14 Nov. 2023 |

What Does “Head” (Kephalē) Mean in Paul’s Letters? Part 3: Ancient Greek Literature

Preston Sprinkle

Introduction

My FIRST POST introduced the topic, and my SECOND looked at the non-literal use of kephalē in the Septuagint. We now turn to examine how kephalē (“head”) is used in extra biblical Greek writings. (I will look at the use of kephalē in post-biblical Christian literature, including the early Church Fathers, in the next post.) I primarily want to see how ancient writers used the term kephalē when they weren’t referring to a literal head. Although, as we’ll see, their understanding of the literal head’s relation to the body is informative as well, since the head/body metaphor could very well be related to how the ancients understood the head’s literal relationship to the body.

Since we’re going to look at a lot of texts, I’ll keep my commentary rather brief on each one. For organizational purposes, I’m going to group each set of texts under the different meanings I think best convey the authors’ usage. Again, the three general meanings that are common for kephalē are:

“Source, beginning, origin”
“Authority over, ruler”
“Prominent, preeminent, foremost”

I’ll begin with references where kephalē most probably means “source.”

Kephalē as “Source”

Herodotus 4.91 (5^th century BC) uses kephalē to refer to the end points of a river:

From the sources (kephalai) of the river Tearus flows the best and fairest of all river waters.¹

Galen (AD 2^nd century) also uses kephalē to refer to the source of a river:

Some rivers grow larger, as we should expect, when tributaries flow into them, while some decrease in size as channels are separated off. No river that comes from a single spring is smaller at its head (ten kephalēn) than it is thereafter (On the Doctrines of Hippocrates and Plato 6.3.21.4).²

[Whirlpools in a river] arise when they are warmed by the sun or its head (ten kephalēn) (De locis affectis 3.12).³

The first-century Jewish work Life of Adam and Eve uses kephalē in a way that seems to mean source or origin:

For covetousness is the head (kephalē) of every kind of sin (19:3).

Some scholars dispute this meaning, but I do think “source” (or possibly “beginning”) is probably the best rendering of kephalē here.⁴

On at least one occasion, the first-century Jewish philosopher Philo uses kephalē in a way that probably means source:

…of all the members of the clan here described Esau is the progenitor, the head (kephalē) as it were of the whole creature. (Prelim. Studies 61)

Although it’s disputed, kephalē seems to be used as a synonym for “progenitor” which clearly refers to Esau being the “source” of “the whole creature” (i.e. his clan).⁵ (There’s another reference in Philo that I’ve added to a list of “Disputed Examples” below.)

We could also “reconstruct a broad medical understanding of kephalē in the period from Hippocrates (460-380 BC) to Galen (AD 130-200)” where the literal “head” is the source or origin of the body’s muscles, nerves, pleasure, pain, grief, and so on.⁶ As we’ll see below, however, at least some of these references don’t exclude all notions of the kephalē exercising some ruling function.

Disputed Examples

There’s a widely known saying about Zeus that’s cited in several places in Greek literature:

Zeus was first, Zeus is las with white, vivid lightening;
Zeus the head (kephalē), Zeus the middle,
Zeus from whom all things are perfected (Orphic Fragments 21a).⁷

Scholars have taken kephalē here to mean a variety of different things. Payne says this text “identifies Zeus as the maker from whom all things come into existence” and there are many ancient references to Zeus being the “source through whom things come into existence.”⁸ Payne rightly points out that several manuscripts that record this saying use the Greek word archē instead of kephalē, which he says supports the meaning of “source” for kephalē, since archē can mean “source.”⁹

But archē has its own ambiguity and can actually means several things in addition to “source,” such as: beginning, origin, or even ruler.¹⁰ Fitzmyer, who argues that kephalē typically means “leader, authority over,” agrees that this is one of the few cases where kephalē means “source.”¹¹

Andrew Perriman, however, disagrees with both Payne and Fitzmyer: “The use of kephalē in” in this passage “is probably better understood to mean ‘beginning’ or ‘creator’ than source’.”¹² Perriman goes on to argue that archē does not usually mean “source” but “beginning,” and “it is by no means clear that ‘beginning’ must imply ‘source’.”¹³ Grudem likewise believes that

…it is doubtful that “source” would be the best meaning here. The sense “beginning” (of a series) or “first one” (in terms of time) seems most likely here because of (1) the similarity to the idea of “first” and “last” in the previous line and (2) the contrast with “middle” and the mention of perfection in the same line—giving the sense, “Zeus is the beginning, Zeus is the middle, Zeus is the one who completes all things.”¹⁴

