The Legend of James the Just and His Martyrdom

[Peter Kirby]

Edited to add: I eventually arrive at this diagram.

The James Tradition

Right about now, it might help to have an ambitious but hopefully illuminating diagram.

Legend
Oval: historical events or sites
Diamond: oral tradition
Rectangle: written source
Arrow: oral dependence
Large Arrow: literary dependence
Bold: exact words in Greek from oral tradition the same in more than one written source mentioned

Comments

• Death before war: A historical death of James before the First Jewish War.
• Stoned because of Priest(s): A historical event where Temple priest(s) had James killed.
• Burial site at Jerusalem wall: this may not be the actual burial site of James, but during the second century there was a burial site reputed to be that of James. This site is mentioned explicitly by Hegesippus. It was near Jerusalem. That it was near a wall would explain the description from Hegesippus and some of the later tradition about James.
• Josephus: This is the Ant. 20.200 reference, if it mentioned the same James.
• Martyr: Every early leader figure like James became a martyr in Christian tradition.
• Thrown from the Pinnacle of the Temple and beaten to death with a Fuller's Club: An oral tradition about the death of James would have arisen as part of his memory. This is the substance of a popular Christian legend about the martyr's death of James. Its legendary elements have an etiological relationship to the site believed to be his grave.
• Ascents of James: a text of this name is identified by Epiphanius, although some would distinguish between the text of that title and the source behind the Recognitions. The text is presented in 1.27-71. Although there may be some differences, no substantial differences between the text of the Recognitions 1.27-71 and this source are postulated here. The discussion has been based on the actual text of Recognitions 1.27-71. It's supposed that this text has featured part of a martyrdom legend (thrown down from a high point of the temple) in a story that takes place very early, when Paul was a persecutor. Because James lived in this story, this text doesn't provide the manner of the death of James.
• Taught the people: it is supposed that James had a reputation (in legend) for teaching the Jewish people, not just Christians.
• The Righteous One: The reputation of James as a holy man and teacher, as well as his eventual martyrdom, led him to be called the Righteous one or James the Just. There could also be some influence here from the Septuagint, which uses the word righteousness or justice (Genesis 32:10 LXX) with Jacob. This is a word that patristic writers also use with respect to the Septuagint Jacob. These are of course the same name.
• Death before the destruction of Jerusalem: There is some awareness in Christian tradition that the death of James happened before the destruction of Jerusalem, which is reflected in the First Apocalypse of James and in Hegesippus. In the First Apocalypse of James, this temporal relationship is mentioned without much additional reflection on it. In Hegesippus, it is a major theme with greater elaboration. Other texts that are part of the James tradition present predictions of the destruction of the Temple (during the life of James) but not necessarily for the same reasons or in the same way, as in Ascents of James (because of a refusal to stop sacrifices) and the Second Apocalypse of James (James is made parallel to Jesus in a few ways, including saying that he will destroy the "house" like Jesus says in the gospels).
• The Gospel of the Hebrews: The text is extant only in a few quotes, but we can see that it referred to James the Just. It's not really possible to confirm or deny because the text is not complete, but there is a possibility that this text could have been the first to introduce the fixed phrase "James the Just."
• The Gospel of Thomas: Has a reference to James the Just, his exalted leadership role, and even his cosmic significance.
• Second Apocalypse of James: one of the texts that has built off the base story provided in Ascents of James, which doesn't provide the manner of his death. This text may have been written in the early to mid second century and transmitted the basics of an oral tradition, perhaps around Syria, that James died by stoning at the order of the Temple priests. Because the way the story is told resembles in some ways the legal tradition about requirements of a stoning (Sanh. 6.3-4), this seems to be how the story of his death was elaborated on here. It presents James as martyr, such as with the prayer at his death. Themes in the speech of James have a doctrinal purpose. The legend of James being thrown from the "pinnacle" of the Temple may also have influenced this text.
• Hegesippus: this source combines pre-existing stories, including a story about the death of James involving the fuller's club and a different story of stoning from the Second Apocalypse of James. It also conforms the death of James in many ways to the manner of the death of Jesus. It uses Ascents of James for details about sects and schisms, and it paraphrase some elements of the story in Ascents of James. It introduces a story of how the righteousness and prayer of James, the bulwark, held off the destruction of Jerusalem. The names Oblias, Bulwark, and the description of what sounds like Nazirite vows for James are unique to this source when compared with other known sources before Eusebius.
• First Apocalypse of James: This text says that James will die before the outbreak of the war in Judea and before what brings sorrow for those in Jerusalem. It may have had an account of his death, now in a lacuna.
• Clement of Alexandria: Would have known the name James the Just from the Gospel of the Hebrews, possibly also from oral tradition. Clement tells what may be a popular story about the death of James. It is possibly true but not necessarily true that Clement had read Hegesippus.

Here are three four instances where I haven't concluded that there is a literary dependence on the Hegesippus account.

Gospel of Thomas

12 The disciples said to Jesus, "We know that you are going to leave us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to them, "No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being."

Gospel of the Hebrews (as quoted by Jerome)

Also the Gospel according to the Hebrews, lately translated by me into Greek and Latin speech, which Origen often uses, tells, after the resurrection of the Saviour: "Now the Lord, when he had given the linen cloth unto the servant of the priest, went unto James and appeared to him" (for James had sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour wherein he had drunk the Lord's cup until he should see him risen again from among them that sleep), and again after a little, "Bring ye, saith the Lord, a table and bread," and immediately it is added, "He took bread and blessed and brake and gave it unto James the Just and said unto him: 'My brother, eat thy bread, for the Son of Man is risen from among them that sleep'."

