Bible Dictionaries
Trade and Commerce (2)

Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament

Search for…

Enter query below:

or

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Prev Entry
Trade and Commerce

Next Entry
Trades

Resource Toolbox

Print Article

TRADE AND COMMERCE

1. The terms.—The terms used in the NT in its allusions to mercantile transactions give but little indication of the remarkable developments which had taken place in the trade and commerce of Palestine since OT times.

Schürer (GJV [Note: JV Geschichte des Jüdischen Volkes.] ^{3 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred]} ii. 50–61) gives a considerable list of trading terms which had been borrowed from the Greek, and were in ordinary use among Palestinian Jews, but few of these appear in the NT. The only term, e.g., for ‘merchant’ is ἔμπορος (Matthew 13:45, Revelation 18:3; Revelation 18:11; Revelation 18:15; Revelation 18:23), this being the equivalent etymologically of the two terms which are common in OT—סֹתֵר and רֹכֵל—both of which seem to have the root-idea of travel, whether by land or sea. What is, however, significant is the frequency of the words ἀγορά and ἀγοραζω (Matthew 20:3; Matthew 23:7, Mark 6:56; Mark 7:4; Matthew 21:12; Matthew 14:15, Mark 14:5; Mark 15:46, Luke 14:19, John 4:8 etc.), which, when it is remembered that in the OT, with the exception of Is 23:3,* [Note: In Ezekiel 27:12-25 the words translated (AV) ‘fairs’ and ‘market’ will not bear that meaning; see RV.] there is no mention of markets properly so called, shows that the old conception of the merchant, as one who travels with his goods, is giving place to a more settled and organized system of trade. But the NT indications of a busy and complex commercial life are mostly indirect and general, e.g., in such terms as ἐργάζομαι, Matthew 25:27; πραγματεύομαι, Luke 19:13 (see context in both places); τρατεζίτης and τόχος, Matthew 25:27; cf. the apocryphal saying of Jesus, ‘Show yourselves tried bankers’ (τραπεζίται, see Westcott, Introd to Gospels, p. 458). Though general references of this kind are fairly numerous, technical names for traders, such as τορφυρότωλις (Acts 16:14), are very rare. Even in the graphic description of the trade of the Roman Empire in Revelation 18:11; Revelation 18:20 there is no word more specific than ἔμτορος, the various trades of the merchants being described simply by mentioning the article in which they deal.

2. The status of the trader.—There is considerable evidence that in Herodian times the occupation of a merchant was held in more repute than had formerly been the case among the Jews. Such a statement as that of Josephus—‘We have no taste for commerce or for the relations with strangers which it establishes’ (c. [Note: circa, about.] Apion, i. 12), must not be taken too literally (cf. Herzfeld, Handelsgesch. der Juden, p. 80). Josephus himself makes numerous references to the widespread trade carried on by Alexandrian Jews, without any implication that they incurred disparagement thereby; he mentions the ‘Upper Market-place’ of Jerusalem; the Valley of the Cheesemongers (BJ v. iv. 1), the wool-merchants, the cloth-mart (v. viii. 1), the timber-market (ii. xix. 4); he tells us of the exportation of corn from Judaea to Arabia (Ant. xiv. v. 1), and through Joppa to Phœnicia (xiv. x. 6); he mentions the influence which a Jewish trader, Ananias, exercised at the court of Adiabene (xx. ii. 3, 4); he relates how John of Giscala made himself rich by obtaining the monopoly of exporting oil from Galilee (BJ ii. xxi. 2); and in various places indicates the growing prosperity and affluence of the Jews (e.g. Ant. xii. iv. 10, Vit. 26, etc.). In no case do we discover any indication that the fact of engaging in trade was a reflexion upon a true Jew, so long as he took care not to defile himself by such contact as the Law forbade (cf. Mark 7:4 ‘when they come from the market-place, except they wash themselves they eat not’). There can be little doubt that the encouragement which high priests like John Hyrcanus gave to trade, and the fact that Herodian princes themselves engaged in it, tended to raise the status of the Jewish trader. Priests were sometimes themselves traders. Josephus descries the high priest Ananias as a keen moneylender (Ant. xx. ix. 2). There were, of course, different grades of traders recognized. Sirach (26:29) distinguishes between a merchant and a huckster. Between the merchant-prince and the mere pedlar there was a vast variety of persons who found no difficulty in reconciling their commerce with their religion, and perhaps we may infer from the following that even the humblest trade was not despised: ‘Rabbi Jehudah the Nasi called Elazar b. Azariah a huckster’s basket, and compared him to a huckster who, taking his basket, goes about the country, and the people come flocking around him, inquiring for various articles, and find he has everything’ (Aḅoth, 2). In the Gospels the allusions to persons engaged in trade take it for granted that merchants have a responsible and even an honourable place in the national economy. In the parable of the Pounds (Luke 19:12-27), a man of noble birth carries on trade through the agency of his servants, and there seems to be no sufficient reason for A. B. Bruce’s supposition (Parabolic Teaching of Christ, p. 219) that such a transaction was ‘a most unusual one for a nobleman.’ In the East, indeed, royalty from early times had associated itself closely with the development of trade.* [Note: See art. ‘Trade and Commerce’ in EBi p. 5192a.] The teaching of Jesus is ‘full of appreciation of the bigness of the methods of trade and of the brave tempers required in it.’† [Note: lb.; cf. also To 1:13, where a Jew is the honoured purveyor (ἀγοραστής) of a foreign monarch, and his nephew is steward and accountant (1:22).]

