Letters. The vast majority of ancient letters were short—an estimated average is eighty-seven words. Most of the *New Testament letters (except Philemon, 2–3 John and Jude) are long even by the standards of literary letters; some, like Romans, are extremely long (about seventy-one hundred words compared to an average of about three hundred in *Cicero and about one thousand in *Seneca). Given the costs of papyrus and labor, a letter such as Romans could have cost more than twenty denarii—perhaps some two thousand dollars in earnings equivalent in the recent U.S. Lacking access to shorthand, Paul may have dictated Romans (Rom 16:22) painstakingly over the course of eleven hours. Such letters were more literary undertakings than most other ancient letters.
Later rhetoricians followed the typical Greek penchant for categorization and provided guidelines for the educated to write different types of letters: letters of rebuke (e.g., Galatians), letters of friendship or family, aesthetic letters (read among the elite for enjoyment), official letters and letter essays. These categories offered samples for the practice of writing letters, but genuine first-century letters were not confined to airtight categories.
Rhetoric. Many scholars have associated Paul’s letters with *rhetoric, the study and use of proper forms for public speaking, so we introduce the character of ancient rhetoric here. (Some *church fathers and Renaissance and Reformation interpreters also read Paul in light of Greco-Roman rhetoric.) Certainly at least one church cared about rhetoric and apparently judged Paul’s letters (which exhibit his argumentation) stronger than his speaking (which would also include accent, gestures and the like), to Paul’s dismay (1 Cor 1:17, 20; 2:1-5, 13; 4:19-20; 2 Cor 10:10-11; 11:6). Paul studied in Jerusalem not as a rhetoric or philosophy major but as a Bible major (cf. Acts 22:3)—whereas orators flaunted their cultural literacy by lavish quotations from Greek literature, Paul expounds Scripture. Perhaps his training in rhetoric amounted to what today might be a couple of homiletics courses, augmented through his argumentative dialogues with others in subsequent years. Nevertheless, he not only spoke Greek but he spoke and wrote good Greek that reflects his sensitivity to cultural idioms. In the Greco-Roman world, it was impossible for him not to dialogue and communicate with people influenced to one degree or another by rhetoric.
Greek higher education usually concentrated on rhetoric, although some students specialized in philosophy instead. Those who could afford it learned basic reading and writing under a grammaticus, often beginning around age ten or twelve, and the fewer who could afford the next stage proceeded to the sophistes or rhetorician, often around the age of fifteen or sixteen. Most who had advanced education completed it by around age eighteen.
Rhetoric was the indispensable tool of politicians, lawyers and other public figures, an essential focus of upper-class education. Its training included speech imitation and composition, oratory, practice in extemporary exposition on diverse topics, gestures, grammar, proper citation technique and so forth. The majority of urban people not specifically trained in rhetoric picked up its basic outlines from listening to public speeches, which pervaded urban public life.
Types of Rhetoric. Those who wrote rhetorical handbooks divided rhetoric into three main categories, although these overlapped in practice: epideictic (or encomiastic), praising or blaming someone in the present; deliberative, convincing someone to act in a particular way (directed toward the future); and judicial (or forensic), the rhetoric of law courts (dealing with actions of the past). Attempts to strictly classify Paul’s letters according to any one of these forms usually fails because in practice speeches mixed the forms.
Rhetoric in New Testament Letters. Most ancient letters were simply business documents or personal notes; such letters averaged eighty-seven words. Even most letters from orators (such as *Cicero, Pliny the Younger or Fronto) contain few rhetorical devices; certainly one could not outline them as speeches. Many of Paul’s letters, however, contain significant argumentation, which was especially the domain of rhetoric. For this reason it is helpful to note Paul’s use of rhetorical devices and conventional forms of argument. More debatably and controversially, some scholars find larger patterns of argumentation matching the typical outlines of speeches. It should be noted, however, that actual speeches did not always conform to the outlines proposed in handbooks; and even the most didactic of letters from members of the rhetorically trained elite do not normally fit such outlines.
Because certain rhetorical conventions were simply part of formal speaking in their day, many writers like Paul may not have been conscious of their own rhetorical artistry. It is nevertheless helpful for the modern reader, accustomed to different forms of public speaking and argumentation, to understand the rhetorical techniques that ancient writers often used. Paul was undoubtedly more conscious of and concerned for his culturally relevant communication technique in his most formal letters (e.g., Romans) or when challenged by upper-class readers (e.g., in 1 and 2 Corinthians), and my treatment of the rhetoric in these letters is accordingly more detailed than that of his other letters. Some objected to Paul’s delivery (cf. 1 Cor 2:3; 2 Cor 10:10; 11:6), but Paul fills some of his letters with more rhetorical devices than some orators would have deemed suitable for mere letters.
