Symbolic Blackness and Ethnic Difference in Early Christian Literature

BLACKENED BY THEIR SINS: Early Christian Ethno-Political Rhetorics about Egyptians, Ethiopians, Blacks and Blackness

Gay L Byron

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2003
• ISBN:
  9781134544004
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Storia
• Subtopic: Storia antica

How were early Christians influenced by contemporary assumptions about ethnic and colour differences?
Why were early Christian writers so attracted to the subject of Blacks, Egyptians, and Ethiopians?
Looking at the neglected issue of race brings valuable new perspectives to the study of the ancient world; now Gay Byron's exciting work is the first to survey and theorise Blacks, Egyptians and Ethiopians in Christian antiquity.
By combining innovative theory and methodology with a detailed survey of early Christian writings, Byron shows how perceptions about ethnic and color differences influenced the discursive strategies of ancient Christian authors. She demonstrates convincingly that, in spite of the contention that Christianity was to extend to all peoples, certain groups of Christians were marginalized and rendered invisible and silent.
Original and pioneering, this book will inspire discussion at every level, encouraging a broader and more sophisticated understanding of early Christianity for scholars and students alike.

Part 1

DEVELOPING A TAXONOMY OF ETHNO-POLITICAL RHETORICS

1
INTERPRETING ETHNIC AND COLOR DIFFERENCES IN EARLY CHRISTIAN WRITINGS

In the apocryphal Acts of Peter Marcellus describes to Peter a dream that featured an evil-looking woman:

And Marcellus went to sleep for a short time; and when he awoke he said to Peter, “Peter, apostle of Christ, let us boldly set about our task. For just now as I slept for a little I saw you sitting on a high place, and before you a great assembly; and a most evil-looking woman, who looked like an Ethiopian (Aethiopissimam), not an Egyptian (Aegyptiam), but was all black (nigram), clothed in filthy rags. She was dancing with an iron collar about her neck and chains on her hands and feet. When you saw her you said aloud to me, ‘Marcellus, the whole power of Simon and of his god is this dancer; take off her head!’ But I said to you ‘Brother Peter, I am a senator of noble family, and I have never stained my hands, nor killed even a sparrow at any time.’ And when you heard this you began to cry out even louder, Come, our true sword, Jesus Christ, and do not only cut off the head of this demon (daemonis), but cut in pieces all her limbs in the sight of all these whom I have approved in thy service.’ And immediately a man who looked like yourself, Peter, with sword in hand, cut her all to pieces, so that I gazed upon you both, both on you and on the one who was cutting up the demon, whose likeness caused me great amazement. And now I have awakened and told you these signs of Christ (signa Christi).” And when Peter heard this he was the more encouraged, because Marcellus had seen these things; for the Lord is always careful for his own. So cheered (gratulatus) and refreshed (recreates) by these words he stood up to go to the forum.¹

It is hard to believe that this text was written during the formative years of early Christianity. It was intended to inspire, encourage, and edify those who would receive it. What is most noticeable (and even shocking) about this text is the way “the evil-looking woman” functions within the narrative. First, she is described by ethnic and color-symbolic language: she was an Ethiopian (Aethiopissimam), not an Egyptian (Aegyptiam), but was all black (nigram). Second, she is described as a dancer with an iron collar about her neck and chains on her feet. Third, she is used to represent the enemy of Peter—Simon Magnus. Fourth, she is to be killed, either through decapitation or through the total dismemberment of her body—in the sight of others!

This text is usually not isolated in its entirety and is generally analyzed as only a minor subtext in the more significant unfolding drama of Peter’s activities as an apostle.² When I have shared this text with audiences that range from seasoned biblical scholars to seminary students, to lay people in mainline Protestant churches, the responses generally include surprise, shock, anger, dismay, and silence. Most of my students cannot believe how the woman is portrayed in the text or why a Christian author would choose to tell a story that is filled with such violence toward an ethnic person. My inability to explain or justify the function of this story or the role of the ethnic woman, along with the lack of any critical commentaries or interpretations of this passage, led me to pursue the task of developing some type of interpretive framework that might account for some of the factors that converge to make such a story an acceptable part of early Christian discourses.

