Scribes, Sanhedrin, Publicans, Money, and Tribute

I. The Scribes

From the very earliest times the Law had to be written, e.g., Deut. 17:18, 31:24-26, 1 Sam 10:25, and in consequence the position of a scribe or copier was an important and honorable one, cf. Prov. 25:1, Ps. 44:2, Isa. 33:18 (LXX), Ecclus. 10:5, 38:25, Dan. 11:33-35, 12:3. In 1 Paral. 2:55, we seem to have an indication of an existing guild of scribes. Esdras is known as the "ready scribe," cf. Esdras 7:6, 10, 21; Neh. 8:9, 12:35. Note, too, the number of scribes or recorders who are mentioned in O.T. It would be a mistake, however, to place in the same category the N.T. scribes, who are reprobated by our Lord, and the scribes of O.T., e.g. Saphan, 4 Kings 22:8, etc. Esdras and Baruch, cf. Jer. 36:2-4, 18, 32. For while the fires of the exile purified the people from idolatry, they at the same time taught them the paramount importance of observance of the Law.

This Law was copied with the utmost care; by a natural consequence these same copyists became its interpreters, and in course of time their interpretations of the Law came to transcend in importance the Law itself.

An interesting proof of the position assigned to these "lawyers" is to be found in the Septuagint translation, which in many places renders the Hebrew word "שׁטר" by γραμματεύς or "scribe." St. Jerome renders this word by exactor, magister, dux, decanus, doctor, but never, as far as we know, by scriba, cf. Exod. 5:6, Num. 11:16, Deut. 20:5; see also Deut. 1:15, 16:18, 29;10, 31:28, where the same word is rendered by γραμματοεισαγωγέυς. This shows that at the time the Pentateuch was translated into Greek the position of the scribe was paramount. Thus in the LXX version of Job 37:20 Eliu says to Job: "I have never had the assistance of either book or scribe."

The consequence of this dominance of the scribes was that by the time of Christ the Jewish religion had become the worship of a multitude of human traditions rather than of the Book itself -- a burden which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear, as St. Peter complains, Acts 15:10.

The scribes were not necessarily either Pharisees or Sadducees. They arose apparently from the "congregation of the Assideans," to whose efforts the success of the Maccabean rising was due, 1 Macc. 2:42, cf. especially 7:12-13. From this same body arose in later times the various sects, Pharisees, Essenes, etc.

The excessive "legalism" of the scribes and their attachment to their own interpretation of the Law led to their jealousy of Christ and their final rejection of Him. Their interpretations took the form of what was known as Halacha, or traditional decisions on points of the Law, cf. Mark 7:3; they insisted on these to the detriment of real moral obligations, cf. Mark 7:9-13. They had also a system of interpretation known as Haggada, which consisted in the accumulation of legends based on Scripture history.

II. The Sanhedrin

In the Greek συνέδριον, or in the English versions "the Council," was the name for the Jewish judicial assembly. The root idea of this judicial assembly is undoubtedly to be sought in Exod. 18:13-26, where on Jethro's advice Moses summons a number of experienced men to assist him in the task of hearing cases; we have a parallel instance in Num. 11:16-17, 24-25, where the Spirit of the Lord is poured out upon seventy of the Elders of Israel with a view to their assisting Moses, cf. Deut. 1:9, 17, as also Josaphat's action in appointing judges, 2 Paral. 19:8-11. But the fact that this judicial assembly of N.T. times is known by a Greek name compels us to refer the actual creation of the assembly as we see it in force in N.T. to the period of the Greek or Seleucidan Kings who held sway over Israel after the days of Alexander the Great.

In this connection it is interesting to note that whereas in the Pentateuch[1] the Greek word used for the assembly of the Elders is γερουσία, a term which also appears in Maccabean times,[2] the word συνέδριον only appears in Ps. 26[25]:4, Jer. 15:17, and eight times in Proverbs, where on six occasions it represents an addition to the Hebrew text.[3] The verb occurs in Ecclus. 23:14 (Vulgate 18) and in the LXX of Daniel (not Theodotion) 13:28 (Susanna).

