JuniaorJunias,whatdoestheevidencetellus?

SuzanneMcCarthy
IlovethenameNakedBibleandinthiscase,itevokesformestrippingtheaccentsofftheGreek
wordsandthenstrippingphrasesdowntotheirmostconcretemeaning.Itmeansgainingan
understandingofwhatisanaccretionofextrabiblicaltraditionaccumulatedoverthecenturies,and
whatwecanagreewasmostlikelyinanearlytext.Iwontsayoriginalwedonthaveoriginals.No
birthdaysuithere!
MikeintroducedthequestionofJunia,asthispersoniscommonlycalled,andwhatheorshesignifiesin
theongoingdiscussionsurroundingwomeninministry.MikereferredtoafewarticleswhichIhad
previouslyread,soIofferedtosummarizesomeoftheissuesfoundinthesearticles.Iwish,however,to
followachronologicaloutlineoftheevidence,textualandotherwise.
ThenameforAndronicuspartnerinRomans16:7,,(Iounian)wasintheaccusativecase,and
grammaticallycouldhavestoodforeitherfor,(Iounia)acceptedasafemininename,or
,(Iounias)masculine.Thereisnodefinitivewayofknowing,butitwillboildowntodeciding
whethertheselettersrepresentedanamewhichusuallyoccurredinotherliteratureofthetimeasa
masculinename,orasafemininename.
Theearlymanuscriptswerecalleduncialsandthelettersweresomewhatasrepresentedhere
noaccents.However,oneearlymanuscript,P46,had(Ioulian).ThisistheGreekfor
Julia,andwasknownonlyasafemininename.Already,wecanguessthatthescribewhocopiedP46,
mayhavefoundthenameinterchangeablewithJulia,andthoughtofwasawomansname.
Wedontknowforsure,buttheevidencesuggeststhis.
ThenextevidenceisfoundintheearlyGreekfathers.Chrysostom,andallotherearlyGreekandLatin
writers,referredtoJuniaasawoman.Chrysostom,alsoreferstoherasanapostle.Hewrote,
'Eventobeanapostleisgreat,buttobeofnoteamongthemconsiderhowwonderfulasongof
honourthatis.Fortheywereofnotebecauseoftheirworks,becauseoftheirsuccesses.Howgreatthe
wisdomofthiswomanthatshewasevendeemedworthyofthetitleoftheapostles.'
TheonlyexceptiontothisisEpiphanius,whoreferredtoJuniasasamasculinename.However,thisis
usuallydiscountedashealsocalledPriscaPriscusaman.Ingeneral,scholarsagreethatallGreekand
Latinauthorsbeforethe12thcenturyreferredtoJuniaasafemale,andsomereferredtoherasan
apostle.
DavidJones,inhisarticleontheCBMWwebsite,statesthatOrigenalsoreferredtoJuniasasamale.In
fact,itisonlyina12thcenturymanuscriptofRufinusLatinparaphraseofOrigenscommentaryon
Romans,thatthevariantJuniasisfound.InthecriticaltextforRufinus,theconclusionisthatRufinus
hadusedthefeminine,asisfoundinthemajorityofthecopiesofhiswork.