Grudem goes on to point out that this understanding best explains the variant readings that have archē instead of kephalē. Grudem says “the context shows that the author is not talking about whether Zeus or someone or something else is the source or origin of all things; he is rather affirming that in terms of time Zeus was first and Zeus will be last as well.”¹⁵

I do think that Grudem and Perriman are probably correct. Kephalē means Zeus is the “beginning” not the “source.” Does this exclude notions of “prominence” and “authority?” In other words, when Zeus is called the kephalē, does this mean he’s the “beginning” (or even “source”) and not also an authoritative ruler? I think it’s more probable that when the head deity of the Greek pantheon is described as being the “beginning” (kephalē) of all things, that this also conveys some sense of “authority” or “rulership” as well.¹⁶

There’s a reference in Philo that is taken by some to mean “source,” and I do believe this meaning is possible. But others argue that “ruler” and even “prominence” can be gathered from the context as well:

For as in an animal the head is the first and best part, and the tail the last and worst part, or rather no part at all…so in the same manner what is said here is that the virtuous man shall be the head of the human race whether he be a single man or a whole people. And that all others, being as it were parts of the body, are only vivified by the powers existing in the head (kephalē) and superior portions of the body (On Rewards and Punishments 125, Yonge’s translation)

This text offers an important parallel to Paul’s head/body metaphors, reflecting rather closely Ephesians 4:15-16 and Colossians 2:19.¹⁷ Clinton Arnold, for instance, points out that the “physiology is metaphorically applied to one person (kephalē) in relationship to a group of other people (mere somatos)” and this is similar “to how Paul uses the imagery in Colossians and Ephesians.”¹⁸

As far as the meaning of kephalē goes, once again scholars don’t agree. Joseph Fitzmyer, who argues that kephalē most often means “leader,” agrees that this is one of the few cases where kephalē means “source.”¹⁹ Philip Payne also believes that kephalē means “source” since “the person called ‘head’ is not in authority over the group identified but is their source of life.”²⁰ (Payne points out that the editor of this text, Colson, explains that “head” here refers to “the source of spiritual life” and says that Philo elsewhere understands “the head as the source of spiritual nourishment.”²¹

Other scholars, however, argue for “leader” or “prominence” here. Wayne Grudem says:

There is a sense here of the members of the ‘body’ being encouraged and directed by the virtuous leaders who are the ‘head’, but there is no sense in which the ordinary people derive their being or existence from the leaders who are the ‘head’; thus, ‘source’ would be an inappropriate sense of kephalē here as well.

Andrew Perriman also strongly rejects the meaning of “source” here:

Clearly the zealous individual or nation is not meant to be understood as the ‘source’ of the human race…Philo does not mean that the human race depends on ton spoudaion [the zealous one] for its life but that such an individual or nation, by virtue of this prominence and excellence, is able to motivate and inspire others.”²²

I’m not sure that Grudem and Perriman have correctly understand what Payne and others mean by “source,” however. Again, as Payne points out: Philo understands “head” to refer to the “source of spiritual nourishment” and not the source of one’s entire existence.

As I’ve gone back and read the entire context (esp. from 120-125), which is no easy task—Philo is notoriously difficult to understand for modern readers—it seems like some sense of “authority” or “leadership” should be retained in his understanding of the “mind” which is housed in the kephalē. The “mind” of the virtuous one contains the “beneficent power of God” and is compared to the “palace and the house of God.” The “God of this mind” is “the one only and true ruler, the Holy One of holies” (123). The mind can be “enslaved to many pleasure” when it’s not exercising control over the body; but the mind of a virtuous person who follows the commandments of God possesses “the authority and power of its champion and defender” (124). This is the context which leads Philo to reflect on the “metaphorical form” and “allegorical meaning” of what he’s talking about, which leads into the quote above where kephalē occurs.

I think Clinton Arnold is probably closest to the mark, when he says that “the dual notion of leadership and source of provisions is present” in Philo’s use of kephalē here.²³ Elsewhere, Philo refers to the head as the “master limb of the members” (Spec. Leg. 1.147) and “the first, highest and principal part” and the “chief” (Quaest. In Exod. 1.17), “like the citadel of a king, has as its occupant the sovereign mind” (ton hegemonikon noun; Quaest. In Gen. 2.5). And according to Clinton Arnold: “Philo frequently uses the word hegemonikos and its cognates (the ‘dominant’ or ‘leading’ part) to characterize the head (e.g., Op. Mund. 119; Fug. 110, 182; Somn. 2.207; Vit. Mos. 2.30, 82; Spec. Leg. 3.184; Quaest. In Gen. 1.3, 10; 2.5; Quaest. In Exod. 2.124).”²⁴

In short, kephalē means both “source” (of spiritual nourishment) and the leadership that the mind, which is contained in the head, provides over the body, which is metaphorically applied to the virtuous one’s relationship to the human race.