Clement of Alexandria (as quoted by Eusebius)

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 3. Κλήμης ἐν ἕκτῳ τῶν Ὑποτυπώσεων γράφων ὧδε παρίστησιν· Πέτρον γάρ φησιν καὶ Ἰάκωβον καὶ Ἰωάννην μετὰ τὴν ἀνάληψιν τοῦ σωτῆρος, ὡς ἂν καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος προτετιμημένους, μὴ ἐπιδικάζεσθαι δόξης, ἀλλὰ Ἰάκωβον τὸν δίκαιον ἐπίσκοπον τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων ἑλέσθαι.

Clement in the sixth of his Hypotyposes presents the following account: "After the ascension of the Savior, Peter, James, and John, not having yet entered on their ministry, were present at the election of his successor. They all unanimously chose James the Just as bishop of Jerusalem."

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 4f. Ὁ δ' αὐτὸς (Clemens) ἐν ἑβδόμῳ τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποθέσεως (d. i. der Hypotyposeis) ἔτι καὶ ταῦτα περὶ αὐτοῦ (d. i. den Jakobus) φησιν· »Ἰακώβῳ τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ Ἰωάννῃ καὶ Πέτρῳ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν παρέδωκεν τὴν γνῶσιν ὁ κύριος, οὗτοι τοῖς λοιποῖς ἀποστόλοις παρέδωκαν, οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι τοῖς ἑβδομήκοντα, ὧν εἷς ἦν καὶ Βαρνάβας. δύο δὲ γεγόνασιν Ἰάκωβοι, εἷς ὁ δίκαιος, ὁ κατὰ τοῦ πτερυγίου βληθεὶς καὶ ὑπὸ γναφέως ξύλῳ πληγεὶς εἰς θάνατον, ἕτερος δὲ ὁ καρατομηθείς. αὐτοῦ δὴ τοῦ δικαίου καὶ ὁ Παῦλος μνημονεύει γράφων· <ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον, εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου.>»

In the seventh book of the same Hypotyposeis, Clement also speaks concerning James as follows: "The Lord after His resurrection delivered knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter; these delivered it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom one was Barnabas. But there are two Jameses: one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded. And Paul mentions the Just, one of the apostles, in his writings, saying, 'But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother.'"

First Apocalypse of James

James said, "Rabbi, you have said, 'they will seize me.' But I, what can I do?" He said to me, "Fear not, James. You too will they seize. But leave Jerusalem. For it is she who always gives the cup of bitterness to the sons of light. She is a dwelling place of a great number of archons. But your redemption will be preserved from them. So that you may understand who they are and what kinds they are, you will [...]. And listen. They are not [...] but archons [...]. These twelve [...] down [...] archons [...] upon his own hebdomad." ...

You are to hide <these things> within you, and you are to keep silence. But you are to reveal them to Addai. When you depart, immediately war will be made with this land. Weep, then, for him who dwells in Jerusalem. But let Addai take these things to heart. In the tenth year let Addai sit and write them down. And when he writes them down [...] and they are to give them [...] he has the [...] he is called Levi. ...

The Lord said, "James, do not be concerned for me or for this people. I am he who was within me. Never have I suffered in any way, nor have I been distressed. And this people has done me no harm. But this (people) existed as a type of the archons, and it deserved to be destroyed through them. But [...] the archons, [...] who has [...] but since it [...] angry with [...] The just [...] is his servant. Therefore your name is "James the Just". You see how you will become sober when you see me. And you stopped this prayer. Now since you are a just man of God, you have embraced me and kissed me. Truly I say to you that you have stirred up great anger and wrath against yourself. But (this has happened) so that these others might come to be." ...

These provide references to James "the Just" (ὁ δίκαιος) that to me indicate in favor of seeing it as having fairly wide currency by the time of the third century, when Origen is writing.

For some more specific comments:

Gospel of Thomas

Among several other non-approved gospel texts, in a commentary on the prologue of Luke, Origen writes, "I know one gospel called According to Thomas and another According to Matthias. We have read many others, too, lest we appear ignorant of anything, because of those people who think they know something if they have examined these gospels." (Homilies on Luke, p. 6) Implied here is a claim that Origen, who no doubt read widely, read the gospels of Thomas and of Matthias. While there is some room for doubt about the exact text being mentioned or even whether Origen did read it, the statement itself indicates that it is certainly plausible that Origen had read, say, the statement of Thomas 12, as the simplest consequence here if this is the same Thomas and if Origen read it. This is mentioned here for completeness, as I don't rely on this hypothesis for anything else. One might suppose that Origen would not rely on this reference alone.

Gospel of the Hebrews

In the case of the Gospel of the Hebrews, we have Eusebius saying that there is a literary dependence in the other direction, where Hegesippus makes use of the Gospel of the Hebrews (EH 4.22.8): "Hegesippus made use in his Memoirs of the Gospel according to the Hebrews."

Clement of Alexandria (Stromateis 1.9.45) also used this text: "Even (or also, in the Gospel according to the Hebrews is written the saying, 'he that wondereth shall reign, and he that reigneth shall rest'."

Origen also used this text: Commentary on John, 2.12. "And if any accept the Gospel according to the Hebrews, where the Saviour himself saith, 'Even now did my mother the Holy Spirit take me by one of mine hairs, and carried me away unto the great mountain Thabor', he will be perplexed..."