ThereisnoscholarlyargumentremainingtodaythatOrigen,oranyGreekauthorotherthan
EpiphaniusevermentionedthemasculinenameJunias,fromtheearliestmanuscriptsuptoour
presentdayGreekBiblesandchurchcalendar.IntheGreekOrthodoxChurchtoday,Juniaisasaintand
consideredoneoftheseventyapostles.ItisnotunheardoffortheGreekchurchtohonourfemale
apostles.SaintNinaisanother.Thisdoesnotmeanthattheywereordainedaspriests,andIwillnotbe
discussingthatinthispost.InadditiontothisevidenceforafeminineJunia,thereisaniconwhich
clearlydemonstratesthatJuniawasawoman.
Whenmanuscriptsshiftedfromuncialtominuscule,orwhatwewouldcalllowercaseletters,accents
wereaddedtothetext.Inthemanuscripts,thenameJuniawasonlyaccentedinoneway,as .
Thisformofaccentwasuniversallyconsideredtoindicateafemininename,Junia.
However,fromthe12thtothe16thcenturytherewerereferencesinLatinliteraturetoJuniasorJuliasas
aman,specificallyinacommentarybyLeFevre,1512.Finallyandmorefamously,inLuthersBible
translation,Juniasappearedasafamousapostle.However,ErasmusGreektextfollowedthe
manuscriptsandaccentedJuniaasafemininenameandtheBiblesintheKingJamestradition
representedJuniaasawoman.
Inthe19thcentury,whencriticalGreektextsbegantomaketheirappearance,thenameJuniawas
accented ,whichiswhatthenamewouldlooklikeifithadbeenJunias,aman.But,infact,no
manuscripteverhadthisform.Itwaspurespeculation,andunfortunately,afabrication.Therewas
somediscussionthatthosecompilingthetextthoughtthattheoriginalunaccentedformcould
technicallyhavebeenamasculinename,andthisiswhat wasintendedtorepresent.Thesimple
factisthatformatconstrictedthepublishersfromprintingthenamewithoutaccents,soinsteadof
accentingasthelaterGreekmanuscriptshad,amasculineformwasgivenpreference.
SincethecriticalGreektextwaspublishedofferingthemasculine asthemostlikelyform,many
Biblesinthelasttwocenturiesusedthemasculinename,andmanycommentariesalsoreportedthat
thenamewasmasculine.However,theonlyaccentedformattestedtoinmanuscriptsis .
SinceaccentsarelateinGreekmanuscriptsanddontreallycountasevidence,thematterhasrecently
restedonthefactthatJuniawasanextremelycommonLatinname,aswasJulia,andwasalsofoundas
afemininenameinGreek,althoughrare.ThemalenameJunias,asaLatinorGreeknameiscompletely
unknown.Itdidnotoccur.Whenthiswasbroughtintoconsideration,mostscholarsmadethesimple
statementthatJuniamusthavebeenawomanafterall,andloopholesweresoughtelsewhere.
However,twoscholarsdugdeeper.BauckhamsuggestedthatJuniawasatransliterationoftheHebrew
nameJoannaor Y nnh/Yeh nh.AndmorerecentlyAlWolterswroteapaperarguingthat
thenamecouldhavebeenJunias,atransliterationofthemasculineHebrewname Ye unni.
WoltersarguesthatJunias,asitwaswrittenintheminuscules,withanacuteaccent, ,could
havebeenmasculine.Heprovesthatthisistechnicallypossible.
Iarguethattheaccentingoftheminuscules,datingfromthe9thcenturyonward,areproofofnothingat
all,exceptthatthescribesatthattimethoughtthatJuniawasafemininename.Thescribesaccented

thewordasfemininebecausetheythoughtthatthenamewasfeminine.Isuggestthis,notbecausethe
acuteaccentautomaticallyindicatesafemininename,butbecauseallGreekandLatinwritersupuntil
the12thcenturyreferredtoJuniaasawoman.TheLatinnameJuniawasverycommonatthetimethat
thelettertotheRomanswaswrittenandthefewIconsandimagesofJuniawehave,portrayherasa
womanbutneverasaman.
CouldthenameJunia/shavereferredtoaman?Itistechnicallypossible.However,thereisnoother
recordofthisnameinGreekorLatinreferringtoamale.ItwasaverycommonwomansnameinLatin.
IfJuniashadbeenatransliterationofamasculineHebrewname,thereisnowaythatthereadersofthe
lettertotheRomanswouldhavebeenabletorecognizethat,giventhepopularityofthenamefor
women.ThemasculineformwasalsopopularbutitwasJunius,notJuniasorJunia.
IverymuchappreciatethatWoltersbroughttolightthetechnicalpossibilitythatJuniawithanacute
accentcouldhavebeenatransliterationofaHebrewname,aHebrewnamewhichcouldhavebeen
eithermasculineorfeminine.Altogethertheargumentforanunderlyingmasculinenameremainshighly
unlikelyand,tomymind,trulyobscure.ButWoltersdiscussionoffirstdeclensionmasculinenamesis
interestingtothosewholovemorphology.Hisargumentiswelltaken,thattheacuteaccentdoesnot
provethatthenameisfeminine.Onthecontraryitisthecommonusageofthenamewhichsuggests
thatitisfeminine,andtheaccentinByzantinemanuscriptsderivesfromthat.Ifweabandonusageasa
guidelineinBibletranslation,werisklosingthemeaningoftheBiblealtogether,nakedorotherwise.
Bauckham,Richard,GospelWomen:StudiesoftheNamedWomenintheGospels(GrandRapids:Eerdmans,2002),16686
Brooten,Bernadette."Junia...OutstandingamongtheApostles(Romans16:7),"inWomenPriests:ACatholicCommentaryonthe
VaticanDeclaration(ed.LeonardSwidlerandArleneSwidler;NewYork:Paulist,1977),14144;

Jones,David.AfemaleApostle?: A Lexical-Syntactical Analysis of Romans 16:7 CBMW Website

Wolters, Al, (Romans16:7)andtheHebrewNameYhunni,JBL127,no.2(2008):397408