Another first-century Jewish work, the Testament of Reuben says:

For seven spirits are established against mankind, and they are the heads (kephalai) of the deeds of youth (2.2)²⁵

Fitzmyer agrees that this is one of the few cases where kephalē means “source.”²⁶ Howard Clark Kee’s translation in Charlesworth’s Old Testament Pseudepigrapha translates kephalai as “sources.”²⁷ Perrimann, however, doesn’t agree: “‘head’ conveys the idea of ‘instigation’, that is, the spirits exert an active, controlling influence, they are the beginning of the deeds of youth: cf., among ‘seven other spirits’ given to man at creation, the ‘spirit of procreation and intercourse’ which leads the young person like a blind man into a ditch’.”²⁸ Grudem also believes the best translation for kephalai here is “leaders.”²⁹

I think “source” is the clearest meaning, but I’m not sure this meaning excludes all senses of leadership or rule. I think Perriman is correct when he says that the spirits continue to “exert an active, controlling influence” over the youth and therefore are performing some kind of ongoing, ruling function.

Kephalē occurs 6 times in the writings of a 2^nd century (AD) writer Artemidorus Daldianus. Philip Payne includes the following portions as evidence that “‘[h]ead’ here conveys the established metaphorical meaning ‘source’.”³⁰

Oneirocritica 1.2: “Another man dreamt that he was beheaded. In real life, the father of this man, too, died; for as the head (kephalē) is the source of life and light for the whole body, he was responsible for the dreamer’s life and light…The head (kephalē) indicates one’s father.”

Oneirocritica 1.35: “The head (kephalē) resembles parents in that it is the cause (aitia) of one’s living.”

Oneirocritica 3.66: “The head (kephalē) signifies the father of the dreamer…Whenever, then a poor man who has a rich father dreams that his own head has been removed by a lion and that he dies as a result, it is probable that his father will die…For the head (kephalē) represents the father; the removal of the head (kephalē), the death of the father”

According to the cited portions, it certainly seems like Payne’s interpretation is indisputable. However, the larger context unquoted by Payne puts the interpretation as “source” in question.³¹ Notice the various ways in which “head” is used in the fuller context of Oneirocritica 1.35:

If a man dreams that he has been beheaded… it is inauspicious both for a man with parents and a man with children. For the head resembles parents in that it is the cause of one’s living. It is like children because of the face and because of the resemblance…. Also, a man who owned a house has lost it. For the head is as it were the house of the senses…To bankers, usurers, men who have to collect subscriptions, shipmasters, merchants, and all who collect money, it [the dream of being beheaded] signifies loss of capital because the word for capital is derived from the word for head…. To a slave who enjoys the confidence of his master, it signifies that he will lose that confidence…. But to other slaves, the dream signifies freedom. For the head is the master of the body, and when it is cut off, it signifies that the slave is separated from his master and will be free…If someone who is at sea sees this dream, it [the dream of being beheaded] signifies that the sailyard of the ship will be lost, unless it is one of the sailors who has seen it. For, in these cases, I have observed that it [the dream of being beheaded]signifies death to their superiors. For the boatswain is the superior of the ordinary sailor; the officer in command of the bow is the boatswain’s superior; the steersman is the superior of the officer who commands the bow; and the shipmaster is the superior of the steersman…

The author uses kephalē to refer to a literal head, which is symbolically interpreted to refer to a whole range of things: the “house of the sense,” “capital,” a “master of a slave,” and several “superior” leaders on a ship. Even the literal head, after being referred to as the “source of life” (1.2) is also called “the master of the body” (1.35). In short, the various uses of kephalē here certainly includes the meaning “source (of life),” but not to the exclusion of other meanings related to “leadership, authority.”

As an addendum, I’m interested to further explore the kindship notions that surround kephalē in the above passages, since these might relate to Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. I believe Cynthia Long Westfall has explored this in her book Paul and Gender.

Kephale as “Prominence” and/or “Leader, Authority Over”

We turn now to what I have found to be the most common meaning of non-literal uses of kephalē in ancient Greek literature. I’m grouping these together since there are many references to kephalē at the very least meaning “prominence” but also expressing some kind of “ruling” activity.