With the quote from Jerome above referencing the phrase in this text ("gave it unto James the Just"), the Gospel of the Hebrews is a source that called James "the Just" and that Hegesippus, Clement, and Origen all used. This doesn't discount the idea that the phrase "James the Just" is also the kind of phrase that would naturally be transmitted outside of such literary contexts, whenever people might be speaking about James. It's possible for example that the phrase enters Thomas this way, rather than by dependence on the Gospel of the Hebrews, or that any of these writers may have known about it not just from the Gospel of the Hebrews. In any event, however, we can say that this phrase and the description of James as righteous predates and is independent of Hegesippus.

Clement of Alexandria

Eric Osborn writes (The Westminster Handbook to Origen, p. 81):

Clement's relation to Origen remains a puzzle. While the latter is Clement's intellectual successor, he does not mention Clement explicitly. The dates of their activity is one explanation. Clement left Alexandria during the persecution in which Origen's father was martyred. Origen's enthusiasm for martyrdom would also limit his appreciation for Clement, who fled, while Origen's father received the ultimate prize. Nevertheless almost every element in Clement's theological architecture and attitudinal stance finds a clear echo in the later Origenian system, though that system obviously developed along more biblico-exegetical lines.

Eusebius quotes a letter of Alexander to Origen suggesting that Alexander became acquainted with Origen through Clement (EH 6.14.8-9):

8. Again the above-mentioned Alexander, in a certain letter to Origen, refers to Clement, and at the same time to Pantænus, as being among his familiar acquaintances. He writes as follows:

For this, as you know, was the will of God, that the ancestral friendship existing between us should remain unshaken; nay, rather should be warmer and stronger.

9. For we know well those blessed fathers who have trodden the way before us, with whom we shall soon be; Pantænus, the truly blessed man and master, and the holy Clement, my master and benefactor, and if there is any other like them, through whom I became acquainted with you, the best in everything, my master and brother.

While providing no extant explicit mention of Clement, Origen does seem at times to wrestle with his work. One example is given as follows: "In the Commentary on Matthew 14.2. Origen refers to the exegesis of Matthew 18:19-20 that Clement offers in his Stromateis 3.10 68.1." (The Westminster Handbook to Origen, p. 6)

So when it comes to Origen's description of James as righteous (δίκαιος), we are faced with an embarrassment of riches when it comes to sources that we are aware, on other grounds, that Origen used. It is a rare situation when we are able to trace as many as three different sources (the Gospel of the Hebrews, Clement, and Thomas) that are already indicated as works that someone had actually read (two of them by Origen's explicit statement, the third i.e. Clement only by the implication of Eusebius and from what is implicit in analysis of Origen's work). Yet that is the situation that we are in here.

[Ken Olson]

Here are three four instances where I haven't concluded that there is a literary dependence on the Hegesippus account.

Clement of Alexandria (as quoted by Eusebius)

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 3. Κλήμης ἐν ἕκτῳ τῶν Ὑποτυπώσεων γράφων ὧδε παρίστησιν· Πέτρον γάρ φησιν καὶ Ἰάκωβον καὶ Ἰωάννην μετὰ τὴν ἀνάληψιν τοῦ σωτῆρος, ὡς ἂν καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος προτετιμημένους, μὴ ἐπιδικάζεσθαι δόξης, ἀλλὰ Ἰάκωβον τὸν δίκαιον ἐπίσκοπον τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων ἑλέσθαι.

Clement in the sixth of his Hypotyposes presents the following account: "After the ascension of the Savior, Peter, James, and John, not having yet entered on their ministry, were present at the election of his successor. They all unanimously chose James the Just as bishop of Jerusalem."

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 4f. Ὁ δ' αὐτὸς (Clemens) ἐν ἑβδόμῳ τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποθέσεως (d. i. der Hypotyposeis) ἔτι καὶ ταῦτα περὶ αὐτοῦ (d. i. den Jakobus) φησιν· »Ἰακώβῳ τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ Ἰωάννῃ καὶ Πέτρῳ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν παρέδωκεν τὴν γνῶσιν ὁ κύριος, οὗτοι τοῖς λοιποῖς ἀποστόλοις παρέδωκαν, οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι τοῖς ἑβδομήκοντα, ὧν εἷς ἦν καὶ Βαρνάβας. δύο δὲ γεγόνασιν Ἰάκωβοι, εἷς ὁ δίκαιος, ὁ κατὰ τοῦ πτερυγίου βληθεὶς καὶ ὑπὸ γναφέως ξύλῳ πληγεὶς εἰς θάνατον, ἕτερος δὲ ὁ καρατομηθείς. αὐτοῦ δὴ τοῦ δικαίου καὶ ὁ Παῦλος μνημονεύει γράφων· <ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον, εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου.>»

In the seventh book of the same Hypotyposeis, Clement also speaks concerning James as follows: "The Lord after His resurrection delivered knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter; these delivered it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom one was Barnabas. But there are two Jameses: one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded. And Paul mentions the Just, one of the apostles, in his writings, saying, 'But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother.'"

Just a comment on what Clement is saying here. He is distinguishing between two Jameses. The one who was beheaded is almost certainly James the brother of John (and presumably the son of Zebedee), the story of whose beheading is related in Acts 12.1-3.

The other James is the one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller. As is the case with the other James, Clement is probably not relating the full story he knows, but is giving enough information to distinguish this James from others. The details he gives suggest that he knows the same story we find in Hegesippus, whether he knows it directly from Hegesippus or from a common source.

Best,

Ken

[Peter Kirby]

Here are three four instances where I haven't concluded that there is a literary dependence on the Hegesippus account.

