A Small Contribution to the Scholarship of Antiquity - the Meaning of אפיפיור in Avodah Zarah 11a

I am the first to admit I am not very smart.  When I was researching the history of the Greek equivalent of the 'Mr.' abbreviation I was dealing with a philologist whose expertise was the period between Byzantine and modern Greek.  I could tell he thought I was an idiot.  And I am an idiot.  He was right.  But I told him that I make up for it by working hard.  By the end, I think he agreed - in spite of my lack of intelligence I figured out something that no one else in his field had ascertained, that is the origin of the current Greek abbreviation for 'Mr.' 

In any event, the same thing happened to me just yesterday.  I am very busy at work and basically find it hard to sleep or stay sleeping.  As a result I gravitate back to religious scholarship which I find strangely relaxing (in part because I don't care about the result I think).  I came across the strange word that is used in modern Hebrew for 'the Pope'   It's anomaly.  Scholars have puzzled how it was that Jews starting calling the Pope אפיפיור.  It apparently comes from a passage in the Talmud Avodah Zarah 11a about a famous translator of the Bible from Hebrew to Aramaic named Onkelos:

אונקלוס בר קלונימוס איגייר שדר קיסר גונדא דרומאי אבתריה משכינהו בקראי איגיור הדר שדר גונדא דרומאי [אחרינא] אבתריה אמר להו לא תימרו ליה ולא מידי 

The Gemara mentions other Romans who converted to Judaism. It relates: Onkelos bar Kelonimos converted to Judaism. The Roman emperor sent a troop [gunda] of Roman soldiers after him to seize Onkelos and bring him to the emperor. Onkelos drew them toward him with verses that he cited and learned with them, and they converted. The emperor then sent another troop of Roman soldiers after him, and said to them: Do not say anything to him, so that he cannot convince you with his arguments. The troops followed this instruction, and took Onkelos with them. 

כי הוו שקלו ואזלו אמר להו אימא לכו מילתא בעלמא ניפיורא נקט נורא קמי פיפיורא פיפיורא לדוכסא דוכסא להגמונא הגמונא לקומא קומא מי נקט נורא מקמי אינשי אמרי ליה לא אמר להו הקב"ה נקט נורא קמי ישראל דכתיב (שמות יג, כא) וה' הולך לפניהם יומם וגו' איגיור [כולהו] 

When they were walking, Onkelos said to the troop of soldiers: I will say a mere statement to you: A minor official [nifyora] holds a torch before a high official [apifyora], the high official holds a torch for a duke [dukasa], a duke for the governor, and the governor for the ruler [koma]. Does the ruler hold a torch before the common people? The soldiers said to Onkelos: No. Onkelos said to them: Yet the Holy One, Blessed be He, holds a torch before the Jewish people, as it is written: “And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of cloud, to lead them the way, and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light” (Exodus 13:21). They all converted. 

 הדר שדר גונדא אחרינא אבתריה אמר להו לא תשתעו מידי בהדיה כי נקטי ליה ואזלי חזא מזוזתא [דמנחא אפתחא] אותיב ידיה עלה ואמר להו מאי האי אמרו ליה אימא לן את 

The emperor then sent another troop of soldiers after him, to bring Onkelos, and said to them: Do not converse with him at all. The troops followed this instruction, and took Onkelos with them. While they grabbed him and were walking, Onkelos saw a mezuza that was placed on the doorway. He placed his hand upon it and said to the soldiers: What is this? They said to him: You tell us. 

אמר להו מנהגו של עולם מלך בשר ודם יושב מבפנים ועבדיו משמרים אותו מבחוץ ואילו הקב"ה עבדיו מבפנים והוא משמרן מבחוץ שנאמר (תהלים קכא, ח) ה' ישמר צאתך ובואך מעתה ועד עולם איגיור תו לא שדר בתריה 

Onkelos said to them: The standard practice throughout the world is that a king of flesh and blood sits inside his palace, and his servants stand guard, protecting him outside; but with regard to the Holy One, Blessed be He, His servants, the Jewish people, sit inside their homes and He guards over them outside. As it is stated: “The Lord shall guard your going out and your coming in, from now and forever” (Psalms 121:8). Upon hearing this, those soldiers also converted to Judaism. After that, the emperor sent no more soldiers after him.

