (“But one must always in all things come to an agree-
ment about the object rather through description than only through the name without description”; text:
P. Staudacher 1970, 226; our trans.); and Aristotle, who favours a combination of both a “nominal” and
a “real definition”: [TopCoBЗϯϰϧϢ҈ЮϮϭ϶Ϫсϫϩшϡϭ϶ЪϰчϰцПϫϣЧϫϟϧϯϥϪϟцϫϵϫ ЋɀϭϢцϢϭϰϟϧϢсЛ
λόγος ἀντ᾽ὀνόματος ἢ λόγος ἀντὶ λόγου· δυνατὸν γὰρ καὶ τῶν ὑπὸ λόγου τινὰ σημαινομένων ὁρίσασθαι.
(“A definition is a phrase indicating the essence of something. The definition is asserted either as a phrase
used in place of a term, or as a phrase used in place of a phrase; for it is possible to define some things
also which are indicated by a phrase.”)] Top. 154a 31 and CoГɀϣϧϢуЪϮϧϯϪш϶Гϯϰϧϩшϡϭ϶Ъϰчϰц
ПϫϣЧϫϟϧϯϥϪϟцϫϵϫyϢϣѴϡпϮϨϟϰпɀϟϫϰч϶ϭжϰϭгϫϭϪϟϨϟϰϥϡϭϮϣѴϰϟϧϨϟϰϥϡϭϮϣѴϯϦϟϧϰчϫЮϮϭϫ ϨϟхЗϰϧ
πρὸς τούτοις ἀντιστρέφειν, εἰ μέλλει ἴδιος εἶναι ὁ ἀποδοθεὶς ὅρος (“for a definition is a description which
signifies the essence of a thing … for the definition must be predicated of everything of which the term
is predicated, and besides this, it must be convertible, if the definition assigned is to be peculiar to the
subject”). Text: H. G. Zekl 1997, 10, 374, 376; trans.: LCL). Cf. Gast o FTQ
257 See the tentative definition which the Paraenesis-group reached at the Oslo seminar, and which is pro-
vided above in the figure on page 302.
Bibliography
I. Abbreviations of Works Quoted in the Notes
Bauer A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Litera-
ture, W. Bauer, edited and revised by F. W. Danker, Chicago, Il.: Chicago University
Press 2000.
HWR Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik WPMo FECZ(6FEJOH %BSNTUBEU8JT-
senschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1992ff.
Lampe A Patristic Greek Lexicon, G. W. H. Lampe, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1961.
LSJ A Greek-English Lexicon, H. G. Liddell & R. Scott, revised by H. S. Jones, Oxford:
Clarendon 1966.
PG Patrologia Graeca, ed. J. P. Migne, Paris: [the author].
II. Editions of Biblical Books

Erasmus Novum Instrumentum omne, diligenter ab Erasmo Roterodamo recognitum & emen-
datum, Basel: In aedibus Ioannis Frobenii, 1516. [Facsimile, Stuttgart: Frommann
Holzboog, 1986]
Nestle- Novum Testamentum Graece, eds. B. et K. Aland, J. Karavidopoulos, C. M. Martini, B.
Aland M. Metzger, 27. ed., Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft 2006.
LXX Septuaginta, vols. I & II, ed. A. Rahlfs, 8th ed., Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelan-
stalt 1935/1965.
III. Editions of Euthalius

1698 L. A. Zacagni, Collectanea monumentorum veterum ecclesiae Græcæ ac Latinæ. Quæ
hactenus in Vaticana Bibliotheca delituerunt. Tomus I, Roma: Typis Sacræ Congreg.
EF1SPQBH'JEF o
1774 A. Gallandius, Biblioteca veterum patrum antiquorumque scriptorum ecclesiastico-
rum, 5PNVT9 7FOJDF5ZQPHSBQIJB+PBOOJT#BQUJTUBF"MCSJUJJ)JFSPOĕM o
1864 J. P. Migne, PGo
1902 Herm. von Soden, Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments in ihrer ältesten erreichbaren
Textgestalt hergestellt auf Grund ihrer Textgeschichte. I. Teil, I. Abteilung, Berlin: Ar-
UIVS(MBVF o аɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶ o Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϟϰцϰϩϭϧ o ɀϮшϩϭϡϭϧ
IV. Texts and Translations of Works from Antiquity and Medieval Times. The
Complete Reference for Each Work is given in the General Bibliography (V).
"10--0/*64%:4$0-64 Syntax. English trans. Householder 1981.
[ATHANASIUS] Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae. PGo
AMMONIUS De adfinium vocabulorum differentia. Ed. K. Nickau 1966.
ANDREAS OF CAESAREA Commentary on the Apocalypse. PGo o
346 Bibliography
ARISTOTLE Aristoteles, Topik. Ed. + German trans. Zekl 1997.

AUGUSTINE The Teacher. Ed. + German trans. Perl 1974; Mojsisch 1998.
BOETHIUS The Consolation of Philosophy. English trans. Slavitt 2008.
BOETHIUS Boethii Consolationis philosophiae libri quinque. Ed. + German
trans. O. Gigon 1969.
CATO De agricultura. Ed. + English trans. Dalby 1998.
CEDRENUS Compendium Historiarum. Ed. Bekker 1838.
CICERO De inventione. Ed. + German trans. Nüßlein 1998.
$:3*--64 Mystagogicae catecheses. Ed. + German trans. Röwekamp 1992.
[DEMETRIUS] Typi epistolares&E &OHMJTIUSBOT.BMIFSCFo
DONATUS Commentary on Terence. Ed. Wessner 1902.
EPIPHANIUS On Weights and Measures. PG 43.
EVAGRIUS PONTICUS Praktikos. Ed. Guillaumont 1971.
EVANTHIUS De comoedia&E8FTTOFSo
EURIPIDES Fabulae&E%JHHMFo
EUSEBIUS Chronikon. Ed. Helm 1913.
EUSEBIUS History of the Church&E4DIXBSU[.PNNTFOo&OH-
lish trans. Williamson and Louth 1989.
EUTECHNIUS Paraphrasis in Nicandri Theraica. Ed. Gualandri 1968.
EUTROPIUS Breviarium ab urbe condita. Ed. Santini 1979. Eng. trans. Bird
1993.
[LIBANIUS] De forma epistolari&E &OHMJTIUSBOT.BMIFSCFo
[LIBANIUS] Hypotheses to the Orations of Demosthenes. Ed. R. Foerster 1895:
o&OHMJTIUSBOT(JCTPO
HERON Pneumatika&E (FSNBOUSBOT4DINJEUo
HESIOD Erga. Ed. Solmsen 1970.
HOMER Odyssey. Ed. Allen 1917.
MENANDER ćFIJTUPSJBO &E-%JOEPSĕVTo
NEPOS De viris illustribus. Ed. Marshall 1977.
OECUMENIUS Commentary on the apostolic writings. PG o
ORIGEN Commentary on Romans. Ed. + German trans. Heither 1990.
OVID Remedia amoris. Ed. Kenney 1961.
1)3:/*$)64 Ecloga. Ed. Fischer 1974.
PLATON Platon, Theaitetos – Der Sophist – Der Staatsmann. Ed. + German
trans. Staudacher 1970.
PLAUTUS Comoediae. Ed. Lindsay 1904.
PLOTIN Enneads. Ed. Henry/Schwyzer 1964.
POLLUX Onomasticon. Ed. Bekker 1846.
Bibliography 347
1031):3*64 About the Life of Plotin&E)FOSZ4DIXZ[FSo

PRISCILLIAN Canones epistularum Pauli&E4DIFQTTo
150-&.: Tetrabiblos. Ed. + English trans. Robbins 1940.
QUINTILIAN Institutio oratoria. Ed. + German trans. Rahn 1972.
SCHOLIA GRAECA Scholia Graeca in Aeschylum&E4NJUIo
SCHOLIA GRAECA Scholia Graeca in Homeri Odysseam. Ed. Dindorfius 1855.
SERVIUS Commentary on the Aeneid. Ed. Rand et al. 1946.
SOPHOCLES Tragoediae. Ed. Dawe 1984.
4:/$&--64 Chronographia&E%JOEPSĕVTo
TERENCE Comoediae. Ed. + comm. Ashmore 1910.
TERTULLIAN De baptismo&E (FSNBOUSBOT4DIMFZFSo
TERTULLIAN De monogamia. Ed. + French trans. Mattei 1998.
TERTULLIAN De pudicitia. Ed. + French trans. Micaelli/Munier 1993.
THEOCRITUS Idylls. Ed. Dover 1971.
THEODORET Commentary on the Pauline Letters. PGo
THEOPHILUS OF Ad Autolycum. Ed. + English trans. Grant 1970.
ANTIOCH
5)&01):-"$5 Commentary on the Pauline Letters. PG o
o
5)&01):-"$5 Commentary on the Catholic Letters. PG o
o
V. General Bibliography
Achtemeier, P. J. 1 Peter (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress).
1996
Aejmelaeus, L. Schwachheit als Waffe. Die Argumentation des Paulus im Tränen-
2000 brief (2. Kor. 10–13) (SESJ 78; Helsinki: Finnische Exegetische
Gesellschaft / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Alexander, L. The preface to Luke’s gospel. Literary convention and social con-
1993 text in Luke 1.1–4 and Acts 1.1 (SNTSMS 78; Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press).
Alkier, S. A*OUFSUFYUVBMJUÊUo"OOÊIFSVOHFOBOFJOUFYUUIFPSFUJTDIFT1BSB-
2003 digma’, in D. Sänger (ed.), Heiligkeit und Herrschaft. Intertextuel-
le Studien zu Heiligkeitsvorstellungen und zu Psalm 110 (BTS 55;
/FVLJSDIFO7MVZO/FVLJSDIFOFS o
Allen, Th. W. Odyssea*o9** 0YGPSE$MBSFOEPO
1917
Arzt-Grabner, P. Philemon (Papyrologische Kommentare zum Neuen Testament
2003 1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
348 Bibliography
Ashmore, S. G. The Comedies of Terence (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

1910
"ŁŁĿĶıĴĲ ): The Epistle to the Hebrews (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, Pa: For-
1989 tress).
Aune, D. E. The New Testament in Its Literary Environment (LEC; Philadel-
1987 phia, Pa: Westminster).
Baasland, E. ‘Der Jakobusbrief als neutestamentliche Weisheitsschrift’, in StTh
1982 o
Baasland, E. ‘Literarische Form, Thematik und geschichtliche Einordnung
1988 des Jakobusbriefes’, in ANRW ** #FSMJOo/FX :PSL EF
(SVZUFSo
Balch, D. L. Let Wives Be Submissive. The Domestic Code in 1 Peter (SBLMS
1981 26; Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press]
Balogh, J. ‘Voces Paginarum’, in Philologus o o
1927
Barclay, J. M. G. Obeying the Truth. A Study of Paul’s Ethics in Galatians (Studies
1988 in the New Testament and Its World; Edinburgh: T & T Clark).
Barclay, J. M. G. Al%P8F6OEFSNJOFUIF-BX k"4UVEZPG3PNBOTo JO
1996 J. D. G. Dunn (ed.), Paul and the Mosaic Law, The Third Durham
Tübingen Research Symposium on Earliest Christianity and Ju-
daism (Durham, September, 1994) (WUNT 89; Tübingen: Mohr
4JFCFDL o
Beare, F. W. The first Epistle of Peter (Oxford: Blackwell [3rd enlarged ed.
1947/1970 1970]).
Beare, W. The Roman Stage (3rd ed.; London: Methuen).
1964
Becker, J. Der Brief an die Galater (NTD 8/1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
1998 Ruprecht).
Bekker, I. Georgius Cedrenus. Tomus prior (Corpus Scriptorum Historiae
1838 Byzantinae; Bonn: Weber).
Bekker, I. Iulii Pollucis Onomasticon (Berlin: Fridericus Nicolaus).
1846
Bengel, J. A. Gnomon Novi Testamenti (Tübingen: Schramm).
1742
Bengel, J. A. Gnomon Novi Testamenti. Secundum editionem tertiam (Berlin:
1773/1855 Gustav Schlawitz).
Berger, Kl. Formgeschichte des Neuen Testaments (Heidelberg: Quelle &
1984 Meyer).
Bibliography 349
Bergjan, S.-P. ‘Theodoret’, in RGG4 VIII: 244.

