ABSTRACT Reimagining the Jesus Tradition: Orality, Memory, and Ancient Biography This study attempts to provide informed answers as to why the gospels are similar yet different. By noting the inadequacy of the traditional literary paradigm—which accounts for the nature of the gospels almost exclusively by appealing to the literary activities of the evangelists at the writing stage—the dissertation argues that informed answers about the same yet different gospel accounts (SDGA) can be gained by taking into full consideration various factors at different stages of Jesus tradition. This study adopts an eclectic approach in reimagining the Jesus tradition in general and the SDGA in particular, and thus explores three areas of research in turn: orality, memory, and ancient biography. The dissertation concludes with two overarching implications for future research. First, the traditional literary paradigm cannot be the sole explanation for the SDGA and a number of possible factors that this study points out should be seriously considered in any future investigation of this topic. Second, the future study of the SDGA must show sensitivity to ancient media culture and conventions. The fact that Jesus, tradents of the Jesus tradition, and the evangelists lived in a deeply oral culture forces us to rethink the SDGA in light of the studies of orality and memory. The literary activities of the evangelists can be best understood in a specific historical context where similar activities were widely attested in ancient biographers. Reimagining the Jesus Tradition: Orality, Memory, and Ancient Biography A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of Asbury Theological Seminary Wilmore, Kentucky In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation Committee: Dr. Craig S. Keener, Mentor Dr. David R. Bauer, Reader By Youngju Kwon March 2018 Copyright 2018 Youngju Kwon All rights reserved TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Framing the Discussion 1 1.1 The Research Problem and Its Significance 1 1.2 The Scope and Justification of the Study 7 1.3 The Plan of the Study 17 Chapter 2: Orality Studies 18 2.1 Difficulties in Studying the Oral Tradition 21 2.1.1 Only Written Gospels Remain 21 2.1.2 Genre Difference 27 2.1.3 Sufficient Length of Time 30 2.1.4 Oral Tradition Is Not Monolithic but Variegated 33 2.2 Justification of Orality Studies: Ancient World as Predominantly Oral 39 2.2.1 Limited Literacy 40 2.2.2 The Dominance of Oral Communication 49 2.2.2.1 Predilection for Spoken Words 49 2.2.2.2 Living Everyday Lives by Word of Mouth 56 2.2.2.3 Writing in a Predominantly Oral Society 65 2.3 Gospels and Oral Tradition 73 2.3.1 The Nature of Oral Tradition 75 2.3.2 The Social Locations of the Jesus Tradition 85 2.3.2.1 The Jesus Tradition in Liturgical or Ritual Settings 86 2.3.2.2 The Jesus Tradition in Didactic Settings 89 2.3.2.3 The Jesus Tradition as Eyewitness Testimony 91 2.4 Conclusion 93 Chapter 3: Memory Studies 96 3.1 A Brief History of the Neglect of Memory 97 3.2 Contemporary Memory Studies 102 3.2.1 Fact vs. Interpretation 102 3.2.2 Past vs. Present 109 3.2.3 Individual Memory vs. Social/Collective Memory 114 3.3 Memory in Antiquity 122 3.3.1 The High Status of Memory in Antiquity 123 3.3.2 The Importance of Memory in Ancient Education 128 3.3.3 Memory in Reading and Composition 133 3.4 Conclusion 140 Chapter 4: Ancient Biography Studies on Agesilaus 144 4.1 Xenophon’s Agesilaus and Hellenica 157 4.2 #1 Agesilaus’s Accession to the Thorne 160 4.3 #2 The News about the Plan of Persians’ Attack 163 4.4 #3 Agesilaus’s Sacrifice at Aulis 166 4.5 #4 Truce between Agesilaus and Tissaphernes 168 4.6 #5 Agesilaus Prevents Lysander’s Growing Influence 173 4.7 #6 Agesilaus’s Righteous Deception 176 4.8 #7 Raising Horses and Horsemen 177 4.9 #8 Tissaphernes’s Self-Delusion 180 4.10 #9 Agesilaus’s Obedience to the Call of the State 182 4.11 #10 Agesilaus’s Battle at the Borders of Boeotia 185 4.12 #11 Agesilaus’s Respect for Religions and Gods 186 4.13 #12 Agesilaus’s March against Peiraeum 189 4.14 #13 Agesilaus’s Support for the Achaeans 192 4.15 #14 Agesilaus’s More Victories 195 4.16 #15 Agesilaus’s Two Battles 197 4.17 #16 Agesilaus’s Virtue of Piety 200 4.18 #17 Tithraustes’s Request for Agesilaus’s Leave 204 4.19 #18 Agesilaus’s Response about the Victory at the Battle of Corinth 206 4.20 #19 Agesilaus’s Response about the Defeat in the Naval Battle 209 4.21 Conclusion 210 Chapter 5: Ancient Biography Studies on Galba 220 5.1 The Relationship among the Works of Suetonius, Plutarch, and Tacitus 220 5.2 #20 Different