μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται: In Defence of Tertullian's Translation

New Test. Stud. (), , pp. –.
© Cambridge University Press, 

doi:10.1017/S0028688519000055
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται: In Defence of

Tertullian’s Translation*
J O H N G RA N G E R C O O K
LaGrange College, 601 Broad St., LaGrange, GA 30240, USA.
Email: jcook@lagrange.edu
The debate over the translation of μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται in  Cor . can
and should be settled by a non-polemical and complete survey of the material
now that comprehensive databases of ancient texts are available. The translation
of ἀρσενοκοῖται by Tertullian, several Vetus Latina MSS and the Vulgate has
the best evidential foundation. To establish the meaning of this term one has
to turn to etymology and usage, a semantic domain of terms for sexual inter-
course, and patristic and classical texts. Once the semantics of ἀρσενοκοίτης
is better grounded, the ancient Latin translation of μαλακοί becomes the
most probable.
Keywords:  Cor ., μαλακοί, ἀρσενοκοῖται, molles, masculorum concubitores
The debate over homosexuality in the last half century has resulted in
numerous attempts to revise the customary translations of Paul’s language in
 Cor .. One would assume that the linguistic investigations of David F.
Wright and William L. Petersen had settled the question – and their work is
the basis for the current entry in BDAG on ἀρσενοκοίτης. The debate, never-
theless, rages on. If one justifiably dispenses with the controversial term
* My thanks to Professors Jerker Blomkvist, Jan Bremmer, David Hellholm and F. Stanley Jones
for their comments on issues in this article. Any errors are my own.
 D. F. Wright, ‘Homosexuals or Prostitutes? The Meaning of ἀρσενοκοῖται ( Cor :,  Tim
:)’, VC  () –; W. L. Petersen, ‘Can ΑΡΣΕΝΟΚΟΙΤΑΙ be Translated by
“Homosexuals”? (I Cor. .; I Tim. .)’, VC  () –; D. F. Wright, ‘Translating
ΑΡΣΕΝΟΚΟΙΤΑΙ ( Cor. :;  Tim. :)’, VC  () –. R. A. J. Gagnon, The Bible
and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, ) –
adds some patristic references to those gathered by Wright, ‘Homosexuals’. Cf. BDAG s.v.
Unless otherwise specified, dates throughout this article are CE.
 Scholars who have interpreted the evidence differently include (among many): J. Boswell,
Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western Europe from the
Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth century (Chicago: University of Chicago
 Press, ) –; R. Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality: Contextual
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Virginia Health Sciences Library, on 04 Aug 2019 at 20:23:04, subject to the Cambridge Core terms
of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688519000055
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται 
‘homosexual’ as a translation for ἀρσενοκοίτης, then the masculorum concubi-

tores (those (males) who have intercourse with [penetrate] males) of Tertullian,
certain Vetus Latina MSS and Jerome’s Vulgate becomes the obvious alternative.
The lemma in BDAG, ‘a male who engages in sexual activity w. a pers. of his own
sex’, is too vague. The translation of μαλακοί in this context by Tertullian, certain
Vetus Latina MSS and Jerome’s Vulgate with molles (‘pathics’) is appropriate, and
Tertullian’s translation is supported by the current entry in BDAG (‘pert. to being
passive in a same-sex relationship, effeminate, esp. of catamites’). There is no
overt reference in . to male prostitution, the age of the individuals engaging
in the activity, power relationships and exploitation, social status, romance, mod-
erate or immoderate desire, and certainly no restriction to ‘apparent heterosex-
uals’ who engage in homoerotic behaviour.
Dale Martin’s statement that contemporary interpretations such as those
which rely on Tertullian’s translation ‘have been driven more by ideological inter-
ests in marginalizing gay and lesbian people than by the general structures of his-
torical criticism’ is an ad hominem argument and as such is a logical fallacy – even
if there is some truth to the claim about motives in certain instances. Scholars on
the other side of the debate also indulge in ad hominem attacks. Robert A. J.
Background for Contemporary Debate (Philadelphia: Fortress, ); D. B. Martin,

‘Arsenokoitês and Malakos: Meanings and Consequences’, Biblical Ethics & Homosexuality:
Listening to Scripture (ed. R. L. Brawley; Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, ) –
; A. Cadwallader, ‘Keeping Lists or Embracing Freedom:  Corinthians :– in Context’,
Five Uneasy Pieces: Essays on Scripture and Sexuality (ed. N. Wright; Adelaide: ATF
Theology, ) –.
 See D. M. Halperin, ‘Homosexuality’, OCD, – and K. J. Dover, Greek Homosexuality:
Updated and with a New Postscript (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, ). J.
Bremmer (‘Greek Pederasty and Modern Homosexuality’, From Sappho to De Sade:
Moments in the History of Sexuality (ed. J. Bremmer; London: Routledge, ) ) traces
the invention of the term ‘homosexuality’ to [K. M. Kertbeny], § des Preussischen
Strafgesetzbuches vom  April  … (Leipzig: Serbe, ) .
 OLD s.v. : ‘effeminate in appearance or behaviour, womanish; (spec.) pathic’. The NRSV’s
‘male prostitutes’ lacks evidential justification. Cf. BDAG s.v. and W. Buchwald, mollis, TLL
VIII..–., at .– (speciatim de pathicis, cinaedis sim.).
 Tertullian, Pud.  (et molles et masculorum concubitores), ‘written toward the end of ’.
Date from Tertullian, Treatises on Penance: On Penitence and On Purity (trans. and annot.
W. P. Le Saint; ACW ; New York: Paulist, ) . For the Vetus Latina evidence, see,
among many, MS VL  (gig), VL  (r), VL  (e), VL  (d) r, VL  (f): all have molles
and masculorum concubitores. Eighteen uses of molles and masculorum concubitores are in
Augustine. I thank Professor Hugh Houghton for providing me with material from his data-
base of the Vetus Latina’s text of  Corinthians.
 This last view (‘apparent heterosexuals’ engaging in ‘homosexual’ behaviour) from Boswell,
Christianity,  (with reference to Romans ) has no evident foundation in the text.
 Martin, Arsenokoitês, .
 JOHN GRANGER COOK
Gagnon, for example, in his relentlessly polemical monograph, complains that

‘there is a built-in bias among many of the intellectual elite against advocates
of traditional sexual values’. Scholars’ motives, however, are irrelevant to the
logical validity of their arguments. Paul’s view corresponds with the perspective
of Hellenistic Jews such as Philo and Josephus towards the penetrating and pene-
trated actors in homoerotic intercourse. Whether or not one uses Paul’s perspec-
tive for contemporary ethics is a matter for moral theologians and any other
interested persons. On numerous questions – slavery being a prime example –
Christian ethicists have drawn conclusions that might or might not comport
with lines of scripture. There is, consequently, no necessary connection
between the philological analysis below and contemporary ethics.
In this article I will show that attempts to avoid the meaning of ἀρσενοκοίτης
by appealing to the ‘etymological fallacy’ fail for several cogent reasons.
Semanticist Kurt Baldinger argues regarding the motivations for word formation:
‘all semantics is based on secondary motivations since all new shades of meaning
are motivated by the existing ones’. An example is the derivation of ‘outfox’ from
‘fox’ – a ‘localized metaphor’ that is a ‘secondary motivation’. He writes, ‘in most
words, motivation is not primary’. A ‘primary’ motivation is one based on reality
(such as onomatopoeic forms): e.g., the frogs’ croaking in Aristophanes’ Frogs
(βρεκεκεκεξ). Etymology as a discipline investigates the historical develop-
ment of words. Some of the evidence cited by Wright and others such as
 Gagnon, Bible, .