For instance, Josephus refers to Jerusalem as the “the very face and head of the whole nation” (War, 4.261).³² At the very least, kephalē means “prominence.” But as the capital city, it would not be a stretch to also see some kind of ruling function as well. This seems clearer in another reference to Jerusalem as “head:” “the royal city Jerusalem was the supreme, and rules (archei) over all the neighboring country, as the head (kephalē) does over the body” (War, 3.54).³³ Kephalē here clearly conveys the idea of “rule,” and it’s even used to describe the head’s relationship to the body.

Similarly, the Jewish book Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs (2^nd cent. B.C.) refers to the two kings of the divided kingdom as two heads: “Do not be divided into two heads (duo kephalas), because everything the Lord has made has a single head. He provides two shoulders, two hands, two feet, but all members obey (hupakouei) one head (kephalē)” (T. Zeb. 9:4).³⁴ Here, prominence is probably present, but the ruling activity of the two kings is clearly the primary meaning in light of the mention of “all members obey one head.” Worthy to note, again, is that the ruling function of the head is described in the context of a head/body metaphor.

Philo also refers to the prominence and ruling activity of kings with the term kephalē. He calls Ptolemy II Philadelphus “in some sense the head of kings (kephalēn tropon tina ton basileon)” (Philo On Rewards and Punishments 2.5).³⁵ Again: “As the head is the ruling place in the living body, so Ptolemy became among kings (genomenos kathaper en zww to hegemoneuon kephalē tropon tina twn Basilewn)” (Philo, Moses 2.30).³⁶ Philo also refers to the high priest as a “divine word” and his “head” (kephalē) in the words of Clinton Arnold “functions as the ruling faculty (to hegemonikon), and upon it is placed a symbol of his ruling authority (hegemonia)” (Philo, Fug. 108-11).³⁷

There are several references to military leaders as “head” and their army as a “body.” For instance:

Iphilcrates used to resemble an army marshalled for action to the human body. The phalanx he called the breast, the light armed troops the hands, the cavalry the feet, and the general the head. If any of the inferior parts were wanting, the army was defective; but if it wanted a general it wanted everything. (Polyaenus, Strategems of War 3.9.2 [2^nd Cent. AD]).³⁸

But after Vindex had openly declared war, he wrote to Galba inviting him to assume the imperial power, and thus to serve what was a vigorous body in need of a head, meaning the Gallic provinces, which already had a hundred thousand men under arms…³⁹ (Plutarch, Galba 4.3 [Loeb])

The light-armed troops are like the hands, the Calvary like the feet, the line of men-at-arms itself like chest and breastplate, and the general is like the head. (Plutarch, Pelopidas, 2.1.3)⁴⁰

Other writers use kephale to refer to some kind of ruler or person in authority, such as Plutarch, who says: “‘Ye cannot have the same man as your ruler and your slave’. Since in this case also one certainly can apply the fable of the serpent whose tail rebelled against its head (kephale) and demanded the right to lead in turn instead of always following…” (Plutarch Agesilaus 2.5)⁴¹ Here, a ruler who follows popular opinions is compared to a serpent whose tail insisted on leading the body instead of it being led by the head. The serpent consequently harmed itself. The implication is that a ruler should be like the “head” of a serpent and thereby lead the people.

Plutarch records an incident where Catiline, a Roman statesman during the Republic, says to Cicero:

“What dreadful thing, pray,” said [Cataline], “am I doing, if, when there are two bodies, one lean and wasted, but with a head (kephale), and the other headless (akephalos) but strong and large, I myself become a head (kephale) for this?” (Cicero 14.4).

It seems rather clear from the context that kephalē refers to an authoritative ruling position, as Wayne Grudem points out: “In saying this, Catiline was threatening to become the head of the people and thus to lead the people in revolt against Cicero. Therefore, ‘Cicero was all the more alarmed’.”⁴²

Richard Cervin, who usually disagrees with Grudem, admits that “the connotation of authority may be present here due to the context” but goes on to identify two problems with this passage: 1) it’s a riddle, and 2) the riddle comes from Cicero’s speech Pro Murena 25.51, and Cicero spoke Latin. “Hence, Plutarch may have been translating this passage from Latin rather literally.”⁴³ I don’t think Cervin’s point overturns Grudem’s interpretation, however. Even if the original speech was in Latin, Plutarch sees no problem using the Greek term kephalē to convey some kind of leadership role that Catiline was proposing.

