The Politics of Race and Ethnicity in

Matthew's Passion Narrative Wongi

Park
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-politics-of-race-and-ethnicity-in-matthews-passion
-narrative-wongi-park/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Latino Politics in America Spectrum Series_ Race and

Ethnicity in National and Global Politics John A.
Garcia

https://textbookfull.com/product/latino-politics-in-america-
spectrum-series_-race-and-ethnicity-in-national-and-global-
politics-john-a-garcia/

The Cambridge Companion to Narrative Theory Matthew

Garrett

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-cambridge-companion-to-
narrative-theory-matthew-garrett/

Recognizing race and ethnicity power privilege and

inequality Second Edition. Edition Fitzgerald

https://textbookfull.com/product/recognizing-race-and-ethnicity-
power-privilege-and-inequality-second-edition-edition-fitzgerald/

Race, Ethnicity, Gender, and Class ; The Sociology of

Group Conflict and Change 8th Edition Joseph F. Healey

https://textbookfull.com/product/race-ethnicity-gender-and-class-
the-sociology-of-group-conflict-and-change-8th-edition-joseph-f-
healey/
Politics of reproduction : race, disease, and fertility
in the age of abolition First Edition Katherine Paugh

https://textbookfull.com/product/politics-of-reproduction-race-
disease-and-fertility-in-the-age-of-abolition-first-edition-
katherine-paugh/

The Emergence of Iranian Nationalism Race and the

Politics of Dislocation Reza Zia-Ebrahimi

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-emergence-of-iranian-
nationalism-race-and-the-politics-of-dislocation-reza-zia-
ebrahimi/

Buddhism Politics and Political Thought in Myanmar

Matthew J Walton

https://textbookfull.com/product/buddhism-politics-and-political-
thought-in-myanmar-matthew-j-walton/

The black presidency Barack Obama and the politics of

race in America First Mariner Books Edition Dyson

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-black-presidency-barack-
obama-and-the-politics-of-race-in-america-first-mariner-books-
edition-dyson/

Narrative Politics in Public Policy: Legalizing

Cannabis Hugh T. Miller

https://textbookfull.com/product/narrative-politics-in-public-
policy-legalizing-cannabis-hugh-t-miller/
THE POLITICS
OF RACE AND
ETHNICITY
IN MATTHEW’S
PASSION
NARRATIVE
WONGI PARK
The Politics of Race and Ethnicity in Matthew’s
Passion Narrative
 Wongi Park

The Politics of Race

and Ethnicity in
Matthew’s Passion
Narrative
Wongi Park
Belmont University
Nashville, TN, USA

ISBN 978-3-030-02377-5    ISBN 978-3-030-02378-2 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02378-2

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018960938

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2019
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

Cover credit: pabloborca / Getty Images

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 People have been responding to the existence of racism for 300 years,
attacking its every overt daily expression. Yet after 300 years, it
remains, changing form over time, in response to political conditions,
while producing more damage. Whenever we have gotten strong enough
to interfere with its operations (as the civil rights movement did), it
comes back wearing different language, speaking an up-to-date lingo,
while creating more of the “same old” effects…These effects, the racial
hierarchies and segregations that get taken for granted, are too dire for
us to simply watch them occur again and again, responding after the
damage is done. Their resurgence, their recurrence, their longevity in
the face of centuries of opposition suggest that their source lies deeper in
this culture than we had imagined. Something keeps rebuilding that
machine, renovating it, something beyond the nefarious individual
prejudices and tainted desires by which racism manifests itself.
—Steve Martinot, The Machinery of Whiteness
 Acknowledgments

This book began life as a Master of Sacred Theology thesis completed at

Yale Divinity School and a PhD dissertation completed at Vanderbilt Uni-
versity. A special word of thanks is due to my doctoral adviser, Dr. Fernando
Segovia, who has been supportive in more ways than one can express,
personally and professionally. A word of thanks is also due to the readers
of my thesis, Drs. Adela Collins and Harold Attridge, and the dissertation
committee, Drs. Kathy Gaca, Jaco Hamman, Tat-Siong Benny Liew, Her-
bert Marbury, and Daniel Patte.
Permissions to reprint “The Black Jesus, the Mestizo Jesus, and the
Historical Jesus” Biblical Interpretation 25 (2017): 190–205 in revised
form by Brill, two epigraph quotations by Abingdon Press and Temple
University Press, and images by Alamy and Warner Press are gratefully
acknowledged. The use of images has been generously funded by the
Theology and Practice Program at Vanderbilt University.