2005
Best, E. Ephesians (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark).
1998
Betz, H. D. ‘The Literary Composition and Function of Paul’s Letter to the
1975/1994 Galatians’, in NTSo<SFQSJOidem, Paulinische Stu-
dien. Gesammelte Studien III 5àCJOHFO.PIS4JFCFDLo>
Betz, H. D. Galatians. A Commentary on Paul’s Letter to the Churches in Ga-
1979 latia (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, Pa: Fortress).
Betz, H. D. 2 Corinthians 8 and 9. A Commentary on Two Administrative
1985 Letters of the Apostle Paul (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, Pa: For-
tress)
Betz, H. D. The Sermon on the Mount (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, Minn.:
1995 Fortress).
Betz, H. D. ‘Das Problem der Grundlagen der paulinischen Ethik (Röm
1988/1989/1994 o JOZThKo<SFQSJOidem, Paulinische Studi-
en. Gesammelte Studien III, 5àCJOHFO.PIS4JFCFDLo
Engl. trans.: “The Foundation of Christian Ethics according to
3PNBOTo JO1&%FWFOJTI(-(PPEXJO FET Witness
and Existence: Essays in Honor of Schuber M. Ogden, Chicago,
*MM-POEPO6$I1o>
Bickerman, E. J. Chronology of the Ancient World (London: Thames and Hud-
1968 son).
Bird, H. W. The Breviarium Ab Urbe Condita of Eutropius (Translated Texts
1993 for Historians 14; Liverpool: Liverpool University Press).
Birdsall, J. N. ‘The New Testament Text’, in P. R. Ackroyd/C. F. Evans (eds.) The
1970 Cambridge History of the Bible. Volume I. From the Beginnings to
Jerome $BNCSJEHF-POEPO/FX:PSL.FMCPVSOF$BNCSJEHF
6OJWFSTJUZ1SFTT o
Birdsall, J. N. ‘The Euthalian Material and its Georgian Versions’, in idem: Col-
1984/2006 lected Papers in Greek and Georgian Textual Criticism (Texts and
Studies. Contributions to Biblical and Patristic Literature. Third
series, 3. Eds. D. C. Parker/D. G. K. Taylor; Piscataway, N.J.:
(PSHJBT1SFTT o
Bjerkelund, C. J. Parakalô (BTN 1; Oslo, Tromsø, Copenhagen, Stockholm: Uni-
1967 versitetsforlaget).
Bjerkelund, C. J. Form und Funktion paulinischer Argumentation (WUNT; Tü-
2013 bingen: Mohr Siebeck).
Blomqvist, J. On adversative Coordination in Ancient Greek and as a Universal
1981 Linguistic Phenomenon (AAU.ASLU 3:2; Stockholm: Almqvist
8JLTFMM o
350 Bibliography
Bocheński, J. M./ Grundriß der formalen Logik (UTB 59; 5th ed.; Paderborn:
Menne, A. Schöningh).
1983
Bornkamm, G. Paulus (UB 19; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer).
1969
Bousset, W. ‘Soden, Dr. theol. Hermann Freiherr von, Die Schriften des neu-
1903 en Testaments […]’, in ThLZo<SFWJFXPGWPO4PEFO
1902]
Bouttier, M. L’Épître de Saint Paul aux Éphesiens $/5*9C(FOÒWF-BCPS
1991 et Fides).
Braun, H. An die Hebräer (HNT 14; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
1984
Brennecke, H. C. ‘Priscillian, Priscillianismus’, in LThK27***o
1999
Brennecke, H. C. ‘Theophylakt’, in RGG4 VIII: 340.
2005
Bring, R. Pauli brev till galaterna (Tolkning NT; Stockholm: SKDB).
1958
Brinkmann, H. ‘Der Prolog im Mittelalter als literarische Erscheinung’, in Wir-
1964 kendes Wort o
Brock, S. ‘The Syriac Euthalian Material and the Philoxenian Version of
1979 the NT’, in ZNWo
Brown, R. E. An Introduction to the New Testament "OD#3FG-JC/FX:PSL
1997 /:%PVCMFEBZ
Brox, N. Der erste Petrusbrief (EKKNT XXI; Zürich: Benziger/Neukirch-
1979 en-Vluyn: Neukirchener).
Brucker, R. ‘Christushymnen’ oder ‘epideiktische Passagen’. Studien zum Stil-
1997 wechsel im Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt (FRLANT 176;
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Bühler, K. Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache (Ullstein
1978 Buch 3392; Frankfurt/Main: Ullstein [First published Jena:
Fischer 1934]).
Bultmann, R. Die drei Johannesbriefe (KEK 14; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
1967 Ruprecht).
Bultmann, R. Der zweite Brief an die Korinther (KEK, Sonderband; Göttingen:
1976 Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Burchard, Ch. A;V+BLPCVTo JOZNW o
1980a
Bibliography 351
Burchard, Ch. ‘Gemeindein der strohernen Epistel. Mutmaßungen über Jako-

1980b bus’, in D. Lührmann/G. Strecker (eds.), Kirche. Festschrift für
Günther Bornkamm zum 75. Geburtstag (Tübingen: Mohr Sie-
CFDL o
Burchard, Ch. Der Jakobusbrief (HNT 15/1; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
2000
Bush, P. G. ‘A Note on the Structure of 1 Timoty’, in NTSo
1990
Callahan, A. D. ‘Paul’s Epistle to Philemon: Toward an Alternative Argumentum’,
1993 in HThRo
Carriker, A. J. The Library of Eusebius of Caesarea (S.VigChr 67; Leiden: Brill).
2003
Casiday, A. M. Evagrius Ponticus -POEPO/FX:PSL /:3PVUMFEHF
2006
Christenson, D. Plautus Amphitruo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
2000
Clark, A. C. The Acts of the Apostles. A Critical Edition with Introduction
1933 and Notes on Selected Passages (Oxford: Clarendon).
Clarke, A. The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments […] in-
[1831]/1857 cluding the Marginal Readings and Parallel Texts: with a Com-
mentary and Critical Notes. A New Edition, with the Author’s Fi-
nal Corrections.7PMT*o7*/FX:PSL /:$BSMUPOBOE1PSUFS
[First published by J. Emory and B. Waugh, for the Methodist
Episcopal Church, at the conference office, 13 Crosby-Street. J.
$PMMPSE 1SJOUFS/FX:PSL /:>
Collins, J. J. Daniel. A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Hermeneia; Min-
1994 neapolis, Minn.: Fortress).
Conte, M.-E. ‘Deixis textuelle et Deixis am Phantasma’, in S. R. Anschütz (ed.),
1992 Texte, Sätze, Wörter und Moneme: Festschrift für Klaus Heger
zum 65. Geburtstag )FJEFMCFSH0SJFOUWFSMBH o
Conybeare, F. C. ‘On the Codex Pamphili and the Date of Euthalius’, in Journal of
1895 Philology o
Conybeare, F. C. ‘The date of Euthalius’, in ZNWo
1904
Conzelmann, H. 1 Corinthians. A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthi-
1975 ans (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, Pa: Fortress).
Conzelmann, H. Der erster Brief an die Korinther (KEK 5; 2nd ed., Göttingen: Van-
1981 denhoeck & Ruprecht).
Conzelmann, H. Acts of the Apostles (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, Pa: Fortress).
1987
352 Bibliography
Conzelmann, H./ Arbeitsbuch zum Neuen Testament (UTB 52; 9th ed.; Tübingen:
Lindemann, A. Mohr Siebeck).
1988
Conzelmann, H./ Arbeitsbuch zum Neuen Testament (UTB 52; 11th ed.; Tübingen:
Lindemann, A. Mohr Siebeck).
1995
Coseriu, E. Einführung in die allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft (UTB 1372;
1988 Tübingen: Franke).
Coseriu, E. Textlinguistik. Eine Einführung (UTB 1808; Tübingen: Franke).
1994
Coseriu, E. Geschichte der Sprachphilosophie. Von den Anfängen bis Rous-
2003 seau (UTB 2266; Tübingen: Franke).
Courtney, E. The Fragmentary Latin Poets (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
2003
Crisp, S. ‘Scribal Marks and Logical Paragraphs: discourse segmentation
2005 criteria in manuscripts of the Pauline corpus’, in P. A. Noss (ed.)
Current Trends in Scripture Translation: Definitions and Identity
6#4#VMMFUJO o
Cropp, M. J. Euripides Electra (Oxford: Aris & Phillips).
1988
Cross, F. L. 1 Peter: A Paschal Liturgy (London: Mowbray).
1954
Dahl, N. A. ‘›A New and Living Way‹: The Approach to God According to
1951 )FCSFXTo JOInt.o
Dahl, N. A. ‘Formgeschichtliche Beobachtungen zur Christusverkündigung
1954 in der Gemeindepredigt’, in W. Eltester (ed.) Neutestamentliche
Studien für Rudolf Bultmann #FSMJO5ÚQFMNBOO o
Dahl, N. A. ‘The Origin of the Earliest Prologues to the Pauline Letters’, in
1978/2000 %BIMo<"QQFBSFEĕSTUJOSemeiao>
Dahl, N. T. ‘Euodia and Syntyche and Paul’s Letter to the Philippians’, in L.
1995 . 8IJUF0 - :BSCSPVHI FET The Social World of the first
Christians. Essays in Honor of Wayne A. Meeks (Minneapolis,
.JOO'PSUSFTT o
Dahl, N. A. Matteusevangeliet. Ed. Å. Justnes (Haugesund: Akademisk fag-
1998 forlag).
Dahl, N. A. Studies in Ephesians. Introductory Questions, Text- and Edi-
2000 tion-critical Issues, Interpretation of Texts and Themes. Eds. D.
Hellholm/V. Blomkvist/T. Fornberg (WUNT 131; Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck).
Bibliography 353
Dahl, N. A. A&JOMFJUVOHTGSBHFO[VN&QIFTFSCSJFG JO%BIMo

2000a
Dahl, N. A. ‘Welche Ordnung der Paulusbriefewird vom Muratorischen Ka-
2000b OPOWPSBVTHFTFU[U JO%BIMo
Dahl, N. A. ‘The Origin of the Earliest Prologues to the Pauline Letters’, in
2000c %BIMo
Dahl, N. A. ‘The “Euthalian Apparatus” and the Affiliated “Argumenta”’ in
2000d %BIMo
Dalby, A. Cato On Farming (Blackawton: Prospect).
1998
Dalton, W. J. Christ’s Proclamation to the Spirits: A Study of 1 Peter 3:18–4:6
1965/1989 (AnBib 23; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute [rev. ed. 1989]).
Dawe, R. D. Sophoclis Tragoediae (Leipzig: Teubner).
1984
Denniston, J. D. The Greek Particles, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon).
1954
Dibelius, M. Die Formgeschichte des Evangeliums, 6th ed. (Tübingen: Mohr
19[33]/1971 Siebeck [2nd ed. 1933]).
Dibelius, M. ‘Der himmlische Kultus nach dem Hebräerbrief ’ in ThBl 21:
1942/1965 o < idem, Botschaft und Geschichte. Gesammelte Aufsätze
II,FECZ(#PSOLBNN 5àCJOHFO.PIS4JFCFDL o>
Dibelius, M./ The Pastoral Epistles (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, Pa.: Fortress).
Conzelmann, H.
1972
Dibelius, M./ Der Brief des Jakobus (KEK 15; 11th ed., Göttingen: Vanden-
Greeven, H. hoeck & Ruprecht).
1964
Dibelius, M./ A Commentary on the Epistle of James (Hermeneia: Philadelphia,
Greeven, H. Pa.: Fortress).
1976
Diggle, J. Euripidis Fabulae*o*** 0YGPSE0YGPSE6OJWFSTJUZ1SFTT
o
Dindorfius, G. Georgius Syncellus et Nicephorus Cp. Vol. I (Corpus Scriptorum
1829 Historiae Byzantinae; Bonn: Weber).
Dindorfius, G. Scholia Graeca in Homeri Odysseam (Oxford: Oxford University
1855/1862 Press). [Reprinted: Amsterdam, Hakkert 1962]
Dindorfius, L. Historici Graeci Minores II (Leipzig: Teubner).
1871
354 Bibliography
von Dobschütz, E. ‘Ein Beitrag zur Euthaliusfrage’, in Centralblatt für Bibliotheks-

1893 weseno
von Dobschütz, E. ‘A hitherto Unpublished Prologue to the Acts of the Apostles
1898 (probably by Theodore of Mopsuestia)’, in AJT o
von Dobschütz, E. ‘Euthaliusstudien’, in ZKGo
1899
von Dobschütz, E. Die Thessalonicher-Briefe (KEK 10; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
1909/1974 Ruprecht [repr. 1974]).
Donelson, L. R. Pseudepigraphy and Ethical Argument in the Pastoral Epistles
1986 (HUTh 22; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
Doty, W. G. Letters in Primitive Christianity (Philadelphia, Pa.: Fortress).
1973
Dover, K. Aristophanes Clouds (Oxford: Clarendon).
1968
Dover, K. J. Theocritus Selected Poems (London: Macmillan)
1971
Duckworth, G. E. T. Macci Plauti Epidicus /FX:PSL"SOP
1940/1979
Dunn, J. D. G. 3PNBOTo 8#$#%BMMBT 5FY8PSE#PPLT
1988
Dunn, J. D. G. The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Commentary
1996 on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Carlisle: Paternoster/Grand Rapids,
Mich.: Eerdmans).
Ehrhard, A. ‘Der Codex H ad epistulas Pauli und “Euthalios diaconos”, in
1891 Centralblatt für Bibliotheksweseno
Eisenstein, E. The printing press as an agent of change (Cambridge: Cambridge
1979/2005 University Press).
Elliott, J. H. 1 Peter. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary
2000 "OD##/FX:PSL /:%PVCMFEBZ
Engels, J. ‘Genera causarum’, in HWRo
1996
Ermert, K. Briefsorten. Untersuchungen zu Theorie und Empirie der Text-
1979 klassifikation (Reihe Germanistische Linguistik 20; Tübingen:
Niemeyer).
Fee, G. The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids,
1987 Mich.: Eerdmans).
Fee, G. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians (NICNT; Grand Rapids, Mich.:
1995 Eerdmans).
Bibliography 355
Feld, H. ‘Der Hebräerbrief: Literarische Form, religionsgeschichtlicher

1987 Hintergrund, theologische Fragen’, in ANRW II. 25.4 (Berlin: de
(SVZUFS o
Feldmeier, R. Die Christen als Fremde. Die Metapher der Fremde in der antiken
1992 Welt, im Urchristentum und im 1 Petrusbrief (WUNT 64; Tübin-
gen: Mohr Siebeck).
Feldmeier, R. Der erste Brief des Petrus (ThHKNT 15/1; Leipzig: Evangelische
2005 Verlagsanstalt).
Fiori, B. The Function of Personal Example in the Socratic and Pastoral
1986 Epistles (AnBib 105; Rome: Biblical Institute Press).
Fischer, E. Die Ekloge des Phrynichos (Berlin: de Gruyter).
1974
Fischer, K. M. Tendenz und Absicht des Epheserbriefes (FRLANT 111; Göttin-
1973 gen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Fitzmyer, J. A. Romans. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary
1993 "OD#$/FX:PSL /:%PVCMFEBZ
Fitzmyer, J. A. The Letter to Philemon. A New Translation with Introduction
2000 BOE$PNNFOUBSZ "#$/FX:PSL%PVCMFEBZ
Foerster, R. Libanii opera VII (Leipzig: Teubner 1895). [Reprinted Hildes-
1895 heim: Olms 1963]
Fontaine, J. ‘Priszillian/Priszillianismus’, in TRE997**o
1997
Francis, F. O. ‘The Form and Function of the Opening and Closing Paragraph
1970 of James and I John’, in ZNWo
Frankemölle, H. Der Brief des Jakobus. Kapitel 1 ½5,(àUFSTMPI(àUFSTMP-
1994a her/Würzburg: Echter).
Frankemölle, H. Der Brief des Jakobus. Kapitel 2–5 ½5, (àUFSTMPI (à-
1994b tersloher/Würzburg: Echter).
Fuhrmann, M. Die antike Rhetorik (Artemis Einführungen 10; München/Zü-
1984 rich: Artemis).
Furnish, V. II Corinthians "OD#"(BSEFO$JUZ /:%PVCMFEBZ
1984
Gärtner, B. Galaterbrevet (KomNT 9; Stockholm: EFS-förlaget).
1998
(ĮĺįĹĲ ): Books and Readers in the Early Church. A History of Early Chris-
1995 tian Texts /FX)BWFO $POO-POEPO:BMF6OJWFSTJUZ1SFTT
Gast, W. ‘Definition’, in HWRo
1994
356 Bibliography
Geissner, H. ‘Lasswell-Formel’, in HWRo