In 1 Macc. 14:28 we find mention of "the Great Synagogue," and a comparison with 12:6 suggests the identity of this with the γερουσία or Sanhedrin.[4] This comparatively late origin for the Sanhedrin as we find it in N.T. times is borne out by Josephus; he tells us that Antiochus the Great was met by the Jerusalem γερουσία;[5] it is only when we come to the times of Hyrcanus II. that he speaks expressly of the Sanhedrin;[6] while elsewhere he seems to draw an express distinction between the Sanhedrin of Jerusalem and the Senate of Tiberias.[7]

The number of members of the Sanhedrin is stated in the Talmud to have been seventy-one, presumably seventy besides the President. That they had the power to adjudicate upon capital questions seems to follow from Matt. 5:22. Except in this passage and in Matt. 10:17 and Mark 8:9 where reference is made in a general sense to the "councils" of the Jews, the Sanhedrin is only referred to in the Gospels apropos of the trial of our Lord: Matt. 26:59, Mark 14:55, 15:1, Luke 22:66, John 11:47. Peter and John were summoned before it, Acts 4:15; the Apostles, too, as a body, 5:21 ff.; Stephen also, 6:12, 15; and St. Paul, 22:30, 23:1 ff., cf. 24:20.

III. Publicans

The word "publican" is from the Latin publicanus, which is formed from the adjective publicus signifying "what concerns the state;" publicamis meant in the mouth of a Roman "what concerns the public revenue." Hence a "publican" came to signify one who looked after the public revenue and its collection. It was the custom of the Romans to farm out these revenues to the highest bidder; the latter agreed to pay a fixed sum and then made what he could out of it by oppressing the people. Long before the time of Christ the Jews had suffered from this species of oppression. Thus Josephus tells us how the richest men approached the Kings, Antiochus and Ptolemy, to obtain the privilege of collecting the customs, with consequent gross abuse of their power.[8] An inscription from Palmyra (Tadmor) dating from the year 137 A.D. shows us the measures taken to limit these abuses.[9] In Palestine the revenues were paid to the Imperial treasury through the Procurator. Hence a Jew who, for the sake of gain, under took to farm the taxes to be collected from his oppressed fellow-countrymen was a subject of peculiar odium. Zacheus, Luke 19:2, is named "the chief of the publicans," i.e., he was not a subordinate agent but one who, presumably, sublet the taxes. N.T. shows us publicans at Jericho, Luke 19:1-2; and at Capharnaum, Matt. 9:9, Mark 2:14, Luke 5:27; the "seat of custom" here mentioned was established on the "via maris" or great trade route between East and West, cf. Matt. 4:15.

IV. The Moneys of the New Testament Times [10]

The Roman domination in Palestine must be taken into account when treating of the coinage systems in use in N.T. times. The Jews had from the very earliest times paid the yearly tax of half-a-shekel to the sanctuary. [11] Hence there must always have been current amongst them coins or their equivalent to facilitate the collection of this tribute. [12] From about B.C. 450 to a.d. 200 coins were issued by the mint at Tyre, which city, like Gaza, Sidon, etc., possessed an inde- pendent mint of its own. Thus during the Ptolemaic and Seleucidan occupations of Phoenicia we find the Jews dependent on the Tyrian mint for their supply of shekels. These shekels appear to have existed in the double form of the heavy and light shekels, viz. the tetradrachm and the didrachma, [13] though this latter was a comparatively rare coin. When the Romans came upon the scene they found the Attic drachma was the silver unit and it corresponded to the Roman denarius; the tetradrachm was also in use, but apparently not the didrachma. As the tetradrachm was the equivalent of the shekel one [14] coin served for two people who wished to pay the Sanctuary tribute ; hence the scene depicted in Matt. xvii. 23-26 must have been a usual one. At a later period we find the Imperial mints at Antioch and Caesarea producing drachmas and tctradrachmas or staters. Thus in Roman Imperial times there existed a double standard in Palestine, the Roman and the Phoenician, the only values common to the two being the Roman denarius and the Phoenician drachma. A further source of confusion lay in the power to coin bronze or copper coins of their own which the various suzerains conceded to their vassals. Thus Antiochus VII., Sidetes, conceded to Simon the Plasmonean the power to coin; [15] the Romans gave the same power to Herod the Great, and we have a long and complicated series of bronze coins of his successors Herod Antipas, Philip the Tetrarch and Agrippa H. Moreover, the Roman Procurators also produced the quadrans, presumably from a mint at Caesarea.