 On Romans , cf. D. Hellholm, ‘Die präsentisch-immanente Wirkung des Zornes Gottes
(Römer ,–)’, Bodies, Borders, Believers: Ancient Texts and Present Conversations. Essays
in Honor of Turid Karlsen Seim on her th Birthday (ed. Anne H. Grung et al.; Eugene, OR:
Wipf and Stock, ) –, a close study of the structure of Paul’s argument.
 I owe these two formulations to colleagues.
 Martin, ‘Arsenokoitês’,  and Cadwallader, ‘Keeping Lists’, – both warn against using a
word’s components to establish its meaning. Nevertheless, etymology and context are useful
in establishing meaning.
 K. Baldinger, Semantic Theory: Towards a Modern Semantics (New York: St. Martin’s, ) .
The ‘all’ is too bald, but should be ‘much of’, in my view.
 Aristophanes, Ran. . Baldinger, Semantic Theory,  notes that clearly ‘there is no direct rela-
tion between a signifiant and reality’.
 Cf. e.g. D. Geeraerts, Theories of Lexical Semantics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ) 
(‘the etymological research project started by Andreas Blank and Peter Koch … intends to sys-
tematically explore motivational preferences in the etymological inventory of the Romance
languages’). See A. Blank and P. Koch, Kognitive romanische Onomasiologie und
Semasiologie (Linguistische Arbeiten, ; Tübingen: Niemeyer, ). J. Barr, The
Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, )  concedes: ‘But
the etymological recognition may be used in conjunction with the context of the Hebrew
word to give a good semantic indication for its occurrence.’ Barr’s ‘etymology’ is one based
on cognate languages, however.
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται 
Gagnon needs to be clarified. Once the semantics of ἀρσενοκοίτης stands on

firmer ground, the semantics of μαλακός will likewise be clearer.
. The LXX, Philo and Josephus in Brief and Secondary Motivations
Two texts in the Septuagint (Lev . μετὰ ἄρσενος οὐ κοιμηθήσῃ

κοίτην γυναικός, ‘you shall not lie with a male as in sexual intercourse with a
woman’, and Lev . καὶ ὃς ἂν, κοιμηθῇ μετὰ ἄρσενος κοίτην γυναικός,
βδέλυγμα ἐποίησαν ἀμφότεροι, ‘and whoever lies with a male as in sexual inter-
course with a woman – both have committed an abomination’) are, according to
Wright, the source of ἀρσενοκοίτης, a ‘coinage of Hellenistic Judaism’. One
should also include Num .– and Judg .– in the discussion, both of
which mention κοίτην ἄρσενος (sexual intercourse with a male) – in contexts
that describe women who have had such sexual experience. All of these texts
from the Septuagint could have been ‘secondary motivations’ for the formulation
of ἀρσενοκοίτης. There is no evident way of determining whether the Jews of
Alexandria formulated the word or whether Paul coined it himself. Since Paul
clearly assumed his Corinthian readers would understand his language, it
seems more probable that he did not invent the word and that it was in circulation
at least among the Hellenistic Jewish community.
The evidence from Philo and Josephus is well known, and does not need to be
repeated here in detail. Philo is scandalised that there is boasting not only for the
penetrators but for the penetrated actors in homoerotic intercourse (νυνὶ δ’ ἐστὶν
αὔχημα οὐ τοῖς δρῶσι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς πάσχουσιν). The pederast
 An error that has persisted from Boswell, Christianity, – to Gagnon, Bible,  is that John
Chrysostom does not use ἀρσενοκοίτης (Gagnon knows of one usage only). A TLG lemma
search of ἀρρενοκοίτης yields sixteen occurrences, although most are from Paul. See
Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu/, accessed  June ).
Boswell’s claim () that ‘in no words coined and generally written with the form
“ἀρσενο-” is the prefix demonstrably objective’ is incorrect. See Bardaisan (the Greek and
Syriac versions) and Hippolytus (?), Refutatio below. The different forms of the word in
Chrysostom (ρρ, an Atticism on his part, once instead of ρσ) are of no more significance
than the form ἀρσενοκῦται in MS  of  Cor . (an itacism).
 Wright, ‘Homosexuals’, –, . A fair number of other usages of Lev . and . can
be found in the volumes of the Biblia Patristica and in lemma searches on ἄρσην and κοίτη in
the TLG database. See J. Allenbach et al., Biblia patristica: index des citations et allusions bib-
liques dans la littérature patristique ( vols. (so far ); Paris: Editions du Centre National de la
Recherche Scientifique, –). . occurs in Ephraem, De his, qui animas ad impudicitiam
pelliciunt (K. G. Phrantzoles, Ὁσίου Ἐφραίμ τοῦ Σύρου ἔργα, vol. V (Thessalonica: Το
περιβόλι τῆς Παναγίας, ) ).
 See further Clement of Alexandria, Paed. ... μετὰ ἄρρενος οὐ κοιμηθήσῃ κοίτην
γυναικείαν; Eusebius, Praep. ev. .. (Lev .); Apos. Con. . (Lev .), etc. (i.e. var-
iations of Lev .).
 JOHN GRANGER COOK
(παιδεραστής) becomes the beloved youth’s guide in unmanliness and softness

(ἀνανδρίας καὶ μαλακίας, ὑφηγητής). Josephus shares Philo’s attitude.
Josephus remarks: ‘the law only knows intercourse according to nature with a
wife … it hates the sexual intercourse of males with males’ (μῖξιν μόνην οἶδεν
ὁ νόμος τὴν κατὰ φύσιν τὴν πρὸς γυναῖκα … τὴν δὲ πρὸς ἄρρενας ἀρρένων
ἐστύγηκεν). One could easily see how ἀρρενομιξία could be formed from
μῖξις and ἄρρην – a secondary motivation – although Josephus does not use
the composite form.
. Etymology and a Word Field for Sexual Intercourse
The etymological argument of course begins with the two words at the
basis of the compound, ἄρσην (‘male’) and κοίτη (‘bed’), which could also
mean ‘sexual embrace’ or ‘sexual intercourse’. Pierre Chantraine, using these
data, defines the word as pédéraste (which in contemporary French usage often
means simply ‘homosexual’) and lists numerous examples of similar compounds:
ἀρρενόθηλυς (‘hermaphrodite’), ἀρρενοκυέω (‘bear a male infant’),
ἀρρενομίκτης (pédéraste), ἀρρενόπαις (‘male child’), etc. The etymological
foundation of these words clearly has to be combined with their usage to under-
stand their meaning. Verbs formed with the stem -κοιτ- have a component
meaning ‘sleep’: φορμοκοιτέω (‘sleep on a mat’); σκληροκοιτέω (‘sleep on a
 A secondary motivation from παῖς (‘boy, youth’) and ἐραστής (‘lover’).

 Philo, Spec. ., . Cf. also Abr. –: (the Sodomites) ἄρρεσιν ἐπιβαίνοντες, τὴν κοινὴν
πρὸς τοὺς πάσχοντας οἱ δρῶντες φύσιν οὐκ αἰδούμενοι (‘mounting males, feeling no
sense of shame for the common nature that the actives and passives shared’); τὰ σώματα
μαλακότητι καὶ θρύψει γυναικοῦντες (‘they feminised their bodies by softness and weak-
ness [or “debauchery”]’). On the topic, cf. W. Loader, Philo, Josephus, and the Testaments on
Sexuality: Attitudes Towards Sexuality in the Writings of Philo, Josephus, and the Testaments of
the Twelve Patriarchs (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, ) – (Philo on pederasty).
 Josephus, C. Ap. .. See also A.J. .: ἐκώλυσε … τὴν πρὸς τὰ ἄρρενα μῖξιν τιμᾶν διὰ
τὴν ἐπ’ αὐτοῖς ὥραν ἡδονὴν θηρωμένους παράνομον (‘[God] forbade … those who hunt
after illegal pleasure to honour intercourse with male youths because of their beauty’). Cf.
A.J. .–: τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτοῖς τεθηλυσμένης (‘eunuchs and their feminised souls’) and
Loader, Philo, – (Josephus on same-sex intercourse, with many references).
 Sextus Empiricus and Ps.-Manetho use ἀρρενομιξία and ἀρρενομίκτης respectively.
 P. Chantraine, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque: histoire des mots (Paris:
Klincksieck, –), s.v. ἄρσην, and BDAG s.v. ἀρσενοκοίτης. R. Beekes, Etymological
Dictionary of Greek (Leiden: Brill, ) does not analyse the word. For κοίτης, see BDAG
s.v., LSJ s.v. and T. Muraoka, A Greek–English Lexicon of the Septuagint (Leuven: Peeters,
) s.v. Already in Euripides, Ion  the word can refer to sexual intercourse: χειρῶν
εἰς ἄντρου κοίτας (‘[Apollo] overpowering me [Creusa] with sexual embraces in a cave
[a rape]). Cf. Rom ., ..
 Chantraine, Dictionnaire, s.v. ἄρσην. LSJ s.v. simply interprets this to mean ‘sodomite’, the
equivalent of ἀρρενοκοίτης.
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται 
hard bed’); ἀνδροκοιτέω (‘sleep with a man’); αἰθριοκοιτέω (‘sleep in the open
air’); ἐγκοιτέω (‘sleep in/on’); λαθροκοιτέω (‘live in secret marriage’);
μονοκοιτέω (‘sleep alone’); and χαμαικοιτέω (‘lie/sleep on the ground’).
Although Wright lists many constructions which end in -κοίτης and so forth, the
issue deserves more discussion. Important terms that signify sexual intercourse
(a semantic field) include: ἀρσενοκοιτία, ἀρσενοκοιτέω, ἀρσενοκοίτης,
ἑλληνοκοίτης, μητροκοίτης, ἀνδροκοίτης, δουλοκοίτης, κυνοκοίτης, Onocoetes
(ὀνοκοίτης), ἀρσενομίκτης, ἀρρενομιξία, ἀρσενοβάτης and ἀνδροβάτης.
These words constitute a ‘word field’ or ‘semantic field’, although they are from
wide- ranging chronological sources. The field includes words comprising the ele-
ments of or elements similar to ἀρσενοκοίτης. These will all be discussed in the
textual analyses below, but the words share a very important characteristic in
common: a male has sex with the person (or animal) referred to by the nominal
form that appears first in the construction (e.g. μητροκοίτης means ‘one who pene-
trates a mother’). The argument from etymology is justified by two fundamental
premises: () the meaning of the roots themselves; and () the usage of the
words in question.
There are many other formations ending in -κοίτης, most of which are rare,
but the ending nearly always indicates sleeping in something. The preceding
element is not, consequently, the subject but the object of κοίτης: δρυοκοίτης
(‘sleeping/living in an oak’); βορβοροκοίτης (‘mud coucher’; a frog);
ἡμεροκοίτης (‘one who sleeps in the day’; can be a fish or a bat); παρακοίτης
(‘one who lies beside’, a husband); ὑληκοίτης (‘one who lodges/sleeps in the
wood’); χαμαικοίτης (‘one who lies on the ground’); κλεψικοίτης (one who
seeks stolen love; ‘sleeping in something stolen’); ἐνωτοκοίτης (‘with ears large
enough to sleep in’); ἀνεμοκοῖται (‘wind-lullers’, sorcerers at Corinth; people
who ‘sleep’ the wind). Only παγκοίτης resists the analysis (‘where all must
sleep’; i.e. the grave), but even in this case the individual referred to by the com-
ponent -κοίτης sleeps in an object. The scholiast commenting on one of the
 Cf. the TLG (using lemma searches).