Libanius, a fourth century (A.D.) rhetorician, says that people who derided government authorities “heaped on their own heads insults” (Oration 20.3.15), and in the context, these “heads” are government authorities. In another oration, Libanius calls the emperor a “head” (kephalē) (Oration 52.18).⁴⁴ And Philo refers “the eternal Logos” with kephalē:“Where is the head of the world? …The head of all things is the eternal Logos of the eternal God, under which, as if it were his feet or other limbs, is placed the whole world” (Quaest. In Exod. 2.117). The “head of the world” and “head of all things” could include some sense of “source,” but it seems to refer primarily to the authority that the Logos has over the world. However, as Clinton Arnold points, Christ is referred to in the next line, which shows that a Christian editor had a hand in the wording here. (I’m not sure if the redactor put in the word kephalē or if it was original.) This doesn’t take away from the fact that the Greek word kephalē still refers to some kind of ruling activity. It just means that it may have come from a later Christian scribe.⁴⁵

In short, there are several references to military leaders and emperors as “heads” ruling over other people, sometimes referred to as a “body.” And there are other references to some kind of authority or leadership role accredited to a person described as a kephalē. As far as I can tell, it wasn’t unnaturally for kephalē to refer to some kind of authoritative leadership role.

This non-literal use of kephalē was probably connected to the ancient belief that the literal head exercised a ruling function over the body.

The Literal “Head” Ruling over the Body

On several occasions, Philo referred to the literal head as exercising some kind of rulership over the body:

Philo, On Dreams 2.207: “‘head’ we interpret allegorically to mean the ruling (hegemona) part of the soul”

Philo, On Moses 2.82: “The mind is head and ruler (hegemonikon) of the sense-faculty in us”

Philo, Special Laws 184: “Nature conferred the sovereignty of the body on the head”

Philo, Quaest. In Gen. 1.10: “The soul innervates and strengthens sense perception by directing its energies to what is suitable for it, with the participation of the parts of the body. And the centre, in one meaning, is the chief and head, as is the leader of a chorus.”⁴⁶

Philo’s statements resonate with Plato, who said:

Copying the revolving shape of the universe, the gods bound the two divine orbits into a ball-shaped body, the part that we now call our head (kephalē). This is the most divine part of us, and master (despoteo)of all our other parts. They then assembled the rest of the body and handed the whole of it to the head, to be in its service. (Plato, Timaeus 44d)

Cervin dismisses this passage as evidence for kephalē meaning “ruler,” since “[i]n Plato’s overall philosophy, it is not the head (kephalē) which is the governor or ruler, but rather it is the soul (psyche).”⁴⁷ I don’t know enough about Plato’s philosophy to agree or disagree. All I can tell is that the Greek word kephalē here is clearly ascribed a ruling function over the body. Perhaps Plato’s statement reflects a correlation between “head” and “soul,” as seen later in Plutarch, who refers to the head and soul as ruling over the body: “We affectionately call a person ‘soul’ or ‘head’(kephalē) from his ruling parts (ton kuriotaton)” (Plutarch, Table Talk 6.7 [692.E.1]).⁴⁸ Or in Philo’s statement quoted above, where the “‘head’ we interpret allegorically to mean the ruling (hegemona) part of the soul” (Philo, On Dreams 2.207; cf. Galen, On the Doctrines of Hippocrates and Plato, 120.1-10 cited below).⁴⁹

The literal head’s ruling activity over the body can also be seen in some medical writers like Galen (AD 129-216) who writes:

Nor is it necessary that because the brain, like the great King, dwells in the head as in an acropolis, for that reason the ruling part of the soul is in the brain, or because the brain has the senses stationed around it like body guards, or even if one should go so far as to say that as heaven is to the whole universe, so the head is to man and that therefore as the former is the home of the gods, so the brain is the home of the rational faculty” (Galen, On the Doctrines of Hippocrates and Plato, 120.1-10).⁵⁰

To most people the head seems to have been formed on account of the encephalon and for that reason to contain all the sense, like the servants and guards of a great king” (Galen, On the Usefulness of the Parts of the Body).⁵¹

Several scholars suggest that this literal understanding of the relationship between head and body probably served as inspiration for Paul’s head/body metaphor in Ephesians and Colossians.⁵² At the very least, I’d say that the literal understanding of the head’s authority over the body contributed to how non-literal uses of head/body imagery functioned in ancient writing.

Summary

As far as I can tell, kephalē can mean “source,” “prominence,” and “leader” in ancient Greek. But the most pervasive meaning is “leader” (or conveying some sense of “authority over”). Of the 5 or 6 references that mean “source,” 3 use kephalē to refer to the source of rivers), 1 to the source of sin, and only 1 refers to a person, Esau, being the “source” of other people (his clan). Another debated example in Philo (On Rewards and Punishments 125) might also mean “source” but without excluding notions of authority.

