Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: [Corpus-Paul] Paul's poverty in Ephesus and the cost of travel

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Richard Fellows <rfellows AT shaw.ca>
  • To: Corpus-Paul <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Paul's poverty in Ephesus and the cost of travel
  • Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 14:26:20 -0700

Dale,

the points that you make actually SUPPORT my argument.

Dale Walker wrote:
> How Paul paid travel expenses is an interesting question, but I would
> like to point out that the use of the word budget is tendentious. How do
> we know Paul had a budget? Perhaps the history of his travels and
> letters is simply the history of lucky opportunities, rather than
planning.
> (Perhaps the word budget wasn't meant as precisely as I'm
> taking it.)

Actually, I didn't use the word 'budget', and nor did I suggest that Paul
had one. My point was only that it is hard to imagine how Paul and Titus
could have paid for the journeys that the commentators have them make
shortly after 1 Corinthians.

> Moreover, the problem of how Paul would finance a proposed
> hypothetical journey applies to every other journey. To say that
> having money is a problem for advocating a hypothetical journey
> is no less a problem for any other journey. If it's a problem for Paul
> to finance a trip, then perhaps other journeys are not factual.

Yes, we should eliminate as many journeys as possible, particularly
expensive ones. For example, we should place Philipians in Ephesus rather
than Rome to cut down the distance for the journeys implied in that letter.
By doing this we save Timothy the full cost of a journey from Rome to
Philippi and back.

The hypothetical journeys by Paul and Titus to Corinth after 1 Corinthians
are particularly in need of elimination for various reasons. Firstly, Paul
was poor at the time (1 Cor 4:11). Secondly, the journeys would have been
unexpected, so they would not have had time to save up money to pay for
them. Thirdly, the journeys seem unnecessary. Why would Paul send Titus to
Corinth immediately after returning from there himself? There are, of
course, many other reasons for believing that the proposed journeys never
happened, but that would take us away from the subject of this thread.

> Or, perhaps
> the reason for Paul's lengthy stay in Ephesus is the expense of the
> emergency trip to Corinth, which precluded his leaving Ephesus until
> he'd worked some more to save up more cash.

These considerations argue AGAINST the proposed trips by Paul and Titus to
Corinth. Why would they have made such journeys, knowing that it would have
meant delaying their departure from Ephesus?

There would be various costs associated with the proposed trips. Firstly
there were the costs in time and lost wages. The sea voyage from Ephesus to
Corinth and back took about two weeks (Cicero took two weeks each way
between Athens and Ephesus but his schedule was particularly slow).
Secondly, there was the fare for the sea voyage. In a fictional work Gene
Edwards suggests that the usual fare for a one way journey from Seleucia to
Salamis was 5 day's wages (5 drachmae), but I have not yet been able to
confirm this. Thirdly, passengers incured the expense of providing their
own food for the journey. Fourthly, in some ports at least, passengers also
had to pay for an exit pass in addition to the fare. Data for the cost of
this exit pass has survived for a Red Sea port in Egypt. Skilled labourers
paid 8 drachmae.

Commentators talk about a 'lightening visit' by Paul to Corinth. But such a
visit could not have been quick. We need to include the length of stay in
Corinth, the actual travel time, the time taken to save enough to pay for
the food consumed on the journey, and time taken to save the money for the
actual fare. All in all, the hypothetical journeys would have set Paul and
Titus back by several weeks.

Richard Fellows.

> I think there are a lot
> of imponderables that make the argument below inconclusive.
>
> Dale Walker
> Chicago
>
>
>
> At 04:23 PM 4/26/03 -0700, you wrote:
> >Most commentators believe that Paul made an unplanned trip to Corinth
> >shortly after 1 Corinthians, and that he then sent Titus to Corinth. But
the
> >commentators do not explain how these hypothetical journeys were funded.
> >Paul would not have budgeted for these unscheduled trips.
> >
> >In 1 Cor 4:11 we read that Paul and his companions were hungry, thirsty,
> >poorly clothed and homeless. How, then, could they afford to make the
> >unscheduled trips to Corinth that the commentators propose? Given that
Paul
> >was barely able to feed and clothe himself, he surely did not command the
> >resources to fund journeys for which he had not budgetted. I find it
> >difficult to reconcile the language of 1 Cor 4:11-12 with the idea that
> >Paul had a store of money reserved for unexpected journeys. Nor is it
> >sufficient to propose that the journeys were paid for by the Ephesian
> >church. If they were able to pay his travel expenses, why did they not
look
> >after him properly in Ephesus? It is hard to imagine that the Ephesian
> >Christians would have paid for Paul and Titus to go to Corinth to
discipline
> >the Corinthian church, but let them go hungry in Ephesus.
> >
> >The problem, of course, disappears once we realize that the journeys
never
> >happened. Titus-Timothy (one and the same person) had already been sent
to
> >Macedonia, and the churches there probably assisted him on his journey on
to
> >Corinth. And Titus never planned nor undertook a sea voyage to Troas.
> >
> >Does anyone have information on the cost of travel by land and sea in the
> >ancient world?
> >
> >Richard Fellows.






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page