1 and 2 Corinthians, and Galatians. To evaluate these conclusions, several points should be taken up, including the nature of the claims about ancient pseudepigraphic letters, expectations of intellectual property, and the way the early church addressed pseudepigraphy and pseudonymity. We should note at the start that pseudepigraphic letters were popular in the Greco-Roman world, and Jews of this time also produced and read pseudepigraphic works. Both of these claims, however, require careful nuance if they are to inform the discussion over the authorship of Ephesians. When we think about the range of letters today, we imagine official letters sent between diplomats wherein every word is carefully parsed, as well as grade school children writing home from summer camp to parents or grandparents eager for some news (and perhaps in this latter case the contents would be likewise carefully edited!). In the ancient world, letters likewise served to unite friends, accomplish tasks, keep in touch with family, or simply entertain. In the latter category we find collections of letters presented as written by the ancient philosophers such as Plato (philosopher of the fourth century BCE who studied under Socrates) or Diogenes (Cynic philosopher of fourth-century BCE Athens). While no one doubts that the capabilities of those two men certainly extended to writing letters, the collections of their letters, produced in the Hellenistic period, were understood for the most part to be pseudepigraphic, that is, written by someone other than the claimed author. These collections served to entertain and edify, they offered another window into the imagined life of the great men (and a few women in their circles). Today they also are cited by some as an analogue to the deutero-Pauline material, so it is important that we explore the world of pseudonymity on the ancient landscape.
The definition of pseudonymity in modern scholarship varies widely, at times being conflated with the category of “anonymous.” A genuine letter is one written (directly or indirectly through a scribe) or commissioned by the author named in the text. An anonymous letter does not contain within the text an attribution to authorship; however, such a text might later have an author falsely attributed to it. For our purposes, a pseudepigraphic letter is one written by a person other than the one named in the text, and thus the text’s author could be categorized as pseudonymous. A key concern when speaking of pseudonymity is the intention of the authors; namely, are they intending to deceive their audience, or are they using an accepted literary device? Intentions are not always easy to determine, but two were commented upon in the ancient world: greed and admiration for the author. Some writers were anxious to have their own ideas propagated, and so used a well-known name to forward the writer’s cause, while others genuinely appreciated the person whose name they used, and sought to promote that person’s ideas out of love, respect, and personal humility. Forgery is another category; here the author intentionally deceives his audience for some perceived gain, which might be wealth, or the downfall of his opponent. In the case of pseudonymous authorship, the audience is not deceived; rather it recognizes without censure the false authorship attribution.
A quick summary of the pseudepigraphic epistolary collections in the Greco-Roman world reveals that they were the product of several authors, or at least an accumulation of material surrounding an authentic core. These collections developed in the first and second centuries CE, perhaps because of the general, widespread interest in classical Greek thought and literary expression. The figures chosen had well-known reputations, and the letter collections might be read alongside their corpus of work. In almost all cases the letters were written to a single individual, another well-known person of the past. Moreover, composing letters in the name of famous philosophers, tyrants, and kings was standard rhetoric training for students. “The goal of the pseudonymous epistolographer was thus to work the bare bones of a biography into a compelling life story. He was both scholar and creative artist, researching historical materials in order to define the bounds of the tradition, and using his imagination to elaborate creatively and dramatically on that tradition.”27 It must be noted that these letters were not read singly, but within the corpus, and the evidence suggests a school setting for their production. For these reasons, a few argued that the disputed Pauline letters were produced by a Pauline school, although this view has never gained much traction due to the paucity of evidence for such an academy.
Additionally, many of these collections focus on ethics and imitating the famous figure. To facilitate these goals, often the letters include personal data or alleged historical details that might motivate the reader to copy the philosopher’s behavior. Since the reader knew the important figure of the distant past was not in fact the author, presenting the personal details as though the philosopher himself wrote it was not deceptive, but rather a literary convention that served to promote the well-known ideals of the philosophy. Because genuine letters can exhibit similar characteristics, such as encouraging imitation and stressing ethics, recognizing pseudepigraphic epistles is not, therefore, always simple and straightforward.
Pausing for a moment, it seems useful to ask whether the characteristics noted above are helpful in deciding whether there are pseudepigraphic letters in the New Testament. A review of the various Greco-Roman corpuses reveals few similarities with the Pauline corpus. Many in the former category do not have the sender’s name in each letter; rather, the real reader knows who the sender is because the letter is embedded in the larger corpus of epistles attributed to that figure. Second, often the material is of a very general nature, amounting to a philosophical reflection. Third, the letters are usually much shorter than the ones in the New Testament, though a few are the length of Paul’s shorter letters. Finally, the attributed author is a figure from the distant, classical Greek period. An exception is the second-century CE collection of Apollonius of Tyana’s letters, which, as single-line statements or quips, are hardly comparable to the epistles of the New Testament.
Authority and Ownership of Literary “Property”
Digging deeper into the issue of ancient pseudepigraphy requires an examination into the sense of intellectual property held at the time, and the role of the apostle and apostolic authority within the early church. While no copyright law existed in the ancient world (that would not happen until the advent of the printing press), there were guidelines and standards of behavior. Readers held a much more laissez-faire attitude towards fictitious letters by Plato, and reacted strongly against letters reportedly by Cicero but written by another. The rule of thumb was that if the alleged author is long deceased, and his ideas and thoughts had been widely disseminated and absorbed, then producing letters to help an audience understand the great man’s personal life and ideas was considered acceptable. As noted above, letter collections of Plato, Diogenes and other Cynic philosophers, or Pythagoras (sixth-century BCE philosopher and mathematician) and the Neo-Pythagoreans, were usually produced by a school, or at least several hands are evident in the final redaction. Indeed, ancient commentators pointed out that Pythagoras was known to have written little himself, but much of his surviving work is the result of his disciples’ careful note taking. For example, Porphyry (second-century CE Neoplatonist) notes that of the 280 works with Pythagoras’ name attached, only 80 are from the philosopher directly; the others were written by his disciples. This fact was not troubling because, as Iamblichus (Neoplatonist, ca. 250–325 CE) observes, it was their custom to sign everything in their master’s name. Olympiodorus (sixth-century CE Neoplatonist) notes that Pythagoras did not leave any personal writings behind because he believed his “spiritual” writings, his disciples, were a better source for hearing his philosophy. These students out of goodwill for their esteemed teacher wrote down his teachings from their notes. Pythagoras is thus somewhat distinctive in that he chose not to write but instructed his students to do so. We have no record of Paul making a similar request, and of course, Paul also wrote some letters. But if someone wrote in Cicero’s name, or Seneca’s, they faced condemnation, because the purpose of writing such a letter was either the real author’s personal gain or the disgrace of the important figure. The physician Galen (second century CE) laments that his works were redacted in inappropriate and lazy ways that violated his literary property. He wrote On His Own Books in an attempt to stem the tide of these inferior works, wherein he recounts an incident that highlights his frustration over forgeries and unscrupulous editors. He explains that a group had gathered in a bookshop and was discussing the authenticity of one of his books. A fellow steps forward, reads the first couple of lines, and tosses it aside as fake, because it was evident that it was not Galen’s