2001
Genette, G. Paratexts. Thresholds of Interpretation (Cambridge: Cambridge
1997 University Press).
Gibson, C. ‘Libanius, Hypotheses to the Orations of Demosthenes’, in C.
2003 Blackwell (ed.) Demos: Classical Athenian Democracy, The Stoa:
a consortium for electronic publication in the humanities [www.
stoa.org].
Gielen, M. Tradition und Theologie neutestamentlicher Haustafelethik: ein
1990 Beitrag zur Frage einer christlichen Auseinandersetzung mit ge-
sellschaftlichen Normen (BBB 75; Frankfurt am Main: Anton
Hein).
Gigon, O. Boethii Consolationis philosophiae libri quinque (Zürich: Arte-
1969 mis).
Gnilka, J. Der Philemonbrief (HThK 10/4; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder).
1982
Gnilka, J. Der Epheserbrief (HThK 10/2; 4th ed.; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder).
1990
Gnilka, J. Der Kolosserbrief (HThK 10/1; 2nd ed.; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder).
1991
Götte, J./ Vergil: Landleben. Bucolica, Georgica, Catalepton. Vergil-Viten
Götte, M./ (München: Heimeran).
Bayer, K.
1981
Goppelt, L. Der Erste Petrusbrief (KEK 12/1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
1978 Ruprecht).
Grässer, E. An die Hebräer (Hebr 1–6) (EKK 17/1: Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neu-
1990 kirchener/Zürich: Benziger).
Grässer, E. An die Hebräer (Hebr 7,1–10,18) (EKK 17/2: Neukirchen-Vluyn:
1993 Neukirchener/Zürich: Benziger).
Grässer, E. An die Hebräer (Hebr 10,19–13,25) (EKK 17/3: Neukirchen-
1997 Vluyn: Neukirchener/Zürich: Benziger).
Grafton, A./ Christianity and the Transformation of the Book (Cambridge:
Williams, M. Belknap).
2006
Grant, R. M. Theophilus of Antioch Ad Autolycum (Oxford: Clarendon).
1970
Grözinger, A. ‘Paränese’, in HWRo
2003
Bibliography 357
Gualandri, I. Eutecnii Paraphrasis in Nicandri Theraica (Milano/Varese: Isti-

1968 tuto Editoriale Cisalpino).
Gülich, E./ ‘Textsorten-Probleme’, in Linguistische Probleme der Textanaly-
Raible, W. se. Jahrbuch 1973 des Instituts für deutsche Sprache (Sprache der
1975 (FHFOXBSU%àTTFMEPSG4DIXBOO o
Gülich, E./ ‘Überlegungen zu einer makrostrukturellen Textanalyse: J.
Raible, W. Thurber, The Lover and His Lass’, in T. A. van Dijk and J. S. Petöfi
1977 (eds.) Grammars and Descriptions (RTT 1; Berlin: de Gruyter):
o
Guillaumont, A./ Évagre le Pontique Traité Pratique ou Le Moine*o** 4$o
Guillaumont, C. Paris: Cerf).
1971
Guinot, J.-N. ‘Theodoret von Kyrrhos’, in TRE999***o
2002
Gyllenberg, R. ‘Die Komposition des Hebräerbriefes’, in SEÅo
1957/58
Haenchen, E. Die Apostelgeschichte (KEK 3; 14th ed., Göttingen: Vandenhoeck
1965 & Ruprecht).
Hannick, Chr. ‘Theophylakt von Achrida’, in TRE999***o
2002
Harnack, A. ‘Excerpte aus dem Muratorischen Fragment (saec. XI. et XII.)’,
1898 in ThLZo
Harris, J. R. ‘Stichometry’, in AJP o o
1883
Harris, J. R. Stichometry (London: C. J. Clay).
1893
Harris, J. R. ‘Euthalius and Eusebius’, in idem: Hermas in Arcadia and Other
1896 Essays $BNCSJEHF$BNCSJEHF6OJWFSTJUZ1SFTT o
Hartman, L. Kolosserbrevet (KomNT 12; Uppsala: EFS-förlaget).
1985
Harweg, R. Pronomina und Textkonstitution (Beihefte zu Poetica 2; 2nd ed.,
1979a München: Fink).
Harweg, R. ‘Dauer-Deixis oder Wie sind Beschriftungen zu lesen?’, in ORBIS
1979b o
Heger, Kl. Monem, Wort, Satz und Text (Konzepte der Sprach- und Litera-
1976 turwissenschaft 8; 2nd augmented ed.; Tübingen: Niemeyer).
Heger, Kl. ‘Langue und Parole’, in V. Ágel/R.Hessky (eds.), Offene Fragen
1992 – offene Antworten in der Sprachgermanistik (Reihe Germanist-
JTDIF-JOHVJTUJL5àCJOHFO/JFNFZFS o
358 Bibliography
Hegermann, H. Der Brief an die Hebräer (ThHK 16; Berlin: Evangelische Ver-
1988 lagsanstalt).
Heither, Th. Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romanos. Liber primus,
1990 liber secundus (FC 2/1, 2/2; Freiburg i.Br.: Herder).
Hellholm, D. Das Visionenbuch des Hermas als Apokalypse. Formgeschichtli-
1980 che und texttheoretische Studien zu einer literarischen Gattung
(CB.NT 13/I; Lund: Gleerup).
Hellholm, D. ‘The Problem of Apocalyptic Genre and the Apocalypse of John’
1986 in Semeiao
Hellholm, D. ‘Methodological Reflections on the Problem of Definition of Ge-
1991 neric Texts’, in J. J. Collins/J. H. Charlesworth (eds.), Mysteries
and Revelations. Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Colloqui-
um +41444IFďFME+4051SFTT o
Hellholm, D. ‘Från judisk tvåvägslära till kristen dopkatekes. En inblick i till-
1994 komsten av en första kyrkoordning’, in R. Hvalvik/H. Kvalbein
(eds.), Ad Acta. Studier til Apostlenes gjerninger og urkristendom-
mens historie. Festskrift til Edvin Larsson på 70-årsdagen (Oslo:
7FSCVN o
Hellholm, D. ‘Enthymemic Argumentation in Paul’, in T. Engberg-Pedersen
1994/1995 (ed.), Paul in his Hellenistic Context (Minneapolis, Minn./Edin-
CVSHI'PSUSFTT55$MBSL o
Hellholm, D. ‘Substitutionelle Gliederungsmerkmale und die Kompositi-
1995 on des Matthäusevangeliums’, in T. Fornberg/D. Hellholm/C.
Hellholm (eds.) Texts and Contexts. Biblical Texts in Their Tex-
tual and Situational Contexts. Essays in Honor of Lars Hartman
(Oslo/Copenhagen/Stockholm/Boston: Scandinavian Univer-
TJUZ1SFTT o
Hellholm, D. A%JFBSHVNFOUBUJWF'VOLUJPOWPO3ÚNFSo JONTSo
1997 411.
Hellholm, D. ‘The “Revelation-Schema” and Its Adaptation in the Coptic
1998 Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter’, in SEÅo
Hellholm, D. ‘The Impact of the Situational Context för Paul’s Use of Baptist-
2003 mal Traditions in His Letters’, in D. Aune/T. Seland/J. Ulrichsen
(eds.), Neotestamentica et Philonica. Studies in Honor of Peder
#PSHFO /54-FJEFOo#PTUPO#SJMM o
Hellholm, D. ‘Deliberations on the Nature of the Church in the Shepherd of
2007 Hermas’, in TTK oo
Hellholm, D. A.PTFTBTϢϧрϨϭϫϭ϶PGUIFɀϟϩϟϧпϢϧϟϦфϨϥo1BVMBTϢϧрϨϭϫϭ϶PG
2008 the καινὴ διαθήκη. Argumenta amplificationis in $PSo
in ZNWo
Bibliography 359
Hellholm, D. ‘The Shepherd of Hermas’, in W. Pratscher (ed.) The Apostolic

2010 Fathers. An Introduction (Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press):
o <(FSNBO PSJHJOBM (ÚUUJOHFO 7BOEFOIPFDL 3VQ
SFDIUo>
Hellholm, D./ ‘Paraenesis as an Ancient Genre-designation. The Case of the
Blomkvist, V. “Euthalian Apparatus” and the “Affiliated Argumenta”’, in J.
2004 4UBSS5&OHCFSH1FEFSTFOo
Hellwig, P. ‘Titulus oder Über den Zusammenhang von Titeln und Texten’,
1984 in Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistiko
Helm, R. Eusebius Werke VII. Die Chronik des Hieronymus (Leipzig: J. C.
1913 Hinrich’sche Buchhandlung).
Hemmerdinger, B. ‘L’Auteur de l’édition «Euthalienne»’, in F. Dölger and H.-G. Beck
1960 (eds.) Acten des XI. Internationalen Byzantinistenkongresses,
München 1958 .àODIFO$)#FDL o
Hemmerdinger, B. ‘Euthaliana’, in Journal of Theological Studieso
1960a
Henne, H. Sprachpragmatik. Nachschrift einer Vorlesung (Reihe Germani-
1975 stische Lingustik 3; Tübingen: Niemeyer).
Henry, P./ Plotini Opera I (Oxford: Clarendon).
Schwyzer, H.-R.
1964
Holmstrand, J. Markers and Meaning in Paul (CB.NT 28; Stockholm: Almqvist
1997 & Wiksell).
Holthuis, S. Intertextualität. Aspekte einer rezeptionsorientierten Konzeption
1993 (Stauffenberg Colloquium 28; Tübingen: Stauffenberg).
Holtz, T. Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher (EKKNT XIII; Zürich: Ben-
1986 ziger/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener).
Hoppe, R. ‘Der Jakobusbrief als briefliches Zeugnis hellenistisch und hel-
2001a lenistisch-jüdisch geprägter Religiosität’, in J. Beutler (ed.), Der
neue Mensch in Christus. Hellenistische Anthropologie und Ethik
im Neuen Testament 2%'SFJCVSHJ#S)FSEFS o
Hoppe, R. ‘Jakobusbief ’, in RGG4*7 o
2001b
Horner, G. W. The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Northern Dialect
1905 […], Volume III, The Epistles of St. Paul (Oxford: Clarendon).
Householder, F. W. The Syntax of Apollonius Dyscolus (Amsterdam Studies in the
1981 Theory and History of Linguistic Science, Series III/Studies in
the History of Linguistics 23, Amsterdam: Benjamins).
360 Bibliography
Hübner, H. Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments. Band 3: Hebräerbrief,

1995 Evangelien und die Offenbarung. Epilegomena (Göttingen: Van-
denhoeck & Ruprecht).
Hübner, H. An Philemon / An die Kolosser / An die Epheser (HNT 12; Tübin-
1997 gen: Mohr Siebeck).
Hülser, K. Die Fragmente zur Dialektik der Stoiker: Neue Sammlung der
1987 Texte mit deutscher Übersetzung und Kommentar, Vol. 2 (Stutt-
gart: Frommann).
Islinger, M. ‘Die Verdienste des Euthalius um den neutestamentlichen Bibel-
1867 text’, in Jahres-Bericht über das Königliche Lyceum und über das
K. Gymnasium und die lateinische Schule zu Regensburg für das
Studienjahr 1866/67 4UBEUBNIPG+PTFQI.BZS o
Jervell, J. Gud og hans fiender. Forsøk på å tolke Romerbrevet (Oslo: Uni-
1973 versitetsforlaget).
Jervell, J. Die Apostelgeschichte (KEK 3; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup-
1998 recht).
Jewett, R. Romans. A Commentary (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, Minn.: For-
2007 tress).
Johanson, B. C. To All the Brethren. A Text-Linguistic and Rhetorical Approach to
1987 1 Thessalonians (CB.NT 16; Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell).
Johnson, L. T. The Gospel of Luke (Sacra Pagina 3; Collegville, Minn.: Liturgical
1991 Press).
Johnson, L. T. The Letter of James. A New Translation with Introduction and
1995 Commentary "OD#"/FX:PSL /:%PVCMFEBZ
Johnson, L. T. The First and Second Letter to Timothy. A New Translation with
2001 Introduction and Commentary "OD# " /FX :PSL /:
Doubleday).
Jülicher, A./ Einleitung in das Neue Testament. 7th edition (Tübingen: Mohr
Fascher, E. Siebeck).
1931
Käsemann, E. An die Römer, 3rd ed. (HNT 8a; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
1974
Kenney, E. J. P. Ovidi Nasonis Amores, Medicamina faciei femineae, Ars amato-
1961 ria, Remedia Amoris (Oxord: Clarendon).
Kieffer, R. Filemonbrevet, Judasbrevet och Andra Petrusbrevet (KomNT 18;
2001 Stockholm: EFS-förlaget).
Kim, Ch.-H. Form and Structure of the Familiar Greek Letter of Recommenda-
1972 tion (SBLDS4; Missoula, Mont.: Society of Biblical Literature).
Klauck, H.-J. Der erste Johannesbrief (EKKNT XIII/1; Zürich: Benziger/Neu-
1991 kirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener).
Bibliography 361
Klauck, H.-J. Der zweite und dritte Johannesbrief (EKKNT XIII/2; Zürich:
1992 Benziger/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener).
Klauck, H.-J. Die antike Briefliteratur und das Neue Testament (UTB 2022;
1998 Paderborn: Schöningh).
Klaus, G. ‘Supposition’, in idem (ed.), Philosophisches Wörterbuch II, 11th
1975 ed. (Leipzig: VEB Bibliographisches Institut): 1193.
Klein, M. ‚Ein vollkommenes Werk‘. Vollkommenheit, Gesetz und Gericht
1995 als theologische Themen des Jakobusbriefes (BWANT 19; Stutt-
gart: Kohlhammer).
Kluge, Th. ‘Die georgischen Übersetzungen des Neuen Testamentes’, in
1911 ZNW o
Kluge, Th. ‘Über zwei altgeorgische neutestamentliche Handschriften’, in
1956 NTo
Kneal, W./ The Development of Logic (Oxford: Clarendon).
Kneal, M.
1978
Koch, D.-A. ‘Kollektenbericht, ‚Wir‘-Bericht und Itinerar’, in idem, Hellenis-
2008 tisches Christentum. Schriftverständnins – Ekklesiologie – Ge-
schichte (NTOA 65; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht):
o
Koester, H. Introduction to the New Testament. Vol. 2: History and Litera-
2000 ture of Early Christianity, 2ndFE #FSMJOo/FX:PSL /:EF
Gruyter).
Konradt, M. Christliche Existenz nach dem Jakobusbrief. Eine Studie zu seiner
1998 soteriologischen und ethischen Konzeption (StUNT 22; Göttin-
gen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Konradt, M. Gericht und Gemeinde. Eine Studie zur Bedeutung und Funktion
2003 von Gerichtsaussagen im Rahmen der paulinischen Ekklesiologie
und Ethik im 1 Thess und 1 Kor #;/8#FSMJOo/FX:PSL
/:EF(SVZUFS
Kremendahl, D. Die Botschaft der Form. Zum Verhältnis von antiker Epistolo-
2000 graphie und Rhetorik im Galaterbrief (NTOA 46; Freiburg, CH:
Universitätsverlag/Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Kümmel, W. G. Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 17th ed. (Heidelberg: Quelle
1973 & Meyer).
Kümmel, W. G. Introduction to the New Testament (London: SCM).
1975
Kürzdörfer K. Der Charakter des Jakobusbriefes. Eine Auseinandersetzung mit
1966 den Thesen von A. Meyer und M. Dibelius (Diss. theol., Evange-
lisch-Theologische Fakultät Tübingen).
362 Bibliography
Lambrecht, J. A"4USVDUVSBM"OBMZTJTPGćFTTBMPOJBOTow JO,1%POGSJFE+