But when it comes to references where kephalē means “leader, authority over,” we have many more examples (about 15 to 20) where kephalē is used to describe a person or persons leadership or authority over another person or people. Several references even use a head/body metaphor to convey this idea, which is probably connected to the literal understanding of the head’s relationship to the literal body. This observation is important, since the two Pauline passages we’re ultimately concerned with (1 Cor 11:3 and Eph 5:23) use kephalē to describe a person’s relationship to another person; namely, man’s (or a husband’s) relationship to woman (or his wife).

This doesn’t mean such non-literal use of kephalē was widespread in ancient Greek. Even a dozen or two examples of this usage is still very infrequent in light of the massive volume of Greek literature we’re working with. But were we to ask whether “source” or “leader” was the more common non-literal meaning of kephalē when it’s used in reference to a person’s relationship to other people, then based on the evidence, it seems to me that the best conclusion would be “leader.”

I do find the claim that it was “foreign…for Greek to use kephalē as a metaphor for ‘leader’”⁵³ or that it “would probably never occur to Paul’s typical Greek readers that ‘head’ (kephalē) might mean ‘leader’ or ‘authority over’”⁵⁴ to be unsubstantiated by the historical evidence thus far.

1
Cited in Payne, Man and Woman, 124; cf. The Greek Anthology (date?) “The sources [kephalai] of the river Tearus supply the best water” (Epigrams 703 9:388-89 [LCL]. Perriman pushes back on this reading: “It does not necessarily mean that kephalai denotes ‘source’; it is at least as likely that the word denotes only the highest or furthest point of the river, the ‘head waters’” (“The Head of a Woman,” 613). He goes on: “Even more telling…is the fact that kephalē may also be used for the mouth of a river (Callim. Aetia, P. Oxy., XVII, 2080, 48), which is consistent with the idea that the word denotes that which is prominent or extreme, but sits ill with the notion of ‘source’” (Ibid., 613-14).
2
Cited in Payne, in a forthcoming study on kephalē, which I’ll refer to as “Forthcoming” (“Forthcoming,” 13). I thank Philip Payne for sending me a pre-published copy of his important study.
3
Cited in Payne, “Forthcoming,” 13.
4
Fitzmyer (“1 Corinthians 11:3”) agrees that this is one of the few cases where kephalē means “source” (pg. 54). MS C has “root and beginning” instead of “head” according to Perriman (“The Head of a Woman,” 615). Perriman argues that “beginning” not “source” is the better rendering: “The idea here is most probably only that ‘desire’ comes first. The context makes nothing of the idea that every sin derives from desire. Only the temporal aspect is required: desire is the poison sprinkled by Satan on the fruit from which Eve ate, and is thus the beginning of every sin” (Perrimann, “The Head of a Woman,” 616). It seems to me like a false dichotomy to say it’s the beginning and not also the source, when it seems to be both.
5
Payne says that Philo consistently uses the word “progenitor” (genarchēs) “to refer to the founder or first ancestor of a family” (Philo, The Preliminary Studies 133 (of Moses or Levi); Who is the Heir 279 (of Abraham); On Dreams 1.167 (of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob)” (Payne, Man and Woman, 125). However, Perriman—who argues against seeing kephalē as “authority over” or “ruler”—says that “it is at least arguable…that when Philo describes Esau as genarchēs of all the parts of the tribe…he has in mind no more than his priority and historical prominence.” He goes on to say: “The significance of Esau within the rather complex allegorical argument in progress here is that he is the foremost embodiment of certain characteristics, not that he is the source of that which is summed up in him” (Perriman, “The Head of a Woman,” 612). Perriman goes on to give what I think is an unclear treatment of the relationship of genarchēs to kephalē in this passage. Grudem says that genarchēs “can mean ‘ruler of created beings’,” citing Liddle-Scott in support, though he ends up concluding: “It seems impossible from the context to decide clearly for one meaning or the other in this text” (“The Meaning of Kephalē,” 454-55).
6
See e.g. Galen, Coac. 498; cf. LSJ 945; Payne, Man and Woman, 124; idem., “Forthcoming,” 14; Thiselton, 1 Corinthians, 816-17 for a list of sources.
7
