The Caiaphas ossuary inscriptions are:
יהוסף בר קיפא
יהוסף בר קפא
יהוסף בר קפא
The name Caiaphas (קפא or קיפא) is spelled with a qoph, but the word for a rock/stone/pebble is כפא, with a kaph. If Cephas (Κηφᾶς) means "rock" (basically "Rocky" as a name), then an initial kaph got transliterated as an initial kappa, which is not impossible, but is comparatively rare. It is intrinsically more likely, therefore, that Κηφᾶς represents קפא/קיפא (Cephas/Caiaphas) rather than כפא (rock). Let us run with this intrinsic likelihood for the sake of argument.
Caiaphas is a family name, not a personal name, for the famous high priest who was known as Joseph Caiaphas. Caiaphas was probably the name of an important ancestor of his. Let us suppose, then, that the famous pillar of Jerusalem known to Paul was actually named Simon Caiaphas, and he belonged to the Caiaphas family of Jerusalem. (Alternatively, Caiaphas could be his actual name, and Simon his Greek nickname, since Jews with Hebrew names tended to adopt Greek or sometimes Latin names for themselves, as well.) There is no need to suppose that this Simon Caiaphas was in any way as important as Joseph Caiaphas; Simon could well have been a distant cousin, born to a cadet branch of the family. Nevertheless, even being a somewhat obscure member of an important family could easily explain how he might be considered a pillar in his own circles in the south, in Judea.
Now, let us also suppose that there existed an early Christian from the north, from Galilee, named Symeon Peter (Acts 15.14; 2 Peter 1.1). Symeon = שִׁמְע֣וֹן/Συμεών, the name of the patriarch. Simon is a Greek name, but it could be used as the Greek equivalent for the Hebrew name Symeon. Peter = Πέτρος/πέτρος = "Rocky"/"rock," doubtless a nickname, given its apparent rarity before this time.
There is actually no true etymological overlap between Simon Cephas (= Greek name + Caiaphas) and Symeon Peter (= Hebrew name + "Rocky" as a nickname). But it is easy to see how the two names could be conflated, whether deliberately or accidentally, into Symeon Cephas (purely Semitic) or Simon Peter (purely Greek), the latter being by far the most likely due to the fact that most of the relevant texts are extant in Greek, not in Hebrew or Aramaic. The relationship between Peter and Cephas/Caiaphas would be, not etymological, but rather on the level of a pun: close enough for one word to call the other to mind in the right circumstances.
This conflation still works with my still purely hypothetical slightly different approach to the Cephas/Peter textual issue in Galatians. But it also reduces the number of figures on another thread of mine from three to two. Instead of...:
- Simon = Galilean disciple.
- Cephas = Judean/Jerusalemite pillar.
- Peter = Hellenistic/Diaspora apostle.
- Symeon Peter = Galilean figure & eventual Hellenistic/Diaspora apostle; possibly a recipient of a mountaintop vision.
- Simon Cephas = Judean/Jerusalemite pillar.
What do you think?
Ben.
