Ἰουδαίαν in Acts 2:9: Reverse Engineering Textual Emendations

2.2.1 Retrieval of toponyms

We used three types of literary resources. For the New Testament, we created a data set from a semantic dictionary. ^[6] This data set contains 259 location-related pronouns, including toponyms, demonyms, and derivatives such as adjectives, which occur in the 27 books of the New Testament. Furthermore, we argue that it is reasonable to construct a list of toponyms, which appear in the Septuagint (LXX), and take them to reflect contemporary toponyms that might have been known to an author contributing to the tradition of early Christian literature in the time of writing the book of Acts. ^[7] For this purpose, we retrieved toponyms from the Septuagint. ^[8] The third group pertains to toponyms occurring in classical authors. We used the website Topostext ^[9] and the Greek-English dictionary by Montanari et al. ^[10] as the two major sources to compile this list of toponyms. Especially the retrieval of topo- and demonyms from a dictionary appeared to be a tedious endeavour. ^[11] Eventually, we made the resulting lists of toponyms in singular nominative form available online. ^[12]

2.2.2 Inflection of toponyms

Subsequently, we had to inflect these lists of toponyms, since the data retrieved from dictionaries and the online databases are in nominative singular form. Instead of looking up almost 10,000 individual toponyms (Table 1), we created a computer script ^[13] that inflected the toponyms to the different cases in singular and plural forms. ^[14] The results of these processes will be evaluated using qualitative criteria (see Section 4).

2.2.3 Geographical parsing

The position of each toponym on the skin of the earth has to be expressed in x,y-coordinates to enable geographical analysis. This is achieved by geographical parsing, which could be defined as “the task of identifying and resolving toponyms to their geographical coordinates”. ^[15] Due to their nature, it is not equally straightforward to acquire coordinates by geoparsing for the three data sets that we introduced in the previous section.

New Testament toponyms are easily tied to the Tyndale Individualised Proper Names with all References (TIPNR). ^[16] Toponyms from the Septuagint can be linked to a toponym in TIPNR using their Hebrew equivalents but need to be checked since some Greek toponyms seem to have been actualised during translation. ^[17] Therefore, the LXX toponyms have also been linked to their equivalents in the Pleiades project ^[18] as far as possible. Toponyms from classical resources had already been given a location in Topostext. ^[19] For the geoparsing of the additional toponyms we retrieved from the Montanari dictionary, we used the Pleiades project.

4.1.1 Exclusion according to semantic subtype

The majority of palaeographically probable toponyms can be discarded as likely replacements for IOϒΔAIAN when their semantical subtype is considered in relation to the structure of the catalogue. The function of the catalogue is to clarify the identity of the audience in Acts 2:8. The catalogue consists of four units ordered in a chiastic structure. ^[23] The first and last units consist of groups of demonyms, while the second and third groups start with an active participle, respectively, οἱ κατοικοῦντες (residents) and οἱ ἐπιδημοῦντες (sojourners). IOϒΔAIAN appears in the second group as an object of κατοικοῦντες. This constrains the possibility of toponyms by excluding the hydrography-related toponyms Λουδιας, Iορδάνης, and Ἰσάρας, and names pertaining to building structures, i.e. Ἱερά πύλη, Προπύλαια, Eὐπαλία, Θυαμία, or a landmark like Λευκάτας.

Besides pairing κατοικοῦντες with regions (Acts 2:9, 13), Luke combines it with city names (Jerusalem in Acts 2:14; 13:27, and Lydda in Acts 9:35). The author of Revelation uses the nomen in a construction to refer to “those who dwell on the earth” (Rev 11:10; 13:8; 17:2, 8). However, although a city name would technically fit the second unit of the catalogue, this would be a surprising deviation of its pattern: in parallel to the other regional toponyms one would also expect a region name at the spot of IOϒΔAIAN. Heuristic support for this observation is found in the historical discussion of proposed emendations, which all describe regions. ^[24]

Therefore, the palaeographical-related settlements …Ἄστραια, Γραῖα, Ἐλαία, Oἰχαλία, and Ὑδραμία; the towns Xετταία, Σουάτρα, Tριταία, Γεραρα, and Ἰμίχαρα; and the cities Bούδεια, Γάδαρα, Γόρδιον, Ἑστίαια, Eὔταια, Ἰουλίς, Ἱστίαια, Ἰστρία, Λῐ́λαια, Mονδαία, Nουαρία, Oὐγαυά, Oὐάγα, Oὐαρία, Oὐελία, Oὐλία, Ποτείδαια, Ῥουδία, Στάδια, and Tουία are not found to be fitting alternatives to emend IOϒΔAIAN in Acts 2:9. This means that 38 of the palaeographically likely unique toponyms can be safely discarded as potential emendations of IOϒΔAIAN on the basis of their semantic subtype.