The gradual change by which the Jews, from being an agricultural people, became a people devoted to commerce, is illustrated by many Talmudic passages: e.g. ‘Rabbi Eleazar said, There is no worse trade than agriculture; and Rabbi Rab added, Commerce is worth all the harvests of the world’ (Jebamoth, 63. 1). This change, however, took place only very slowly; the time of Christ was the transition period, and while there were many pious Jews who did not hesitate to engage in foreign trade, there were others who viewed it with suspicion and dislike, and some who would have nothing to do with it. The Essenes abjured trade, apparently, at least among themselves (BJ ii. viii. 4). The two things which laid a stigma upon it were (1) the extensive contact with foreigners which it involved, and the consequent risk of ceremonial pollution; and (2) the moral deterioration which it seemed to bring.

The fact that Sirach has several passages emphasizing the latter danger indicates the prevalent fear that, with the growth of Hellenistic influences, there was coming in a relaxation of Hebrew strictness and integrity: e.g. ‘A merchant shall hardly keep himself from doing wrong, and a huckster shall not be acquitted of sin’ (Sirach 26:29); ‘Sin will thrust itself in between buying and selling’ (Sirach 27:2); ‘Take not counsel with a merchant about exchange nor with a buyer about selling’ (Sirach 37:11).

Delitzsch, indeed, thinks that it was not until about 500 years after Christ that the Jewish people began to show any special preference for those branches of trade which deal in work furnished by others (Jewish Artisan Life in the time of Christ, p. 19), but the passages which he quotes appear to be not so much indicative of the Jew’s aversion from trade, as such, as instances of the feeling that a commercial occupation is hardly compatible with a devout life: e.g. ‘Wisdom, says Rabbi Jochanan, in reference to Deuteronomy 30:12, is not in heaven,—that is to say, not to be found among the proud; nor beyond the sea—that is to say, you will not find it among traders and travelling merchants’ (ib. and Erubin, 55a).

In the NT there is no disparagement of trade as such. A passage like James 4:13 ‘Go to now, ye that say, To-day or tomorrow we will go into this city and spend a year there and trade (ἐμτοπεύομαι)’ is not directed against trading, but only against that commercial spirit which leaves God out of account. The passage Revelation 18:11 ff. (based on Ezekiel 27) suggests, not the prevalence of an anti-trade spirit in the early Christian community, but a Puritanic protest against the excessive luxury of a materialistic society.* [Note: For a description of the demands of society for which the trade of the day catered, see Friedländer, Darstellungen aus der Sittengesch. Rome, iii. ‘Der Luxus.’] Whatever the obscure passage Revelation 13:16 ‘that no man should be able to buy or to sell save he that hath the mark, even the name of the beast or the number of his name,’ may mean, the writer can hardly be taken to mean more than that the habits of trade were so mixed up with pagan practices that it was difficult for a Christian to be a trader without becoming stamped with the ‘mark of the beast.’ In this connexion it may be noted that Deissmann (Bible Studies, p. 241 ff.) finds a reference to seals, bearing the name of the Roman emperor, which seem to have been necessary in documents of a commercial nature. We may, at any rate, set over against Delitzsch’s assertion that ‘in the whole Talmud there is scarcely a word in honour of trade,’ the statement that in the NT there is no word in its dishonour.