Clement of Alexandria (as quoted by Eusebius)

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 3. Κλήμης ἐν ἕκτῳ τῶν Ὑποτυπώσεων γράφων ὧδε παρίστησιν· Πέτρον γάρ φησιν καὶ Ἰάκωβον καὶ Ἰωάννην μετὰ τὴν ἀνάληψιν τοῦ σωτῆρος, ὡς ἂν καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος προτετιμημένους, μὴ ἐπιδικάζεσθαι δόξης, ἀλλὰ Ἰάκωβον τὸν δίκαιον ἐπίσκοπον τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων ἑλέσθαι.

Clement in the sixth of his Hypotyposes presents the following account: "After the ascension of the Savior, Peter, James, and John, not having yet entered on their ministry, were present at the election of his successor. They all unanimously chose James the Just as bishop of Jerusalem."

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 4f. Ὁ δ' αὐτὸς (Clemens) ἐν ἑβδόμῳ τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποθέσεως (d. i. der Hypotyposeis) ἔτι καὶ ταῦτα περὶ αὐτοῦ (d. i. den Jakobus) φησιν· »Ἰακώβῳ τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ Ἰωάννῃ καὶ Πέτρῳ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν παρέδωκεν τὴν γνῶσιν ὁ κύριος, οὗτοι τοῖς λοιποῖς ἀποστόλοις παρέδωκαν, οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι τοῖς ἑβδομήκοντα, ὧν εἷς ἦν καὶ Βαρνάβας. δύο δὲ γεγόνασιν Ἰάκωβοι, εἷς ὁ δίκαιος, ὁ κατὰ τοῦ πτερυγίου βληθεὶς καὶ ὑπὸ γναφέως ξύλῳ πληγεὶς εἰς θάνατον, ἕτερος δὲ ὁ καρατομηθείς. αὐτοῦ δὴ τοῦ δικαίου καὶ ὁ Παῦλος μνημονεύει γράφων· <ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον, εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου.>»

In the seventh book of the same Hypotyposeis, Clement also speaks concerning James as follows: "The Lord after His resurrection delivered knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter; these delivered it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom one was Barnabas. But there are two Jameses: one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded. And Paul mentions the Just, one of the apostles, in his writings, saying, 'But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother.'"

Just a comment on what Clement is saying here. He is distinguishing between two Jameses. The one who was beheaded is almost certainly James the brother of John (and presumably the son of Zebedee), the story of whose beheading is related in Acts 12.1-3.

The other James is the one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller. As is the case with the other James, Clement is probably not relating the full story he knows, but is giving enough information to distinguish this James from others. The details he gives suggest that he knows the same story we find in Hegesippus, whether he knows it directly from Hegesippus or from a common source.

I haven't been able to justify that conclusion.

[Peter Kirby]

I am able to place Clement of Alexandria and Ascents of James* in a category together as referring to James being thrown down from the temple in a non-fatal way, with Clement of Alexandria having the additional detail that this is the manner of his death (beaten to death after with a club by a fuller), and with the Ascents of James having this event soon after the death of Jesus and without the death of James (not beaten after). These two texts share a similar kind of story being told about James, and I would allow that there could have been more than one story being told about James. This kind of story (the forms found in the Ascents of James* and in Clement of Alexandria) could have developed before the story that we find in Hegesippus. There are some additional details in the Ascents of James* (which I am not mentioning now), compared to what we know from Clement of Alexandria, which could also have developed before the story found in Hegesippus.

* The quotes are from the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions. That this was based on an earlier source, an "Ascents of James," is a hypothesis.

Syriac translation 1.70.8	Latin translation 1.70.8
Then, in the great flight that ensued, some fell upon others and others were smitten. There were not a few who died so that much blood poured forth from those who had been killed. Now the enemy threw James from the top of the stairs. Since he fell and was as if dead, he did not smite him a second time.	There was a clamor of all, of the smiting as well as of the smitten. Very much blood was shed. A confused flight ensued. When in the meantime that hostile person had made his way to James, he pushed him from the highest flight of stairs. Since he believed him to be dead, he made no effort to mishandle him further.

The details common between Clement of Alexandria and the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions do not seem sufficient to me to postulate specifically literary contact between them or to assume that there was a common written source.

Likewise when I find this in Hegesippus:

So they went up and threw down the just man ... And one of them, who was a fuller, took the club with which he beat out clothes and struck the just man on the head. And thus he suffered martyrdom.

This also does not seem sufficient to me to postulate specifically literary contact between them or to assume that there was a common written source. Nor does it seem enough for me to assume that Clement was familiar with a story of the death of James that was presented in the same form it is found in Hegesippus (i.e., Hegesippus or a source that was substantially the same as Hegesippus).

It may have been Hegesippus who was aware of a simpler form of the story and incorporated it.

[Ken Olson]

[box=][/box]

Here are three four instances where I haven't concluded that there is a literary dependence on the Hegesippus account.

Clement of Alexandria (as quoted by Eusebius)

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 3. Κλήμης ἐν ἕκτῳ τῶν Ὑποτυπώσεων γράφων ὧδε παρίστησιν· Πέτρον γάρ φησιν καὶ Ἰάκωβον καὶ Ἰωάννην μετὰ τὴν ἀνάληψιν τοῦ σωτῆρος, ὡς ἂν καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος προτετιμημένους, μὴ ἐπιδικάζεσθαι δόξης, ἀλλὰ Ἰάκωβον τὸν δίκαιον ἐπίσκοπον τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων ἑλέσθαι.

