The debate over homosexuality in the last half century has resulted in numerous attempts to revise the customary translations of Paul's language in 1 Cor 6.9. 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.Footnote 1 The debate, nevertheless, rages on.Footnote 2 If one justifiably dispenses with the controversial term ‘homosexual’Footnote 3 as a translation for ἀρσενοκοίτης, then the masculorum concubitores (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’)Footnote 4 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’).Footnote 5 There is no overt reference in 6.9 to male prostitution, the age of the individuals engaging in the activity, power relationships and exploitation, social status, romance, moderate or immoderate desire, and certainly no restriction to ‘apparent heterosexuals’ who engage in homoerotic behaviour.Footnote 6
Dale Martin's statement that contemporary interpretations such as those which rely on Tertullian's translation ‘have been driven more by ideological interests in marginalizing gay and lesbian people than by the general structures of historical 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.Footnote 7 Scholars on the other side of the debate also indulge in ad hominem attacks. Robert A. J. 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’.Footnote 8 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 penetrated actors in homoerotic intercourse.Footnote 9 Whether or not one uses Paul's perspective 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.Footnote 10
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.Footnote 11 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’.Footnote 12 A ‘primary’ motivation is one based on reality (such as onomatopoeic forms): e.g., the frogs’ croaking in Aristophanes’ Frogs (βρεκεκεκεξ).Footnote 13 Etymology as a discipline investigates the historical development of words.Footnote 14 Some of the evidence cited by Wright and others such as Gagnon needs to be clarified.Footnote 15 Once the semantics of ἀρσενοκοίτης stands on firmer ground, the semantics of μαλακός will likewise be clearer.
1. The LXX, Philo and Josephus in Brief and Secondary Motivations
Two texts in the Septuagint (Lev 18.22 μετὰ ἄρσενος οὐ κοιμηθήσῃ κοίτην γυναικός, ‘you shall not lie with a male as in sexual intercourse with a woman’, and Lev 20.13 καὶ ὃς ἂν, κοιμηθῇ μετὰ ἄρσενος κοίτην γυναικός, βδέλυγμα ἐποίησαν ἀμφότεροι, ‘and whoever lies with a male as in sexual intercourse with a woman – both have committed an abomination’) are, according to Wright, the source of ἀρσενοκοίτης, a ‘coinage of Hellenistic Judaism’.Footnote 16 One should also include Num 31.17–18 and Judg 21.11–12 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.Footnote 17 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 (παιδεραστής)Footnote 18 becomes the beloved youth's guide in unmanliness and softness (ἀνανδρίας καὶ μαλακίας, ὑφηγητής).Footnote 19 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).Footnote 20 One could easily see how ἀρρενομιξία could be formed from μῖξις and ἄρρην – a secondary motivation – although Josephus does not use the composite form.Footnote 21
2. 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’.Footnote 22 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),Footnote 23 ἀρρενόπαις (‘male child’), etc. The etymological foundation of these words clearly has to be combined with their usage to understand their meaning. Verbs formed with the stem -κοιτ- have a component meaning ‘sleep’: φορμοκοιτέω (‘sleep on a mat’); σκληροκοιτέω (‘sleep on a 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’).Footnote 24 Although Wright lists many constructions which end in -κοίτης and so forth, the issue deserves more discussion.Footnote 25 Important terms that signify sexual intercourse (a semantic field) include: ἀρσενοκοιτία, ἀρσενοκοιτέω, ἀρσενοκοίτης,Footnote 26 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 elements of or elements similar to ἀρσενοκοίτης.Footnote 27 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 penetrates a mother’). The argument from etymology is justified by two fundamental premises: (1) the meaning of the roots themselves; and (2) 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).Footnote 28 Only παγκοίτης resists the analysis (‘where all must sleep’; i.e. the grave), but even in this case the individual referred to by the component -κοίτης sleeps in an object. The scholiast commenting on one of the 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’).Footnote 29 For my purposes, ‘all’ in the scholiast's analysis is the object of the component -κοίτης. The place ‘sleeps’ everyone.