3. Commercial morality.—From some of the passages already quoted it might be inferred that trade in the Roman Empire in the 1st cent. was particularly corrupt. Was this actually so? It is, of course, not difficult to put together a number of instances in which the trader appears as a person of smirched reputation. Autolycus had his parallel in Palestine, The merchants of Lydda seem to have been notorious for dishonesty (according to Pesachim, 62b). Sirach (Sirach 29:1-7) dwells upon the difficulty of getting loans repaid, and upon the ready excuse of ‘bad times.’ Zacchaeus (Luke 19:1-10), who probably farmed the revenues from the famous balsam-gardens of Jericho (see Josephus BJ iv. viii. 3, Ant. xiv. iv. 1; cf. G. A. Smith, HGHL [Note: GHL Historical Geog. of Holy Land.] p. 267, note), was, according to the generally received interpretation, given to unscrupulous exaction. In the parable of the Unjust Steward (Luke 16:1-9) we have a graphic picture of a factor whose dealings are a tissue of knavery. It is probable, too, that the publicans, who appear in the Gospels with so poor a reputation, owed this partly to a shady connexion with the traffic which passed through their hands. But it is obviously unfair to assume from such data as these that there was any more dishonesty among Jewish than among other traders. Herzfeld justly claims (p. 276 f.) that, though the reproach of usury attached to the Jews of the Middle Ages, it appears that among the Jews of earlier times the rate of interest was lower than among other peoples engaged in trade. The enemies of the Jews in Roman times did not scruple to bring against them the most ridiculous charges, but precisely this charge of dishonesty in business relations is not found. In the Talmud usurers are regarded as in the same category with gamblers (Rosh ha-shana, i. 8). Surely, too, the close connexion between business and religion, which is so often emphasized in the Bible (e.g. Leviticus 19:35-36; Leviticus 25:36-37; Deuteronomy 15:2; Deuteronomy 23:20, Proverbs 11:1; Proverbs 16:11; Proverbs 20:10; Proverbs 23:4 f., Proverbs 28:22, Amos 8:5, Micah 6:10-11, cf. Sirach 42:4), and of which the Talmudic writers have so much to say (cf. Herzfeld, p. 162 f.), was not without its effect upon mercantile morality. That trade was directly recognized as having the sanction of religion would appear from an allusion (Joma, v. 3) to a prayer offered by the high priest on the Day of Atonement for ‘a year of trade and traffic.’ The indignation of Jesus when He ejected the traders and money-changers from the Temple courts (Matthew 21:12-13, Mark 11:15-18, Luke 19:45-47, John 2:14-16) must no doubt have been prompted partly by a knowledge of the dishonesty of their dealings (‘a den of robbers’); but His denunciation is a quotation from Jeremiah (Jeremiah 7:11), and must not be pressed. What stirred His wrath was the conjunction of unscrupulousness with high religious pretensions. It was because their practice was not in harmony with their principles that He drove them forth. That they suffered it with so little resistance seems to show a tacit admission on their part that they were departing from the strictness of Jewish law. Jesus never singles out the trader, as such, as an example of covetousness or fraud; when He inveighs against corrupt practices, it is rather the Pharisees ‘who devour widows’ houses’ (Mark 12:40), and who are ‘full from extortion’ (Matthew 23:25) that are selected for castigation. If, as is not improbable, the Good Samaritan of Luke 10:30-37 was suggested by the merchants who travelled regularly on the trade-route that led through Jericho (cf. Luke 10:35), we have an instance of the way in which Jesus contrasted the humanity often characterizing men of the world with the inhumanity which professors of religion may be capable of showing.

