Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-ksp62 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-06T14:24:36.760Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why ΑΥΓΟΥΣΤΟΣ? A note to Luke 2.11

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

Royce L. B. Morris
Royce L. B. Morris
Affiliation:
(Dept. of Languages, Emory & Henry College, Emory, VA 24327-0947, USA)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Recent commentators on the works of Luke, the Gospel and Acts, make remarkably similar statements regarding the transliteration of the Latin title Augustus into Greek. All agree that Luke used Αύγοΰστο, in the Gospel as a personal name and all agree that in Acts 25.21, 25, he used the Greek form of the Latin title, Σεβαστός. Only one of these commentators, however, goes beyond this simple observation to deal with the questions that must arise from such selective use by Luke of Αὐγο⋯στος and Σεβαστ⋯ς. Colin Hemer attempts to go slightly beyond this to explain Luke's use of Σεβατός in Acts as the formal rendering of the imperial title. It is not clear what Hemer means by his use of the words ‘rendered formally’ because Σεβαστός is no more formal than Αὐγο⋯στος. The point is simply that the former is the correct form of the imperial title in Greek and the latter is the correct form in Latin. Unless Luke had an ulterior motive these words should not have been used in any other sense. Moreover, if one detects some new or special use of Αὐγο⋯στος by Luke, one certainly should ask what this means? Such a question is especially pertinent when one notes that, according to Blass and Debrunner, Luke was ‘inclined to remove Latinisms’.

Information

Type
Short Studies
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , January 1992 , pp. 142 - 144
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

2 Hemer, Colin J., The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History (Tübingen, 1989) 30–3Google Scholar, has given the most recent survey of the scholarship on the issue of the authorship of the Gospel and Acts and points to ‘a near consensus’ on the unity of authorship.

3 These recent commentators in chronological order have made the following statements regarding the use of Αὐγοΰστος and Σεβαστός: Bruce, F. F., The Acts of the Apostles (London, 1951) 436Google Scholar, ،Σεβαστός, is the equivalent of the Lat. title Augustus (transliterated, not translated, in Lk. ii. I, Αὐγοΰστος, because Augustus in the case of the first Emperor was considered a personal name as much as a title).’

Marshall, I. H., The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text (The New International Greek Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, 1978) 98Google Scholar, states, ‘Likewise Αὐγοΰστος, a Latin term usually translated into Greek as Σεβαστός, (Acts 25.21, 25) may be a title, but is here a proper name.’

Fitzmyer, Joseph A., , S. J., The Gospel According to Luke (I-IX) Introduction, Translation, and Notes (The Anchor Bible; Garden City, 1981) 399Google Scholar, states, ‘Luke transcribes the Latin title in Greek as Augoustos, treating the title as the emperor's proper name, which it actually became in time. Normally, the title Augustus was translated into Greek as Sebastos (see Acts 25:21, 25).’

Hemer, Colin J., The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History (Tübingen, 1989) 107Google Scholar, writes, ‘The emperor's title “Augustus” is rendered formally ⋯ Σεβαστός in words attributed to a Roman official (Acts 25:21, 25), whereas “Augustus” as the name bestowed upon the first emperor is transliterated Αὐγοΰστος in Luke 2:1.’

4 One should note that Luke's use of Αὐγοΰστος in Luke 2.1 is the single occurrence of this word in the New Testament and that his uses of Σεβαστόςin Acts 25.21, 25, are the only occurrences of that word in the New Testament. This in itself should arouse questions. (Cf. Packard Humanities Institute: Demonstration CD Rom #1.)

5 Hemer, note 2.

6 A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, translated by Funk, Robert W. (Chicago, 1964) 4.Google Scholar

7 Thesaurus Linguae Graecae: Pilot CD Rom #C.

8 Packard Humanities Institute: Demonstration CD Rom #2 Duke Data Bank of Documentary Papyri (Duke University, 1988).

9 Fitzmyer, note 2.

10 Since the word ήγεμών in the general bureaucratic structure in the provinces of the east was equivalent to the praefectus and since the governor of Judaea prior to Claudius was a ήγεμών (see Fitzmyer, The Gospel, 133), the very use of a word so closely related as the one used here by Luke clouds rather than clarifies the meaning for his ancient Greek audience as well as his modern audience.

11 Fitzmyer, The Gospel, 446.

12 It is of interest to note that modern translators have also apparently found Σεβαστός a bit troublesome to deal with in its literal sense. The translators of the Authorized Version chose to translate it with the Latin word, Augustus, whereas the following modern translators chose to translate it as emperor, although to be so translated the Greek word should have been αὐτοκράτωρ Revised Standard Version; Phillips, J. B., The New Testament in Modern English (New York, 1958); Good News Bible (New York, 1976)Google Scholar; and Munck, Johannes, The Acts of the Apostles, Introduction, Translation and Notes (The Anchor Bible; Garden City, 1967).Google Scholar

13 Munck, Johannes, The Acts of the Apostles, LVIII.Google Scholar

14 See above p. 143 and notes 7 & 8.