This saying is also cited in Proclus (AD 410-485), In Tim. 1.313.21; Aristotle (or Pseudo-Aristotle), de Mundo (“On the World/Cosmos”) 401a.29-30; Eusebius, Praep. Ev. 3.9; Deveni Papyrus, col 13, line 12 (late 4^th cent. BC); Stobaeus, Ecl. 1 23 (5^th cent. AD); Plutarch, Def. Orac. 436D (uses arche and not kephalē); Achilles Tatius (not the 2^nd cent. AD famous author, but to a 3^rd cent AD author), lines 32-33 (again, uses arche and not kephalē).
8
Payne, Man and Woman, 127, see n. 59 for ancient references.
9
Payne, Man and Woman, 127, see n. 60 for references where archē is used instead of kephalē.
10
See, for instance, Gen 1:1; Matt 19:4; Mark 1:1; John 1:1; 2:11; Col 1:18; Rev 22:13, where archē means “beginning” and not “source.” Archē means “ruler” in Gen 40:13, 21; 41:13; 2 Macc 4:10; Luke 20:20, et al. (see BDAG).
11
“1 Corinthians 11:3,” 54.
12
“The Head of a Woman,” 614-615.
13
“The Head of a Woman,” 611. The TDNT says that in the LXX archē “usually denotes temporal beginning” and Liddell and Scott “offer only one instance of archē meaning ‘source’ (of an action), and even here the attribution is difficult to account for” (cited in Perriman, “The Head of a Woman,” 611 n. 25). Later on he says: “That archē is found in some MSS in place of kephalē would seem to confirm this view, and certainly does not serve as unambiguous evidence that kephalēcan mean ‘source’.” Later: “Zeus as archē is interpreted as creative power” (Ibid., 615)
14
I cannot find which source/page from Grudem where I got this quote.
15
Wayne Grudem, “Does Kephalē (“Head”) Mean “Source” Or “Authority Over” in Greek Literature? A Survey of 2,336 Examples,” Trinity Journal ns 6.1 (Spring 1985): 38-59 (45-46).
16
Payne’s own footnote references Barth, Ephesians, documenting “an extensive tradition identifying the supreme god as the ‘head,’ namely, as the ‘originator and power source’ of the universe’” (Payne, n. 59 quoting Barth). This certainly doesn’t feel like it’s talking about head as source with no sense of authority. The full quote from Barth reads: “In religious or related literature—ranging from Orphic fragments through Plato, Cleanthes’ Hymn to Zeus and other Stoic philosophers’ voices, the Magic Papyri, the Naassene Sermon, and up to early medieval Mandaean documents—the idea is expressed that the whole universe resembles one large human body. Its head is its originator, power source, and life spender: it is the supreme god, called e.g. Zeus or Aion or Reason. The members of this body are, on descending levels, the invisible powers, man, animals, organic and inorganic things. According to this notion Zeus is not only the highest part of the universe, but its very life” (Barth, Ephesians, 185).
17
On the importance of this text, see Arnold, “Jesus Christ,” 357.
18
“Jesus Christ,” 357.
19
“1 Corinthians 11:3,” 54.
20
Man and Woman, 125.
21
“Forthcoming,” 16, citing Philo, Quod Deterius Potiori Insidiari Soleat, 85 (LCL).
22
“The Head of a Woman,” 612-13. See further Perriman’s treatment of the larger context of Philo’s statement on page 613.
23
“Jesus Christ,” 357.
24
“Jesus Christ,” 356.
25
Cited in Payne, Man and Woman, 125.
26
“1 Corinthians 11:3,” 54.
27
OTP 1.782.
28
Perriman, “The Head of a Woman,” 616
29
“Does Kephalē Mean ‘Source’.”
30
Man and Woman, 126.
31
See Grudem, “The Meaning of Kephalē,” 455-56 for a discussion and critique of Payne along these lines.
32
Cervin says “The notion of ‘leader’ may be admitted here,” p. 111. Grudem and Fitzmyer agree. But Perriman says: “…the context and the close association with prosopōn indicate that the idea behind kephalen is one not of authority but of prominence” (“The Head of a Woman,” 610).
33
Whiston’s translation, except he translated the verb archei as “presided” but I’ve used “rule” which is the main meaning of the verb and better suits the context of this passage.
34
Cited in Arnold, “Jesus Christ,” 358. Arnold points out that this passage is surprisingly left out of the conversation, but it references a head in relation to the body (doesn’t say “body” but it’s clearly implied; body parts, etc.). Also, the author here is “calling attention to Israel’s demise under the divided kingdom when they followed after two kings” (Arnold, “Jesus Christ,” 358).
35
(ss. 114) See Cervin, 15, for full quote. Fitzmyer (“1 Corinthians 11:3,” 55), classifies this under “ruler, authority over,” etc. Cervin argues that the “kings” here are dead, so how’s it “possible for one dead king to rule or exercise authority over other dead kings” (“On the Significance,” 15). Cervin then says that head means “prominence or preeminence” here.
36