vii
 Contents

1 Introduction  1

2 Identifying the Dominant Narrative: Non-ethnoracial

Readings of Matthew 26–27  15

3 Situating the Dominant Narrative: Deracialized Readers

and Reading Locations 47

4 Constructing a Minoritized Approach: Racialized Readers

and Reading Locations 89

5 Proposing an Alternative Narrative: An Ethnoracial

Reading of Matthew 26–27107

6 Conclusion149

Index157

ix
 List of Figures

Fig. 3.1 Head of Christ © 1941, 1968 Warner Press, Inc., Anderson,
Indiana. (Used with permission) 66
Fig. 3.2 A wooden African statue of Jesus Christ on the cross with a
crown of thorns on his head, in a Roman Catholic chapel in
Namibia. (Credit: Friedrich Stark/Alamy Stock Photo) 67
Fig. 3.3 The Madonna and Child of Soweto, mostly referred to as “The
Black Madonna,” depicting a black Virgin Mary holding the
Child Jesus (also black), Regina Mundi Church (is the largest
Roman Catholic church in South Africa), Soweto (South
Western townships), Johannesburg, South Africa. (Credit: Blaine
Harrington III/Alamy Stock Photo) 68
Fig. 3.4 Ethiopian Orthodox Church fresco painting with black Jesus
Christ crucified. (Credit: Maciej Wojtkowiak/Alamy Stock Photo) 69
Fig. 3.5 Jesus Christ in the slums in Chennai, Tamil Nadu, in South
India, South Asia. (Credit: Shaun Higson/India-Chennai/
Alamy Stock Photo) 69
Fig. 3.6 Jesus image on a garage door in Makati City in Manila,
Philippines. (Credit: NiceProspects-LM/Alamy Stock Photo) 70
Fig. 3.7 A typical catholic image of Jesus Christ from Slovakia by the
painter Zabateri. (Credit: Jozef Sedmak/Alamy Stock Photo) 71
Fig. 3.8 Hamra, Beirut, Lebanon: Greek Orthodox Church Jesus.
(Credit: Art Directors & TRIP/Alamy Stock Photo) 72
Fig. 3.9 An image of Jesus. (Contributor: Godong/Alamy Stock Photo) 73

xi
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Identifying the Problem

In the final moments leading to the crucifixion, Jesus is cast in a lead role.
Surrounded by a Roman cohort, reed in hand, and a crown of thorns on
his head, he is paraded into the Praetorium. With theatrical flair, Roman
soldiers kneel before Jesus who is propped up, dressed in a scarlet robe.
They beat and berate him, exclaiming, “Hail, ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων!”
until he is bloodied and bruised. Once the Roman soldiers are satisfied,
the scene shifts; they strip him of the robe and put on his garments, but
the show is not over. The soldiers enlist Simon of Cyrene to carry a cross
upon which the formal charge is written. The stage is set—garments are
divided, heads wag, and insults are hurled. At the ninth hour, in a climactic
moment, the one convicted as ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων utters a loud
cryptic cry in his regional dialect of Aramaic. But no one around him
seems to understand what he says.
In Matthew’s passion narrative, the ethnoracial identity of Jesus comes
into sharp focus. The repetition of the title ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων
(“King of the Judeans”1) in the trial scenes that comprise the passion nar-
rative accents its pivotal role. Jesus’ ethnoracial identity as a marginalized
Judean is reiteratively cited at key points, serving as the basis for his inter-
rogation before Pilate the governor (Matt 27:11–14), torture by the
Roman soldiers (Matt 27:27–30), and mockery from the Judean leaders
(Matt 27:41–43). The title is publically displayed as a formal charge above
the cross—a detail that is attested in all four Gospels (Matt 27:37; Mark

© The Author(s) 2019 1

W. Park, The Politics of Race and Ethnicity in Matthew’s Passion
Narrative, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02378-2_1
2 W. PARK

15:26; Luke 23:38; John 19:19).2 Made to hang from a Roman tree
under a derogatory banner—Οὗτός ἐστιν Ἰησοῦς ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων
(“This is Jesus: King of the Judeans” [Matt 27:37])—Jesus’ gruesome
execution is fraught with ethnoracializing implications. Despite the
explicit use of terminology, previous scholarship has understood the title
curiously in non-­ethnoracial ways.
The present book takes this peculiar omission in the history of interpre-
tation as its point of departure. But rather than only filling the lacuna of
an ethnoracial reading, it is also necessary to pose a more fundamental
ideological question that interrogates the pattern in the larger disciplinary
context of modern biblical scholarship.3 Therefore, the main question that
orients this research is: How and why are dominant readings of Jesus’
crucifixion as ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων in Matthew’s passion narrative
rendered in non-ethnoracial terms? To develop an answer, it is necessary
to probe the history of readings that constitute the non-ethnoracial pat-
tern as well as the history of reading strategies that produce it. Yet because
the terminology of race and ethnicity is not self-evident but highly con-
tested, each with complex histories in their own right, it is necessary to
clarify the use of these terms at the very outset.