Clement in the sixth of his Hypotyposes presents the following account: "After the ascension of the Savior, Peter, James, and John, not having yet entered on their ministry, were present at the election of his successor. They all unanimously chose James the Just as bishop of Jerusalem."

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 4f. Ὁ δ' αὐτὸς (Clemens) ἐν ἑβδόμῳ τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποθέσεως (d. i. der Hypotyposeis) ἔτι καὶ ταῦτα περὶ αὐτοῦ (d. i. den Jakobus) φησιν· »Ἰακώβῳ τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ Ἰωάννῃ καὶ Πέτρῳ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν παρέδωκεν τὴν γνῶσιν ὁ κύριος, οὗτοι τοῖς λοιποῖς ἀποστόλοις παρέδωκαν, οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι τοῖς ἑβδομήκοντα, ὧν εἷς ἦν καὶ Βαρνάβας. δύο δὲ γεγόνασιν Ἰάκωβοι, εἷς ὁ δίκαιος, ὁ κατὰ τοῦ πτερυγίου βληθεὶς καὶ ὑπὸ γναφέως ξύλῳ πληγεὶς εἰς θάνατον, ἕτερος δὲ ὁ καρατομηθείς. αὐτοῦ δὴ τοῦ δικαίου καὶ ὁ Παῦλος μνημονεύει γράφων· <ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον, εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου.>»

In the seventh book of the same Hypotyposeis, Clement also speaks concerning James as follows: "The Lord after His resurrection delivered knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter; these delivered it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom one was Barnabas. But there are two Jameses: one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded. And Paul mentions the Just, one of the apostles, in his writings, saying, 'But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother.'"

Just a comment on what Clement is saying here. He is distinguishing between two Jameses. The one who was beheaded is almost certainly James the brother of John (and presumably the son of Zebedee), the story of whose beheading is related in Acts 12.1-3.

The other James is the one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller. As is the case with the other James, Clement is probably not relating the full story he knows, but is giving enough information to distinguish this James from others. The details he gives suggest that he knows the same story we find in Hegesippus, whether he knows it directly from Hegesippus or from a common source.

I haven't been able to justify that conclusion.

You are allowing for the possibility that there were multiple different stories circulating about James the Just being the thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with the club of a fuller?

Clement per Eusebius HE 2.1.5 (which you quote above):

Jameses, one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller
Ἰάκωβοι, εἷς ὁ δίκαιος, ὁ κατὰ τοῦ πτερυγίου βληθεὶς καὶ ὑπὸ γναφέως ξύλῳ πληγεὶς εἰς θάνατον

Hegesippus, per Eusebius, HE 2.18.4-18:

Therefore stand on the pinnacle of the temple, that you may be clearly visible on high
στῆθι οὖν ἐπὶ τὸ πτερύγιοντοῦ ἱεροῦ, ἵνα ἄνωθεν ᾖς ἐπιφανὴς (2.23.11)

So they went up and threw down the Just
ἀναβάντες οὖν κατέβαλον τὸν δίκαιον. (2.23.15)

And a certain man among them, one of the fullers, took the club with which he used to beat out clothes, and hit the Just on the head, and so he suffered martyrdom.
καὶ λαβών τις ἀπ̓ αὐτῶν, εἷς τῶν γναφέων, τὸ ξύλον, ἐν ᾧ ἀποπιέζει τὰ ἱμάτια, ἤνεγκεν κατὰ τῆς κεφαλῆς τοῦ δικαίου, καὶ οὕτως ἐμαρτύρησεν (2.23.28)

Best,

Ken

[Peter Kirby]

[box=][/box]

Here are three four instances where I haven't concluded that there is a literary dependence on the Hegesippus account.

Clement of Alexandria (as quoted by Eusebius)

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 3. Κλήμης ἐν ἕκτῳ τῶν Ὑποτυπώσεων γράφων ὧδε παρίστησιν· Πέτρον γάρ φησιν καὶ Ἰάκωβον καὶ Ἰωάννην μετὰ τὴν ἀνάληψιν τοῦ σωτῆρος, ὡς ἂν καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος προτετιμημένους, μὴ ἐπιδικάζεσθαι δόξης, ἀλλὰ Ἰάκωβον τὸν δίκαιον ἐπίσκοπον τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων ἑλέσθαι.

Clement in the sixth of his Hypotyposes presents the following account: "After the ascension of the Savior, Peter, James, and John, not having yet entered on their ministry, were present at the election of his successor. They all unanimously chose James the Just as bishop of Jerusalem."

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 4f. Ὁ δ' αὐτὸς (Clemens) ἐν ἑβδόμῳ τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποθέσεως (d. i. der Hypotyposeis) ἔτι καὶ ταῦτα περὶ αὐτοῦ (d. i. den Jakobus) φησιν· »Ἰακώβῳ τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ Ἰωάννῃ καὶ Πέτρῳ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν παρέδωκεν τὴν γνῶσιν ὁ κύριος, οὗτοι τοῖς λοιποῖς ἀποστόλοις παρέδωκαν, οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι τοῖς ἑβδομήκοντα, ὧν εἷς ἦν καὶ Βαρνάβας. δύο δὲ γεγόνασιν Ἰάκωβοι, εἷς ὁ δίκαιος, ὁ κατὰ τοῦ πτερυγίου βληθεὶς καὶ ὑπὸ γναφέως ξύλῳ πληγεὶς εἰς θάνατον, ἕτερος δὲ ὁ καρατομηθείς. αὐτοῦ δὴ τοῦ δικαίου καὶ ὁ Παῦλος μνημονεύει γράφων· <ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον, εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου.>»

In the seventh book of the same Hypotyposeis, Clement also speaks concerning James as follows: "The Lord after His resurrection delivered knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter; these delivered it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom one was Barnabas. But there are two Jameses: one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded. And Paul mentions the Just, one of the apostles, in his writings, saying, 'But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother.'"