Three general observations about this dream of Marcellus shape the development of the theoretical framework that will be discussed in this chapter and used throughout this book. First, the author uses the woman in this text as a symbolic trope in order to communicate certain values about early Christianity. Second, the author clearly delineates the woman’s ethnic identity, and clarifies this identity with color-symbolic language. Third, the interactions between the woman and the phantom person who killed her in this dream (a man who looked like Peter) raise questions about gender relations in the ancient world. In addition to these observations, this text highlights the problem I encountered in trying to come up with a theoretical framework for exploring how ethnicity might be used as an interpretive category within biblical studies. There was no one particular theory or scholar that would enable me to address all of the questions related to understanding the symbolic meanings of ethnic groups, geographical locations, and color differences in early Christian writings. Thus, for this study, I have undertaken an interdisciplinary approach that is based upon rhetorical criticism, ethnocriticism, and gender criticism. These three forms of biblical interpretation will serve as the theoretical foundation for the exploration of ethnic and color-coded discourses, which will be referred to as “ethno-political rhetorics.” I will not provide an overall historical development of each of these forms of biblical interpretation; such information has already been documented in a variety of sources.³ What is more pertinent for my purposes is to show how each of these interpretive methods opens a door for exploring the symbolic functions of Egyptians/Egypt, Ethiopians/Ethiopia, and Blacks/ blackness in ancient Christian writings.

RHETORICAL CRITICISM

In recent years many scholars have identified the benefits of exploring discursive or rhetorical strategies within ancient Christian writings.⁴ In her book entitled Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire: The Development of Christian Discourse, Averil Cameron offers a compelling proposal for understanding the different ways that Christian writers adopted the discursive patterns of the larger Greco-Roman culture in their particular writings. Writing from the standpoint of a historian, Cameron examines how Christians “spoke and wrote the rhetoric of empire”; in other words, she explores the relation of Christian discourse to its context in the Roman Empire. This point will be explored more fully in Chapter 2.⁵ Her understanding of Christian rhetoric, not in its technical sense, but rather in its broadest sense, “as modes of expression within which early Christianity was articulated and the power of that expression to persuade,” informs my understanding of the persuasive power of ethno-political rhetorics explored throughout this book.⁶ One of the most important contributions that Cameron makes in her persuasive discussion about the development of Christian discourse is the strong connection between historical events and rhetorical constructions that appear in different types of Christian writings.⁷

Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza argues that analyzing the “rhetoricity of the texts” yields important insights about the political intent of the author.⁸ She demonstrates how the “‘politics and rhetorics of othering’ establish identity either by declaring the difference of the other to be the same or by vilifying and idealizing the difference as otherness.”⁹ Her insights draw attention to both the polemical and political commentary embedded in ancient Christian writings.

It is a well-established fact that ancient Christian writings were produced within polemical contexts that led to slander among different groups who were vying for authority. New Testament scholar Luke Timothy Johnson examines the rhetoric of slander that non-Jewish Christians directed against their Jewish opponents. Johnson argues that the power of language to shape hostile and destructive attitudes and actions toward Jews is best understood through the exercise of historical and literary imagination.¹⁰ He analyzes the New Testament’s anti-Jewish slander by outlining the historical and social context that generated anti-Jewish slander. Then he contextualizes the polemic within the conventional rhetoric of slander in the Hellenistic world.

Historian of early Christianity Robert Wilken also examines how Jews and Judaizers were the object of slander and rhetorical abuse in the sermons of John Chrysostom.¹¹ According to Wilken, Chrysostom’s sermons were directed at Christians in his congregation who were participating in Jewish festivals and taking part in other Jewish observances in Antioch. Wilken demonstrates how Chrysostom was a model rhetor whose preaching exemplified the fourth-century standards of rhetoric of the later Roman Empire.¹² Chrysostom used hyberbole, metaphors, and similes to present the Judaizers and Jews in the worst possible light: “do not be surprised if I have called the Jews wretched. They are truly wretched and miserable for they have received many good things from God yet they have spurned them and violently cast them away.”¹³ Wilken accurately describes how the rhetoric of abuse found in fourth-century Christian writings was directed at religious opponents, chiefly heretics and Jews.¹⁴ This rhetoric, influenced by sophistic invective, was instrumental in shaping the theological arguments about the status of the Jews after the death of Christ and the destruction of the temple.¹⁵

This present book draws upon the theoretical presuppositions of the aforementioned studies and offers a much-needed theoretical framework for exploring the symbolic use of Egyptians/Egypt, Ethiopians/Ethiopia, and Blacks/blackness in ancient Christian literature. Although rhetorical criticism provides a means for analyzing discursive strategies within ancient writings, it does not offer a theoretical framework for examining the impact of ethnic and color differences within early Christian writings. The next section will assess how a relatively new area of biblical criticism, known as ethnocriticism, yields interpretive possibilities for understanding such differences.

ETHNOCRITICISM

Ethnocritical studies have generally opened a new window onto ancient Christian writings. Because there are so many different scholarly approaches for interpreting and understanding ethnicity,¹⁶ this section will summarize some of the more pertinent studies related to the New Testament and early Christianity and outline the general approach that will be used in this study. Hebrew Bible and New Testament scholars have generated many provocative studies that indicate how ancient understandings of ethnic differences filtered into religious writings.¹⁷ Given the diverse cultural and ethnic backgrounds of the ancient world, it is no surprise that scholars are now raising questions about the ways that ethnicity or rac...