2000 Beutler (eds.), The Thessalonian Debate. Methodological Discord
or Methodological Synthesis? (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans):
o
Lampe, G. W. H. A Patristic Greek Lexicon, G. W. H. Lampe, Oxford: Oxford Uni-
1961/1968 versity Press 1961 [repr. 1968].
Lampe, P. ‘Keine ›Sklavenflucht‹ des Onesimus’, in ZNWo
1985
Lampe, P. ‘An Philemon’, in N. Walter, E. Reinmuth, P. Lampe, Die Briefe an
1998 die Philipper, Thessalonicher und an Philemon (NTD 8/2; Göttin-
HFO7BOEFOIPFDL3VQSFDIU o
Larsen, K. B. ‘Treasures in Clay Jars: The Modesty Topos in the Dead Sea
2008 Scrolls’. Paper delivered at Early Christianity: Religion, Culture,
and Literature, Faculty of Theology, Århus, Jan 24th, 2008.
Lausberg, H. Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik. Eine Grundlegung der Lite-
1973 raturwissenschaft, 2 Vol., 2nd ed. (München: Hueber).
Lausberg, H. Handbook of Literary Rhetoric. Tr. M. T. Bliss/A. Jansen/ D. E.
1998 Orton (Leiden: Brill). [German original: idem, Handbuch der
literarischen Rhetorik. Eine Grundlegung der Literaturwissen-
schaft (3rd ed.; Munich: Hueber) 1990.]
Lefkowitz, M. R. The lives of the Greek poets (Baltimore, Md.: John Hopkins Uni-
1981 versity Press).
Leutzsch, M. Die Bewährung der Wahrheit. Der dritte Johannesbrief als Doku-
1994 ment urchristlichen Alltags (Stätten und Formen der Kommuni-
kation im Altertum; BAC 16; Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag
Trier).
Leutzsch, M./ Papiasfragmente / Hirt des Hermas (SUC 3; Darmstadt: Wissen-
Körtner, U. H. J. schaftliche Buchgesellschaft).
1998
Lietzmann, H. An die Römer (HNT 8; 4th ed., Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
1933/1971
Lietzmann, H. Zeitrechnung der römischen Kaiserzeit des Mittelalters und der
1934/1984 Neuzeit für die Jahre 1–2000 n.Chr. 4. Auflage durchgesehen von
,VSU"MBOE #FSMJO/FX:PSLEF(SVZUFS
Lightfoot, J. B. Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon (London/
1892/1959 /FX:PSL.BDNJMMBOSFQS(SBOE3BQJET .JDI;POEFSWBO
Lincoln, A. T. Ephesians (WBC 42; Dallas, Tex.: Word Books).
1990
Lindemann, A. Paulus im ältesten Christentum (BHTh 58; Tübingen: Mohr Sie-
1979 beck)
Bibliography 363
Lindemann, A. Der Kolosserbrief (ZBK 10; Zürich: Theologischer Verlag Zü-

1983 rich).
Lindemann, A. Der Epheserbrief (ZBK 8; Zürich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich).
1985
Lindemann, A. Paulus, Apostel und Lehrer der Kirche (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
1999
Lindemann, A. Der erste Korintherbrief (HNT 9/1; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
2000
Lindsay, W. M. T. Macci Plauti Comoediae (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
1904
von Lips, H. Glaube – Gemeinde – Amt: zum Verhältnis der Ordination in den
1979 Pastoralbriefen (FRLANT 122; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup-
recht).
von Lips, H. ‘Die Haustafel als ›Topos‹ im Rahmen der urchristlichen Paräne-
1994 se: Beobachtungen anhand des 1. Petrusbriefes und des Titus-
briefes”, in NTSo
Lohmeyer, E. Die Briefe an die Philipper, an die Kolosser und an Philemon
1953/1974 (KEK 9/1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Lohmeyer, E. Die Briefe an die Philipper, an die Kolosser und an Philemon
1964 (KEK 9/1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Löhr, W. ‘Priscillianus/Priscillianisten’, in RGG4 VI: 1668.
2003
Lohse, E. Die Briefe an die Kolosser und an Philemon (KEK 9/2; Göttingen:
Lohse, E. Colossians and Philemon. A Commentary on the Epistles to the
1971 Colossians and to Philemon (Hermeneia: Philadelphia, Pa: For-
tress).
Lohse, E. ‘Glauben und Werke. Zur Theologie des Jakobusbriefes’, in idem,
1973a Die Einheit des Neuen Testaments. Exegetische Studien zur Theo-
logie des Neuen Testaments (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup-
SFDIU o
Lohse, E. ‘Paränese und Kerygma im 1. Petrusbrief ’, in idem, Die Einheit
1973b des Neuen Testaments. Exegetische Studien zur Theologie des Neu-
en Testaments (ÚUUJOHFO7BOEFOIPFDL3VQSFDIU o
Lohse, E. Der Brief an die Römer (KEK 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
2003 Ruprecht).
364 Bibliography
Lührmann, D. ‘Freundschaftsbrief trotz Spannungen. Zu Gatung und Aufbau

1986 des Ersten Korintherbriefs’, in W. Schrage (ed.), Studien zum
Text und zur Ethik des Neuen Testaments. Festschrift zum 80. Ge-
burtstag von Heinrich Greeven #;/8#FSMJOo/FX:PSL
/:EF(SVZUFS o
Luz, U. Der Brief an die Epheser (NTD 8/1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
1998a 3VQSFDIU o
Luz, U. Der Brief an die Kolosser (NTD 8/2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
1998b Ruprucht).
Lyons, J. Semantics, Vol. 1 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press).
1977
Lyons, J. ‘Deixis and anaphora’, in idem, Natural Language and Universal
1991 Grammar. Essays in Linguistic Theory, Vol. 1 (Cambridge, UK:
$BNCSJEHF6OJWFSTJUZ1SFTT o
Malherbe, A. J. Ancient Epistolary Theorists (Sources for Biblical Study 19; At-
1988 lanta, Ga.: Scholars Press).
Malherbe, A. J. The Letters to the Thessalonians. A New translation with Introduc-
2000 tion and Commentary "OD##/FX:PSL /:%PVCMFEBZ
Marchand, J. W. ‘The Gothic Evidence for the ‘Euthalian Matter’’, in HThR 49:
1956 o
Markschies, Ch. ‘Pamphilos’, in DNP 4UVUUHBSUo8FJNBS.FU[MFS
2000
Marshall, I. H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles
1999 (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark).
Marshall, P. K. Cornelii vitae cum fragmentis (Leipzig: Teubner).
1977
Martin, J. Antike Rhetorik. Technik und Methode (HAW II.3; München:
1974 Beck).
Martin, R. A. ‘The Earliest Messianic Interpretation of Genesis 3:15’, in JBL 84:
1965 o
Martin, R. P. James (WBC 48; Waco, Tex.: Word Books).
1988
Martin, T. W. ‘Apostasy to Paganism: The Rhetorical Stasis of the Galatian
1995 Controversy’, in JBLo
Martin, T. W. Metaphor and Composition in 1 Peter (SBLDS 131; Atlanta, Ga.:
1992 Scholars Press).
Martyn, J. L. Galatians. A New Translation with Introduction and Commen-
1997 tary "OD#"/FX:PSL /:%PVCMFEBZ
Bibliography 365
Mattei, P. Tertullien Le Mariage Unique (SC 343; Paris: Cerf).

1988
Marxsen, W. Der zweite Thessalonicherbrief (ZBK 11/2; Theologischer Verlag
1982 Zürich).
Meiser, M. Galater (NTP 9; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
2007
Menne, A. Einführung in die Methodologie (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
1980 Buchgesellschaft).
Merz, A. Die fiktive Selbstauslegung des Paulus. Intertextuelle Studien zur
2004 Intention und Rezeption der Pastoralbriefe (NTOA 52; Göttin-
gen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Metzger, B. M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (Stuttgart:
1994 United Bible Societies).
Micaelli, C./ Tertullien La Pudicité 4$o1BSJT$FSG
Munier, Ch.
1993
Michel, O. Der Brief an die Hebräer (KEK 13; 6th ed., Göttingen: Vanden-
1966 hoeck & Ruprecht).
Michel, O. Der Brief an die Römer (KEK 4; 5th ed., Göttingen: Vandenhoeck
1978 & Ruprecht).
Mill, J. Η ΚΑΙΝΗ ΔΙΑΘΗΚΗ. Novum Testamentum Græcum, cum lec-
1707 tionibus variantibus MSS. Exemplarium, Versionum, Editionum,
SS. Patrum et Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum, et in easdem notis
(Oxford: Theatrum Sheldonianum).
Mitchell, M. M. ‘Concerning ΠΕΡΙ ΔΕ in 1 Corinthians’, in NTo
1989
Mitchell, M. M. Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation. An exegetical Investiga-
1991 tion of the Language and Composition of 1 Corinthians (HUTh
28; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
Mitchell, M. M. ‘John Chrysostom on Philemon’, in HThRo
1995
Mitchell, M. M. ‘Reading Rhetoric with Patristic Exegets. John Chrysostom on
2001 (BMBUJBOT JO":$PMMJOT...JUDIFMM FET Antiquity and
Humanity. Essays on Ancient Religion and Philosophy. Presented
to Hans Dieter Betz on His 70th Birthday (Tübingen: Mohr Sie-
CFDL o
Mitchell, M. M. ‘PTebt 703 and the Genre of 1 Timothy: The Curious Career of
2002 a Ptolemaic Papyrus in Pauline Scholarship’, in NTo
366 Bibliography
Mitchell, M. M. ‘The Corinthian Correspondence and the Birth of Pauline

2003 Hermeneutics’, in T. J. Burke and J. K. Elliott, Paul and the Cor-
inthians: Studies on a Community Conflict: Essays in Honour of
Margaret Thrall /54-FJEFO#SJMM o
Mojsisch, B. Aurelius Augustinus: De Magistro/Über den Lehrer (Stuttgart:
1998 Reklam).
Müller, P. Der Brief an Philemon (KEK 9/3; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
2012 Ruprecht).
Müller, U. B. Der Brief des Paulus an die Philipper (ThHKNT 11/1; 2nd ed.,
2002 Leipzig: Evangeliche Verlagsanstalt).
Müller, W. G. ‘Brief ’, in HWRo
1994
Murdock, J. The Syriac New Testament Translated into English from the Syri-
1893/2001 ac Peshitto Version (Gorgias Reprint Series 18; Piscataway, N.J.:
Gorgias).
Murray, G. Two Plays of Menander /FX:PSL0YGPSE6OJWFSTJUZ1SFTT
1945
Mussner, F. Der Jakobusbrief (HThKXIII/1; 5th ed.; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder).
1987
Nauck, W. ‘Zum Aufbau des Hebräerbriefes’, in W. Eltester (ed.) Judentum,
1960 Urchristentum, Kirche. Festschrift für Joachim Jeremias (BZNW
#FSMJO5ÚQFMNBOO o
Nickau, K. Liber qui dicitur De adfinium vocabulorum differentia (Leipzig:
1966 Teubner)
Niebuhr, K.-W. ‘Der Jakobusbrief im Licht frühjüdischer Diasporabriefe’, in NTS
1998 o
Nies, F. ‘Das Ärgernis Historiette. Für eine Semiotik der literarischen
1973 Gattung’, in Zeitschrift für romanische Philologieo
Noris, E. Annus et epochae Syromacedonum in vetustis urbium Syriae
1696 nummis præsertim Mediceis expositæ. Additis Fastis Consulari-
bus anonymi omnium optimis (Leipzig: Thomas Fritsch).
Nüsslein, Th. M. Tullius Cicero De inventione De optimo genere oratorum.
1998 Lateinisch-deutsch (Sammlung Tusculum; Darmstadt: Wissen-
schaftliche Buchgesellschaft).
Nygren, A. Pauli brev till romarna (Tolkning av NT; Stockholm: SKD).
1947
Oberlinner, L. Die Pastoralbriefe. Kommentar zum ersten Timotheusbrief
1994 (HThK XI 2/1; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder).
Oberlinner, L. Die Pastoralbriefe. Kommentar zum zweiten Timotheusbrief
1995 (HThK XI 2/2; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder).
Bibliography 367
Oberlinner, L. Die Pastoralbriefe. Kommentar zum Titusbrief (HThK XI 2/3;