Many more qualified people than me have written something on this subject.  All of it is complete garbage.  If this was an academic paper I'd have to go through all of what has been written on the subject before me but it belongs in a trash bin.  אפיפיור has nothing to do with the Pope. 

Why then did Jews start calling the Pope by the name אפיפיור?  The short answer is that at one time the Jews living in the Roman Empire spoke Greek.  This original account likely originated at that time and the people spoke Greek and then in the later period - when the Talmud was being codified - people didn't understand the language.  You see the same thing happening in the Samaritan chronicle of Abu'l Fath (although he is honest enough to admit he doesn't understand the Greek well enough to preserve the material). 

So if אפיפיור doesn't mean 'Pope' what does it mean?  The first step when digging a hole is to stop digging.  Instead of trying to make the term 'fit' the word for Pope (as all previous studies) let's see what we get if we simply try to figure out the Greek without prejudice.  First אפיפיורא is actually pretty easy when figuring out the Greek:

אפיפיורא = ἐπιφορ-ά , ἡ, （ἐπιφέρω） 

A. bringing to or upon: hence, 

1. donative, extra pay, in pl., Th.6.31, D.S.17.94 ; so “ἡ ἔξωθεν ἐ. τῆς εὐδαιμονίας” Plb.5.90.4 2. application, “ὀνομάτων” Pl.Lg.944b, cf.Cra.430d. 3. secondcourse [at dinner], Damox.2.58 (pl.). 4. fine paid by contractor for failure to keep time, BCH35.44 (Delos), cf.Hermes17.5 (ibid.); = καταδίκη, Hsch. (pl.). 5. application, τὴν τῆς αἰσθήσεως ἐ. ποιεῖσθαι to concentrate attention, Plu.2.1144b. b. infliction, “πληγῶν” POxy. 283.15 (i A. D.). 6. additional payment of φόρος, IG12.205, al. II. (from Pass.) offering made at the grave, Plu.Num.22. 2. impact, Epicur.Nat.15.26, al. ; sudden attack, Plb.6.55.2, etc. ; ἐπιφορὰς πρός τινα ποιῆσαι, in controversy, Phld.Lib.p.35 O. ; ἐ. ὄμβρων sudden burst of rain, Plb.4.41.7 ; of wind, Thphr.CP5.12.11 ; “ἡ τοῦ κωρύκου ἐ.” Philostr.Gym.57 ; attack of an orator, opp. ἀπολογία, Id.VS1.25.10 (pl.). 3. vehemence in oratory, Hermog.Id.1.11, al., Philostr.VS1.17.1, al. 4. growth by assimilation of nourishment, Stoic.2.229. 5. Medic., epiphora, persistent flow of tears, as a disease, Dsc.Eup.1.35, Gal.14.749,768 (but non-technically, floods of tears, Plb.15.26.3) ; deflux of morbid humours, Meno Iatr.5.30, Plu.2.102a (pl.) ; “τοῦ γάλακτος” Sor.1.76 ; ὀχθώδεις ἐ. tuberous eruption, Ruf. ap. Orib.8.24.35. b. attack, πυρετῶν, etc., Vett.Val.3.4 (pl.), al. 6. propensity, -φορὰς ἔχειν πρός τι Men.Rh.p.342 S. III. Rhet., second clause in a sentence, opp. ἀρχή, D.H.Dem. 20. 

