The Pairing of Barbarian and Scythian in Col 3:11 Poses Difficult Exegetical Problems

THE SCYTHIAN PERSPECTIVE IN COL 3:11 by TROY MARTIN Chicago The pairing of barbarian and Scythian in Col 3:11 poses difficult exegetical problems. Each of the other pairs in this verse describe mutually exclusive categories such as Greek/Jew, circum- cised/uncircumcised, and slave/free In the opinion of many exegetes, the categories of barbarian and Scythian are not mutually exclusive but overlapping.1 In Greco-Roman literature, Scythians are either hailed as the noblest or the most backward of barbarians.2 In either assessment, the term Scythian belongs to the category of barbarian according to the dominant usage of the terms from a Greek perspective. 1 Petr Pokorny concludes, "The next couple of terms is not an antithesis but an escalation barbarian-Scythian" (Colossians [Peabody, MA Hendrickson, 1991] 170) Peter Τ O'Brien observes, "The list of terms overlaps somewhat 'Barbarian' and 'Scythian' are not contrasted like 'Greek' and 'Jew,' or 'bond man' and 'freeman ' Rather, they stand over against 'Greek' when the latter is used in its cultural sense" (Colossians, Philemon [Word Biblical Commentary 44, Waco Word, 1982] 193) 2 The positive assessment of Scythians considers them to be a simple, nomadic people living apart from the ills that afflicted Greco-Roman civilization Strabo says, "In fact, even now there are Wagon-dwellers and Nomads, so called, who life off their herds, and on milk and cheese and know nothing about storing up food or about peddling merchandise either, except the exchange of wares for wares How, then, could the poet be ignorant of the Scythians Homer called 'most just' and 'proud' those who by no means spend their lives on contracts and money-getting but actually possess all things in common except sword and dnnking-cup, and above all things have their wives and children in common, in the Platonic way" (Geog 7 3 7, Horace Leonard Jones, The Geography of Strabo [LCL, Cambridge Harvard University Press, 1961] 3 196-199) The Cynics adopt this view and closely identify with the Scythians as the Cynic epistles attributed to the Scythian Anacharsis demonstrate (Abraham J Malherbe, The Cynic Epistles [SBLSBS 12, Atlanta Scholars Press, 1986] 36-51) The negative assessment, however, dominates the Greco-Roman literature This view considers the Scythians as a crude, ferocious, and inhuman people Accordingly, Scythians become the lowest of barbarians in the estimation of almost all Greeks For the numerous references, see Otto Michel ("Σκύθης," TDNT 7 448) © E J Brill, Leiden, 1995 Novum Testamentum XXXVII, 3 250 TROY MARTIN The exegetical tradition attempts to resolve the problems of this pairing of barbarian and Scythian in two different ways.3 The first approach considers Scythian within the category of barbarian.4 Depending upon the assessment of Scythian as a pejorative or a positive reference, the term Scythian is understood as an example of the worse or noblest type of barbarian.5 The chief argument for this approach is that it maintains the common meanings of bar barian and Scythian. The chief defect in this approach is that the pair barbarian/Scythian is not congruent with the other pairs since it does not depict mutually exclusive categories. The second approach considers barbarian and Scythian as exclusive geographical or racial categories. Geographically, bar barian refers to peoples that live in the South while Scythian refers to peoples that live in the North.6 Racially, barbarian refers to the black race; Scythian to the white race.7 The strongest argument for this approach is that it makes the pair barbarian/Scythian con gruent with the other pairs in this list of exclusive categories. The 3 Michel comments, "It is hard to say whether Σκύθης is simply an outstanding example of a barbarian people or whether βάρβαρος and Σκύθης are meant to differ from one another culturally, geographically, and racially" ("Σκύθης," 7 449) 4 Eduard Lohse comments, "The words 'barbarian' and 'Scythian' which follow in the series, are no longer juxtaposed to one another antithetically but are an enumerative continuation of the series The Scythians are cited as an especially strange kind of barbarian" (Colossians and Philemon [Hermeneia, Philadelphia Fortress, 1971] 144) 5 Pejorative interpretations like those of J Β Lightfoot and Otto Michel prevail among commentators Lightfoot explains, "The Apostle offers the full privileges of the Gospel to barbarians and even barbarians of the lowest type" (St Paul's Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon [London Macmillan, 1875, reprint, Zonder- van Commentary Series, Grand Rapids Zondervan, 1979] 216-217) Michel says, "The obvious meaning is that even the offence which a Scythian must give to natural sensibility