1996 Freiburg i. Br.: Herder).
O’Brien, P. T. ‘Thanksgiving and the Gospel in Paul’, in NTSo
1974
O’Brien, P. T. Colossians, Philemon (WBC 44; Waco, Tex.: Word Books).
1982
Oepke, A. Der Brief des Paulus an die Galater (ThHKNT 9; 3rd ed., Berlin:
1973 Evangelische Verlagsanstalt).
Olsson, B. Första Petrusbrevet (KomNT 17; Stockholm: EFS-förlaget).
1982
Olsson, B. ‘A Social Scientific Criticism of 1 Peter’, in T. Fornberg/D. Hell-
1995 holm/Ch. Hellholm (eds.), Texts and Contexts. Biblical Texts in
Their Textual and Situational Contexts. Essays in Honor of Lars
Hartman 0TMP4DBOEJOBWJBO6OJWFSTJUZ1SFTT o
Omont, H. A/PUJDFTVSVOUSÒTBODJFONBOVTDSJUHSFDFOPODJBMFTEFT²QÔUSFT
1890 de Saint Paul’, in Notices et Extraits des Manuscrits de la Bi-
bliothèque Nationaleo
Opelt, I. ‘Epitome’, in RAC7o
1962
Paulsen, H. Der Zweite Petrusbrief und der Judasbrief (KEK 12/2; Göttingen:
Percy, E. Die Probleme der Kolosser- und Epheserbriefe (Skrifter utgivna
1946 av Kungl. Humanistiska Vetenskapssamfundet i Lund 39; Lund:
Gleerup).
Perdelwitz, E. R. Die Mysterienreligion und das Problem des 1 Petrusbriefes (RVV
1911 XI/3; Gießen: Töpelmann).
Perl, C. J. Aurelius Augustinus: Der Lehrer. De Magistro (Aurelius Augusti-
1974 nus Werke 17; 3rd ed.; Paderborn: Schöningh).
Pervo, R. I. Acts. A Commentary (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress).
2009
Petersen, N. R. Rediscovering Paul. Philemon and the Sociology of Paul’s Narra-
1985 tive World (Philadelphia, Pa: Fortress).
Pinborg, J./ ‘Supposition’, in R. Ritter/K. Gründer (eds.), Historisches Wör-
Meier- Oeser, S. terbuch der Philosophie,7PM #BTFM4DIXBCF$Po
1998
Plett, H. F. Einführung in die rhetorische Textanalyse (9th ed.; Hamburg:
2001 Buske).
Podskalsky, G. ‘Theophylaktos’, in LThK2 IX: 1475.
2000
368 Bibliography
Pokorný, P. Der Brief des Paulus an die Kolosser (ThHKNT 10/1, Berlin:
Pokorný, P. Der Brief des Paulus an die Epheser (ThHKNT 10/2; Leipzig:
Popkes, W. Adressaten, Situation und Form des Jakobusbriefes (SBS 125/126;
1986 Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk).
Popkes, W. ‘James and Paraenesis Reconsidered’, in T. Fornberg/D. Hell-
1995 holm/ Chr. Hellholm (eds.), Texts and Contexts. Biblical Texts in
Their Textual and Situational Contexts. Essays in Honor of Lars
Hartman 0TMP4DBOEJOBWJBO6OJWFSTJUZ1SFTT o
Popkes, W. Paränese und Neues Testament (SBS 168; Stuttgart: Katholisches
1996 Bibelwerk).
Popkes, W. Der Brief des Jakobus (ThHKNT 14; Leipzig: Evangelische Ver-
2001 lagsanstalt).
Popkes, W. ‘Paraenesis in the New Testament. An Exercise in Conceptuality’,
2004 JO+4UBSS5&OHCFSH1FEFSTFO FET o
Pradels, W./ ‘Das bisher vermisste Textstück in Johannes Chrysostomus, Ad-
Brändle, R./ versus Judaeos Oratio 2’, in ZACo
Heimgartner, M.
2001
Quine, W. V. Mathematical Logic (Revised Edition; Cambridge, Mass.: Har-
1951/1976 vard University Press).
Quinn, J. D. The Letter to Titus. A New Translation with Notes and Commen-
1990 tary and an Introduction to Titus "OD# /FX :PSL /:
Doubleday).
von Rad, G. Das erste Buch Mose (ATD 3/4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ru-
1981 precht).
Rahn, H. M. Fabii Quintiliani Institutionis oratoriae libri XII. Ausbildung
1972 des Redners Zwölf Bücher. Erster Teil (Darmstadt: Wissenschaft-
liche Buchgesellschaft).
Raible, W. Satz und Text. Untersuchungen zu vier romanischen Sprachen
1972 (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 132; Tübin-
gen: Niemeyer).
Raible, W. ‘Textlinguistische Überlegungen zu neutestamentlichen Texten’,
1975 in U. Gerber/E. Güttgemanns (eds.), ‘Linguistiche’ Theologie
(Forum Theologiae Linguisticae 3; 2nd ed. Bonn: Linguistica Bi-
CMJDB o
Raible, W. ‘Was sind Gattungen? Eine Antwort aus semiotischer und text-
1980 linguistischer Sicht’, in Poeticao
Bibliography 369
Raible, W. A"SUFO EFT ,PNNFOUJFSFOT o "SUFO EFS 4JOOCJMEVOH o "SUFO

1995 des Verstehens. Spielarten der generischen Intertextualität’, in
J. Assmann/B. Gladigow (eds.) Text und Kommentar (München:
'JOL o
Raible, W. Kognitive Aspekte des Schreibens (Schriften der Philosophisch-
1999 historischen Klasse der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissen-
schaften 14; Heidelberg: Winter).
Rand, E. K. et al. Servianorum in Vergilii carmina commentariorum editio Har-
1946 vardiana II (Lancastriae Pennsylvanianorum: Typographeum
Lancastreanum).
Rapp, Ch. Aristoteles Rhetorik (Aristoteles Werke in deutscher Überset-
2002a zung, Vol. 4/1; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft).
Rapp, Ch. Aristoteles Rhetorik (Aristoteles Werke in deutscher Überset-
2002b zung, Vol. 4/2; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft).
Rapske, B. M. ‘The Prisoner Paul in the Eyes of Onesimus’, in NTSo
1991
Reichert, A. Eine urchristliche praeparatio ad martyrium: Studien zur Kom-
1989 position, Traditionsgeschichte und Theologie des 1. Petrusbriefes
(BBET 22; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang).
Reichert, A. Der Römerbrief als Gratwanderung. Eine Untersuchung zur Ab-
2001 fassungsproblematik (FRLANT 194; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht).
Reinmuth, E. Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher (NTD 8/2; Göttingen: Van-
1998a EFOIPFDL3VQSFDIU o
Reinmuth, E. Der zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher (NTD 8/2; Göttingen:
1998b 7BOEFOIPFDL3VQSFDIU o
Reinmuth, E. Der Brief des Paulus an Philemon (ThHKNT 11/II; Leipzig:
Reiser, M. Sprache und literarische Formen des Neuen Testaments: Eine Ein-
2001 führung (UTB 2197; Paderborn: Schöningh).
Robbins, F. E. Ptolemy Tetrabiblos (LCL 435; Cambridge, Mass./London: Har-
1940/2001 vard University Press) [Reprinted 2001].
Robinson, J. A. Euthaliana (Texts and Studies III/1; Cambridge: Cambridge
1895 University Press).
Roloff, J. Der erste Brief an Timotheus (EKKNT XV; Zürich: Benziger/
1988 Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener).
Röwekamp, G. Cyrill von Jerusalem Mystagogicae Catecheses Mystagogische Ka-
1992 techesen (FC 7; Freiburg: Herder).
Rusten, J. ‘Dicaearchus and the Tales from Euripides’, in GRBSo
1982
370 Bibliography
Rydbeck, L. Fachprosa, vermeintliche Volkssprache und Neues Testament. Zur

1967 Beurteilung der sprachlichen Niveauunterschiede im nachklassi-
schen Griechisch (Lund: Gleerup 1967).
Rydbeck L. ‘Det nytestamentliga språkets inplacering i den samtida språk-
1995 miljön’, in T. Engberg-Pedersen/P. Bilde/L. Hannestad/J. Zahle
(eds.) Sproget i Hellenismen (Hellenismestudier 10; Aarhus: Aar-
hus Universitetsforlag).
Salmond, S. D. ‘Pamphilus’, in: Ante-Nicene Fathers WPM7* #VČBMP /:ćF
1886 $ISJTUJBO-JUFSBUVSF$PNQBOZ o
Sandnes, K. O. A3FWJTFE $POWFOUJPOT JO &BSMZ $ISJTUJBO 1BSBFOFTJT o l8PSL-
2004 ing Good‹ in 1 Peter as an Example’, in Starr/Engberg-Pedersen
FET o
Santini, C. Eutropii Breviarium ab urbe condita (Leipzig: Teubner).
1979
Schadel, E. Aurelius Augustinus. De magistro: Einführung, Übersetzung und
1975 Kommentar (Ph.D. Diss. Universität Würzburg).
Scheck, Th. P. Origen Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans I (Washington
2001 D. C.: Catholic University of America Press).
Schelkle, K. H. Die Petrusbriefe – Der Judasbrief (HThK XIII/2; 2nd ed.; Freiburg
1963 i. Br.: Herder).
Schenk, W. Die Philipperbriefe des Paulus (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer).
1984
4İĵĲĻĸĲ )o. ‘Erwägungen zum Rätsel des Hebräerbriefes’, in H. D. Betz/L.
1973 Schottroff (eds.), Neues Testament und christliche Existenz. Fest-
schrift für Herbert Braun 5àCJOHFO.PIS4JFCFDL o
4İĵĲĻĸĲ )o. Einleitung in die Schriften des Neuen Testament I: Die Briefe des
K. M. Fischer Paulus und die Schriften des Paulinismus (Berlin: Evangelische
1978 Verlagsanstalt).
4İĵĲĻĸĲ )o. Einleitung in die Schriften des Neuen Testament II: Die Evangeli-
K. M. Fischer en und die anderen neutestamentlichen Schriften (Berlin: Evan-
1979 gelische Verlagsanstalt).
Schepss, G. Priscilliani quae supersunt (CSEL XVIII; Wien: Tempsky).
1889
Schleyer, D. De baptismo, De oratione/Von der Taufe, Vom Gebet (FC 76;
2006 Turnhout: Brepols).
Schlier, H. Der Brief an die Galater (KEK 7; 12th ed., Göttingen: Vanden-
Schlier, H. Der Brief an die Epheser, 4th ed., (Düsseldorf: Patmos).
1963
Bibliography 371
Schlier, H. Der Römerbrief (HThK 6; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder).

1977
Schmidt, W. Herons von Alexandria Druckwerke und Automatentheater grie-
1899 chisch und deutsch herausgegeben (Leipzig: Teubner).
Schmithals, W. Der Römerbrief. Ein Kommentar (Gütersloh: Mohn).
1988
Schmitz, O./ ‘παρακαλέω, παράκλησις’, in ThWNT 5 (Stuttgart: Kohlham-
Stählin, G. NFS o
1954
Schnackenburg, R. Der Brief an die Epheser (EKK 10; Zürich: Benziger/Neukirchen-
1982 Vluyn: Neukirchener).
Schnelle, U. Einleitung in das Neue Testament (UTB 1830; 4th ed., Göttingen:
Schnelle, U. Die Johannesbriefe (ThHKNT 17; Leipzig: Evangelische Verlags-
2010 anstalt).
Schoeler, G. ‘Text und Kommentar in der klassisch-islamischen Tradition’ in
1995 J. Assmann/B. Gladigow (eds.) Text und Kommentar (Archäo-
logie der literarischen Kommunikation 4: München: Fink):
o
Schrage, W. ‘Der Jakobusbrief ’, in H. Balz/W. Schrage, Die ‘Katholischen’
1980 Briefe (NTD 10; 11th ed., Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Schrage, W. Ethik des neuen Testaments (GNT 4; 5th ed., Göttingen: Vanden-
Schrage, W. Der erste Brief an die Korinther. 1. Teilband 1Kor 1,1–6,11
1991 (EKKNT VII/2; Zürich: Benziger/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukir-
chener).
Schrage, W. Der erste Brief an die Korinther. 2. Teilband 1Kor 6,12–11,16
1995 (EKKNT VII/3; Zürich: Benziger/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukir-
chener).
Schurb, K. ‘Sixteenth-Century Lutheran-Calvinist Conflict on the Prote-
1990 vangelium’, in CTQo
Schwartz E./ Eusebius Werke ***o** -FJQ[JH+$)JOSJDITDIF#VDIBOEMVOH
Mommsen, Th.
o
Schweizer, Ed. Der Brief an die Kolosser (EKK 12; Zürich: Benziger/Neukir-
1976 chen-Vluyn: Neukirchener).
Sellin, G. ‘Die Paränese des Epheserbriefes’, in E. Brandt/P. S. Fiddes/J.
1996 Molthagen (eds.), Gemeinschaft am Evangelium. Festschrift für
Wiard Popkes -FJQ[JH&WBOHFMJTDIF7FSMBHTBOTUBMU o
372 Bibliography
Sellin, G. Der Brief an die Epheser (KEK 8; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &

2008 Ruprecht).
Selwyn, E. G. The First Epistle of St. Peter, 2nd ed. (London: Macmillan [repr.
1947/1964 1964].
Sievers, J. ‘The Ancient Lists of Contents of Josephus’ Antiquities’, in S. J. D.
2007 Cohen/J. J. Schwartz (eds.) Studies in Josephus and the Varieties
of Ancient Judaism (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 67;
-FJEFO#SJMM o
Slavitt, D. R. The Consolation of Philosophy. Anicius Manlius Severinus Bo-
2008 ethius (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).
Smith, O. L. Scholia Graeca in Aeschylum *o** -FJQ[JH5FVCOFS
o
von Soden, Herm. Die Schriften des neuen Testaments in ihrer ältesten erreichba-
1902 ren Textgestalt hergestellt auf Grund ihrer Textgeschichte. I. Teil, I.
Abteilung (Berlin: Arthur Glaue).
Solmsen, F. Hesiodi Theogonia Opera et dies Scutum (Oxford: Clarendon).
1970
Sorabji, R. The Philosophy of the Commentators. A Sourcebook. Vol. 3, Log-
2004 ics & Metaphysics (London: Duckworth).
Souter, A. The Text and Canon of the New Testament (London: Duckworth).
1913
Staab, K. Pauluskommentare aus der griechischen Kirche (NTA 15; Mün-
1933 ster: Aschendorf).
Stachowiak, L. R. ‘Die Erforschung der paulinischen Paränese im 20. Jahrhundert’,
1983 in CoTho
Stammerjohann, Handbuch der Linguistik. Allgemeine und angewandte Sprach-
H. (ed.) wissenschaft (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft).
1975
Standhartinger, Studien zur Entstehungsgeschichte & Intention des Kolosserbriefs
A. (NT.S 94; Leiden: Brill).
1999
Starr, J./ Early Christian Paraenesis in Context (BZNW 125; Berlin/New
Engberg- :PSLEF(SVZUFS
Pedersen, T. (eds.),
2004
Staudacher, P. Platon, Theaitetos – Der Sophist – Der Staatsmann (Platon Wer-
1970 ke in Acht Bänden, Bd. 6; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buch-
gesellschaft).
Steindorff, G. Lehrbuch der koptischen Grammatik (Chicago: University of
1951 Chicago Press).
Bibliography 373
Stowers, S. K. Letter Writing in Greco-Roman Antiquity (LEC; Philadelphia,

1986 Pa.: Westminster).
Strecker, G. AA%JF OFVUFTUBNFOUMJDIFO )BVTUBGFMO ,PM o VOE &QI
1989a o JO).FSLMFJO FE Neues Testament und Ethik. Für
Rudolf Schnackenburg 'SFJCVSHJ#S)FSEFS o
Strecker, G. Die Johannesbriefe (KEK 14; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup-
1989b recht).
Strecker, G. Literaturgeschichte des Neuen Testaments (UTB 1682; Göttingen:
Strohm, S. Ursprung der Biblia Deutsch von Martin Luther: Ausstellung in
1983 d. Württemberg. Landesbibliothek Stuttgart, 21. September– 19.
November 1983 (Katalog) Stuttgart: Württembergische Landesbi-
bliothek (Stuttgart: Quell-Verlag).
Stuhlmacher, P. Der Brief an Philemon (EKK 18; Zürich: Benziger/Neukirchen-
1975 Vluyn: Neukirchener).
Souček, J. B. ‘Zu den Problemen des Jakobusbriefes’, in EvTho
1958
van der Tak, J. G. Euthalius the Deacon: Prologues and Abstracts in Greek and
2003 Church Slavic Translation (Kirilo-Metodievski Studii 15; Sofia:
Kirilo-Metodievski Nauchen Centar).
Theissen, G. Untersuchungen zum Hebräerbrief (StNT 2; Gütersloh: Mohn).
1969
Thiselton, A. C. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. A Commentary on the Greek
2000 Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans).
Thrall, M. E. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Second Epistle to
1994 the Corinthians. Volume I (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark).
Thrall, M. E. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Second Epistle to
2000 the Corinthians. Volume II (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark).
Thurén, J. Das Lobopfer der Hebräer: Studien zum Aufbau und Anliegen
1973 vom Hebräerbrief 13 (AAÅ, serie A 47/1; Åbo: Akademis Förlag
1990).
Thurén, L. The Rhetorical Strategy of 1 Peter. With Special Regard to Am-
1990 biguous Expressions (Åbo: Åbo Akademis Förlag).
Tischendorf, C. Η ΚΑΙΝΗ ΔΙΑΘΗΚΗ. Novum Testamentum Graece. Editio ste-
1891 reotypa duodecima ad editionem viii. maiorem compluribus locis
emendatam conformata (Leipzig: Tauchnitz).
Toynbee, A. Greek Historical Thought from Homer to the Age of Heraclius
1950 (London: Dent).
Trapp, M. Greek and Latin Letters. An Anthology, with Translation (Cam-
2003 bridge: Cambridge University Press).
374 Bibliography
Trilling, W. Der zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher (EKKNT XIV; Zürich:

1980 Benziger/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener).
Trobisch, D. Die Paulusbriefe und die Anfänge der christlichen Publizistik (KT
1994 135; Gütersloh: Kaiser).
5Ŀļİĺ˦ ² A-FT²HMJTFTQBVMJOJFOOFTWVFTEVEFIPST+BDRVFT Ë JO
1964 StEv** #FSMJO"LBEFNJF7FSMBH o
Trubetzkoy, N. S. ‘Die Aussprache des griechischen Χ im 9. Jahrhundert n. Chr.’, in
1936 Glotta o
Tsuji, M. Glaube zwischen Vollkommenheit ud Verweltlichung. Eine Unter-
1997 suchung zur literarischen Gestalt und zur inhaltlichen Kohärenz
des Jakobusbriefes (WUNT 2/93; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
Übelacker, W. Der Hebräerbrief als Appell (CB.NT 21; Uppsala: Almqvist &
1989 Wiksell).
Übelacker, W. A1BSBFOFTJTPS1BSBDMFTJTo)FCSFXTBTB5FTU$BTF JO4UBSS&OH-
2004 CFSH1FEFSTFOo
Vallozza, M. ‘Encomion’, in HWRo
1994
Vanhoye, A. La Structure Littéraire de l’Épître aux Hébreux (SN1; Paris: Des-
1963/1976 clee de Brouwer [2nd ed., slightly revised 1976].
Vardanian, P. A. Euthalius. Werke, Untersuchungen und Texte (Kritische Ausgabe
1930 der armenischen Schriftsteller und Übersetzungen 3/1; Vienna:
Mechitaristen-Buchdr.).
Vedberg, A. Filosofins historia. Antiken och Medeltiden, Vol. 1, 2nd ed. (Stock-
1968 holm: Bonniers).
Verner, D. C. The Household of God. The Social World of the Pastoral Epistles
1983 (SBLDS 71; Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press).
Viciano, A. ‘Theodoretos’, in LThK2 IX: 1401.
2000
Vielhauer, Ph. Geschichte der urchristlichen Litertur: Einleitung in das Neue Tes-
1975 tament, die Apokryphen und die Apostolischen Väter (GLB; Ber-
MJOo/FX:PSL /:EF(SVZUFS
Vögtle, A. Der Judasbrief. Der zweite Petrusbrief (EKKNT XXII; Düssel-
1994 dorf: Benziger/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener).
Vouga, F. L’Épître de Saint Jacques $/59***B(FOÒWF-BCPSFU'JEFT
1984
Vouga, F. An die Galater (HNT 10; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
1998
Bibliography 375
Wagener, U. Die Ordnung des ‘Hauses Gottes’. Der Ort von Frauen in der Ec-
1994 clesiologie und Ethik der Pastoralriefe (WUNT 65/2: Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck).
Wagner, M. ‘A Chapter in Byzantine Epistolography: The Letters of Theodo-
1948 ret of Cyrrus’, in DOPo
Walter, N. Der Brief an die Philipper (NTD 8/2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
1998 3VQSFDIU o
Walter, N. ‘Nikolaos, Proselyt aus Antiochien und die Nikolaiten in Ephe-
2002 sus und Pergamon. Ein Beitrag auch zum Thema: Paulus und
Ephesus’, in ZNWo
Weiser, A. Der Zweite Brief an Timotheus (EKK 16/1; Düsseldorf: Benziger/
Weiss, H.-F. Der Brief an die Hebräer (KEK 13; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
1991 Ruprecht).
Weiss, J. ‘Beiträge zur Paulinischen Rhetorik’, in C. R. Gregory et al. (eds.),
1897 Theologische Studien. Festschrift für B. J. Weiss (Göttingen: Van-
EFOIPFDL3VQSFDIU o
Weiss, J. Der erste Korintherbrief (KEK 5; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
1910 Ruprecht) [Reprint 1970].
Welles, C. B. Royal Correspondence in the Hellenistic Period: A Study in Greek
1934 Epigraphy /FX)BWFO $POO:BMF6OJWFSTJUZ1SFTT
Welte, W. Moderne Linguistik: Terminologie/Bibliographie, Vol. 1 (Mün-
1974 chen: Hueber).
Wenham, G. J. Genesis 1–15 (WBC; Waco, Tex.: Word Books).
1987
Wessner, P. Aeli Donati quod fertur commentum Terenti I (Leipzig: Teubner)
1902
West, M. L. (ed.) Homeric Hymns. Homeric apocrypha. Lives of Homer (LCL 496;
2003 Cambridge, Mass./London: Harvard University Press).
Wettstein, J. Novum Testamentum Graecum (Amsterdam: Dommerian, re-
1752 printed in 1962, Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt).
Wilckens, U. Der Brief an die Römer (12–16) (EKK 6/3; Zürich: Benziger/
Willard, L. Ch. A Critical Study of the Euthalian Apparatus (Diss., New Haven,
1970 $POO:BMF6OJWFSTJUZ
Willard, L. Ch. A Critical Study of the Euthalian Apparatus "/55#FSMJOo
2009 /FX:PSLEF(SVZUFS
376 Bibliography
Williamson, G. A./ Eusebius The History of the Church from Christ to Constantine
Louth, A. (London: Penguin).
1989
Wilson, W. T. Love without Pretense. Romans 12,9–21 and Hellenistic-Jewish
1991 Wisdom Literature (WUNT 46/2; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
Wilson, W. T. The Hope of Glory. Education and Exhortation in the Epistle to
1997 the Colossians (NT.S 88; Leiden: Brill).
Windisch, H. Der zweite Korintherbrief (KEK 6; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
1924/1970 Ruprecht) [Reprint 1970].
Windisch, H. Der Hebräerbrief (HNT 14; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
1931
Windisch. H./ Die Katholischen Briefe (HNT 15; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
Preisker, H.
1951
Wolter, M. Die Pastoralbriefe als Paulustradition (FRLANT 148; Tübingen:
1988 Mohr Siebeck).
Wolter, M. Der Brief an die Kolosser. Der Brief an Philemon ½5,(à-
1993 tersloh: Mohn/Würzburg: Ecther).
Wordsworth, J./ Novum Testamentum Domini Nostri Iesu Christi Latine Secun-
White, H. J. dum Editionem Sancti Hieronymi1BSTQSJPSoRVBUUVPSFWBOHF-
1889/1898 lia (Oxford: Clarendon).
Woyke, J. Die neutestamentlichen Haustafeln. Ein kritischer und konstruk-
2000 tiver Forschungsüberblick (SBS 184; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bi-
belwerk).
Wuellner, W. H. ‘Der Jakobusbrief im Licht der Rhetorik und Textpragmatik’, in
1978 Linguistica Biblicao
Zacagni, L. Collectanea monumentorum veterum ecclesiae Græcæ ac Latinæ.
1698 Quæ hactenus in Vaticana Bibliotheca delituerunt. Tomus I [et
unicus] (Rome: Typis Sacræ Congreg. de Propag. Fide).
von Zahn, Th. ‘Neues und Altes über den Isagogiker Euthalius’, in Neue kirchli-
1904 che Zeitschrifto o
Zekl, H. G. Aristoteles, Topik (Aristoteles Organon Bd. 1; Darmstadt: Wis-
1997 senschaftliche Buchgesellschaft).
Zeller, D. Der erste Brief an die Korinther (KEK 5; Göttingen: Vanden-
Zuntz, G. The Ancestry of the Harklean New Testament (The British Acad-
1945 emy Supplemental Papers 7; London: Oxford University Press).
Zuntz, G. ‘Euthalius = Euzoius?’, in VCo
1953
Index of Modern Authors
Achtemeier, P. J. ... 136, 180, 181, 330, 331 Brändle, R. ............................................. 303
Aejmelaeus, L. ....................................... 318 Braun, H. ....................................... 328, 329
Albrecht, J. ............................................. 299 Brennecke, H. C. ............................. 42, 244
Alexander, L. ................................. 198, 215 Bring, R. ................................................. 317
Alkier, S. .................................................... 34 Brinkmann, H. ................ 23, 194, 195, 198
Arzt-Grabner, P. .................... 174, 335, 336 Brock, S. ....................................... 6, 23, 194
Attridge, H. W. .............................. 328, 329 Brown, R. E........... 308, 311, 313, 315, 317
Aune, D. ......................................... 301, 336 Brox, N. .......................... 180, 181, 330, 331
Baasland, E. ........................................... 333 Brucker, R. ............................................. 313
Balch, D. L. ............................................ 330 Bühler, K. ............................... 300, 301, 305
Balogh, J. ................................................ 199 Bultmann, R. ........ 125, 133, 158, 185, 186
Barclay, J. ........................................ 308, 317 Burchard, C. .......................... 178, 333, 334
Bauer, W. ................................................ 135 Bush, P. G. .............................................. 325
Baur, F. C................................................... 41 Callahan, A. D. .............................. 174, 335
Bayer, K. ................................................. 200 Carriker, A. J.......................................... 306
Beare, F. W. ............................................ 330 Casiday, A. M. ....................................... 121
Beare, W. ................................................ 143 Christenson, D. ..................................... 143
Becker, J.................................................. 317 Clark, A. C. ............................................ 220
Bengel, J. A. .. 139, 180, 181, 183, 185, 190 Clarke, A. ...... 155, 157, 167, 180, 184, 185
Berger, Kl. .............................................. 333 Collins, J. J. ............................................ 191
Bergjan, S.-P. ............................................ 42 Conte, M.-E. .................................. 300, 305
Best, E..................................... 161, 162, 311 Conybeare, F. C. ..... 3, 6, 18, 19, 26, 27, 28,
Betz, H. D. ... 160, 161, 206, 308, 317, 318, 29, 32, 231
321, 336 Conzelmann, H... 156, 171, 172, 190, 320,
Bickerman, E. J. ........................................ 13 325, 326, 327, 328, 330, 333, 335
Bird, H. W. ............................................. 213 Coseriu, E. ..................................... 299, 300
Birdsall, J. N..................... 3, 6, 7, 17, 19, 33 Courtney, E............................................ 201
Bjerkelund, C. J. ............................................. Crisp, S. .......................................... 7, 30, 33
126, 127, 301, 308, 310, 311, 312, Cropp, M. J. ........................................... 142
313, 315, 317, 318, 320, 335, 340 Cross, F. L. ............................................. 330
Blank, D. ................................................... 37 Dahl, N. A..................... 4, 7, 30, 32, 33, 35,
Blomkvist, V. .................................... 30, 38, 41, 42, 129, 140, 145, 148, 152, 157,
39, 41, 126, 127, 129, 144, 154, 157, 161, 162, 163, 175, 176, 193, 197,
165, 174, 188, 304, 305 203, 206, 208, 209, 211, 212, 232,
Blomqvist, J. ..................................... xi, 308 236, 237, 245, 248, 301, 304, 305,
Bocheńsky, J. M..................................... 300 306, 307, 309, 310, 311, 313, 316,
Bornkamm, G. ...................................... 335 329, 336, 338, 343, 344
Bousset, W. ........................................ 3, 223 Dalby, A. ................................................ 122
Bouttier, M. ........................................... 311 Dalton, W. J............................................ 330
378 Index of Modern Authors
Dawe, R. D. ............................................ 143 Goppelt, L. ..................................... 330, 331