2. repetition, “συνδέσμου” Demetr.Eloc.196. 3. succession of clauses ending in the same word, opp. ἐπιβολή, Rut.Lup.1.8. IV. in Stoic Logic, the conclusion of a syllogism, Chrysipp.Stoic.2.80, Crinisib.3.269, Procl.in Prm.p.534 S. 2. question at issue, “τῆς ἐ. ἀπερρυηκέναι” Phld.Mus.p.96 K. V. in Gramm., ἔχειν ἐν ἐπιφορᾷ τὸ λ_λ_ to have λ_λ_ immediately following, Hdn.Gr.2.932. 

So you can see it has nothing to do with 'Pope.'  Then the second Greek word transposed into Aramaic is a little more difficult but soluble:

אניפיורא = ἀναφορά , ἡ, (ἀναφέρομαι) 

A.coming up, rising, “ἀ. ποιεῖσθαι” rise, Arist.HA622b7; of vapours or exhalations, Placit.3.7.4, Theol.Ar. 31, cf. Orib.9.16.3, etc. 2. Astron., ascent of a sign measured in degrees of the equator, Ptol.Tetr.134. b. Astrol., = ἐπαναφορά, τόπος next to a κέντρον, Vett.Val.19.18. c. ascendant, Cat.Cod.Astr.8(3).100; opp. ἀπόκλιμα, Serapion in Cat.Cod.Astr. 1.99, S.E.M.5.20, etc. d. rising of a sign, Ach.Tat.Intr.Arat. 39. II. (ἀναφέρω) carrying back, reference of a thing to a standard, “διὰ τὸ γίνεσθαι ἐπαίνους δι᾽ ἀναφορᾶς” Arist.EN1101b20; in Law, recourse, “ἐκείνοις εἶναι εἰς τοὺς ἔχοντας ἀναφοράν” D.24.13: abs., Thphr. Char.8.5 (pl.), IG5(1).1390.111 (Andania, i B.C.); “ἡ ἀ. ἐστι πρός τι” Arist.Cat.5b20, al.; ἀ. ἔχειν πρός or ἐπί τι to be referable to . ., Epicur. Fr.409, Plb.4.28.3, Plu.2.290e, al.; ἀ. τινος γίγνεται πρός or ἐπί τι, Plb.1.3.4, Plu.2.1071a; “ἐπ᾽ ἀναφορᾷ τῇ πρὸς τὸν δῆμον” BCH46.312 (Teos); ἀ. ἔχειν ἐπί τι, of writings, refer to, Alex.Aphr.in Mete.4.1; τούτων εἰς Κυναίγειρον ποιήσασθαι τὴν ἀναφοράν assign to, give credit for . ., Polem.Call.23. 2. way of retreat, “ὑπέλιπε ἑαυτῷ ἀναφοράν” D.18.219; “νῦν δὲ αὑτοῖς μὲν κατέλιπον τὴν εἰς τὸ ἀφανὲς ἀναφοράν” Aeschin. 2.104, cf. Plb.15.8.13, etc. 3. means of repairing a fault, defeat, etc., “ἀλλ᾽ ἔστιν ἡμῖν ἀ. τῆς ξυμφορᾶς” E.Or.414; “ἀ. ἁμαρτήματος ἔχειν” way to atone for . ., Plu.Phoc.2; “ἀ. ἔχειν” means of recovery, Id.Fab. 14. 4. offering, LXX Ps.50(51).21; “ἡ ἀ. τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ λεκτικοῦ” PMag.Par.2.281. 5. report, PLond.1.17.34 (ii B.C.), etc. 6. petition, PRyl.119.28(i A.D.). 7. payment on account, instalment, OGI225 (Milet.), PEleph.14.26 (iii B.C.), PRev.Laws16.10 (iii B.C.), etc. 8. Rhet., repetition of a word, Longin.20.1, Demetr.Eloc, 141. 9. office of ἀναφορεύς, LXX Nu.4.6,10. 10. Medic., = ἀνάδοσις, opp. πέψις, Aret.SD2.7.