Periman, “The Head of a Woman,” 607, says—without much convincing evidence IMHO—that “the point is evidently not that he ruled over them but that he was outstanding or preeminent among them. This idea is anticipated in the preceding sentence, where it is said that ‘as the house of the Ptolemies flourished above the other dynasties (GREEK), so did Philadelphus above the Ptolemies’.”
37
“Jesus Christ: ‘Head’ of the Church,” 348. The fuller context of Philo reads: “And the most ancient word of the living God is clothed with the word as with a garment, for it has put on earth, and water, and air, and fire, and the things which proceed from those elements. But the particular soul is clothed with the body, and the mind of the wise man is clothed with the virtues. (111) And it is said that he will never take the mitre off from his head, he will never lay aside the kingly diadem, the symbol of an authority which is not indeed absolute, but only that of a viceroy, but which is nevertheless an object of admiration” (Fug. 110-111).
38
Cited in Lee-Barnwall, “Turning Kephalē on its Head,” 606.
39
Here “we see the closest parallel to the NT in that the word kephalē is used in conjunction with the word ‘body’ (soma) as a compound metaphor” and “the connotation of authority is readily derivable from the military context (“On the Significance,” 16). I would add several important parallels: (1) head/body metaphor, (2) date—1^st century, (3) kephalēused of persons in relation to one another, not just inanimate objects like rivers, etc. Cervin earlier says this is a simile, but Grudem disagrees and says it’s a metaphor: “Vindex does not say that Galba should ‘act like a head’ to something that acts like a body, but should become ‘head’ to a body that is seeking one. It is an extended metaphor, but it is nonetheless a metaphor in which the leader of a government is called the ‘head’ of a body” (Grudem, “Appendix 1,” 439). Bilzekian says: “They needed an emperor in Rome who would ‘serve’ them as the head ‘serves a vigorous body.’ …Headship is viewed in this text as a source of increased vitality….This instance of kephalē is to be listed under ‘source, origin’” (cited in Grudem, “Appendix 1,” 459).
40
Cervin argues that this isn’t a metaphorical use; it’s a simile. Grudem says that’s correct, but it’s still relevant. Plutarch clearly says that the general is “like the head” of the army (Grudem, “The Meaning of Kephalē,” 439). Bilezikian says: “The general’s function as the ‘head’ of the troops is explained as the general’s being the source of their safety ,the cause of their continued existence…This instance of kephalē should be tabulated under ‘Source, origin” (cited in Grudem, “The Meaning of Kephalē,” 459). Lee-Barnwall interacts with Cervin’s concern (and Grudem’s concession) about simile vs. metaphor and rightly says that “simile and metaphor were not considered fundamentally different by the rhetoricians. Thus, Aristotle states, ‘A simile is also a metaphor; for there is little difference…(Similes) should be brought in like metaphors, for they are metaphors, differing in the form of expressions’ (Rhet. 3.4.1)” (Lee-Barnwall, 608).
41
Cervin, “On the Significance,” 15 says this is a literal use of head and not a metaphor.
42
Grudem, “Does Kephalē (‘Head’) Mean ‘Source’ Or ‘Authority Over’ in Greek Literature?”
43
“On the Significance,” 16.
44
See Fitzmyer, “I Corinthians 11:3,” 55.
45
Arnold, “Jesus Christ,” 348.
46
Clinton Arnold notes: “In this passage both the leadership of the head and its ability to provide for the body are stressed” (“Jesus Christ,” 356).
47
Cervin, “On the Significance,” 11.
48
Cervin says this is a literal use of head and not a metaphor. People were commonly addressed by “O Head” like we’d say “hey, man” and “Plutarch’s use of kephalē as the ‘ruling part’ is surely derived from his Platonism. Remember that for Plato, the ruling part is not the head as such, but the soul which is merely located in the head” (“On the Significance,” 16). But doesn’t this still correlate the notion of “head” being “ruler” in some sense? The head is described as the “ruler” of the body or whole person (for whatever philosophical reason).
49
See Grudem, “Does Kephalē (“Head”) Mean “Source” Or “Authority Over” in Greek Literature?” 42.
50
Cited in Arnold, “Jesus Christ,” 353.
51
Cited inArnold, “Jesus Christ,” 354. Arnold says that for Galen, the brain is the source of the senses and nerves and all voluntary motion (see De Usu Partiuns 1.453.13-15). “What is important for us to note…is that he was firmly convinced that the egkephalos, located in the kephalē, was the command and supply center for the body” (ibid, 354).
52
Arnold, “Jesus Christ,” 350-51 citing Lightfoot and M. Barth in support.
53
Payne, The Bible, 54.
54
Payne, Man and Woman in Christ, 121.