 Wright, ‘Homosexuals’, .
 The significance of ἀρσενοκοιτία, ἀρσενοκοιτέω and ἀρσενοκοίτης is only a working
hypothesis at this point.
 O. M. Bakke (‘Concord and Peace’: A Rhetorical Analysis of the First Letter of Clement with an
Emphasis on the Language of Unity and Sedition (WUNT II/; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
) –) usefully summarises the concept and its history in modern language analysis. J.
P. Louw and E. A. Nida, Greek–English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic
Domains ( vols.; New York: United Bible Societies, –) I.vi–xi (theory) is a lexicon
based on the concept of semantic fields. On lexicogenesis, cf. Geeraerts, Theories, 
(index) s.v. The ancient grammarians reflected on the formation of compound words
(σύνθετοι). Cf. e.g. Dionysius Thrax, Ars grammatica,  Περὶ ὀνόματος (G. Uhlig, ed.,
Dionysii Thracis Ars grammatica … (Grammatici Graeci .; Leipzig: Teubner, ) –).
 All these can be found in LSJ, although I have added my own interpretations.
 JOHN GRANGER COOK
word’s two occurrences in Sophocles’ Antigone interprets the word so: τὸν
παγκοίταν τὸν πάντας κοιμίζοντα (‘the place where all sleep: the place which
receives all’). For my purposes, ‘all’ in the scholiast’s analysis is the object of
the component -κοίτης. The place ‘sleeps’ everyone.
. Textual Analyses of Forms Analogous to ἀρσενοκοίτης
By necessity the analyses must be diachronic for most of the words treated
in this article, since they are not of high frequency. For example, Hipponax (th
cent. BCE) uses a word, μητροκοίτης, that does not appear again in the TLG
until the Greek Apocalypse of Ezra. The translation of the term in Hipponax by
Douglas E. Gerber is a well-known English obscenity, although ‘mother-penetra-
tor’ is probably good enough. In the Greek Apocalypse of Ezra, the seer asks
Michael why a man is suspended by his eyelids, and Michael explains: οὗτος
μητροκοίτης ἐστίν (‘this person is a mother-penetrator)’. According to the
Apostolic Constitutions (th cent.), Miriam derided Moses as one who sexually
penetrated a pagan (Μαριὰμ δὲ ὡς ἑλληνοκοίτην ὀνειδίσασα Μωϋσῆν).
Despite the derisive word’s rarity, the sense is clear because of the etymology
and the ethnicity of Zipporah. One of the recensions of the Life of Aesop is
blunt. The wife of Xanthos (Aesop’s master) spurns his advances and reviles
him with some choice profanities: μὴ πρόσιθί μοι, δουλοκοῖτα, μᾶλλον δὲ
κυνοκοῖτα. ἀπόδος μοι τὴν προῖκά μου (‘don’t come near me, slave-penetrator,
and even more you dog-penetrator; give me back my dowry’). δουλοκοίτης, for
 Schol. in Sophoclem (scholia vetera) Antig. . Antig.  is the other occurrence. These
scholia are based on the work of Didymus (st cent. BCE) and authors from the Roman era.
See E. Dickey, Ancient Greek Scholarship (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ) , .
 Hipponax, fr.  (D. E. Gerber, ed. and trans., Greek Iambic Poetry (LCL; Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, ) –): ὁ μητροκοίτης Βούπαλος σὺν Ἀρήτηι (‘Bupalus
the mother-fucker with Arete’). A. Willi, The Languages of Aristophanes: Aspects of Linguistic
Variation in Classical Attic Greek (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ) , in his analysis
of obscenities, includes words that denote ‘sexual activity’ in ‘lower’ genres such as ‘Old
Comedy, satirical or subliterary prose, as well as non-literary texts like graffiti, curse tablets,
and magical spells’.
 Greek Urtext, –.
 Gk. Apoc. Ezra (C. Tischendorf, ed., Apocalypses apocryphae (Leipzig: Mendelssohn, ) ).
Would an archangel use an obscenity? On this text, cf. J. Bremmer, ‘The Long Latin Version of
the Vision of Ezra: Date, Place and Tour of Hell’, Figures of Ezra (ed. J. Bremmer, V.
Hirschberger and T. Nicklas; Leuven: Peeters ) –. Bremmer (ibid., ) translates
the term in the apocalypse as an obscenity, but the context seems to suggest a description
of punishments and not abusive speech.
 Apos. Con. ..
 Vita Aesopi (st cent.?), Vita G  (B. E. Perry, Aesopica, vol. I (Urbana: University of Illinois
Press, ) ). This is a ‘sub-literary text’, and consequently the words are probably obscene.
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται 
whose meaning and usage the DGE should be consulted, is probably obscene,
because the context indicates the abusive nature of the terms for her husband’s
sexual proclivities.
A text of Tertullian’s Nationes is also relevant. An individual mocked the God
of the Christians (Jesus) by dressing up as an ass:
noua iam de deo nostro fama suggessit, et adeo nuper quidam perditissimus in
ista ciuit<ate>, etiam suae religionis desertor, solo detrimento cutis Iudaeus,
uti<que> magis post bestiarum morsus, ut ad quas se locando quot<idie>
toto iam corpore decutitur et circumciditur, picture<m> in nos pro<posuit>
sub ista proscriptione: Onocoetes. is erat auribus cant<herinis>, in toga, cum
libro, altero pede ungulate.
Now a new rumour about our god began to spread: just the other day a perfect
scoundrel in that city, a renegade even from his own religion, a Jew merely
because of the damage to his skin, and even more so after being bitten by
beasts – because while hiring himself out every day against them, he was
goaded and circumcised in his entire body – he exhibited against us a painting
under this inscription: ‘one who penetrates an ass’. This Onocoetes had the
ears of an ass, a toga, a book and a foot in the form of a hoof.
André Schneider notes the relevance of ἀρσενοκοίτης, ἀνδροκοίτης, μητροκοίτης

and δουλοκοίτης for interpreting onocoetes and concludes that ὀνοκοίτης can only
have one meaning: ‘one who has sex with an ass’. The word is probably obscene,
since the context is that of an arena and a crude individual’s reviling of Christ.
Another important member of the word field is ἀρσενομίκτης. Pseudo-
Manetho, probably to be dated to the third century, describes some hapless
individuals born under the wrong signs:
 Diccionario Griego-Español en linea (DGE) s.v. ‘he who lies with slaves’. Cf. the usage in Paulus
Astrologus, Elementa apotelesmatica (E. Boer, ed., Pauli Alexandrini elementa apotelesmatica
(Leipzig: Teubner, ) ). For the DGE, see http://dge.cchs.csic.es/xdge/, accessed 
January . For κυνοκοίτης, cf. LSJ supplement (‘having sexual intercourse with dogs’).
 The city is probably Carthage. In Apol. . the individual is described as a frustrandis bestiis
mercenarius (‘one hired to goad the beasts in an arena by eluding them’).
 Tertullian, Nat. .. (André Schneider, Le premier livre Ad nationes de Tertullien: introduc-
tion, texte, traduction et commentaire (Bibliotheca Helvetica Romana ; Rome: Institut Suisse
de Rome, ) –); translation from Schneider, adapted.
 Schneider, Tertullien, –.
 I owe this point to Felicity Harley-McGowan, who translates the term with the obscenity ‘ass-
fucker’ in her forthcoming chapter on the Palatine graffito (the crucified man with the head of
an ass): ‘The Alexamenos Graffito’, The Reception of Jesus in the First Three Centuries (ed. C.
Keith et al.; Edinburgh: Bloomsbury T. & T. Clark). E. Baer, onocoetes, TLL IX...–, at
. is probably overcautious: ‘perhaps he who has sexual intercourse with asses’.
 A. B. Lloyd and N. Hopkinson, ‘Manetho’, OCD, – (‘Probably they [the Apotelesmatica]
were composed between the nd and rd cents. AD’).
 JOHN GRANGER COOK
ἢν δ’ ἰσόμοιρος Ἄρης κατὰ σήματα τοιάδε λάμψῃ,