So the original Greek is becoming a little clearer.  Onkelos was originally remembered as 'Aquila' a Greek translator of the Bible.  But what on earth do the two Greek terms ἐπιφορά and ἀναφορά have to do with one another and especially the context of the Talmudic passage where it speaks of torches being carried 'in front' and 'behind'?

Here's the part where my stupidity comes in.  Instead of being so smart that I impose my will on the passage I simply did a Google search for the two terms in order to see in what context they were used together and what direction that would point us.  So Google search for: 

ἀναφορά ἐπιφορά 

Interestingly the only hit I come up with that had any relevance notes that the two terms were used in the teaching of ancient rhetoric:

Anaphor(a) (ἀναφορά "repetition, bringing back again") - repetition of the same word at the beginning of the following sentence or clause. 

a! quotiens aliquo dixi properante 'quid urges?​

vel quo festinas ire, vel unde, vide.'​

a! quotiens certam me sum mentitus habere ​

horam, propositae quae foret apta viae. ​

ter limen tetigi, ter sum reuocatus, et ipse ​

indulgens animo pes mihi tardus erat. (Ov. tris. 1,3,51-56)​

Epiphora (ἐπιφορά "bringing to") - repetition of the same word a the end of sentences (or parts of sentences). 

de exsilio reducti multi a mortuo, civitas data non solum singulis, sed nationibus et provinciis universis a mortuo, immunitatibus infinitis sublata vectigalia a mortuo. (Cic. Phil. 1,24) 

So again I repeat.  I am an idiot.  But my lack of intelligence led me to what I consider to be the right answer.  I didn't impose my beliefs on the passage.  I didn't force the terminology to 'fit' with Pope.  Instead I came up with a context that better suits what we know about Onkelos/Aquila - namely that he was essentially a grammaticus who taught Gentiles rhetoric and then during the course of his teachings used examples from the Bible to explain concepts like ἀναφορά ἐπιφορά to convert his students to Judaism. 

As such let's look at the original passage from the Talmud now with the substitution of the original terminology:

Onkelos bar Kelonimos converted to Judaism. The Roman emperor sent a troop [gunda] of Roman soldiers after him to seize Onkelos and bring him to the emperor. Onkelos drew them toward him with verses that he cited and learned with them, and they converted. The emperor then sent another troop of Roman soldiers after him, and said to them: Do not say anything to him, so that he cannot convince you with his arguments. The troops followed this instruction, and took Onkelos with them. The troops followed this instruction, and took Onkelos with them. When they were walking, Onkelos said to the troop of soldiers: I will say a mere statement to you: An ἀναφορά holds a torch before an ἐπιφορά, the high official holds a torch for a duke [dukasa], a duke for the governor, and the governor for the ruler [koma]. Does the ruler hold a torch before the common people? The soldiers said to Onkelos: No. Onkelos said to them: Yet the Holy One, Blessed be He, holds a torch before the Jewish people ...

Whether or not this is an 'historical' account it is at the very least an explanative account of the manner Gentiles were converted to Judaism.  The narrative seems to be saying that Jewish teachers converted non-Jews to Judaism by means of their position as teachers in classical education.

A lot of things that appear in the Talmud are complete nonsense - especially from this period.  Nero wasn't a proselyte, the Jews couldn't have been puzzled about what to do when Passover falls on a Sabbath etc.  But there is something to this story.  We only need to look at the other side of the ledger and see how many Christians were grammarians.  The story of Origen provides a close parallel.  But also Cyril's reference to Εἰρηναῖος ὁ ἐξηγητὴς is noteworthy too.  True an 'exegete' is usually a term associated with the writing of commentaries as we see from the example of Alexander of Aphrodisias.  Nevertheless these titles and terminologies were flexible.  The fact that Onkelos/Aquila was known as a translator of the Bible but also remembered in Avodah as a teacher of rhetoric is instructive.