Denniston, J. D. ..................................... 308 Götte, J. .................................................. 200
Dibelius, M. . 129, 171, 172, 178, 179, 234, Götte, M. ................................................ 200
308, 315, 316, 325, 326, 327, 328, Grafton, A. ............................................. 200
329, 332, 333, 334, 336 Grant, R. M............................................ 218
Diggle, J. ................................................. 143 Gräßer, E. ....................................... 328, 329
Dindorfius, G. ....................................... 143 Greeven, H. .. 129, 178, 179, 332, 333, 334
Dindorfius, L. ........................................ 198 Grözinger, A. ......................................... 302
D. Lührmann......................................... 320 Gualandri, I. .......................................... 143
von Dobschütz, E..................... 6, 7, 17, 19, Guillaumont, A. .................................... 121
20, 23, 26, 31, 32, 34, 148, 177, 178, Guillaumont, C. .................................... 121
189, 197, 199, 204, 205, 211, 215, Guinot, J.-N. ............................................. 42
218, 221, 228, 231, 242, 312, 319 Gülich, E. ................................... 38, 39, 301
Donelson, L. R. ..................... 323, 324, 343 Gyllenberg, R. ....................................... 328
Doty, W. G. .................................... 132, 159 Haenchen, E. ........ 133, 140, 190, 191, 203
Dover, K. ................................................ 142 Hannick, Chr. ........................................... 42
Duckworth, G. E. .................................. 143 Harnack, A. ....................................... 7, 204
Dunn, J. D. G. ................................ 308, 335 Harris, J. R. .... 3, 14, 15, 17, 18, 22, 23, 27,
Ehrhard, A. 3, 4, 5, 15, 16, 17, 19, 147, 176 29, 31, 190, 196, 197, 212, 213, 214,
Eisenstein, E. .............................................. 4 215, 219, 221, 222
Elliott, J. H. .................................... 330, 331 Hartman, L. ........................................... 315
Engels, J. ................................................. 342 Harweg, R. ............................................. 300
Ermert, K. .............................................. 340 Heger, Kl. ....................................... 300, 301
Fascher, E. .......................... 8, 123, 219, 244 Hegermann, H. ............................. 328, 329
Fee, G. 155, 157, 313 Heimgartner, M. ................................... 303
Feld, H. ................................................... 328 Hellholm, D. ......................... 30, 33, 38, 39,
Feldmeier, R. ......................... 180, 330, 331 40, 41, 123, 126, 127, 129, 137, 144,
Fiori, B.................................... 322, 324, 325 152, 154, 156, 157, 158, 161, 165,
Fischer, K. M. ........................ 328, 332, 335 174, 188, 198, 204, 206, 209, 232,
Fitzmyer, J. A. ........................ 174, 308, 335 234, 300, 301, 302, 317, 321, 323,
Foerster, R.............................................. 144 325, 334, 341
Fontaine, J. ....................................... 42, 244 Hellwig, P. .............................................. 300
Francis, F. O. .......................................... 333 Henne, H. .............................................. 145
Frankemölle, H. ............................ 333, 334 Henry, P. ................................................. 200
Fuhrmann, M. ....................................... 145 Holmstrand, J. ............... 127, 312, 313, 317
Furnish, V. .... 132, 133, 157, 158, 159, 318 Holstenius, L. ........................................ 146
Galland, A................................................... 5 Holthuis, S. ............................................... 34
(BNCMF ): ........................................ 306 Holtz, T........................................... 167, 312
Gärtner, B. ............................................. 317 Hoppe, R. ....................................... 333, 334
Gast, W. .......................................... 302, 344 Horner, G. W. ........................................ 167
Geissner, H. ........................................... 145 Hübner, H. ... 166, 167, 174, 311, 315, 328,
Genette, G. ............................... 40, 122, 123 335
Gibson, C. ...................................... 143, 144 Hülser, K. ............................................... 341
Gnilka, J. ................................ 311, 315, 335 Islinger, M. ....................................... 31, 220
von der Goltz, E. ...................................... 25 Jervell, J. ....... 128, 133, 140, 189, 190, 191,
Index of Modern Authors 379
198, 308 Maier-Oeser, S....................................... 300
Jewett, R. ...... 137, 138, 149, 150, 151, 153, Malherbe, A. J. ...... 38, 154, 302, 311, 312,
308 319, 320, 321, 340, 341, 342, 343
Johanson, B. C. .............................. 127, 312 Marchand, J. W.................................. 7, 124
Johnson, L. T. 198, 325, 326, 327, 333, 334 Markschies, Ch. .................................... 306
Jülicher, A. ................ 8, 123, 185, 219, 244 Marshall, I. H. ..... 171, 172, 223, 323, 325,
Käsemann, E. ................................ 151, 308 326, 327
Kieffer, R. ............................................... 335 Marshall, P. K. ....................................... 202
Kim, Ch.-H.................................... 335, 336 Martin, J. ................................................ 320
Klauck, H.-J. 125, 128, 133, 183, 185, 186, Martin, R. A. ......................................... 152
308, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 317, Martin, R. P.................................... 333, 334
320, 331 Martin, T. W. ................................. 317, 331
Klaus, G.................................................. 300 Martyn, J. L. ........................................... 317
Klein, M. ................................................ 334 Marxsen, W.................................... 319, 320
Kluge, Th..................................................... 6 Meiser, M. ................................................. 34
Kneal, M. ............................................... 300 Menne, A. ...................................... 123, 300
Kneal, W. ................................................ 300 Merz, A. ................................... 34, 322, 326
Koch, D.-A............................................. 190 Metzger, B. ..................................... 191, 204
Koester, H. ..................................... 317, 335 Michel, O. .... 130, 149, 150, 151, 153, 170,
Konradt, M. .. 301, 308, 312, 317, 333, 334 171, 308, 328, 329
Kremendahl, D.............................. 317, 341 Migne, J. P. .................................................. 5
Kümmel, W. G..... 189, 190, 308, 328, 330, Mill, J. 14, 18
331, 332, 334 Mitchell, M. M. ... 154, 301, 303, 311, 316,
Kürzdörfer, Kl. ...................................... 333 318, 320, 321, 325, 335, 336
Lambecius, P. ......................................... 146 Mojsisch, B. ........................................... 299
Lambrecht, J. ......................................... 312 Müller, P. ................................................ 335
Lampe, G. W. H. ................................... 303 Müller, U. B.................................... 127, 164
Lampe, P. ........................................ 335, 341 Müller, W. G. ......................................... 340
Larsen, K. B. .......................................... 198 Murray, G. ............................................. 142
Lausberg, H. .................. 137, 145, 149, 320 Mußner, F............................... 332, 333, 334
Lefkowitz, M. R. ............................ 200, 201 Nauck, W................................................ 328
Leutzsch, M. .................................... 40, 335 Nickau, Kl. ............................................. 341
Lietzmann, H. ................................. 12, 308 Niebuhr, K.-W. ...................................... 334
Lightfoot, J. B. ............................... 209, 315 Nies, F. .................................................... 302
Lincoln, A. T. ......................................... 311 Noris, E. .................................................... 12
Lindemann, A. ...... 41, 157, 311, 315, 320, Nygren, A. ............................................. 308
328, 330, 333, 335 Oberlinner, L. ........................ 325, 326, 327
von Lips, H. ........................... 310, 315, 326 O’Brien, P. T................................... 149, 335
Lohmeyer, E. 127, 164, 165, 166, 234, 313 Oepke, A. ....................................... 160, 161
Löhr, W...................................................... 42 Olsson, B. ....................................... 330, 331
Lohse, E. 137, 308, 314, 315, 330, 332, 335 Omont, H. ....................... 5, 15, 16, 29, 123
Louth, A. ........................................ 180, 206 Opelt, I. .......................................... 206, 207
Lührmann, D......................................... 318 Parker, D. C. ............................................. 33
Luz, U. ............................................ 311, 315 Paulsen, H............. 136, 138, 183, 186, 187
Lyons, J. .................................................. 300 Percy, E................................................... 209
380 Index of Modern Authors
Perdelwitz, E. R. .................................... 330 315, 320, 329, 330, 333, 334, 335
Perl, C. J. ................................................ 299 Schoeler, G................................................ 41
Pervo, R. I. .............. 41, 128, 133, 190, 203 Schrage, W. ... 156, 157, 320, 332, 339, 340
Petersen, N. R........................................ 335 Schurb, K. .............................................. 153
Pinborg, J. .............................................. 300 Schweizer, E. .......................................... 315
Plett, H. F. ...................................... 145, 320 Schwyzer, H.-R.............................. 122, 200
Podskalsky, G. .......................................... 42 Sellin, G.................................. 161, 209, 311
Pokorný, P. ............ 161, 162, 209, 311, 315 Selwyn, E. G. ......................................... 330
Popkes, W..... 178, 179, 302, 303, 308, 311, Sievers, J. ................................................ 143
315, 317, 324, 330, 331, 333, 334 Slavitt, D. R. ........................................... 198
Pradels, W. ............................................. 303 Smith, O. L............................................. 143
Preisker, H. ............................ 330, 332, 334 von Soden, H... 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 23, 24, 25,
Quine, W. ........................... 36, 37, 232, 300 26, 27, 31, 32, 33, 39, 45, 121, 123,
Quinn, J. D..................................... 326, 327 124, 127, 128, 133, 147, 148, 177,
von Rad, G. ............................................ 152 189, 192, 193, 197, 201, 202, 204,
Raible, W. ..... 34, 38, 39, 40, 121, 142, 143, 211, 212, 218, 219, 220, 221, 223,
146, 206, 300, 301, 302, 323, 341 225, 226, 231, 232, 242, 243
Rapp, Ch. ............................................... 342 Sorabij, R................................................... 37
Rapske, R. M. ........................................ 335 Souček, J. B. ........................................... 333
Reichert, A. .................... 308, 309, 330, 331 Souter, A. ..... 145, 149, 150, 154, 160, 161,
Reinmuth, E. ......................... 174, 312, 319 164, 167, 168, 173, 183, 221, 253
Reiser, M. ............................................... 303 Staab, K. ................................................. 164
Robbins, F. E. ......................................... 122 Stachowiak, L. R. .................................. 303
Robinson, J. A. ......................... 5, 6, 11, 12, Stählin, G. .............................................. 301
14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 31, Stammerjohann, H. .............................. 301
32, 33, 123, 137, 146, 148, 193, 206, Standhartinger, A.................................. 315
212, 213, 223, 227, 228, 231, 242 Staudacher, P.......................................... 344
Roloff, J........................................... 171, 325 Stowers, S. K. ................. 320, 331, 336, 339
Rusten, J. ................................................ 146 Strecker, G. ... 128, 183, 185, 186, 310, 311
Rydbeck, L. ............................................ 215 Streeter, B. H. ........................................ 330
Sandnes, K. O. ....................................... 331 Strohm, S. .............................................. 304
Sänger, D. .......................................... xi, 235 Stuhlmacher, P. ...................................... 335
Santini, C. .............................................. 213 van der Tak, J. G......................................... 7
Schadel, E............................................... 299 Theißen, G. .................................... 328, 329
Scheck, Th. P. ......................................... 198 Thiselton, A. C. ..................... 155, 156, 320
Schelkle, K. H. ....................................... 330 Thrall, M. E.................................... 158, 159
Schenke, H.-M. ............. 328, 329, 332, 335 Thurén, J................................................. 328
Schenk, W. ............................. 210, 313, 314 Thurén, L. .............................................. 330
Schepss, G. ............ 139, 157, 205, 209, 255 Tischendorf, C. ..................................... 121
Schlier, H. ............. 160, 161, 308, 311, 317 Toynbee, A. ............................................ 198
Schmithals, W................................ 308, 317 Trapp, M. ............................... 154, 195, 196
Schmitz, O. ............................................ 301 Trilling, W. ..................... 132, 139, 169, 319
Schnackenburg, R. ................................ 311 Trobisch, D. ........................................... 306
Schnelle, U. ..................................................... Trocmé, E............................................... 333
125, 185, 186, 308, 311, 313, 314, Trubetzkoy, N. S.................................... 225
Index of Modern Authors 381
Tsuji, M. ......................................... 333, 334 Willard, L. Ch. 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 16, 20, 28, 29,
Übelacker, W. ................ 130, 301, 328, 329 30, 31, 33, 35, 37, 42, 122, 123, 144,
Vallozza, M. ........................................... 223 147, 148, 175, 177, 192, 197, 200,
Vanhoye, A. ........................................... 329 204, 210, 211, 212, 216, 219, 221,
Vardanian, P. A. .................................. 6, 29 231, 238, 240, 304, 307
Vedberg, A. ............................................ 300 Williams, M. .......................................... 200
Viciano, A. ................................................ 42 Williamson, G. A. ......................... 180, 206
Vielhauer, Ph. ...... 308, 311, 312, 313, 314, Wilson, W. T. ................................. 301, 315
315, 317, 319, 329, 330, 331, 332, Windisch, H. 132, 157, 158, 159, 318, 328,
334, 335, 336 330, 332, 334
Vögtle, A. ............................................... 187 Wobbermin, G. ........................................ 23
Vouga, F.......................................... 317, 334 Wolter, M. .... 174, 315, 322, 325, 326, 335,
Wagener, U. ........................................... 310 336
Wagner, M. ............................................ 227 Wordsworth, J. ...................................... 199
Walter, N. ............................... 313, 314, 335 Woyke, J. ........................................ 310, 315
Weiser, A. ....................................... 325, 326 Wuellner, W. .......................................... 333
Weiß, H.-F.............................. 130, 171, 329 Zacagni, L. ............................................. 3, 4,
Weiß, J. ........................... 137, 138, 152, 161 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 18, 25, 27, 31,
Welles, C. B. ........................................... 325 32, 36, 123, 133, 146, 147, 148, 177,
Welte, W. ................................................ 302 178, 187, 197, 199, 200, 210, 211,
Wenham, G. J. ....................................... 152 219, 221, 222, 224, 231, 232, 305,
Wessner, P. ............................................. 200 307, 311, 316, 317, 324, 332, 334
West, M. L.............................................. 200 Zekl, H. G. ............................................. 344
Wettstein, J... 3, 4, 14, 15, 31, 36, 220, 224, Zeller, D. ................................ 156, 157, 320
231 Zuntz, G. 3, 4, 14, 29, 30, 31, 33, 121, 122,
White, H. J. ............................................ 199 143, 146, 211, 219, 224, 231
Wilckens, U. .......................................... 308
Index of Passages
I. Old Testament
A. Hebrew Bible and Septuagint