φύσονται μάχλοι, διδυμόστροφοι, ἀρσενομίκται.
μεμφόμενοι φύσεως ὀρθὴν ὁδόν, ἔν τε πόλεσσιν
ἀλλοτρίαις ζήσουσιν ἀλώμενοι αἰσχεόφημοι.
If Ares, in the same degree, occupies a favourable position in these planets,

lewd people are born, people who wander to and fro, men who penetrate
men. Finding fault with the right course of nature, they will live in strange
cities wandering about saying shameful things.
ἀρσενομίκτης (‘penetrator of males’) is a hapax legomenon in the TLG, but it was

probably current in Pseudo-Manetho’s late-second and early-third century world
(presumably Egypt). The well-attested nominal form (ἀρρενομιξία, ‘penetra-
tion of males’) leaves no doubt about the meaning of ἀρσενομίκται – a word
probably synonymous with ἀρσενοκοῖται – or at least the terms have identical
referential meaning. Sextus Empiricus notes: παρὰ μὲν Πέρσαις ἔθος εἶναι
ἀρρενομιξίαις χρῆσθαι, παρὰ δὲ Ῥωμαίοις ἀπαγορεύεσθαι νόμῳ τοῦτο
πράττειν (‘among the Persians it is the custom to penetrate males, but among
the Romans this is prohibited by law’). Sextus indulges his scepticism about
ethics in another similar passage that is worth quoting in full:
οἷον γοῦν παρ’ ἡμῖν μὲν αἰσχρόν, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ παράνομον νενόμισται τὸ
τῆς ἀρρενομιξίας, παρὰ Γερμανοῖς δέ, ὡς φασίν, οὐκ αἰσχρόν, ἀλλ’ ὡς ἕν
τι τῶν συνήθων. λέγεται δὲ καὶ παρὰ Θηβαίοις τὸ παλαιὸν οὐκ αἰσχρὸν
τοῦτο εἶναι δόξαι, καὶ τὸν Μηριόνην τὸν Κρῆτα οὕτω κεκλῆσθαί φασι
δι’ ἔμφασιν τοῦ Κρητῶν ἔθους, καὶ τὴν Ἀχιλλέως πρὸς Πάτροκλον
διάπυρον φιλίαν εἰς τοῦτο ἀνάγουσί τινες. καὶ τί θαυμαστόν, ὅπου γε
καὶ οἱ ἀπὸ τῆς κυνικῆς φιλοσοφίας καὶ οἱ περὶ τὸν Κιτιέα Ζήνωνα καὶ
Κλεάνθην καὶ Χρύσιππον ἀδιάφορον τοῦτο εἶναί φασιν;
For example, among us intercourse with [or ‘penetration of’] males is regarded
as shameful or rather illegal, but among the Germans, they say, it is not looked
on as shameful but as a customary thing. It is said, too, that in Thebes long ago
this practice was not held to be shameful, and they say that Meriones the
 Pseudo-Manetho, Apotelesmatica .–.

 His horoscope indicates his birth as . Cf. Lloyd and Hopkinson, ‘Manetho’, .
 Etymologically the word can be compared to δουλομίκτης (‘one who penetrates slaves’). On
‘sense’ (conceptual meaning) and ‘reference’ (the class of objects specified by a term), cf.
Baldinger, Semantic Theory, xx, –, –, . For example, ‘homosexual’ and ‘queer’
have the same referent, but ‘queer’ in many usages is highly derogatory.
 Sextus Empiricus, Pyr. .. His works were composed before  according to A. Bailey,
Sextus Empiricus and the Pyrrhonean Scepticism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ) 
(and see the problems of dating his life ibid., –). Cyril, De adoratione (PG .)
refers to the homoerotic intercourse mentioned in Lev . with the noun ἀῤῥενομιξίαν.
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται 
Cretan was so called by way of indicating the Cretans’ custom, and some refer
to this the burning love of Achilles for Patroclus. And what wonder, when both
the adherents of the Cynic philosophy and the followers of Zeno of Citium,
Cleanthes and Chrysippus, declare that this practice is indifferent?
Clearly there is no question of male prostitution. In Sextus’ period (probably the

late second century), he asserts that intercourse with males is not a matter of indif-
ference in Athens or Alexandria, and his examples rule out male prostitution
decisively.
ἀνδροβάτης, which Chantraine defines as paedicator (male penetrator of a
male), should also be included in the analysis of the word field. Hesychius
(th-th cent.) makes this word’s meaning clear: παιδοπίπας· ἀρσενοβάτης,
ἀνδροβάτης (‘pederast: penetrator of a male; penetrator of a male’).
ἀνδροκοίτης (PGL: ‘sodomite’), which appears in John Malalas’ Chronicle (ca.
), is also of value. In  some bishops had been accused of homoerotic inter-
course with males (ἐν αὐτῷ δὲ τῷ χρόνῳ διεβλήθησάν τινες τῶν ἐπισκόπων
ἀπὸ διαφόρων ἐπαρχιῶν ὡς κακῶς βιοῦντες περὶ τὰ σωματικὰ καὶ
ἀρσενοκοιτοῦντες). The prefect of Constantinople exiled Isaiah of Rhodes
and cut off Alexander the bishop of Diospolis’ penis. The sovereign (Justinian)
immediately decreed that those found in pederastic relationships have their
penises cut off (καὶ εὐθέως προσέταξεν ὁ αὐτὸς βασιλεὺς τοὺς ἐν
παιδεραστίαις εὑρισκομένους καυλοτομεῖσθαι). Malalas then writes: ‘At that
time many men who had sexual intercourse with men were gathered together,
and after their penises were cut off, they died’ (καὶ συνεσχέθησαν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ
καιρῷ πολλοὶ ἀνδροκοῖται, καὶ καυλοτομηθέντες ἀπέθανον). The obvious
result was that ‘thereafter fear was upon those who suffered from the desire for
males’ (καὶ ἐγένετο ἔκτοτε φόβος κατὰ τῶν νοσούντων τὴν τῶν ἀρρένων
ἐπιθυμίαν). The verb form (ἀνδροκοιτέω) usually referred to women having
 Sextus Empiricus, Pyr. .–; translation slightly modified from Sextus Empiricus,
Outlines of Pyrrhonism (ed. and trans. R. G. Bury;  vols.; LCL; Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, –) I.. Bury uses ‘sodomy’ in his translation.
 The arguments are inconclusive. He probably lived in both places at times. Cf. Bailey, Sextus
Empiricus, –.
 Chantraine, Dictionnaire, .
 Hesychius, Lexicon Π §. Aristides, Apol. . (Aristide, Apologie (ed. and trans. B. Pouderon,
M.-J. Pierre, B. Outtier and M. Guiorgadzé; SC ; Paris: Cerf, ) ) describes Zeus’s
active role in homoerotic intercourse with the ἀνδροβάτην (Ganymede is the example
Aristides mentions in .). Presumably the translation of this word is not controversial.
 Cf. E. Jeffreys, M. Jeffreys and R. Scott, The Chronicle of John Malalas (Leiden: Brill, ) xxiii.
 Malalas, Chronographia . (I. Thurn, ed., Ioannis Malalae chronographia (Corpus Fontium
Historiae Byzantinae. Series Berolinensis ; Berlin: de Gruyter, ) –). At this point in
my argument, the correct translation of ἀρσενοκοιτοῦντες is not demonstrated.
 Malalas, Chronographia .. I do not understand why DGE s.v. ἀνδροκοίτης interprets the
word as ‘pathic’ (bardaje), since the castration of the males emphasises their offending
 JOHN GRANGER COOK
sex with men and is well attested in the documentary papyri. These powerful
men were in relationships of ‘pederasty’ – in other words, they were the erastai
in love with younger men, the erōmenoi, and were the penetrating partners.
. Textual Analysis of ἀρσενοκοίτης, ἀρσενοκοιτία and

ἀρσενοκοιτέω
The context of the usage of ἀρσενοκοίτης in the vice catalogues of  Cor
. and  Tim . does not explain the meaning of term, nor does that in Acts John
. ἀρσενοκοίτης does not occur in the papyrological or epigraphical databases
with one late exception. Since there is confusion in some of the scholarly pub-
lications over the usage in The Book of the Laws of Countries, it deserves further
discussion. Bardaisan (–) is the principal speaker. Eusebius’ text, which
is a Greek translation of the Syriac, reads:
ἀπὸ Εὐφράτου ποταμοῦ καὶ μέχρι τοῦ Ὠκεανοῦ ὡς ἐπὶ ἀνατολὰς ὁ