V. Tribute

The tribute referred to in the N.T. is, with the exception of two instances where D.V. has custom, the tax levied by the Romans on the Jews. The question was put to Christ: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar or no? Matt. 22:17, Mark 12:14, Luke 20:22; in spite of His answer He was accused of forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, Luke 23:2; in Matt. 17:23-26, we have the demand for the payment of the didrachma, or two-drachma piece, or half-shekel; the stater miraculously found in the fish's mouth was a four-drachma piece. But Christ points out the injustice of making the children pay a tribute which the Kings of the earth properly exacted from strangers: of whom do the Kings of the earth receive tribute or custom? Thus St. Paul says: Let every soul be subject to higher powers ... for therefore also do you pay tribute. ... Render therefore to all men their dues. Tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom... Rom. 13:1, 6-7. The distinction between these two terms "tribute" and "custom" is to be sought in the Greek: φόρος or tribute implies a burden imposed by a foreign power; τέλος or custom is the generic word for imposts or taxes which do not denote subjection. The student should note how correct St. Luke is in his use of φόρος in 20:22, 23:2, and cf. the parallel to 20:22, in Matthew and Mark.

____________________

1 - E.g. Exod. 3:16, Lev. 9:1, Num. 22:4, Deut. 5:20, etc.

2 - 1 Macc. 12:6, 2 Macc. 1:10, 4:44, 11:27.

3 - Prov. 11:13, 22:10 (bis), 24:7, 27:22, 31:23; in 26:26 it represents the Hebrew קהל; Vulgate, in concilio.

4 - The expressions used are worth noting for the constitution of the Sanhedrin: 1 Macc. 14:28, ἐπὶ συναγωγης μεγάλης τɷν ἱερέων καὶ λαοῡ καὶ ἀρχόντων ἔθνους καὶ τɷν πρεσβυτέρων της χώρας. In 12:6 we have ἀρχιερεὼς τοῡ ἔθνους καὶ ἡ γερουσία καὶ οἱ ἱερεῑς καὶ ὁ λοιπὸς δημος τɷν Ιουδαίων.

5 - Ant. XII. iii. 3.

6 - Ibid. XIV. ix. 4-5.

7 - Vita, 12 and 13.

8 - Ant. XII. iv. i, 3, 4;

9 - Cooke, A Text-Book of North-Semitic Inscriptions, No. 147, Clarendon Press, 1903.

10 - For this section the student should refer to the article on Money in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. III. See also Vol. I. of these "Aids," p. 167-171.

11 - Exod. 30:13, etc.

12 - Cf. 1 Sam. 9:8, Neh. 10:32.

13 - See Origen, Tom. XIII. 13 in Matth. P.G. XIII. 1125 ; and note how the "five thousand sides of silver" of 1 Macc. 10:42 is rendered by Josephus as "ten thousand drachmae," Ant. XIII. ii. 3.

14 - So St. Jerome on Ezech. iv. 10, "Siclus autem, id est stater, habet drachmas quatuor." P.L. XXV. 48.

15 - I Macc. XV. 5. It used to be supposed that the silver shekels bearing the date "year 1" to "year 5" and inscribed "Shekel of Israel" and "Jerusalem the Holy" were to be referred to this same Simon. But the arguments against this view have been forcibly stated by Kennedy (Money, in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. III. p. 424), they may be summarised thus (a) as a general rule power to coin in bronze only was so conceded. (b) The years 1-5 would take us back to a time when Demetrius II. was still on the throne, (c) The fact that we have no coins after the time of Simon remains unexplained. (d) Lastly these silver shekels do not resemble the known contemporary silver coins of that period.




by
Hugh Pope, O.P., S.T.M., D.S.ScR.
Professor of New Testament Exegesis
The Collegio Angelico, Rome