A Preliminary Definition of Race and Ethnicity

In this book, race/ethnicity is theoretically defined in two ways as discourse
and dialectic—or, better, as a discourse that functions within a dialectic.4 As
a discursive category, race/ethnicity is not a static or stable entity that iden-
tifies essential and ontological differences between ethnoracial groups.
Strictly speaking, the biological basis of race has been debunked as a mod-
ern myth that has fueled scientific racism.5 Instead, it is a fluid discourse of
representations—a way of speaking to, from, and within individual and
group differences in constant flux and under constant negotiation. On this
understanding, individuals are not born in possession of an intrinsic racial
attribute that confines them to the boundaries of a racial group. Rather,
they are racialized into being. In other words, race/ethnicity is not a noun
but a verb that signals a meaning-making process, a strategic coding of
human difference. To draw on J. L. Austin’s speech act theory, race/eth-
nicity is not a constative utterance that faithfully describes reality; it is a
performative utterance that brings about the very thing to which it refers—
the veritable formation of the ethnoracial-other.6
 INTRODUCTION 3

As a dialectical category, race/ethnicity is an ideology that structures the

formations of power between dominant groups and minority groups. More
specifically, it is a discourse whereby the self attributes superiority to some
and inferiority to others on the basis of ethnoracial signifiers. Here, the
term “race” most often refers to biological markers such as phenotypes,
while the term “ethnicity” most often refers to cultural markers such as
language. These terms, while not exactly identical, share histories that are
very much intertwined. During the latter part of the twentieth century,
“race” fell out of favor as “ethnicity” became the preferred term in anthro-
pological and sociological study. But the change in terminology did not
imply material differences between the two. Rather, it signaled a method-
ological shift in the humanities and social sciences from essentialist to con-
structivist approaches.7 Fundamentally, however, the discourse of race and
the discourse of ethnicity fall on the same continuum; one cannot be exam-
ined without the other. For this reason, I use both terms interchangeably
and in combination in this book (e.g., race/ethnicity, ethnoracial, ethnora-
cialization) as a reference to their overlapping and interconnected histories
as signifying discourses of power.8
A central theoretical axiom underlying the book’s argument may be
enumerated in light of this definition of race/ethnicity. The discourse of
race/ethnicity always functions with a dialectic of dominant-minority for-
mations; therefore, the logic of the non-ethnoracial must also be subject
to critique.9 It is not possible to speak intelligibly about what defines
­ethnoracial identity without also examining what simultaneously defies
and paradoxically resists ethnoracial definition. Stated positively, that
which is regarded as ethnoracial must be examined alongside that which is
regarded as non-ethnoracial, for the two are intimately and organically
connected. The crucial importance of this theoretical insight is gaining
more recognition and traction in recent New Testament scholarship. For
instance, there is an increasing number of minority biblical scholars who
draw on insights from ethnoracial theory, whiteness studies, and minority
criticism for biblical interpretation.10 Similarly, there is an increasing num-
ber of dominant biblical scholars who are doing the same.11 By approach-
ing race/ethnicity as a discourse that functions within a dominant-minority
dialectic, I hope to contribute to the burgeoning trend of taking the criti-
cal intersection of race/ethnicity and biblical interpretation more seriously
into account.12
4 W. PARK

Preview of the Argument

The argument of the book works on two levels (i.e., exegetical and meth-
odological), with the primary goal of critiquing the dominant narrative
and presenting an alternative reading of Matthew’s passion narrative. A
secondary goal is to identify a critical vocabulary and framework of analysis
to decode the politics of race/ethnicity implicit in the history of
­interpretation. Both aims are reflected in the chiastic arrangement of what
follows: Chap. 2 examines the logic of dominant non-ethnoracial readings
of Matthew’s passion narrative; Chap. 3, the logic of dominant deracial-
ized reading locations; Chap. 4, the logic of minority racialized reading
locations; and finally Chap. 5, the logic of a minority ethnoracial reading
of Matthew’s passion narrative.
The first half of the book in Chaps. 2 and 3 offers a deconstructive
analysis of dominant readings, reading strategies, and reading locations.
Specifically, it traces the dominant narrative surrounding the interpreta-
tion of the title ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων in Matthew’s passion narrative.
To that end, Chap. 2 identifies the history of readings that purportedly
render the world of biblical antiquity with scholarly objectivity and scien-
tific neutrality. But as we shall see, the exegetical history of readings is
actually dependent upon the reading strategies that produce them. Paying
close attention to the link between the two underscores how the underly-
ing problem of the dominant narrative is methodological from beginning
to end.
After establishing the trajectory of readings in the world of antiquity,
Chap. 3 turns to an ideological assessment of the dominant narrative
among real readers. My argument is that this pattern, however subtle, of
bypassing race/ethnicity, of effectively marginalizing its importance, is not
an isolated phenomenon. It is rather predicated on and produced by dom-
inant readers and reading locations. Thus, the argument from Chap. 2 to
Chap. 3 is that the dominant narrative is articulated in and through a
dialectic of dominant interlocutors. Indeed, the non-ethnoracial pattern
cannot be fully appreciated without examining the deracialized reading
locations from which it stems. When contextualized within a broader per-
spective that includes real readers and reading locations, the pattern can be
seen as a critical synthesis of two dominant discourses in modernity that
represent Christianness and whiteness as being universal and pitted against
race/ethnicity.13 The discursive vehicle that drives this ideology is the
deracializing logic of white invisibility and white superiority.14
 INTRODUCTION 5