λοιδορούμενος ὡς φονεὺς ἢ ὡς κλέπτης οὐ πάνυ ἀγανακτεῖ, ὁ δὲ ὡς
ἀρσενοκοίτης λοιδορούμενος ἑαυτὸν ἐκδικεῖ μέχρι καὶ φόνου·
From the Euphrates river to the ocean toward the east, a person who is
reviled as a murderer or thief does not become very angry, but a person who
members. An interesting text of Pseudo-Gregorius Magnus, Ordo Romanus . (PL .D–
A) = Ordo Romanus . (M. Andrieu, Les Ordines romani du haut moyen âge ( vols.;
Leuven: Spicilegium sacrum Lovaniense, –) III. ) states that before ordination
future bishops were asked about a number of transgressions: id est arsenoquita, quod est
masculo; pro ancilla Dei sacrata, quae a Francis nonnata dicitur; pro quatuor pedes, et pro
muliere viro alio conjuncta; aut si coniugem habuit ex alio viro, quod est a Grecis dicatur deu-
terogamia. Cadwallader’s (‘Keeping Lists’, ) attempt to relate the word to rape in later con-
texts is indefensible. His reference ((John Jejunator?), Paenit. (PG .A): τὸ μέντοι τῆς
ἀρσενοκοιτίας μῦσος πολλοὶ καὶ μετᾶ τῶν γυναικῶν αὐτῶν ἐκτελοῦσιν) has nothing
to do with rape, but is simply a statement that many men defiled their wives with the same
stain as that of male penetration of men (i.e., heteroerotic anal intercourse).
 It would be tedious to list them here. Cf. the Papyri.info database (http://papyri.info/search,
accessed  June ). The earliest reliable date appears to be  BCE.
 Acts John : ὁ φαρμακός, ὁ περίεργος, ὁ ἅρπαξ, ὁ ἀποστερητής, ὁ ἀρσενοκοίτης, ὁ
κλέπτης. The same thesis applies to Theophilus, Autol. .. Clearly the fundamental unit of
meaning (and context) is an entire text. Cf. K. Heger, Monem, Wort, Satz, und Text
(Tübingen: Niemeyer, ). Intertextual analysis is necessary to understand Paul’s
terminology.
 IG X/.. = RIChrM  = Anth. Pal. . (a poem, inscription lost): βάρβαρον οὐ τρομέεις,
οὐκ ἄρρενας ἀρρενοκοίτας. SEG XXXIX. dates it to th–th century.
 J. Teixidor, ‘ Bardesane de Syrie’, Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques ( vols.; Paris: CNRS,
–) I. dates the treatise between the end of nd and the beginning of third century.
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται 
is reviled as one who has intercourse with a male, revenges himself as far as
murder.
The crucial Syriac phrase is:
But if a man is reviled as having intercourse with males, he avenges himself up

to the point of murder.
The Syriac text emphasises the act of lying with another male. This vitiates
Boswell’s claim that Paul understood the word to mean the individual engaging
in the active role in ‘male prostitution’. The Syriac shows that the
ἀρσενοκοίτης is the one who penetrates the other male. In Germany,
Bardaisan mentions the marriage of men with handsome boys:
Those youths among them who are handsome become like wives to the men,
and they also have wedding feasts.
The emphasis in the text is that of the mature male having intercourse with
youths. They are the penetrating partners. Bardaisan, towards the end of the dia-
logue, insists that Christians do not indulge in such practices.
The brothers [Christians] in Gaul do not marry men.
 Adam Becker, ‘Bardesanes’, Brill’s New Jacoby (BNJ)  fr. b. = Eusebius, Praep. ev.
.. = H. J. W. Drijvers, The Book of the Laws of Countries: Dialogue on Fate of Bardaiṣan
of Edessa (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias, ) . Eusebius’ παρ’ Ἕλλησι καὶ οἱ σοφοὶ
ἐρωμένους ἔχοντες οὐ ψέγονται (‘among the Greek their wise men who have beloved
ones (erōmenoi) are not censured’) is missing in the Syriac text and its absence does not
affect the argument. Martin, Arsenokoitês,  erroneously asserts that the word
ἀρσενοκοίτης ‘appears to’ be the equivalent of ‘having a favorite’ (Eusebius does not say
that) and fails to analyse the Syriac text. For BNJ, see http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/
browse/brill-s-new-jacoby, accessed  January .
 Book of the Laws, text and translation modified from Drijvers, Book, –. On the construction
‘lie with’, cf. the entry škb §G  (‘to lie with, have intercourse’) in the Comprehensive Aramaic
Lexicon (http://cal.huc.edu/, accessed  January ).
 Boswell, Christianity, –.
 Book of the Laws, text and translation modified from Drijvers, Book, –. Rufinus, Clem.
Recogn. .. translates the key phrase as: nec cogere potest genesis … Gallorum pueros non
pati muliebria (‘astrological fortune is unable to determine that … Gallic boys not have a
woman’s experience’), which Eusebius, Praep. ev. .. (= Clem., Recogn. .) expresses
as καὶ οὐκ ἀναγκάζει ἡ γένεσις … τοὺς Γάλλους μὴ γαμεῖσθαι.
 Drijvers, Book, –.
 JOHN GRANGER COOK
The Syriac translators of  Cor ., as Wright notes, did not restrict the use of
ἀρσενοκοῖται to sexual intercourse with boys:
and not liers with males
There is no doubt how the Peshitta interpreted the word. The use of the Greek
word for Bardaisan’s Syriac expression indicates that Martin’s despairing conclu-
sion that ‘Arsenokoitês had a more specific meaning in Greco-Roman culture than
homosexual penetration in general, a meaning that is now lost to us’ is a declar-
ation of premature semantic death. He speculates that the context in  Cor . and
 Tim . implies that the word may mean ‘economic exploitation by means of
sex, perhaps but not necessarily homosexual sex’.
Aristides, who probably wrote in the middle of the second century, uses the
generic nominal form in a condemnation of the practices of the Greek gods:
πῶς δὲ οὐ συνῆκαν οἱ σοφοὶ καὶ λόγιοι τῶν Ἑλλήνων, ὅτι νόμους θέμενοι
κατακρίνονται ὑπὸ τῶν ἰδίων νόμων; εἰ γὰρ οἱ νόμοι δίκαιοί εἰσιν, ἄδικοι
πάντως οἱ θεοὶ αὐτῶν εἰσὶ παράνομα ποιήσαντες, ἀλληλοκτονίας καὶ
φαρμακείας καὶ μοιχείας καὶ κλοπὰς καὶ ἀρσενοκοιτίας·
And how did those of the Greeks who are wise and reasonable not understand
that those who have established laws are judged by their own laws? For if their
laws are just, then their gods are completely unjust, because they commit acts
that are contrary to the laws, mutual killings, poisonings, adulteries, thefts and
intercourse with males.
The Syriac translation of the nominal form (ἀρσενοκοιτίας) is:

. The Greek text may date to – even if there was a
second redaction under Antoninus. John Boswell attempts to evade the clear
evidence provided by Aristides (and he fails to refer to the Syriac version) by
arguing that ‘in no city within the Roman Empire in the second century were
there laws in effect against homosexual relations per se, least of all in Aristides’
native Athens’. Sextus Empiricus, however, certainly claimed they were illegal
 Wright, ‘Homosexuality’, .

 Martin, ‘Arsenokoitês’, ; cf. : ‘I am claiming that no one knows what it meant’ – a rather
unusual claim, since many writers in antiquity used the word ( instances in the TLG,
although some are repetitions in texts such as the Catenae).
 Aristides, Apol. . (Aristide, Apologie, –); translation done with reference to Pouderon’s.
 ‘And ones lying with males’. Aristides, Apol. . (SC .– Pierre). Pouderon in
Pouderon, Pierre, Outtier and Guiorgadzé, Aristide, Apologie, – dates the Syriac transla-
tion to the fourth century.
 Pouderon in Pouderon, Pierre, Outtier and Guiorgadzé, Aristide, Apologie, –.
 Boswell, Christianity, .
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται 
in his community. Boswell interprets the apologist to be objecting to male pros-

titutes (who took an active role) in the Roman upper class and to be comparing
the gods to their behavior. There is support for Aristides’ claim in legal texts.
A municipal law found in Heraclea Lucania (the so-called tabula Heracleensis)
denied those males who prostituted themselves the right to be a member of the
municipal magistracies or to speak in any municipal body: queiue corpor<e >
quaestum | fecit fecerit (‘or he who has made or will have made a living with his
body’). Ulpian attributes the following law to the praetor’s edict: removet
autem a postulando pro aliis et eum, qui corpore suo muliebria passus est (‘he
also forbids a man who has been a catamite to make applications on behalf of
others’). Eva Cantarella has shown that the lex Scantinia forbade certain homo-
erotic acts: being one of the molles (pathics); and seducing a freeborn boy
(stuprum cum puero). A fine of , sesterces was apparently the penalty for vio-
lating the law, which was probably ignored by some Roman men. The praetor’s
edict, De adtemptata pudicitia, punished individuals who tried to seduce ‘respect-
able women and praetextati’ (freeborn boys who wore the purple striped tunic).
Rape of a man or woman was almost certainly punishable under the lex Iulia de vi
publica.
The earliest extant usage of the verb form is in the Sibylline Oracles, in a
passage that has been interpolated into a longer excerpt of Pseudo-
Phocylides. The text is probably Jewish according to John J. Collins, who
dates the Christian redaction of the first and second books of the Sibyllines to
. He argues that ‘the polemic against homosexuality (vs. ), while less conclu-
sive, is also typically Jewish. Nothing in these verses [.–] is necessarily
Christian.’ The relevant lines are:
 See his remarks about illegality above.