3. 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 (6th 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-penetrator’ is probably good enough.Footnote 30 In the Greek Apocalypse of Ezra,Footnote 31 the seer asks Michael why a man is suspended by his eyelids, and Michael explains: οὗτος μητροκοίτης ἐστίν (‘this person is a mother-penetrator)’.Footnote 32 According to the Apostolic Constitutions (4th cent.), Miriam derided Moses as one who sexually penetrated a pagan (Μαριὰμ δὲ ὡς ἑλληνοκοίτην ὀνειδίσασα Μωϋσῆν).Footnote 33 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’).Footnote 34 δουλοκοίτης, for whose meaning and usage the DGE should be consulted,Footnote 35 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’.Footnote 36 This Onocoetes had the ears of an ass, a toga, a book and a foot in the form of a hoof.Footnote 37
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’.Footnote 38 The word is probably obscene, since the context is that of an arena and a crude individual's reviling of Christ.Footnote 39
Another important member of the word field is ἀρσενομίκτης. Pseudo-Manetho, probably to be dated to the third century,Footnote 40 describes some hapless individuals born under the wrong signs:
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.Footnote 41
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).Footnote 42 The well-attested nominal form (ἀρρενομιξία, ‘penetration 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.Footnote 43 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’).Footnote 44 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 घήνωνα 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 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?Footnote 45
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 indifference in Athens or Alexandria,Footnote 46 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.Footnote 47 Hesychius (5th-6th cent.) makes this word's meaning clear: παιδοπίπας· ἀρσενοβάτης, ἀνδροβάτης (‘pederast: penetrator of a male; penetrator of a male’).Footnote 48 ἀνδροκοίτης (PGL: ‘sodomite’), which appears in John Malalas’ Chronicle (ca. 570),Footnote 49 is also of value. In 528 some bishops had been accused of homoerotic intercourse with males (ἐν αὐτῷ δὲ τῷ χρόνῳ διεβλήθησάν τινες τῶν ἐπισκόπων ἀπὸ διαφόρων ἐπαρχιῶν ὡς κακῶς βιοῦντες περὶ τὰ σωματικὰ καὶ ἀρσενοκοιτοῦντες).Footnote 50 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).Footnote 51 The verb form (ἀνδροκοιτέω) usually referred to women having sex with men and is well attested in the documentary papyri.Footnote 52 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.
4. Textual Analysis of ἀρσενοκοίτης, ἀρσενοκοιτία and ἀρσενοκοιτέω
The context of the usage of ἀρσενοκοίτης in the vice catalogues of 1 Cor 6.9 and 1 Tim 1.1 does not explain the meaning of term, nor does that in Acts John 36.Footnote 53 ἀρσενοκοίτης does not occur in the papyrological or epigraphical databases with one late exception.Footnote 54 Since there is confusion in some of the scholarly publications over the usage in The Book of the Laws of Countries, it deserves further discussion. Bardaisan (154–222) is the principal speaker.Footnote 55 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 is reviled as one who has intercourse with a male, revenges himself as far as murder.Footnote 56
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.Footnote 57
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’.Footnote 58 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.Footnote 59
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 dialogue, insists that Christians do not indulge in such practices.