The second half of the book in Chaps. 4 and 5 follows suit in terms of
theory and method. Specifically, it offers a constructive proposal for an alter-
native narrative based on minority readings, reading strategies, and reading
locations. For if the non-ethnoracial pattern is actually a function of dera-
cialized reading locations, then it is necessary to construct an alternative
approach contextualized by racialized reading locations. Such an approach
presents an effective way to foreground the politics of race/ethnicity in
Matthew’s passion narrative. Chapter 4, therefore, draws upon the insights
of minority biblical criticism in order to introduce minority readers into the
discussion.15 To develop the specific contours of my proposal, I engage an
important essay by Jeffrey Siker on how Jesus has been racialized by two
minority scholars.16 This essay helpfully frames a number of related issues—
notably, the discourse of race/ethnicity, the dialectic of dominant-minority
relations, and the impasse of competing ethnoracial representations. Yet my
primary interest in Siker’s essay is to make legible the logic of racialization
and deracialization inherent in both his reading and reading location. Here,
the ideology of white invisibility and superiority can be seen even in the
most constructive efforts to diversify modern biblical scholarship. By utiliz-
ing the insights of minority b ­ iblical criticism, Chap. 4 provides a crucial
segue to the final stage of the argument.
Chapter 5 returns to Matthew’s passion narrative to offer an alternative
narrative of Jesus’ crucifixion as ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων. My argument is
that Jesus is minoritized as an ethnoracial-other. Just as important as its
substance, however, is the basis for the alternative narrative. I offer an
ethnoracial reading of Jesus’ minoritization in light of the experiences of
US minority groups, drawing on four conventional tropes that have been
historically used against Native Americans (“being proud”), African
Americans (“being inferior”), Latinx Americans (“being illegal”), and
Asian Americans (“being foreign”).17 These four tropes—alternatively
summarized as beyond, below, between, and besides the normative center
of whiteness—furnish a critical lens to reframe the politics of race/ethnicity
in the Matthean passion narrative. My reading underscores how Jesus is
minoritized through an analysis of how ethnoracial signifiers are mobilized
in four courtroom scenes (Judean, Roman, popular, and divine) that com-
prise Matthew’s passion narrative. Accordingly, the title ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν
Ἰουδαίων is not a positive messianic designation. It is an ethnoracial slur
that signifies Jesus’ death on a Roman crucifix as a grotesque act of minori-
tization—specifically, Judean ethnoracialization.
6 W. PARK

Overall, my argument is that the pattern of non-ethnoracial readings of

ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων is epiphenomenal in the history of modern bibli-
cal scholarship. It is one of the many instantiations of the dominant narra-
tive of Christianity as being universal and pitted against ethnoracial
particularity. At the very heart of the dominant narrative—indeed the very
discursive vehicle that drives it—is a modern deracializing ideology of
white invisibility and white superiority. The archetypal expression of this
modern ideology is the dominant Western representation of Jesus as a
white male with blond hair and blue eyes or brown hair and brown eyes—
Jesus is made white.18 Theorizing the ideology of white invisibility and
superiority is primarily a deconstructive endeavor. But there is also a highly
­constructive possibility as well: to find a way to move beyond a politics of
invisibility and visibility between groups toward an alternative understand-
ing of ethnoracial power, identity, and difference—a point to which I
return in the Conclusion.
The primary contribution of this book, then, is a critical retrieval of
ethnoracial politics in Jesus’ crucifixion. The methodological contribution
is an interdisciplinary approach to the study of race/ethnicity in antiquity
that draws on the insights of ethnoracial theory, whiteness studies, and
minority biblical criticism. Ultimately, these aims serve a broader research
agenda: to destabilize the dominant narrative of early Christianity’s non-­
ethnoracial origins.