Just a comment on what Clement is saying here. He is distinguishing between two Jameses. The one who was beheaded is almost certainly James the brother of John (and presumably the son of Zebedee), the story of whose beheading is related in Acts 12.1-3.

The other James is the one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller. As is the case with the other James, Clement is probably not relating the full story he knows, but is giving enough information to distinguish this James from others. The details he gives suggest that he knows the same story we find in Hegesippus, whether he knows it directly from Hegesippus or from a common source.

I haven't been able to justify that conclusion.

You are allowing for the possibility that there were multiple different stories circulating about James the Just being the thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with the club of a fuller?

Essentially, yes.

[Peter Kirby]

[box=][/box]

Here are three four instances where I haven't concluded that there is a literary dependence on the Hegesippus account.

Clement of Alexandria (as quoted by Eusebius)

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 3. Κλήμης ἐν ἕκτῳ τῶν Ὑποτυπώσεων γράφων ὧδε παρίστησιν· Πέτρον γάρ φησιν καὶ Ἰάκωβον καὶ Ἰωάννην μετὰ τὴν ἀνάληψιν τοῦ σωτῆρος, ὡς ἂν καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος προτετιμημένους, μὴ ἐπιδικάζεσθαι δόξης, ἀλλὰ Ἰάκωβον τὸν δίκαιον ἐπίσκοπον τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων ἑλέσθαι.

Clement in the sixth of his Hypotyposes presents the following account: "After the ascension of the Savior, Peter, James, and John, not having yet entered on their ministry, were present at the election of his successor. They all unanimously chose James the Just as bishop of Jerusalem."

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 4f. Ὁ δ' αὐτὸς (Clemens) ἐν ἑβδόμῳ τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποθέσεως (d. i. der Hypotyposeis) ἔτι καὶ ταῦτα περὶ αὐτοῦ (d. i. den Jakobus) φησιν· »Ἰακώβῳ τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ Ἰωάννῃ καὶ Πέτρῳ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν παρέδωκεν τὴν γνῶσιν ὁ κύριος, οὗτοι τοῖς λοιποῖς ἀποστόλοις παρέδωκαν, οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι τοῖς ἑβδομήκοντα, ὧν εἷς ἦν καὶ Βαρνάβας. δύο δὲ γεγόνασιν Ἰάκωβοι, εἷς ὁ δίκαιος, ὁ κατὰ τοῦ πτερυγίου βληθεὶς καὶ ὑπὸ γναφέως ξύλῳ πληγεὶς εἰς θάνατον, ἕτερος δὲ ὁ καρατομηθείς. αὐτοῦ δὴ τοῦ δικαίου καὶ ὁ Παῦλος μνημονεύει γράφων· <ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον, εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου.>»

In the seventh book of the same Hypotyposeis, Clement also speaks concerning James as follows: "The Lord after His resurrection delivered knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter; these delivered it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom one was Barnabas. But there are two Jameses: one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded. And Paul mentions the Just, one of the apostles, in his writings, saying, 'But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother.'"

Just a comment on what Clement is saying here. He is distinguishing between two Jameses. The one who was beheaded is almost certainly James the brother of John (and presumably the son of Zebedee), the story of whose beheading is related in Acts 12.1-3.

The other James is the one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller. As is the case with the other James, Clement is probably not relating the full story he knows, but is giving enough information to distinguish this James from others. The details he gives suggest that he knows the same story we find in Hegesippus, whether he knows it directly from Hegesippus or from a common source.

I haven't been able to justify that conclusion.

You are allowing for the possibility that there were multiple different stories circulating about James the Just being the thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with the club of a fuller?

There's something about this I didn't notice before. The expression "multiple different stories circulating" might be read by someone (and I am not sure exactly what you mean!) as implying, by the word circulating, that said multiple stories were being spread by oral tradition. To clarify, I haven't suggested as a possibility that the story found in Hegesippus was circulating in this sense. Instead it may be that a simpler form of the story was circulating.

That simpler form of the story (which nonetheless had the details where James the Just was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with the club of a fuller) may have made its way into Clement of Alexandria and into what Hegesippus writes down, where Hegesippus has elaborated on the fuller-club-death story which he received in a simpler form (along with other traditions).

But I am not sure that the story found in Hegesippus was widely circulating in the second and third centuries, either in oral or written form. It was certainly written down, but Hegesippus may not have had wide impact before being quoted by Eusebius.

[Peter Kirby]

On the other hand, I consider there to be sufficient evidence to believe that there is a literary relationship among these three texts: the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions (or its source, an Ascents of James), the Second Apocalypse of James, and Hegesippus. The pairing of the Second Apocalypse of James and Hegesippus provides the strongest points of verbal contact, out of these, but the pairing of each of those two as being in a literary relationship with the Recognitions also seems more probable than not. It is less clear to me how to work out this "synoptic problem," but the quantity and nature of the shared material is enough to indicate to me in favor of a literary relationship.

I am working on some posts regarding this.

[Peter Kirby]

Second Apocalypse of James and Recognitions

Painter in Just James draws several parallels between the Second Apocalypse of James and the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions.

