Just received proofs of my chapter ‘Letter Carriers in the Ancient Jewish Epistolary Material’ in a forthcoming book of great importance: Jewish and Christian Scripture as Artifact and Canon (eds. C.A. Evans & H.D. Zacharias; SSEJC 13; LNTS 70; London: T & T Clark / Continuum, 2009), 203-219.

The Letter-Carriers of 1 Clement

Just got news that my paper - '"Witnesses between you and us": The Role of the Letter-Carriers in 1 Clement' - has been accepted for the National Patristics Conference (9-11 Sept 09, in Cambridge).

For details about the conference check here.

The abstract:
This paper discusses the role which 1 Clement envisages for those sent with the letter ‘who will be witnesses between you and us’ (1 Clement 63.3). The couriers are presented as the personal agents by which the appeal for ‘peace and harmony’ will be speedily received in the Corinthian church. Careful attention is given to 63.1-4 and 65.1-2 within the context of the letter as a whole.

Published in JSNT
Just received an email saying that my article ‘Named Letter-Carriers among the Oxyrhynchus Papyri’ has been published in JSNT 31.3 (2009), 279-299; and is now available on-line (DOI: 10.1177/0142064X08101525). On-line at:
http://jnt.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/31/3/279

The abstract: This paper analyses the role played by named letter-carriers among Greek personal letters in the Oxyrhynchus papyri as possible background for Pauline practice, and within the context of recent proposals concerning the role of the letter-carriers within Pauline practice. Around forty letters are discussed, with three examples analysed in more depth (P.Oxy. 113; P.Oxy. 3313; P.Oxy. 3505). It is seen that, when named and identified within the letter, the letter-carrier frequently supplements the written communication with some oral supplement. Against some recent proposals no evidence is found in support of the view that the letter-carrier ever read the letter itself to the recipient.

Just a brief note to say that my article 'Named Letter-Carriers among the Oxyrhynchus Papyri' is forthcoming in the Journal for the Study of the New Testament 31.3 (2009), 279-300.

Pieter J. J. Botha's review of Hans-Josef Klauck (with Dan. P. Bailey), Ancient Letters and the New Testament: A Guide to Context and Exegesis (2006) is here, and the review is an easy read, not technical or overly critical, and mostly descriptive, generally praising the book for its excellent contribution to the field. Botha does note that occasionally Klauck's comprehensiveness in collecting information about ancient letters, may actually mislead readers in regard to their importance (although this is very useful from a research perspective). He also questions whether Klauck's assumptions about Greco-Roman "schools", education and literacy may not be somewhat overconfident.

Botha closes with Klauck's final words:

"Letters articulate relationships. This means that understanding letters aims at a mutual understanding of persons and hearts, even if this can only be approximated under present conditions and complete understanding will remain reserved for the future time of consummation." (443)

I agree that this book is now a fundamental resource in this subject.


Pieter J. J. Botha review of Hans-Josef Klauck, Ancient Letters and the New Testament: A Guide to Context and Exegesis, Review of Biblical Literature [http://www.bookreviews.org] (2007).

Who wrote Romans?

An old question, with an unexpected answer: 'Tertius' (according to Rom 16.22).

Ian J. Elmer, 'I, Tertius: Secretary or Co-Author of Romans' ABR 56 (2008), 45-60.

Elmer offers a useful survey of scholarship on Tertius and his role, but challenges the general assumption that his role was only passive - taking down Paul's dictation. He argues that professional secretaries played a greater role in the composition of a letter than we customarily assume. 2 Cor 10.10 suggests that the secretary may have played an important role in 'strengthening' his letters when compared with his speech. He (in my view rightly) takes 'in the Lord' in 16.22 to modifying the writing of the letter, and hence expresses something of Tertius' perception of his role as a Christian ministry to the Roman Christians. He further suggests that Tertius was actually from Rome, a Roman Christian who could inform Paul about the situation in Rome.
'Tertius' previous association wiht the recipients would have been utilised at various stages in drafting the letter so as to make the content both germane and personal to the Roman congregation.' (p. 59)

An interesting argument, perhaps a little over-dependent on Cicero (via Richards) for examples, but raising an interesting issue. I am not really persuaded that Tertius is from Rome, but the general point about the need for drafting, wax tablets, re-drafting etc. of a long letter like Romans is well taken.

Bret Mulligan review in BMCR:

Ruth Morello, A.D. Morrison (ed.), Ancient Letters. Classical and Late Antique Epistolography (Oxford: OUP, 2007). http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2008/2008-09-56.html

Just using this to test some formats.