Notes
1. All translations are mine unless otherwise noted. The most common
English Bible translation of ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων is “King of the Jews”
(KJV, RSV, NIV, NASB, ESV, ASV, NKJV, HCSB, NLT). A rationale for
rendering the title as “King of the Judeans” will be developed in Chap. 5.
2. The titulus inscribed on the cross is different in all four Gospels. However,
the following highlights ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων as a core element all four
accounts share in common:
Οὗτός ἐστιν Ἰησοῦς ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων (Matt 27:37);
Ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων (Mark 15:26);
Ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων οὗτος (Luke 23:38);
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων (John 19:19).
3. For a helpful overview of ideological criticism, see: Fernando F. Segovia,
Decolonizing Biblical Studies: A View from the Margins (Maryknoll: Orbis
Books, 2000).
 INTRODUCTION 7

4. My approach to race/ethnicity is influenced by Robert Miles and Malcolm

Brown, Racism (London and New York: Routledge, 2004), and Randall
C. Bailey, Tat-Siong B. Liew, and Fernando F. Segovia, eds., They Were All
Together in One Place: Toward Minority Biblical Criticism (Atlanta: Society
of Biblical Literature, 2009). Race/ethnicity is often stigmatized morally
and politically. Hence, one of the advantages of a theoretical (rather than
an empirical) approach to race/ethnicity is its conceptual clarity and utility.
See Chaps. 3 and 4 for further discussion of a discursive and a dialectical
approach to race/ethnicity, respectively.
5. Although the biological basis of race has been debunked, the damaging
effects of this modern myth are ongoing. See: Ali Rattansi, Racism: A Very
Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 69–85.
6. J. L. Austin, How to Do Things with Words: The William James Lectures
Delivered at Harvard University in 1955 (Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1962). For a performative approach to race/ethnicity, see: Louis
F. Mirón and Jonathan Xavier Inda, “Race as a Kind of Speech Act,”
Cultural Studies 5 (49): 85–107. For uses of speech act theory in biblical
interpretation, see: J. Eugene Botha, “Speech Act Theory and Biblical
Interpretation,” Neotestamentica 41.2 (2007): 274–94; Richard S. Briggs,
Words in Action: Speech Act Theory and Biblical Interpretation: Toward a
Hermeneutic of Self-involvement (Edinburgh: New York, 2001).
7. For further discussion, see: Steve Fenton, Ethnicity: Key Concepts
(Cambridge: Polity Press, 2003), 51–72; Elazar Barkan, The Retreat of
Scientific Racism: Changing Concepts of Race in Britain and the United
States between the World Wars (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1992), 137–176.
8. Denise K. Buell, Why This New Race: Ethnic Reasoning in Early Christianity
(New York: Columbia University Press, 2005), xi.
9. Calling attention to white identity as a racialized identity is a central tenet
of whiteness studies. Woody Doane, “Rethinking Whiteness Studies,” in
White Out: The Continuing Significance of Racism, eds. Ashley W. Doane
and Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, (New York and London: Routledge, 2003)
3–18; here, 3: “What is new and unique about ‘whiteness studies’ is that it
reverses the traditional focus of research on race relations by concentrating
attention upon the socially constructed nature of white identity and the
impact of whiteness upon intergroup relations. In contrast to the usual
practice of studying the ‘problem’ of ‘minority groups,’ the ‘whiteness
studies’ paradigm makes problematic the identity and practices of the
dominant group.” See further: Michael K. Brown, Whitewashing Race: The
Myth of a Color-Blind Society (Berkeley: University of California Press,
2003); Steve Martinot, The Machinery of Whiteness: Studies in the Structure
of Racialization (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2010); Toni
Morrison, Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992).
8 W. PARK