4. Relations of Jesus with the mercantile community.—It has been said* [Note: EBi, art. ‘Trade and Commerce,’ 5191a.] that the trade of Palestine is often reflected in the parables of Jesus spoken as He passed along the busy trade-routes of Galilee and Judaea. Typical of these is the parable of the Merchant seeking Goodly Pearls (Matthew 13:45-46). Jesus would be sure to meet traders on His frequent journeys. Merchandise was still carried, for the most part probably, on pack-animals—asses, mules, or camels (cf. Josephus Vit. 26 f.); for, though under Imperial Rome there had been a great development of the means of transit, and a fast service of conveyances had been established on the great trunk roads of the Empire, this would hardly be the case in Palestine in the time of Jesus. But conditions had arisen more favourable to commerce: the roads were safer; brigandage was put down with a strong hand (Josephus Ant. xiv. xv. 2, iv. 4); in addition to the usual town-markets, which in the time of the Maccabees seem to have been held monthly, and to which the country people came in (1 Maccabees 1:58, cf. Herzfeld, p. 75 f.), there was a good deal of trade done at the regular stopping-places of the caravans, and at the inns; periodical fairs also sprang up at certain places, e.g. Gaza, Acco, and Tyre (Herzfeld, p. 134). In the towns, at any rate the larger towns, merchants would have their recognized exchange for corn, wool, etc., and their bazaars for manufactured articles. They had their trade guilds, capable sometimes of exercising a considerable influence (cf. Acts 19:23 ff.), and their trade leagues between neighbouring towns, e.g. those of Decapolis (Herzfeld, p. 148; HGHL [Note: GHL Historical Geog. of Holy Land.] p. 595); there were trading corporations, which had their representatives in the important centres. Thus, there were Antiochian Jews settled in Jerusalem, presumably for purposes of trade (2 Maccabees 4:9; 2 Maccabees 4:19), and there is little doubt that at the times of the great feasts, many who came up to Jerusalem combined business with religion, and used the opportunity to establish trade relations with their fellow-countrymen coming from other parts of the Empire. The sea, now cleared of pirates, no longer offered obstruction to the spread of commerce; the Jews had at last ports of their own; Philo (in Flaccum, 8) refers to Jewish shipmasters at Alexandria; Josephus (Ant. xviii. ix.) and the Talmud refer to the wealth of Babylonian Jews. Through Galilee ran some of the most frequented trade-routes; and in this province, more than elsewhere, the influence of the enterprising Greek was in evidence.

Jesus was in close contact, then, with the busy traffic of His day, and the allusions to it in the Gospels are many; e.g. the trade in oil (Matthew 25:9), in spices (Mark 16:1; Mark 14:5, John 19:39; an indication of the extent of this traffic may be gathered from the statement made by Josephus, that at Herod’s funeral there were 500 spice-bearers [Ant. xvii. viii. 3]), in clothes (Mark 15:46, Luke 22:36), in cattle (Luke 14:19), in weapons (Luke 22:36). It is a little remarkable that there is no special reference to what must have been the trade best known to Christ’s disciples, that in dried fish, for which Taricheae on the Lake of Galilee was a famous centre (Strabo, xvi. ii. 45; BJ III. x. 6; HGHL [Note: GHL Historical Geog. of Holy Land.] p. 455). Absorption in trade is hinted at in the case of the man who neglects the king’s invitation, that he may go to his merchandise (Matthew 22:5), and in Matthew 18:25 we get a glimpse into a trade the dimensions and importance of which must have been much greater than is indicated by anything in the NT,—the slave-trade. This, however, would be wholly in the hands of foreigners, its chief centre being at Delos (Strabo, xiv. v. 2), where as many as 10,000 slaves might be found at one time. Phœnician merchants seem to have been the usual intermediaries, in this traffic (1 Maccabees 3:41, 2 Maccabees 8:11, Ant. xii. vii. 3); and, while the only direct allusion to the slave-merchant in the NT is Revelation 18:13, this personage must have been a too familiar figure on the roads of Galilee.

Literature.—Herzfeld, Handelsgesch. der Juden des Alterthums; art. ‘Trade and Commerce’ in Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible and in EBi [Note: Bi Encyclopaedia Biblica.] ; on the general subject of the relation between commerce and religion see G. A. Smith’s Isaiah, vol. i. ch. 18.

J. Ross Murray.