Plots against Galba 222 5.3 #21 Galba’s Bad Associates and Galba’s Bad Character 226 5.4 #22 The Growing Complaints of People and Soldiers 229 5.5 #23 Galba’s Decision Not to Adopt Otho as His Successor 233 5.6 #24 Galba’s Adoption of Piso as His Successor 236 5.7 #25 Otho’s Revolt against Galba 240 5.8 #26 Galba’s Wrong Decision and His Ensuing Death 245 5.9 #27 Galba’s End and Otho’s Beginning 250 5.10 Conclusion 254 Chapter 6: Ancient Biography Studies on Otho 258 6.1 #28 Otho’s Bad Character and His Help in Nero’s Bad Behaviors 258 6.2 #29 Vitellius’s Revolt, Soldiers’s Riot, and Otho’s Response 262 6.3 #30 Otho’s Expedition 268 6.4 #31 A Council of War in the Camp at Bedricum 270 6.5 #32 Otho’s Withdrawal to Brixellum and Othonians’ Defeat 274 6.6 #33 Further Defeat of the Battle and Otho’s Last Words 277 6.7 #34 Otho’s Final Moments 280 6.8 Conclusion 284 Chapter 7: Conclusion: Summaries, Contributions, and Implications 289 7.1 Summaries 289 7.2 Contributions, Implications, and Further Studies 295 Bibliography 308 ABBREVIATIONS BPC Biblical Performance Criticism CSOLC Cambridge Studies in Oral and Literate Culture EC Early Christianity GRBS Greek, Roman & Byzantine Studies JRASup Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series JSHJ Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus OLAG Orality and Literacy in Ancient Greece OLAW Orality and Literacy in the Ancient World OrT Oral Tradition CHAPTER 1 Framing the Discussion One Jesus or four Jesuses? The Jesus of history or the Christ of faith? Is Jesus a historical person in the past who can be objectively portrayed, or a figure who can be constantly reconstructed in conformity to the different needs of the present? Are the gospels different stories of Jesus or various histories of Jesus?1 Not many scholars would respond to these questions with affirmative either/or answers; rather, they would prefer more nuanced both/and approaches, although the nature of both/and merits further clarifications. Acknowledging the significance of these questions, the present study seeks informed answers for the overarching question of how the Jesus tradition should be understood. 1.1 The Research Problem and Its Significance In general, the Jesus tradition refers to a body of traditional materials that contain Jesus’s words and deeds, whether oral or written, that may or may not be included in the canonical gospels. However, the specific aspect of the Jesus tradition on which this project concentrates is the “consistent character” of the gospel accounts—the 1 This question echoes the primary concern of Samuel Byrskog, Story as History—History as Story: The Gospel Tradition in the Context of Ancient Oral History (Boston: Brill, 2002). Following the 2nd edition of The SBL Handbook of Style (p. 33), I will use gospel(s) in lowercase throughout this study when referring to the canonical four gospels and their related subjects (e.g., gospel genre or gospel studies). I will make an exception when the expression is a part of the biblical title (e.g., the Gospel of Luke) or in quotations from other works. 1 2 feature that James D. G. Dunn often calls “the same yet different.”2 Time and time again, the evangelists narrate the same story of Jesus with different wording and various details. The reasons for this continuity and discontinuity among the gospel accounts are unknown as is the person or persons responsible for these discrepancies. Perhaps Jesus himself told the same story differently in various settings, or the varying accounts might be the result of different transmission processes during which the initial message of Jesus reproduced a series of varied versions. They might also be due to the gospel writers who had their own theological agenda that led them to adapt the Jesus tradition. As this series of ideas implies, determining the nature of “the same yet different gospel accounts” (SDGA) is a complex task that takes into account at least three different stages of the Jesus tradition: the initial stage in which Jesus’s words and deeds were revealed, the transmission stage during which the Jesus tradition was more or less conserved and changed over a period of time, and the writing stage in which the evangelists put together the available Jesus tradition into written gospels, again by conserving and changing the traditional materials.3 Historically, scholars have primarily focused on the last stage of the Jesus tradition—the writing stage—when addressing the issue of SDGA. They attempt to answer the following types of issues: (1) the available sources that the evangelists 2 James D.