10. For representative examples of minority biblical scholarship, see: Margaret

P. Aymer, Eric D. Barreto, Gay L. Byron, Jin Young Choi, Jacqueline
M. Hidalgo, Tat-siong Benny Liew, Francisco Lozada, Emerson Powery,
Love Sechrest, Fernando Segovia, Mitzi Smith, R. S. Sugirtharajah, Sze-
kar Wan, Demetrius Williams.
11. For representative examples of dominant biblical scholarship, see: Cynthia
M. Baker, Denise Buell, Greg Carey, Cavan W. Concannon, Philip Esler,
Caroline Johnson Hodge, David G. Horrell, Shawn Kelley, Joseph
Marchal, Jeremy Punt, Anders Runesson, Jeffrey Siker.
12. For race/ethnicity in Matthean scholarship, see: Dennis C. Duling,
“Ethnicity, Ethnocentrism and the Matthean ethnos,” Biblical Theology
Bulletin 35 (2005): 125–43; John Riches, Conflicting Mythologies: Identity
Formation in the Gospels of Mark and Matthew (Edinburgh: T&T Clark,
2000); Anders Runesson “Judging Gentiles in the Gospel of Matthew:
Between ‘Othering’ and Inclusion” in Jesus, Matthew’s Gospel and Early
Christianity: Studies in Memory of Graham N. Stanton, eds. Daniel
M. Gurtner, Joel Willitts, and Richard A. Burridge (New York: T&T Clark,
2011), 133–151; Love L. Sechrest, “Enemies, Romans, Pigs, and Dogs:
Loving the Other in the Gospel of Matthew,” Ex Auditu 31 (2015): 71–105;
David Sim “Christianity and Ethnicity in the Gospel of Matthew” in Ethnicity
and the Bible, ed. Mark G. Brett, (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1996), 171–196.
13. For an overview of the complex intersection between race/ethnicity and
biblical interpretation, see: Katherine M. Hockey and David G. Horrell,
eds., Ethnicity, Race, Religion. Identities and Ideologies in Early Jewish and
Christian Texts, and in Modern Biblical Interpretation (Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 2018). For an overview of race, ethnicity, and religion in the US
more broadly, see: Kathryn Gin Lum and Paul Harvey, eds., The Oxford
Handbook of Religion and Race in American History (New York: Oxford
University Press, 2018).
14. Steve Garner, Whiteness: An Introduction (New York: Routledge, 2007),
6: “All deviance in societies dominated by white people is measured as
distance from selected white norms of a given society. Those norms are
usually class-based, gender-biased and ageist, they may or may not be secu-
lar or Christian to varying degrees, but the key point is that these norms
dictate the criteria by which the behaviour of people who are not racialised
as white are understood and evaluated.”
15. Randall C. Bailey, Tat-siong Benny Liew, and Fernando F. Segovia,
“Toward Minority Biblical Criticism: Framework, Contours, Dynamics,”
in They Were All Together in One Place: Toward Minority Biblical Criticism
(Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2009), 3–46.
16. Jeffrey Siker, “Historicizing a Racialized Jesus: Case Studies in the ‘Black
Christ,’ the ‘Mestizo Christ,’ and White Critique,” Biblical Interpretation
15 (2007): 26–53.
 INTRODUCTION 9

17. Bailey, Liew, and Segovia, “Toward Minority Biblical Criticism,” 13, n. 7.
18. The scope of the problem, as a number of scholars have pointed out, is
enormous:
Shawn Kelley, Racializing Jesus: Race, Ideology, and the Formation of
Modern Biblical Scholarship (London: Routledge, 2002), 3–4: “For most
modern Europeans, racism was a morally and empirically justifiable way of
thinking. This was true for thinkers in most academic disciplines, including
biblical scholarship, for most of modern history. Repulsion in the face of
overt racism is a relatively recent phenomenon. If this assessment is true, it
raises a number of interesting and disturbing questions … Behind these
questions lurks another question specifically directed to biblical scholarship:
if racism is embedded deeply within the culture and political practice of
modern European countries (as slavery, imperial conquests, and the Shoah
imply), and if it is also embedded in the thought of the great intellectuals of
the modern era (as I hope to show), is it not reasonable to assume that racist
thought has also found its way into the disciple of biblical scholarship? After
all, modern biblical scholarship did not emerge in a vacuum.”
Jeffrey Siker, “Historicizing a Racialized Jesus,” 27: “The history of
Western Christian theology (often articulated in art) has seen the ascen-
dancy of Jesus as a white Christ with a resultant de facto white God endors-
ing white power claims over other racial/ethnic groups.”
Stephen D. Moore, God’s Beauty Parlor: And Other Queer Spaces in and
around the Bible (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001), 110: “Although
its pedestal was erected during the Renaissance and the ‘Age of Exploration,’
it was not until the nineteenth century that the image of Jesus as not just
fair-skinned but blond and blue-eyed as well was fully in place, towering over
the world.”
Halvor Moxnes, Jesus and the Rise of Nationalism: A New Quest for the
Nineteenth-Century Historical Jesus (London: I.B. Taurus, 2012), 146–7:
“In that sense, Renan’s picture of Jesus as non-racial is characteristic of
later representations of Jesus. Mass media, especially films, provide good
illustrations of cultural presupposition, and the many popular Jesus movies
from the 1920s to Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ (2004) are perti-
nent examples. Jesus’ opponents, the mob in scenes from the Passion, and
even his disciples are played by men from the Middle Easy or North Africa,
but Jesus himself is always played by a white European or North American.
It seems that in order to present the story of Jesus as universal, to lift him
out of his historical setting in a Middle Eastern context, he has to be made
in a white man.”
Susannah Heschel, The Aryan Jesus: Christian Theologians and the Bible
in Nazi Germany (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008), 28:
“Images of Jesus were crucial to racism in establishing the primary criterion
of whiteness: Christ himself. It is not the Caucasian male who was the
10 W. PARK