Purpose of Letters. Although most brief papyrus letters were merely personal or business communications, some wrote letters with a long-term purpose, intending publication and ideally wide circulation even if addressed to an individual. The prophetic letters in the *Old Testament (2 Chron 21:12-15; Jer 29; 36; cf. also Rev 2–3) show that in Jewish circles letters could be viewed as inspired if dictated by a prophet (1 Cor 7:40; 14:37).
Letter essays were general treatises that depended more on the author’s context than on the situation of the readers. Most letters, however, were addressed to the audience’s situation; later epistolary theorists stressed adapting letters to the situation of the readers. James might be a letter essay; probably all of Paul’s extant epistles (including Romans) are addressed to specific situations.
Stereotypical Forms in Letters. Different kinds of letters sometimes addressed different standard themes (now loosely called topoi). For instance, ancient letters of consolation repeated some basic themes, just as modern sympathy cards, epitaphs or eulogies do. The use of conventional themes does not mean insincerity, however; for example, rhetoricians like *Cicero emphasized that one should feel what one was preaching, rather than merely reproduce stereotypical forms emotionlessly. For information on introductions and conclusions of letters, see comments on Romans 1:1-7; 16:21-24 and 25-27.
Reception of Letters. According to some estimates, literacy in the Roman world was around ten percent (much higher for elite urban males, lower for others); although reading was more common than writing, and urban areas had more education than rural areas, many persons in the congregation would be unable to read. Reading was usually done aloud even in private; churches receiving Paul’s letters would have them read publicly in the congregation’s services, probably often by those who normally read Scripture in the meetings (for those who had Scripture scrolls available). Readers might try to help communicate the thought with appropriate intonation and gestures.
How to Understand Letters. Letters had no chapter or verse breaks when they were first written (these were added later); thus one should read the whole letter to catch the flow of thought and never extract verses from their context. Ancient readers recognized that one should try to understand the author’s purpose in writing, and they already knew their own cultural situation. When we read the letters, we should try to assume the original situation and then catch the writer’s flow of thought by reading through the whole context. We may put ourselves, as best as possible, in their situation and consider how the principles apply in our situations today.
Collections of Letters. Sometimes the letters of a famous person would be collected for publication. Paul’s letters were collected some time after his death, but possibly as early as the end of the first century as local churches shared their own treasures and memories of a key leader in the *Diaspora mission.
Tensions Among Letters. Because most letters addressed specific situations, similar phrases could be used to address very different problems. Most writers were eclectic philosophically, drawing from a variety of different sources; even the *Dead Sea Scrolls testify that the same audience could accept different kinds of religious language (*law, ritual, *apocalyptic, hymns, *narrative). It is therefore difficult to determine differences of authorship, or to argue for the presence of apparent theological contradictions, based exclusively on differences among Paul’s or other early Christian letters.
Works on Ancient Letter Writing. The most readable and helpful introductions to the *genre include Stanley K. Stowers, Letter Writing in Greco-Roman Antiquity, LEC 5 (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986); David E. Aune, The New Testament in Its Literary Environment, LEC 8 (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987), pp. 158-225; and E. Randolph Richards, Paul and First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004). For rhetoric, see, e.g., S. E. Porter, ed., Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period 330 b.c.–a.d. 400 (Leiden: Brill, 1997); R. D. Anderson Jr., Glossary of Greek Rhetorical Terms Connected to Methods of Argumentation, Figures and Tropes from Anaximenes to Quintilian (Leuven: Peeters, 2000); D. E. Aune, The Westminster Dictionary of New Testament & Early Christian Literature & Rhetoric (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003); and J. D. Harvey, Listening to the Text: Oral Patterning in Paul’s Letters (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998). For background to Paul and his thought, see, e.g., A. J. Malherbe, Paul and the Popular Philosophers (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989); many articles in J. P. Sampley, ed., Paul in the Greco-Roman World: A Handbook (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2003); on Paul more generally, see, e.g., Stephen Westerholm, ed., The Blackwell Companion to Paul (Oxford: Blackwell, 2011). For specialized studies, see, e.g., Terence L. Donaldson, Paul and the Gentiles: Remapping the Apostle’s Convictional World (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997); Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989); Christopher D. Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture: Citation Techniques in the Pauline Epistles and Contemporary Literature, SNTSMS 69 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).