4.1.2 Fitting in the geographic progression

The remaining 11 toponyms pertain to regions that all are palaeographically close to IOϒΔAIAN. For these regions, the question needs to be addressed whether they do fit in the geographical progression of Acts 2:9–11, somewhere between Mesopotamia and Cappadocia.

To visualise the potential search area, we used ArcGIS Pro software to create a multiple ring buffer from the centre point of the straight line between the centre points of Mesopotamia and Cappadocia (Figure 4). These artificial zones can be used as a visual aid in the evaluation of the geographically fitting of the individual regions.

Figure 4

Search area for a region between Macedonia and Cappadocia.

Unfortunately, none of the palaeographically related regions form geographically fitting alternatives for IOϒΔAIAN. Ῥιπαῖα refers to a mythical range of mountains that were thought to form the northern edge of the world. The region was thought to be uninhabited, and already in classical times authors doubted its existence.

The other alternatives (Figure 5) break the geographical progression and have additional issues: Ἰστρία could be either a region or people on the north-eastern Adriatic coast as well as a city at the Black Sea. The region Πισιδία in Asia Minor is attested both in the book of Acts and in classical works. Ἰταλία roughly corresponds to modern Italy and is very well attested in Classical, Jewish, and Christian texts. It is also hard to conceive in which way this toponym could fit the geographical progression and how the overlap with Rome (Acts 2:10) should be explained.

Additionally, the African region Nομαδία, the Macedonian landscape Ἐορδαία or Ἐορδία, the Aegean islands Ἱεράκια and Ῥοδία, and the island group Πεταλία do not fit the geographical arrangement better than IOϒΔAIAN.

4.1.3 Contextual appropriateness of Ἰδουμαία

The remaining toponym IΔOϒMAIA has already been proposed as an alternative to IOϒΔAIAN by several authors. ^[25] The designation was first applied to the country of Edom and later also to the southern part of Judah. This region had an important strategic position for controlling trade routes.

In favour of IΔOϒMAIAN is that it is palaeographically close to IOϒΔAIAN. ^[26] Only two operations are required to transform it to IOϒΔAIAN and a variant reading on Mark 3:7 transposes the two words. ^[27] Furthermore, the toponym was valid and common during the time of writing, and the region had Jews among its population from various ethnic backgrounds (Mark 3:8; JW 2.43).

If IΔOϒMAIAN is assumed as the original reading, additional support is still needed to show how the current reading IOϒΔAIAN could have come into existence. One might speculate that a copyist wanted to remove a reference to IΔOϒMAIA especially because of the turbulent relationship between IΔOϒMAIA and IOϒΔAIA: during Nebuchadnezzar’s besiege of Jerusalem the Edomites scorned and mocked the endangered Jews. After Jerusalem was defeated in 587 BCE, its Jewish population was deported into Babylonian captivity and their homes and possessions were confiscated by Edomites (Am. 10–14, cf. Ps. 137:7). Decades later when the Jews returned from being exiled, they found the homes of their families occupied by Edomites. A few centuries later, after the Arabs had invaded the territory, the Jewish high priest John Hyrcanus forced the Idumeans to follow the Jewish law and thus had them circumcised (Jos. Ant 13.9.1). Later on, the tyrant king Herod the Great was a born Idumean. ^[28] A mutual hostility between these two peoples is not difficult to perceive.

This is however pure conjecture and it does not explain why such a well-known topographic name like IΔOϒMAIA could have been confused with IOϒΔAIA, which introduces even more difficulties. Furthermore, IΔOϒMAIA does not provide a better solution to the odd geographic progression ^[29] (which however could also be argued in favour of its originality).

Figure 5

Map of regional toponyms that are paleographically close to Ioudaian.

4.1.4 Summary of findings on alternatives

Though it is tempting to draw firm conclusions about the likely candidates for IOϒΔAIAN in Acts 2:9, there is no significant evidence to warrant any of them.

What can be concluded is that an unintentional scribal error based on palaeographical confusion of IOϒΔAIAN with one of the toponyms we retrieved from the New Testament, Greek Old Testament, and Classical literature seems very unlikely. We simply did not find a fitting candidate that was palaeographically close enough to IOϒΔAIAN and might have been altered unintentionally in only a few operations and that–on top of this–is also meeting the historical, geographical, and contextual requirements to fit the catalogue in Acts 2:9–11.

For the moment, this leaves the problem unsolved. However, the possibility remains that a new artefact might be discovered that contains a different spelling of an existing or even a completely unknown toponym that fits the geographical progression, corresponds to the expected semantic subtype (i.e. being a region), and also suits the wider historical and literary context. Such a discovery would provide an ideal toponym to emend IOϒΔAIAN in Acts 2:9.

Until such a discovery is done, it might be better to refrain from speculation about unintentional palaeographical confusion and to accept that the catalogue of nations in Acts 2 is a peculiar list in multiple facets. The mention of IOϒΔAIAN is just one of these peculiarities.