model of the authentic white man, but rather an idealized ‘White Man,’
namely Christ. For the European male to define himself as a ‘white man’ he
had to fantasize himself as Christ, a Christ who had to be imaged not as Jew
but as Aryan … Yet by converting to Christianity, blacks did not become
white, any more than Jews became Aryans. The ultimate impossibility of
Christianizing nonwhites highlighted the problem of race at the heart of
Christian theology. Missionary efforts recapitulated Christianity’s funda-
mental supercessionist flaw: the effort to Christianize Judaism was a theo-
logical miscegenation.”
Julian Kunnie, “Jesus in Black Theology: The ancient ancestor visits,” in
The Cambridge Companion to Black Theology, eds. Dwight N. Hopkins and
Edward P. Antonio, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012),
94–110; here 94: “For too long, Judeo-Christianity has been viewed as a
Western Christian tradition mediated by the entrepreneurial agents of colo-
nial missionaries from Europe for the ‘enlightenment’ of the vast majority of
the world’s people, most of whom are overwhelmingly of color. Since
Christianity as we know it in most places in the world today, with the excep-
tion of places such as Egypt, Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, India, and
other places in close proximity to the confluence of the African-Asian world,
has generally been a Western European transmission with its concomitants of
colonization and slavery, much of the world has ineluctably been indoctri-
nated with the hegemonic ideological imposition that Jesus of Nazareth was
a ‘white man’ so depicted in the plethora of books, paintings, pictures, and
stained-glass windows around the world.”
J. Kameron Carter, Race: A Theological Account (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2008), 12: “This is the modern problem of imagining the
human being in racial terms, and within these terms positioning whiteness
as supreme. As a central ideological component in constructing the mod-
ern world as we have come to know it, the racial imagination arose inside
of, nurtured itself on, and even camouflaged itself within the discourse of
theology. That is, it articulated itself in a Christian theological idiom.”
Karen Teel, “What Jesus wouldn’t do: A white theologian engages white-
ness,” in Christology and Whiteness: What Would Jesus Do?, ed. George
Yancy, (London: Routledge, 2012), 19–36; here 20: “Whiteness has devel-
oped through a long and tortuous history…a history that some scholars
contend has its root in an ancient and fundamental perversion of
Christianity’s Jewish origins. There can be no doubt that it began at least as
long ago as the European Christians who, even before thinking of them-
selves as ‘white,’ created the U.S. system of race-based slavery. ‘Whiteness’
is a properly and peculiarly white Christian theological problem that
demands a white theological response.”
Tim Wise: “The image of a white Jesus has been used to justify enslave-
ment, conquest, colonialism, the genocide of indigenous peoples. There
are literally millions of human beings whose lives have been snuffed out
 INTRODUCTION 11

by people who conquered under the banner of a white god” (CNN inter-
view, December 16, 2013, n.p. [cited March 28, 2014] Online: http://
www.timwise.org/2013/12/tim-wise-on-cnn-1216-discussing-white-
jesussanta-imagery-and-racist-iconography/).
Teju Cole: “From Sachs to Kristof to Invisible Children to TED, the fast-
est growth industry in the US is the White Savior Industrial Complex …
The white savior supports brutal policies in the morning, founds charities in
the afternoon, and receives awards in the evening” (“The White-Savior
Industrial Complex,” March 21, 2012, n.p. [cited March 31, 2014] Online:
h t t p : / / w w w. t h e a t l a n t i c . c o m / i n t e r n a t i o n a l / a r c h i v e / 2 0 1 2 /
03/the-white-savior-industrial-complex/254843/).

References
Austin, J.L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words: The William James Lectures
Delivered at Harvard University in 1955. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Bailey, Randall C., Tat-Siong B. Liew, and Fernando F. Segovia, eds. 2009. They
Were All Together in One Place: Toward Minority Biblical Criticism. Atlanta:
Society of Biblical Literature.
Barkan, Elazar. 1992. The Retreat of Scientific Racism: Changing Concepts of Race
in Britain and the United States Between the World Wars. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Barreto, Eric D. 2010. Ethnic Negotiations: The Function of Race and Ethnicity in
Acts 16. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Berg, InHee C. 2014. Irony in the Matthean Passion Narrative. Minneapolis:
Fortress Press.
Botha, J. Eugene. 2007. Speech Act Theory and Biblical Interpretation.
Neotestamentica 41 (2): 274–294.
Brett, Mark G. 1996. Ethnicity and the Bible. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Briggs, Richard S. 2001. Words in Action: Speech Act Theory and Biblical
Interpretation: Toward a Hermeneutic of Self-Involvement. New York:
Edinburgh.
Brown, Michael K. 2003. Whitewashing Race: The Myth of a Color-Blind Society.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Buell, Denise K. 2005. Why This New Race: Ethnic Reasoning in Early Christianity.
New York: Columbia University Press.
Buell, Denise K., and Caroline Johnson Hodge. 2004. The Politics of
Interpretation: The Rhetoric of Race and Ethnicity in Paul. Journal of Biblical
Literature 123: 235–251.
Byron, Gay L. 2002. Symbolic Blackness and Ethnic Difference in Early Christian
Literature. London: Routledge.
12 W. PARK