 Boswell, Christianity, .
 Tabula Heracleensis, ll. – (M. H. Crawford and J. D. Cloud, Roman Statutes, vol. I (London:
Institute of Classical Studies, University of London, )  §); translation from T. A. J.
McGinn, Prostitution, Sexuality, and the Law in Ancient Rome (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, ) .
 Ulpian, lib. VI ad edictum, apud Justinian, Digesta ...; translation from A. Watson, ed., The
Digest of Justinian ( vols.; Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, ) I..
 E. Cantarella, Bisexuality in the Ancient World (New Haven: Yale University Press, ) –
 (citing the necessary evidence). A more succinct discussion may be found in B. Santalucia,
Diritto e processo penale nell’antica Roma (Milan: Giuffrè, ) .
 Cf. Cantarella, Bisexuality, – and Gaius, Institutiones ..
 Marcianus, lib. XIV institutionum apud Justinian, Digesta (Ad legem Iuliam de vi publica)
...: praeterea punitur huius legis poena, qui puerum vel feminam vel quemquam per
vim stupraverit (‘Furthermore, anyone who forcibly violates a boy or a woman or any other
person is punished by the penalty of this statute’; translation from Watson, Digest, IV.).
Cf. Cantarella, Bisexuality,  and Santalucia, Diritto, .
 Sib. Or. .–.
 J. J. Collins, OTP I.. On the Christian redaction probably ‘no later’ than , see ibid., .
 JOHN GRANGER COOK
σπέρματα μὴ κλέπτειν· ἐπαράσιμος ὅστις ἕληται

(εἰς γενεὰς γενεῶν <εἰς> σκορπισμὸν βιότοιο.
μὴ ἀρσενοκοιτεῖν, μὴ συκοφαντεῖν, μήτε φονεύειν.)
Do not steal seeds. Whoever takes for himself is accursed

(to generations of generations, to the scattering of life.
Do not have sexual intercourse with males, do not betray information, do not
murder).
The parentheses signify the material added to Pseudo-Phocylides. The etymo-

logical arguments, the semantic word field and Bardaisan indicate that the
author is discouraging homoerotic intercourse.
Naas (the serpent) is responsible for homoerotic intercourse according to the
Refutatio (completed before ) that is often attributed to Hippolytus (ca.  –
ca. ):
προσῆλθε γὰρ τῇ Εὔᾳ ἐξαπατήσας αὐτὴν καὶ ἐμοίχευσεν αὐτήν, ὅπερ

ἐστὶ παράνομον· προσῆλθε δὲ καὶ τῷ Ἀδὰμ καὶ ἔσχεν αὐτὸν ὡς
παιδ<ικ>ά, ὅπερ ἐστὶ καὶ αὐτὸ παράνομον. ἔνθεν <δὲ> γέγονε μοιχεία
καὶ ἀρσενοκοιτία …
For he [Naas] came to Eve deceiving her and committed adultery with her,
which is unlawful. And he also came to Adam and had him as a lover-boy,
which is itself also unlawful. And from that occasion adultery and penetration
of males came into being …
There is no explicit indication that Naas exploited or raped Adam, nor is there any
question of male prostitution. He seduced Eve and, after that explicit seduction,
pursued Adam as a Greek erastēs pursues his erōmenos – which is indicated by a
phrase that appears several times in marriage contracts found in Egypt: μήτε
 This is Pseudo-Phocylides, Sent.  (P. W. van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides:
With Introduction and Commentary (Leiden: Brill, ) –).
 Sib. Or. .–; translation modified from Collins, OTP I. (who has ‘do not practice
homosexuality’).
 A. Brent, Hippolytus and the Roman Church in the Third Century: Communities in Tension
before the Emergence of a Monarch-Bishop (Leiden: Brill, ) –.
 (Hippolytus?), Refutatio ... παιδ<ικ>ά is probably a plurale tantum or ‘plural of majesty’;
cf. H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar (rev. G. M. Messing; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, ) §: ‘παιδικά favourite in prose (only in the plural form)’.
 Contra Martin, ‘Arsenokoitês’,  and Boswell, Christianity,  (‘male prostitution’). The first
sexual act of Naas (beguiling Eve) does not suggest a violent context for his subsequent sexual
intercourse with Adam.
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται 
παλλακὴν μηδὲ παιδικὸν ἔχειν (‘he will have neither a [slave] concubine nor a
lover-boy’).
A much later astrologer, Rhetorius the Egyptian (th cent.), uses Paul’s word in
a catalogue of non-normative sexual behaviour:
ἡ Ἀφροδίτη ἐπιτυχοῦσα Κριοῦ δεκανῷ πρώτῳ ἀσελγεῖς ποιεῖ καὶ

ἀθεμιτοφάγους καὶ ἀθεμιτογάμους καὶ ἀρρητοποιοὺς καὶ λείκτας καὶ
ψογιστὰς καὶ ἐμπαθεῖς καὶ ἀρρενοκοίτας καὶ ἅρπαγας γυναικῶν·
ἀγαθοποιηθεῖσα δὲ οὐχ οὕτως φαύλη. Ἀφροδίτη Διδύμων δεκανῷ
δευτέρῳ παραιρέτης καὶ ἀποκλίνασα ἀρρενοκοίτας, λάγνους, αἰσχρούς,
ἀψικόρως συναπτομένους· μοιχικοὺς καὶ ἐπιμανεῖς πρὸς τὰ ἀφροδίσια.
Venus chancing to be in the first decan of Aries makes lechers and eaters of
unlawful meats and unlawful marriages and those who practise unmentionable
vices [male fellators] and lickers and reprehensible persons and passionate
ones and males who penetrate males and rapers of women; but when it is
made fortunate, it is not so depraved. Venus in the second decan of Gemini,
out of sect and cadent [makes] males who penetrate males, lewd, shameful
persons, those who join together in a fickle manner; adulterers and those
mad for sexual pleasures.
Rhetorius’ comment that ‘they come together in a fickle manner’ (ἀψικόρως

συναπτομένους) indicates his views on those who practise homoerotic
intercourse.
To sum up the results: the etymological argument and usage, the semantic
word field, the evidence from Bardaisan in both Greek and Syriac, the evidence
from Aristides in both Greek and Syriac, and the texts from the Refutatio, John
Malalas and Rhetorius, are decisive. ἀρσενοκοίτης, ἀρσενοκοιτία and
ἀρσενοκοιτέω all refer to males who penetrate other males. The early Latin
translators of  Cor . were well justified in rendering the word as masculorum
concubitores (those who have sexual intercourse with males). The only classical
 For παιδικὸν ἔχειν, see P.Giss. II.; P.Tebt. I..–; P.Tebt. III/..– etc. Herod’s son
Alexander lured Herod’s three eunuchs εἰς τὰ παιδικά (‘as lover-boys’). Cf. Josephus, B.J.
.. Dover, Greek Homosexuality,  gives various examples from the ancient lexicographers
of ‘using paidika’. See e.g. Hesychius, Lexicon Κ § Κρῆτα τρόπον· τὸ παιδικοῖς χρῆσθαι
(‘the Cretan way: to use paidika (a lover-boy)’; trans. Dover, Greek Homosexuality, ).
 Cf. Scholia in Aristophanem, Pax c and ἀρρητοποιεῖν in Artemidorus, Onir. ..
 Rhetorius, Astrological Compendium  (F. Cumont, ed., Codices Parisini (CCAG .; Paris:
Lamertin) ), translation modified of James A. Holden, Rhetorius the Egyptian:
Astrological Compendium Containing his Explanation and Narration of the Whole Art of
Astrology (Tempe, AZ: American Federation of Astrologers, ) –.
 Cyprian, Test. . has a variation (molles … masculorum adpetitores). Boswell, Christianity,
: ‘in bald English the compound means “male fuckers”’; however, I do not think it is
clear that Paul would use an obscenity, and none of the subsequent usages suggest that the
word was an obscenity.
 JOHN GRANGER COOK
example the OLD finds for concubitor is an inauthentic text of Pseudo-Quintilian,

which was added to the Declamationes. It first appears in Tertullian in extant
Latin literature. Whoever coined the word, its meaning is clear, and it derives
from concumbere: ‘to lie with (for sexual intercourse)’. Closely related concubitio
and concubitus both mean ‘sexual intercourse’, that is, ‘penetration’. For
example, Gnaeus Pompeius, one of Claudius’ sons-in-law, was stabbed while
having sexual intercourse with his favourite youth (Pompeius in concubitu
dilecti adulescentuli confossus est). Masculorum concubitores are individuals
who penetrate males.
. The μαλακοί (molles)
The demonstration that ἀρσενοκοίτης refers to the penetrating actor in

homoerotic intercourse renders Tertullian’s, the Old Latin’s and Jerome’s transla-
tion of μαλακοί as molles highly probable. This is an example of the way in
which linguistic (or ‘syntagmatic’) context enables one to choose between the
multiple meanings of a word (in this case μαλακοί). Vettius Valens (nd
cent.), the astrologer, is a good place to begin the analysis:
Ἥλιος Ὑδροχόῳ, Σελήνη Παρθένῳ, Κρόνος Ταύρῳ, Ζεύς, ὡροσκόπος