Genesis 17:11 200
2:17 152
Deuteronomy
o
o
3:15 152
21:23 153
3:19 152
27:26 224
17 151
o Daniel
17:5 151 7:13 191
22:1 179
Psalms
Exodus o
14 200
Psalms [LXX]
Exodus [LXX] 18:15 224
14:9 200 88:13 240
o 118 223
B. Apocrypha
2 Maccabees Wisdom of Sirach
8:8 223 o
51:17 223
II. Christian Texts
A. New Testament
Mark John
o 5:43 139
13:26 191 10:30 184
14:62 191
Acts
Luke 1:1 189
1:1 189 1:9 191
1:63 199 1:9b 191
1:11 191
384 Index of Passages
1:13.26 192 26:11 203

o 26:12 203
o o
o o
5:34 202 27:22 128
5:39 202 27:25 129
o o
6:5 192
Romans
6:9 141
1:5 141
o
1:8 149
7:58 203
1:10 149
7:58b 203
1:16 150
o
o
9 217, 226
o
o
3:1 141
o
o
9:15 194
3:9b 150
o
3:28 171
11:28 190
4 151, 154
13:1 190
4:10 151
13:21 202
o
14:4 236
o
14:14 236
o
16:3 160
o
o
8:8 163
o
o
o
9:3 153
o
o
o
o
o
9:31 153, 237
o
10:1 153
20:31 128
10:9 153
20:36 128
10:31 237
o
11 237
o
11:1 202
22 138
o
22:3 202
o
22:5 203
11:18 153, 154, 237
22:10 204
o
22:20 203
11:25 153
23:6 202
o
26 138
o
26:5 202
12:1 126, 154
26:9 203
o
o
Index of Passages 385
15:16 140 o
15:19 206 1:23 235
15:19b 205 2 217
16:1 149 2:1 205
16:20 159 2:7 205
o 2:9 205
o
1 Corinthians
3:13 153
o
5:6 152, 160, 176
o
6:15 152, 158, 160
o
6:18 159
5:2 155
7 157 Ephesians
7:1 156, 301 1:9 184
o o
o o
7:19 152 o
7:37 156 o
o o
o o
9 140 4:1 126
o o
o 5:23 159
16:5 157 o
o o
16:8 154 6:22 162
16:23 159 6:24 159
2 Corinthians Philippians
o o
o o
o o
o 1:4 132
5:17 158, 161, 176 1:9 207
o o
9:2a 157 o
o 3:5 202
11:22 202 3:6 202, 203
13:13 159, 234 3:7 164
o
Galatians
4:23 159
o
o
1:6 160
1:10 163 Colossians
1:13 235 1:3 132
1:18 205 o
1:6 207 o

o Co
o 4:9 210
1:14 133 o
1:20 166 4:22b 159
3:5 127, 129
Titus
o
o
4:14 189
2:1 127
4:18b 159
o
$PMo
2:2.4.6.9 127
1 Thessalonians 3:10 141
2:14 208 o
2:15 163 3:12 172
3:1 167 3:15b 159
o
Philemon
o
1:4 132
4:1 126
o
o
1:10 129
5:23 134
o
5:28 159
1:25 159
2 Thessalonians
Hebrews
1:3 132
o
o
6:13 130
o
o
2:2 169
6:18 130
2:10 139
7:3 121
o
10:1 150
o
o
o
11 171
3:5 40, 134
11:2 170
3:11 169
o
o
13:22 130
3:16 134, 169, 170, 233
13:24b 170
3:18 159
13:25 159
1 Timothy
James
o
1:1 178
o
oB
5:13 169
1:22 179, 241
5:14 171
o
6:21b 159
o
2 Timothy 2:18 241
1:17 172 2:18b 179
2:18 239 o
2:22 241 2:22 184
2:24 241 2:23 184
o 5:7 184
5:15 233 5:16 188
o
1 Peter
1:1 180 2 John
3:19 180, 181 1:1 185
4:5 181 o
4:6 180, 188
3 John
4:7 181
o
5: 1 126
o
o
5:10 136 Jude
o o
1:3b 186
2 Peter
o
o
1:9 240
o
o
o
1:14 191
o
o
o
o Revelation
1:7 191
1 John
o
1:1 184
12 204
1:12 124
12:15 204
o
20:3 153
2:15 128
B. Apostolic Fathers and Other Early Christian Texts

Pseudo-Athanasius Didaché
Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae 7:1 301
1(o
Epiphanius
PG 28:385B 144
On Weights and Measures
PG 28:405D 177
PG 43: 237B 224
PG 28:412D 148
Eusebius
Cedrenus
Historia Ecclesiastica
Historiarum compendium
ii, 1 206, 214
360.17 213, 214
ii, 22 22, 214, 215
Cyrillus ii, 25 22, 213, 214, 215
Mystagogicae Catecheses iii, 4 180
2, 8 198 iii, 4, 6 190
iii, 31 22
iii, 39 185 LXVII 159

LXXI 247
Hermas
LXXV 205, 247
Similitudines
LXXVI 246
IX, 3,6 198
LXXXVII 139
IX, 14,4 198
V, 4,2 198 Schepss 1889
7* o o
Visiones Syncellus
iii, 32 204 636.8 213, 214
V, 4 198 644.2 214
John Chrysostom Tertullian
Oratio 2 De baptismo
WCoWB 10, 1 198
‘Marcionite’ prologues [Souter 1913] De monogamia
145, 253 11, 6 156
Ad Galatas 160
De pudicitia
Ad Corinthios 154 o
Ad Romanos 149, 150 Theodoret
PG 82 269
Ad Thessalonicenses 167
o
Ad Laodicenses 161 37C 167
37D 154
Ad Colosenses 165
40A 157
Ad Philippenses 164 42B 149
42C 161
Ad Philemonem 173
44A 170, 172
Oecumenius 44C 150
PG 118–119 147, 176 45BC 150
272A 156
Priscillian
401 309
Canones epistularum Pauli
o
III 244
503 311
IV 244
504D 160
XXIX 244
o
XXXIII 157, 244
508D 129
XLII 209
544 328
LIV 246, 248
560A 164
LVII 248
592A 165
LX 248
593A 165
LXI 248
593B 165
LXII 248
609B 166
LXVI 153
629B 132
657B 146 1205A 165
658C 132 1205B 165, 166
668Α 139 1249CD 165
672C 169 1340BC 139
829C 171 1353D 169
869B 172 %o"
872A 173
PG 124–125 286
Theophilus of Antioch
PG 125
Ad Autolycum
169B 172
2, 8 218
172B 173
Theophylact $o"
PG 124 188BC 170
549B 149 #o#
560BC 155 o
640A 156 o
788B 154 1136B 179
o 1240C 180
952A 159 1288A 183
953B 160
PG 126
%o"
o
1033A 161, 162
69BC 185
1124C 163
%o"
1140A 164
104C 136
III. Classical Texts
A. Greek Texts
Ammonius Co
De differentia
Pseudo-Aristotle
455 341
Auctor ad Alexandrum
Apollonius Dyscolus *oCo
Syntax *oCo
1,37 37
Demetrius
Aristotle De Elocutione
Ars rhetorica 16,2 342
* Co 18,38 342
Topica Pseudo-Demetrius
CoB Typi epistolares
Co 13 38
154a 31 344 14 38
30,25 342 67 [3] 341

34,18 [5] 343 <>o <>
o 68f. [5] 340
34.20f. 321 72,7 [46] 341
o 74,1 [51] 341
o 74, 9f. [51] 341
78 150
Dionysios Thrax
89 182
Ars grammatica
92 183
fQ o
Hypotheses to the Orations of Demos-
Epictetus
thenes, υποθεσις
Dissertationes
30 144
2.26.4 324
Philostratus of Lemnos
Hesiod
De Epistulis
Erga
42,2.9 342
412 224
42,9 342
Homer
Phrynichus
Odyssey
Ecloga
7 o
10 131
Isokrates
Plato
Ad Nicoclem
Sophistes
6 336
218c 344
41 336
Plotin
Pseudo-Libanius
Enneads 122, 200
De forma epistolari
31 150 Pollux
42 154, 182 Onomasticon
45 183 I, 1 195
59 38 V, 130 135
66,1 [1] 342 V, 141 131
66,10 [3] 341
Ptolemy
66.12 [3] 340
Tetrabiblos
66,14 [4] 341
* JJoWJ
B. Latin Texts
Boethius Donatus
Consolation of Philosophy Aeli Donati quod fertur commentum
3, 9 197 Terenti
* o
Cicero
De inventione
1,21 145
Evanthius Quintilian
De comoedia Institutio oratoria
WJJ o 3.4,9 342
4,2,55 145
Ovid
9.2.103 304
Remedia amoris
o Terence
Andria
Plautus
6 143
Amphitryo
96 143

Euthalian Traditions

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Euthalian Traditions

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Vemund Blomkvist

Archiv für die Ausgabe der Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller

Herausgegeben im Auftrag der

Including the Appendix

Gutachter dieses Bandes:

This publication has been supported by the Research Council of Norway.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek

쑔 2012 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

I. Introductory Issues ........................................................................................3

II. The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι ..............................45

2.2.3. Διὰ τί: An Ancient Introduction to the Ὑποθέσεις of the

2.5. The List of Apostles and Deacons ..............................................192

3.4.1. Structure of the Prologue to Acts ...................................... 220

VI. Appendix II ..............................................................................................299

7 See E. Eisenstein 1979/2005: 11.

1.2. Manuscript Evidence and Editions

13 See the manuscript survey in Willard oo 

2. The Catholic letters

3. The Pauline letters

b) The Martyrdom of Paul the Apostle (Μαρτύριον Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου)

προσωδίαν. The theory, however, is probably based on a misunderstanding, since the

42 See Zuntz 1945: 90.

50 See Harris 1883: 151.

Colophon of Codex H 015 My translation

A further consequence of these three criticisms, is that Robinson’s theory of a second

87 See Harris 1896.

From the Confession of Euthalius. Text in My translation

97 See von Soden 1902: 638.

The Πρὸς ἐμαυτόν of Euthalius. Text in von My translation

102 See von Sodeno

114 For a detailed summary of the work of Vardanian, see Willardoo

Dahl, who had acted as 8JMMBSETTVQFSWJTPSBU:BMF SFUVSOFEUPUIFBQQBSBUVTJOBOBS-

120 See Willard 1970: 175/2009: 131.

130 See Conybeare 1904: 45.

3. Aim and Structure of the Study

3.2. The Sequence and Style of the Present Commentary

3.3. Themes of the Commentary

3.3.1. The Pre-text

3.3.2. The Meta-terminology of the Apparatus

138 See Wettstein 1752: 75 and above on the history of research.

Pseudo-Demetrius, Typi epistolares, 13 Translated by Malherbe 1988: 39

Pseudo-Demetrius, Typi epistolares, 14 Translated by Malherbe 1988: 39

Pseudo-Libanius, De forma epistolari, 59 Translated by Malherbe 1988: 74

145 See E. Gülich/RaibleoHellholmo

1. A meta-communicative clause in the pre-text

147 See Hellholm 1986: 47.

2. The use of a particular mood in the pre-text

3. The apparatus uses a meta-term that is not found in the pre-text

3.3.3. The Apparatus as Paraphrase

be considered parallel texts to the biblical material, see Hellholm/Blomkvisto "QQ**

3.3.4. Parallel Materials

159 See Willard 1970: 180/2009: 134.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Ῥωμαίους Chapters of the Letter

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Κορινθίους Chapters of the First Letter

III (6:1) About not demanding trials, and

θ (15:1) περὶ ἀναστάσεως σωμάτων IX (15:1) About the universal resurrection

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Koρινθίους Chapters of the Second

θ (8:1) προτροπὴ εἰς ἐπίδοσιν χρημάτων IX (8:1) Encouragement to give money to

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Γαλάτας Chapters of the Letter

θ (4:21) ὅτι ἐν τῇ ἐλευθέρᾳ γυναικὶ IX (4:21) That there is no need to be en-

ια (5:13) ὑπογραφὴ τῆς κατὰ πνεῦμα XI (5:13) Description of freedom accord-

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Ἐφεσίους Chapters of the Letter

θ (5:22) διάταξις οἰκειακῶν καθηκόντων IX (5:22) Regulation of the domestic duties

13 See the manuscript survey in Willard oo

102 See von Sodeno

114 For a detailed summary of the work of Vardanian, see Willardoo

Dahl, who had acted as 8JMMBSETTVQFSWJTPSBU:BMF SFUVSOFEUPUIFBQQBSBUVTJOBOBS-

145 See E. Gülich/RaibleoHellholmo

be considered parallel texts to the biblical material, see Hellholm/Blomkvisto "QQ**