The brothers [Christians] in Gaul do not marry men.Footnote 60
The Syriac translators of 1 Cor 6.9, as Wright notes, did not restrict the use of ἀρσενοκοῖται to sexual intercourse with boys:
and not liers with malesFootnote 61
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 conclusion 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 declaration of premature semantic death. He speculates that the context in 1 Cor 6.9 and 1 Tim 1.10 implies that the word may mean ‘economic exploitation by means of sex, perhaps but not necessarily homosexual sex’.Footnote 62
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.Footnote 63
The Syriac translation of the nominal form (ἀρσενοκοιτίας) is: 
.Footnote 64 The Greek text may date to 124–5 even if there was a second redaction under Antoninus.Footnote 65 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’.Footnote 66 Sextus Empiricus, however, certainly claimed they were illegal in his community.Footnote 67 Boswell interprets the apologist to be objecting to male prostitutes (who took an active role) in the Roman upper class and to be comparing the gods to their behavior.Footnote 68 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’).Footnote 69 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’).Footnote 70 Eva Cantarella has shown that the lex Scantinia forbade certain homoerotic acts: being one of the molles (pathics); and seducing a freeborn boy (stuprum cum puero). A fine of 10,000 sesterces was apparently the penalty for violating the law, which was probably ignored by some Roman men.Footnote 71 The praetor's edict, De adtemptata pudicitia, punished individuals who tried to seduce ‘respectable women and praetextati’ (freeborn boys who wore the purple striped tunic).Footnote 72 Rape of a man or woman was almost certainly punishable under the lex Iulia de vi publica.Footnote 73
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.Footnote 74 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 150. He argues that ‘the polemic against homosexuality (vs. 73), while less conclusive, is also typically Jewish. Nothing in these verses [2.56–148] is necessarily Christian.’Footnote 75 The relevant lines are:
The parentheses signify the material added to Pseudo-Phocylides. The etymological 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 222)Footnote 78 that is often attributed to Hippolytus (ca. 170 – ca. 236):
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 …Footnote 79
There is no explicit indication that Naas exploited or raped Adam, nor is there any question of male prostitution.Footnote 80 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 παλλακὴν μηδὲ παιδικὸν ἔχειν (‘he will have neither a [slave] concubine nor a lover-boy’).Footnote 81
A much later astrologer, Rhetorius the Egyptian (6th 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]Footnote 82 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.Footnote 83
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 1 Cor 6.9 were well justified in rendering the word as masculorum concubitores (those who have sexual intercourse with males).Footnote 84 The only classical example the OLD finds for concubitor is an inauthentic text of Pseudo-Quintilian, which was added to the Declamationes.Footnote 85 It first appears in Tertullian in extant Latin literature.Footnote 86 Whoever coined the word, its meaning is clear, and it derives from concumbere: ‘to lie with (for sexual intercourse)’.Footnote 87 Closely related concubitio and concubitus both mean ‘sexual intercourse’, that is, ‘penetration’.Footnote 88 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).Footnote 89 Masculorum concubitores are individuals who penetrate males.
5. 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 translation of μαλακοί as molles highly probable.Footnote 90 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).Footnote 91 Vettius Valens (2nd cent.), the astrologer, is a good place to begin the analysis:
Ἥλιος Ὑδροχόῳ, Σελήνη Παρθένῳ, Κρόνος Ταύρῳ, घεύς, 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 unmentionable vices, because Capricorn is a lewd sign and its ruler was in Taurus, a pathic sign. Scorpio also indicates this kind of vice.Footnote 92
The unmentionable vice (ἀρρητοποιός) is oral sex.Footnote 93 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.Footnote 94
Ptolemy (2nd 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 effeminate. 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.Footnote 95
In context, the μαλακοί of Ptolemy are pathics. Hephaestion (4th cent.) somewhat 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’).Footnote 96 It should be noted that nowhere in these texts is there any overt reference to the pathics being effeminate ‘call boys’ in a relationship of exploitive pederasty.Footnote 97
The massive Byzantine encyclopedia called the Suda (10th cent.) provides additional clarity: Κίναιδος: ἀσελγής, μαλακός. καὶ ἐν Ἐπιγράμμασι: ὡς μεγάλου κιναίδου (‘catamite: licentious, soft [pathic]; and in Epigrams: like a great catamite’).Footnote 98 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]).Footnote 99 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.Footnote 100 Aristophanes says [sc. these words].Footnote 101
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).Footnote 102 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.
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 BatalosFootnote 103 the effeminate flute player, and others from the poet who wrote effeminate melodies.Footnote 104
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 saltandum non cinaedus malacus aequest a[n]tque ego (‘Now when it comes to dancing, a catamite isn't as soft as I’).Footnote 105 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.Footnote 106 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’.Footnote 107 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.Footnote 108
6. 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 language in 1 Cor 6.9. The arguments developed in this article place on a more solid foundation the work of those commentators on 1 Corinthians who interpret μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται in the tradition of Tertullian's translation.Footnote 109