Διδύμοις, Ἄρης Καρκίνῳ, Ἀφροδίτη Ἰχθύσιν, Ἑρμῆς Αἰγοκέρωτι. ὁ
κλῆρος τῆς τύχης Αἰγοκέρωτι, ὁ δαίμων Σκορπίῳ· τούτοις ἠναντιώθησαν
οἱ κακοποιοί. ἐγένετο μαλακός, ἀρρητοποιός· καὶ γὰρ ὁ Αἰγόκερως
ἀσελγής, καὶ ὁ τούτου κύριος Ταύρῳ, παθητικῷ ζῳδίῳ. καὶ Σκορπίος
τὸν τρόπον τῆς ἀσελγείας δηλοῖ.
Another example: sun in Aquarius, moon in Virgo, Saturn in Taurus, Jupiter,

Ascendant in Gemini, Mars in Cancer, Venus in Pisces, Mercury in
Capricorn, the Lot of Fortune in Capricorn, Daimon in Scorpio. Malefics
were in opposition to the Lots. The native was effeminate (pathic) and had
 OLD s.v.: [Quint.] Decl. b.. On the inauthenticity of Decl. b, cf. L. Håkanson, ed.,
Declamationes XIX maiores Quintiliano falso ascriptae (Bibliotheca Teubneriana; Stuttgart:
Teubner, ) iv, vi. Cf. E. Lommatzsch, concubitor, TLL IV..– (from concumbere).
 According to the Brepolis Library of Latin Texts A database (http://clt.brepolis.net/llta/
Default.aspx, accessed  June ).
 Cf. OLD s.v.
 Cf. OLD s.vv.
 Suetonius, Claud. ..
 There are many surveys of μαλακοί. See, e.g., Boswell, Christianity, ; Martin,
‘Arsenokoitês’, –; B. W. Winter, After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics
and Social Change (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, ) –; Gagnon, The Bible, –;
and W. Loader, The New Testament on Sexuality (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, ) –.
 Baldinger, Semantic Theory, –, –.
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται 
unmentionable vices, because Capricorn is a lewd sign and its ruler was in
Taurus, a pathic sign. Scorpio also indicates this kind of vice.
The unmentionable vice (ἀρρητοποιός) is oral sex. The ‘pathic sign’ is that of
individuals the Romans called cinaedi or pathici – the males who desire to be
penetrated – and consequently explains the passions of the μαλακός.
Ptolemy (nd cent.) also gives an astrological explanation for such character
traits:
τὸ δὲ ἐναντίον τῶν φώτων κατὰ τὸν ἐκκείμενον σχηματισμὸν ἐν θηλυκοῖς

ζῳδίοις ὑπαρχόντων μόνον αἱ μὲν γυναῖκες ὑπερβάλλουσι τοῦ κατὰ
φύσιν, οἱ δὲ ἄνδρες τοῦ παρὰ φύσιν πρὸς τὸ εὔθρυπτον καὶ
τεθηλυσμένον τῆς ψυχῆς. ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ὁ τῆς Ἀφροδίτης ᾖ τεθηλυσμένος,
αἱ μὲν γυναῖκες καταφερεῖς τε καὶ μοιχάδες καὶ λάγνοι γίνονται … οἱ
δὲ ἄνδρες μαλακοί τε καὶ σαθροὶ πρὸς τὰς παρὰ φύσιν συνουσίας καὶ
γυναικῶν ἔργα διατιθέμενοι παθητικῶς, ἀποκρύφως μέντοι καὶ
λεληθότως.
But on the other hand, when the luminaries in the aforesaid configuration are
unattended in feminine signs, the females exceed in the natural, and the males
in unnatural practice, with the result that their souls become soft and effemin-
ate. If Venus too is made feminine, the women become depraved, adulterous,
and lustful … The men, on the contrary, become effeminate and unsound with
respect to unnatural congresses and the functions of women, and are dealt with
as pathics, though privately and secretly.
In context, the μαλακοί of Ptolemy are pathics. Hephaestion (th cent.) some-
what modified Ptolemy’s tradition, but he also is clear that the ‘soft ones’ desire
to be penetrated as women: οἱ δὲ ἄνδρες μαλακοὶ καὶ θρασεῖς πρὸς τὰς
παρὰ φύσιν συνουσίας καὶ γυναικῶν ἔργα διατιθέμενοι (‘the men become
effeminate and bold for unnatural intercourse and are disposed for the functions
of women’). It should be noted that nowhere in these texts is there any overt
 Vettius Valens, Anthol. .; translation from M. T. Riley (who translates μαλακός as ‘homo-
sexual’, which is too vague). (www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vettius%Valens%entire.pdf,
accessed  June ).
 See n. .
 See D. Kamen and S. Levin-Richardson, ‘Revisiting Roman Sexuality: Agency and the
Conceptualization of Penetrated Males’, Sex in Antiquity: Exploring Gender and Sexuality in
the Ancient World (ed. M. Masterson et al.; London: Routledge, ) – and C. A.
Williams, Roman Homosexuality: Ideologies of Masculinity in Classical Antiquity (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, ) –.
 Ptolemy, Tetrab. ..; translation from Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos (ed. and trans. F. E. Robbins;
LCL; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, ) .
 Hephaestion, Apotelesmatica .. (Hephaestionis Thebani apotelesmaticorum libri tres (ed.
D. Pingree;  vols.; Bibliotheca Teubneriana; Leipzig: Teubner, –) I.).
 JOHN GRANGER COOK
reference to the pathics being effeminate ‘call boys’ in a relationship of exploitive

pederasty.
The massive Byzantine encyclopedia called the Suda (th cent.) provides
additional clarity: Κίναιδος: ἀσελγής, μαλακός. καὶ ἐν Ἐπιγράμμασι: ὡς
μεγάλου κιναίδου (‘catamite: licentious, soft [pathic]; and in Epigrams: like a
great catamite’). The Suda glosses a phrase from Aristophanes’ Clouds so:
Ἀντιμάχου καταπυγοσύνης ἀναπλήσει: ἀντὶ τοῦ ἡ μαλακία (‘he will fill you
with the “buggery” [katapugosunē] of Antimachos: instead of his “softness”
[malakia]). Another text from the Suda explains a crude verse in
Aristophanes’ Acharnians:
ἐναπομόρξεται Πρέμις τὴν εὐρυπρωκτίαν σοι: τουτέστι τὴν μαλακίαν

ἐναποψήσεται, ἀπομάξει. καταπύγων δὲ ἐκωμῳδεῖτο ὁ Πρέμις.
Ἀριστοφάνης φησίν.
[Νor shall] Premis wipe his wide-arsedness off on you: That is, [nor shall he]
smear [you] with his effeminacy, [nor shall he] wipe [it] off. Premis was the
target of comedy as a pathic. Aristophanes says [sc. these words].
Again, it is the context that indicates that μαλακία (‘effeminacy’) refers to a

pathic.
A scholiast of Aeschines’ False Legation interprets a nickname that had been
given to Demosthenes, ‘Batalos’, because of what Aeschines says was some
shameful act and his pathic nature (ἐκλήθη δι’ αἰσχρουργίαν τινὰ καὶ
κιναιδίαν Βάταλος). The scholiast explains:
Βάταλον] Αἰσχίνης περὶ παραπρεσβείας· ἐν παιδὶ μὲν γὰρ ὢν ἐκλήθη δι’