With Recognitions 1 the Second Apocalypse shares the motifs of the prediction of the destruction of the Temple (R 64.2 and A 60.13—22); James’s secret ally in the Council (R 65.2; 66.4 and A 61.9-11); the speech of James (R 68.3; 69 and A 46.6—60.24); given on the steps of the Temple (R 70.8 and A 45.24); James’s fall (R 70.8 and A 61.25f.); and the tumult (R 70.4—8; 71.1 and A 61.1-5).

I will quote some of this.

A prediction of the destruction of the Temple

(Recognitions 1.64.1) For we know that he [God] is even more angered about your sacrificing after the end of the time for sacrifices.
(1.64.2) Precisely because of this, the temple will be destroyed, and they will erect the abomination of desolation in the holy place. Then, the gospel will be made known to the nations as a witness for the healing of the schisms that have arisen so that also your separation will occur.

(Second Apocalypse of James 59) “He, the master, was rejected before he stretched out his hand. [But] as for me, [he has] opened [my ears]....... (60) He makes me hear the <silencing> of your trumpets, your flutes, and your harps [for this] house. It is the Lord who has taken you captive, closing your ears that they may not hear the sound of my speech, yet you [will be able to pay] attention in your hearts, and you will call me ‘the Just.’ Thus I say to you <in the name of the Lord>, look, I have given you your house, which you say God has made, through which the one who dwells in it has promised to give you an inheritance. I shall tear down this house, to the ruin and derision of those who live in ignorance.”

James’s secret ally in the Council

(Recognitions 1.65.2) But Gamaliel, who was the head of the nation and who was, because it was advantageous, secretly our brother in the matter regarding faith, perceived that they were intensely gnashing their teeth in the great anger towards us with which they were filled. He said these things:

(Recognitions 1.66.4) Then there was a great stillness, Gamaliel, who as I said previously was our brother who was hidden from them because it was advantageous (for they especially accepted the advice of those who were thus, as if fellows of their way of thinking--thus, he kept himself in hiding so that when something was plotted against us we should be able to know the various things and to repel them from us, and he might be able to change peacefully those who are opposed to us through persuasion with appropriate advice) (5) spoke first wisely as if he were our enemy. Through his argument he attempted to persuade the people to listen in the love of truth to the words being spoken. He looked towards James the bishop and began with his discourse as follows.

(Second Apocalypse of James 1) This is the discourse that James the Just delivered in Jerusalem and Mareim wrote down. (2) One of the priests told it to Theudas, (3) the father of this just man, since he was a relative of his. He said, [Hurry] and come with [Mary] your wife and your relatives. ... So hurry. Perhaps, [if] you yourself lead us to him, [he will] come to his senses. For look, there are many who are disturbed at his [slander]. They are extremely angry [with him, for he has said], “They [do not] pray….” [He has said] these things often, and other things too.

(Second Apocalypse of James 61) Another day he came in again and spoke for a few hours. I was with the priests, and I said nothing of our relationship, because they were all saying with one voice, “Come, let us stone ‘the Just.’”

advice not to speak

(Recognitions 1.62.1) "After him, Caiaphas gave heed to me, sometimes as if exhorting me and sometimes as if finding fault with me. ‘Be silent and do not proclaim about Jesus that he is the Christ, for you are bringing destruction He said, on yourself since you have gone astray after him and are leading others astray.’ (2) Again, he found fault with me as with someone rash, ‘For while you were untaught and a fisher by trade you became a teacher by chance.’"

(Second Apocalypse of James 2) One of the priests told it to Theudas, (3) the father of this just man, since he was a relative of his. He said, [Hurry] and come with [Mary] your wife and your relatives. ... So hurry. Perhaps, [if] you yourself lead us to him, [he will] come to his senses. For look, there are many who are disturbed at his [slander].

"you have gone astray"

(Recognitions 1.62.1) ‘Be silent and do not proclaim about Jesus that he is the Christ, for you are bringing destruction He said, on yourself since you have gone astray after him and are leading others astray.’

(Second Apocalypse of James 62) They stretched out his body and rolled a stone on his abdomen, and they trampled him with their feet and said, “O you who have gone astray!”

a reference to Jesus doing miracles (being admired) or being a magician (leading astray)

(Recognitions 1.70.2) ‘What are you doing, O men, the children of Israel? How have you been carried off so quickly by wretched men who have strayed after a magician?’

(Second Apocalypse of James 56) You [they shall] admire because of all your miracles.

speech of James given on the steps of the Temple

(Recognitions 1.70.8) Now the enemy threw James from the top of the stairs.

(Second Apocalypse of James 45) He used to say these things while the multitude of the people was seated. But on this occasion he entered and sat down <not> in his customary place but on the fifth flight of steps, [which] is the favored place.

given over multiple days

(Recognitions 1.69.8) In seven full days he persuaded all the people together with the high priest so that they should immediately make haste to proceed to baptism.

(Second Apocalypse of James 61) He got up and left after saying these things. Another day he came in again and spoke for a few hours

speaking and then being silent

(Recognitions 1.55.4) Now he spoke these things as if at ease, testified to related matters, and then was silent.

(Recognitions 1.56.3) Now he spoke these things, testified to related matters, and then was silent.

(Recognitions 1.57.5) Now they spoke these things, witnessed to related matters, and then were silent.

(Recognitions 1.58.3) Now he spoke these things, witnessed to related matters, and then was silent.

(Recognition 1.59.3) Now he spoke these things, witnessed to related matters, and then was silent.