is overcome by the baptism of the Messiah Jesus" ("Σκύθης," 7 450) 6 Arguing that the list oí Greeks, Jews, barbarians, and Scythians represents the nations in the four quarters of the Greco-Roman world, J A Bengel suggests that the barbarians are the most southerly of uncivilized peoples and the Scythians the most northerly (Gnomon Novi Testamenti [Tubingen J G Ρ Schrammi, 1742, ET, Gnomon oj the New Testament, Philadelphia Perkinpine & Higgins, 1860] 2 468- 469) However, he does not place Scythian and barbarian in completely exclusive categories but prefers to understand Scythian as an intensified subcategory of bar barian 7 Theodor Hermann builds upon Bengel's suggestion and intimates that the contrast may be between the white Scythians and the black barbarians oí Somalia or Ethiopia ("Barbar und Sky the Em Erklärungsversuch zu Kol 3, 11," Theologische Blatter 9 [1930] 106-107) SCYTHIAN PERSPECTIVE 251 most serious flaw in this approach is that it restricts the meaning of barbarian to peoples living on the southern side of the Mediterra nean Sea.8 Although these peoples are indeed referred to as bar barians, barbarians live in all directions of the Mediterranean world.9 Furthermore, cultural and especially linguistic criteria determine the category of barbarian more than geographical or racial criteria.10 Both of these basic approaches in the exegetical tradition assume a Greek perspective in the interpretation of the pair bar barian/Scythian.11 This perspective causes the first approach to deny the pair refers to mutually exclusive categories even though the immediate context requires such an understanding. This perspective induces the second approach to adopt untenable restric tions upon the meanings of the two terms. Both approaches are defective because they rely upon a Greek perspective for their inter pretation of the pair, and neither of these basic approaches is able to resolve the exegetical problems associated with the pairing of barbarian with Scythian in Col 3:11 because they operate from this Greek perspective. A new approach is needed that permits the perspective of the text to emerge. The following interpretation attempts such an approach. An interpretation of this third pair of categories should begin with the recognition that this pair does not necessarily reflect a 8 Eduard Schweizer critiques the suggestions by Bengel and Hermann when he says, "To take this to indicate four nations set in the west, east, south, and north respectively is difficult, in spite of the fact that the expression 'barbarian' is occa sionally applied to Africans The word rather denotes anyone who is a non-Greek, and for the west, the Romans would be more obvious than the Greeks Thus it is hardly a racial contrast between black and white that the writer has in mind here" (The Letter to the Colossians [Minneapolis Augsburg, 1982] 199) Schweizer is correct except for his understanding of barbarian as exclusively a non-Greek 9 The ancient authors who describe these peoples as barbarians do not restrict the term to these peoples 10 Strabo states, "I suppose that the word 'barbarian' was at first uttered onomatopoetically in reference to people who enunciated words only with dif ficulty and talked harshly and raucously, like our words 'battanzein ' Those, therefore, they called barbarian in the special sense of the term at first derisively, meaning that they pronounced words thickly or harshly, and then we misused the word as a general ethnic term, thus making a logical distinction between the Greeks and all other races" (Geog 14 2 28, Jones, Strabo, 6 302-305) Lightfoot correctly comments, "The word βάρβαρος properly denoted one who spoke an inarticulate, stammering, unintelligible language" (Colossians, 217) 11 Hans Windisch states, "We are thus forced to explain the formula [bar barian/Scythian] in relation to βάρβαρος/"Ελλην" ("βάρβαρος," TDNT 1 553) All commentators adopt this incorrect assumption 252 TROY MARTIN Greek perspective since this pairing of barbarian and Scythian occurs third in a list of pairs that does not maintain a consistently Greek perspective. The first pair in the list reflects a Jewish point of view.12 Ever since their incorporation into the Greek empire, the Jews perceived non-Jews as Greeks.13 If this first pair were to articulate a Greek perspective, the contrast would be between Greek and barbarian instead of Greek and Jew. The second pair in the list also adopts a distinction primarily important for the Jews.14 Since the list does not develop a Greek point of view in the first two pairs, the Greek perspective should not be assumed for the third pair of barbarian/Scythian either.15 An interpretation of this third pair of categories should also rec ognize this pair describes mutually exclusive categories.16 The exclusive nature

Load more