αἰσχρουργίαν τινὰ ἢ κιναιδίαν Βάταλος. καταπύγωνα καὶ μαλακόν.
ὠνομάσθαι δέ φασιν οἱ μὲν ἀπὸ Βατάλου αὐλητοῦ μαλακοῦ, οἱ δὲ ἀπὸ
ποιητοῦ κατεαγότα κρούματα γράφοντος.
 Pace Scroggs, New Testament, , – (‘the youth who consciously imitated feminine styles
and ways and who walked the thin line between passive homosexual activity for pleasure and
that for pay’) , , and passim. Cf. the comments of Gagnon, The Bible, –.
 Suda K §. Cf. Photius, Lexicon Κ §.
 Suda Α §. Cf. Aristophanes, Nub. –. That is, Aristophanes uses καταπυγοσύνη
instead of the word μαλακία.
 On the meaning of this vulgarism (καταπύγων), cf. K. Dover, ‘Some Evaluative Terms in
Aristophanes’, The Language of Greek Comedy (ed. A. Willi; Oxford: Oxford University
Press, )  (‘down-into-the-arse-man’).
 Suda Ε §, Aristophanes, Acharn. ; translation from of Ἐναπομόρξεται, Suda On
Line, D. Whitehead,  November  (www.stoa.org/sol-entries/epsilon/, accessed
 June ), slightly modified.
 Aeschines, Fals. leg. .
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται 
Batalos] Aeschines in the False Legation. For in childhood he was called

‘Batalos’ because of some shameful deed and being a male penetrated by
males. A down-into-the-arse-man and pathic. But some said that he was
named that from Batalos the effeminate flute player, and others from the
poet who wrote effeminate melodies.
The context indicates the clear meaning of μαλακός. Plautus used the Latinised
form to describe a dancer who took pleasure in being penetrated: tum ad saltan-
dum non cinaedus malacus aequest a[n]tque ego (‘Now when it comes to dancing,
a catamite isn’t as soft as I’). I will concede the point to Boswell and Martin that
μαλακός in itself has no necessary relationship to homoerotic intercourse (or
other acts) in Paul’s time. However, since one can demonstrate that
ἀρσενοκοίτης refers to the active partner in homoerotic intercourse, it is nearly
certain that μαλακός refers to the penetrated partner. There is little ground for
limiting the reference of the term to ‘an effeminate call boy’. In the context
of the clear meaning of ἀρσενοκοῖται, the translation of μαλακοί in the Vetus
Latina, Tertullian and Jerome as molles is well justified.
. Conclusion
One might object to the thesis of this article: ‘What is new?’ The semantic
results I hope to have established are not fundamentally new, but they are, in my
view, better grounded than before. To my knowledge, the investigation above is
the most complete and compact presentation of the evidence and has effectively
refuted the objections of Dale Martin and others to Tertullian’s translation of the
 Plutarch, Dem. . remarks that Batalos, according to some, was a poet who wrote effeminate
verses and drinking songs (ποιητοῦ τρυφερὰ καὶ παροίνια γράφοντος).
 Schol. in Aeschinem, Fals. leg. .
 Plautus, Mil. glor. ; translation from Plautus, The Merchant, The Braggart Soldier, The
Ghost, The Persian (ed. and trans. W. de Melo; LCL; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, ) . Cf. Williams, Roman Homosexuality,  (on the dancer’s predilections).
 Boswell, Christianity, –; Martin, ‘Arsenokoitês’, –.
 Scroggs, New Testament, ; W. Schrage, Der erste Brief an die Korinther. . Teilband:  Kor
,–, (EKK VII/; Düsseldorf: Benziger/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, ) –:
‘Lustknaben oder Strichjungen’, the younger individual in a pederastic relationship or a
young male prostitute (which also limits the reference too much).
 See Juvenal, Sat. .–, where the Greek κίναιδος (‘catamite’) is compared to the Latin
mollis avarus (‘greedy pathic’). He ‘pays to be penetrated’. Cf. Kamen and Levin-
Richardson, ‘Revisiting Roman Sexuality’,  (Juvenal, Sat. .–). See Caelius
Aurelianus, De acutis morbis (tardae vel chronicae passiones) ..– for an analysis of
molles (whom he says the Greeks call malthacoi (μαλθακούς)) as a disease.
 JOHN GRANGER COOK
language in  Cor .. The arguments developed in this article place on a more
solid foundation the work of those commentators on  Corinthians who interpret
μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται in the tradition of Tertullian’s translation.
 J. Weiss, Der erste Korintherbrief (KEK ; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, ) ;
E.-B. Allo, Saint Paul: Première épitre aux Corinthiens (Paris: Gabalda, ) ; H.
Lietzmann, An Die Korinther I, II (supplemented by W. G. Kümmel; HNT ; Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck, ) ; H. Conzelmann,  Corinthians: A Commentary on the First
Epistle to the Corinthians (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, ) ; A. Lindemann,
Der erste Korintherbrief (HNT /; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, ) –; A. C. Thiselton,
The First Epistle of the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, ) –; Schrage, Der erste Brief, –; J. A. Fitzmyer, First
Corinthians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AYBC ; New
Haven: Yale University Press, ) –; D. Zeller, Der erste Brief an die Korinther (KEK
; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, ) –.

μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται: In Defence of Tertullian's Translation

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται: In Defence of Tertullian's Translation

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

New Test. Stud. (), , pp. –.

© Cambridge University Press, 

μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται: In Defence of

‘homosexual’ as a translation for ἀρσενοκοίτης, then the masculorum concubi-

Background for Contemporary Debate (Philadelphia: Fortress, ); D. B. Martin,

Gagnon, for example, in his relentlessly polemical monograph, complains that

 Gagnon, Bible, .

Gagnon needs to be clarified. Once the semantics of ἀρσενοκοίτης stands on

. The LXX, Philo and Josephus in Brief and Secondary Motivations

Two texts in the Septuagint (Lev . μετὰ ἄρσενος οὐ κοιμηθήσῃ

(παιδεραστής) becomes the beloved youth’s guide in unmanliness and softness

. Etymology and a Word Field for Sexual Intercourse

 A secondary motivation from παῖς (‘boy, youth’) and ἐραστής (‘lover’).

 Cf. the TLG (using lemma searches).

. Textual Analyses of Forms Analogous to ἀρσενοκοίτης

André Schneider notes the relevance of ἀρσενοκοίτης, ἀνδροκοίτης, μητροκοίτης

ἢν δ’ ἰσόμοιρος Ἄρης κατὰ σήματα τοιάδε λάμψῃ,

If Ares, in the same degree, occupies a favourable position in these planets,

ἀρσενομίκτης (‘penetrator of males’) is a hapax legomenon in the TLG, but it was

 Pseudo-Manetho, Apotelesmatica .–.

Clearly there is no question of male prostitution. In Sextus’ period (probably the

. Textual Analysis of ἀρσενοκοίτης, ἀρσενοκοιτία and

ἀπὸ Εὐφράτου ποταμοῦ καὶ μέχρι τοῦ Ὠκεανοῦ ὡς ἐπὶ ἀνατολὰς ὁ

The crucial Syriac phrase is:

But if a man is reviled as having intercourse with males, he avenges himself up

The brothers [Christians] in Gaul do not marry men.

and not liers with males

The Syriac translation of the nominal form (ἀρσενοκοιτίας) is:

 Wright, ‘Homosexuality’, .

in his community. Boswell interprets the apologist to be objecting to male pros-

 See his remarks about illegality above.

σπέρματα μὴ κλέπτειν· ἐπαράσιμος ὅστις ἕληται

Do not steal seeds. Whoever takes for himself is accursed

The parentheses signify the material added to Pseudo-Phocylides. The etymo-

προσῆλθε γὰρ τῇ Εὔᾳ ἐξαπατήσας αὐτὴν καὶ ἐμοίχευσεν αὐτήν, ὅπερ

ἡ Ἀφροδίτη ἐπιτυχοῦσα Κριοῦ δεκανῷ πρώτῳ ἀσελγεῖς ποιεῖ καὶ

Rhetorius’ comment that ‘they come together in a fickle manner’ (ἀψικόρως

example the OLD finds for concubitor is an inauthentic text of Pseudo-Quintilian,

. The μαλακοί (molles)

The demonstration that ἀρσενοκοίτης refers to the penetrating actor in

Ἥλιος Ὑδροχόῳ, Σελήνη Παρθένῳ, Κρόνος Ταύρῳ, Ζεύς, ὡροσκόπος

Another example: sun in Aquarius, moon in Virgo, Saturn in Taurus, Jupiter,

τὸ δὲ ἐναντίον τῶν φώτων κατὰ τὸν ἐκκείμενον σχηματισμὸν ἐν θηλυκοῖς

reference to the pathics being effeminate ‘call boys’ in a relationship of exploitive

ἐναπομόρξεται Πρέμις τὴν εὐρυπρωκτίαν σοι: τουτέστι τὴν μαλακίαν

Again, it is the context that indicates that μαλακία (‘effeminacy’) refers to a

Βάταλον] Αἰσχίνης περὶ παραπρεσβείας· ἐν παιδὶ μὲν γὰρ ὢν ἐκλήθη δι’

Batalos] Aeschines in the False Legation. For in childhood he was called

Potrebbero piacerti anche