03-04-2008, 04:35 PM
I would interpret it in this way as well. The author was most likely using a term which was understandable for his audience and was in use at his time.
The army, ranks, structure everyone was "familiar" with at this time was the Roman army with its (latin) terms. So to me, no real surprise he uses the latin term of the day in his greek text even if the term was different during Antipas reign (greek or aramaic or whatever it may have been).
Kind of a stupid comparison but nowadays if you'd have to write an article for a newsmag (not for specialists) you'd probably write "herodes' bodyguard" instead of "herodes somatophylakes, which is the greek name of his guards".
The army, ranks, structure everyone was "familiar" with at this time was the Roman army with its (latin) terms. So to me, no real surprise he uses the latin term of the day in his greek text even if the term was different during Antipas reign (greek or aramaic or whatever it may have been).
Kind of a stupid comparison but nowadays if you'd have to write an article for a newsmag (not for specialists) you'd probably write "herodes' bodyguard" instead of "herodes somatophylakes, which is the greek name of his guards".
RESTITVTOR LIBERTATIS ET ROMANAE RELIGIONIS
DEDITICIVS MINERVAE ET MVSARVM
[Micha F.]
DEDITICIVS MINERVAE ET MVSARVM
[Micha F.]