(Recogntions 1.59.6) Now he spoke these things, also witnessed to related matters, and then was silent.

(Recognitions 1.59.7) Now he spoke these things, witnessed to related matters, and then was silent.

(Recognitions 1.60.4) Now he spoke these things, witnessed to related matters, and then was silent.

(Recognitions 1.60.7) Now he spoke these things, witnessed to related matters, and then was silent.

(Recognitions 1.61.3) Now he said this, testified to similar matters, and then was silent.

(Second Apocalypse of James 59) Look upon the one who speaks, and seek the one who is silent.

(Second Apocalypse of James 63) When he finished speaking, [he] fell silent.

a call for violence instead of deliberation

(1.70.1) "Then a certain man who was the enemy entered the temple near the altar with a few others. He cried out and said,
(2) ‘What are you doing, O men, the children of Israel? How have you been carried off so quickly by wretched men who have strayed after a magician?’
(3) "He said things such as these, and he listened to counterarguments, and, when he was overcome by James the bishop, he began to create a great commotion so that the matters that were rightly being said in calmness would neither be put to the test nor be understood and believed.
(4) For this purpose, he let forth an outcry over the foolishness and feebleness of the priests and reproached them.
(5) He said, ‘Why are you delaying? Why are you not immediately seizing all those who are with him?’

(Second Apocalypse of James 60) Look, those who hold the office of judge are deliberating, to pass [judgment on all he said]. ... [61] [on] that day. All the [people] and the crowd were confused, and it was clear that they were not convinced. He got up and left after saying these things.
Another day he came in again and spoke for a few hours. I was with the priests, and I said nothing of our relationship, because they were all saying with one voice, “Come, let us stone ‘the Just.’” They arose and said, “Yes, let us kill this man, that he may be removed from our midst. For he will be of no use to us at all.”

James’s fall

(Recognitions 1.70.8) Now the enemy threw James from the top of the stairs. Since he fell and was as if dead, he did not smite him a second time.

(Second Apocalypse of James 61) They were there, and they found him standing by the pinnacle of the temple, next to the mighty cornerstone. They determined to throw him down from the height, and they did just that. [When] they [looked at him], they saw [he was alive. So] they arose [and went down], [62] and they seized him and [abused] him, dragging him on the ground. They stretched out his body and rolled a stone on his abdomen, and they trampled him with their feet and said, “O you who have gone astray!” Since he was still alive, they raised him up again, made him dig a hole, and forced him to stand in it. They covered him up to his abdomen and stoned him in this manner.

The parallels mentioned by Painter are less impressive when they are quoted in full than they originally appeared to be when presented in the abstract. Instead of finding any one passage where the texts are remarkably close (with the possible exception of the shared phrase "you have gone astray"), there are instead a fairly good number of different elements at various points in the story that are in common, yet in each case those elements are told differently. Determining the nature of the relationships of these texts would be a difficult endeavor.

If I had to make a guess, then I would suppose that the account given in the Recognitions or by its source has some degree of priority here, relative to the account given in the Second Apocalypse of James, assuming that there is some kind of literary relationship. One thing that I note is that the theme of "speaking and then being silent" is very much a characteristic of the narrative in the Recognitions, to the point that it seems like the theme was not likely borrowed from a reference or two from the Second Apocalypse of James. This may suggest that this reference was first introduced in this kind of context by the original source behind the Recognitions. Later, the Second Apocalypse of James was influenced by this. I wouldn't venture to guess whether it was influenced directly.

[Peter Kirby]

Euseb. H. E. II 1, 4f. Ὁ δ' αὐτὸς (Clemens) ἐν ἑβδόμῳ τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποθέσεως (d. i. der Hypotyposeis) ἔτι καὶ ταῦτα περὶ αὐτοῦ (d. i. den Jakobus) φησιν· »Ἰακώβῳ τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ Ἰωάννῃ καὶ Πέτρῳ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν παρέδωκεν τὴν γνῶσιν ὁ κύριος, οὗτοι τοῖς λοιποῖς ἀποστόλοις παρέδωκαν, οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι τοῖς ἑβδομήκοντα, ὧν εἷς ἦν καὶ Βαρνάβας. δύο δὲ γεγόνασιν Ἰάκωβοι, εἷς ὁ δίκαιος, ὁ κατὰ τοῦ πτερυγίου βληθεὶς καὶ ὑπὸ γναφέως ξύλῳ πληγεὶς εἰς θάνατον, ἕτερος δὲ ὁ καρατομηθείς. αὐτοῦ δὴ τοῦ δικαίου καὶ ὁ Παῦλος μνημονεύει γράφων· <ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον, εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου.>»

In the seventh book of the same Hypotyposeis, Clement also speaks concerning James as follows: "The Lord after His resurrection delivered knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter; these delivered it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom one was Barnabas. But there are two Jameses: one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and beaten to death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded. And Paul mentions the Just, one of the apostles, in his writings, saying, 'But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother.'"

This can also be punctuated this way:

But the same writer, in the seventh book of the same work, relates also the following things concerning him: "The Lord after his resurrection imparted knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter, and they imparted it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom Barnabas was one. But there were two Jameses: one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and was beaten to death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded." Paul also makes mention of the same the Just, where he writes, "Other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother."

In this rendition, it would perhaps be Eusebius who was inspired to make this quote by Origen (Against Celsus 1.47), instead of Eusebius preserving part of a quote from Clement of Alexandria. I can't be certain, but the idea that it is two separate quotes seems consistent with the quotation habits of Eusebius and the respect that Eusebius paid to Origen.