Byron, Gay L., and Vanessa Lovelace, eds. 2016. Womanist Interpretations of the
Bible: Expanding the Discourse. Atlanta: SBL Press.
Carey, Greg. 2013. Introduction and a Proposal: Culture, Power, and Identity in
White New Testament Studies. In Soundings in Cultural Criticism: Perspectives
and Methods in Culture, Power, and Identity in the New Testament, ed. Francisco
Lozada and Greg Carey, 1–13. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Carter, Warren. 2001. Matthew and Empire: Initial Explorations. Harrisburg:
Trinity Press International.
Carter, J. Kameron. 2008. Race: A Theological Account. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Choi, Jin Young. 2015. Postcolonial Discipleship of Embodiment: An Asian and
Asian American Feminist Reading of the Gospel of Mark. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Concannon, Cavan W. 2014. “When You Were Gentiles”: Specters of Ethnicity in
Roman Corinth and Paul’s Corinthian Correspondence. New Haven: Yale
University Press.
Delgado, Richard, and Jean Stefancic. 2012. Critical Race Theory: An Introduction.
New York: New York University Press.
Doane, Woody. 2003. Rethinking Whiteness Studies. In White Out: The Continuing
Significance of Racism, ed. Ashley W. Doane and Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, 3–18.
New York/London: Routledge.
Fenton, Steve. 2003. Ethnicity: Key Concepts. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Garner, Steve. 2007. Whiteness: An Introduction. London/New York: Routledge.
Gin Lum, Kathryn, and Paul Harvey, eds. 2018. The Oxford Handbook of Religion
and Race in American History. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hamilton, Catherine S. 2017. The Death of Jesus in Matthew: Innocent Blood and
the End of Exile. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heschel, Susannah. 2008. The Aryan Jesus: Christian Theologians and the Bible in
Nazi Germany. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hockey, Katherine M., and David G. Horrell, eds. 2018. Ethnicity, Race, Religion.
Identities and Ideologies in Early Jewish and Christian Texts, and in Modern
Biblical Interpretation. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.
Horrell, David G. 2017. Paul, Inclusion and Whiteness: Particularizing
Interpretation. Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40 (2): 123–147.
Isaac, Benjamin H. 2004. The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kelley, Shawn. 2002. Racializing Jesus: Race, Ideology, and the Formation of
Modern Biblical Scholarship. London: Routledge.
Kidd, Colin. 2006. The Forging of Races: Race and Scripture in the Protestant
Atlantic World, 1600–49. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kingsbury, Jack D. 1988. Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom, 51.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
 INTRODUCTION 13

Kunnie, Julian. 2012. Jesus in Black Theology: The Ancient Ancestor Visits. In
The Cambridge Companion to Black Theology, ed. Dwight N. Hopkins and
Edward P. Antonio, 94–110. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liew, Tat-siong Benny. 2008. What Is Asian American Biblical Hermeneutics?:
Reading the New Testament. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Lozada, Francisco, and Fernando F. Segovia. 2014. Latino/a Biblical Hermeneutics:
Problematics, Objectives, Strategies. Atlanta: SBL Press.
Luz, Ulrich. 1995. The Theology of the Gospel of Matthew. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Martinot, Steve. 2010. The Machinery of Whiteness: Studies in the Structure of
Racialization. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Miles, Robert, and Malcolm Brown. 2004. Racism. London/New York:
Routledge.
Mirón, Louis F., and Jonathan Xavier Inda. 2000. Race as a Kind of Speech Act.
Cultural Studies 5: 85–107.
Moore, Stephen D. 2001. God’s Beauty Parlor: And Other Queer Spaces in and
Around the Bible. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Morrison, Toni. 1992. Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Moxnes, Halvor. 2012. Jesus and the Rise of Nationalism: A New Quest for the
Nineteenth-Century Historical Jesus. London: I.B. Taurus.
Nasrallah, Laura S., and Fiorenza E. Schüssler, eds. 2009. Prejudice and Christian
Beginnings: Investigating Race, Gender, and Ethnicity in Early Christian
Studies. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Omi, Michael, and Howard Winant. 1994. Racial Formation in the United States:
From the 1960s to the 1990s. New York: Routledge.
Powell, Mark Alan, ed. 2009. Methods for Matthew. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Rattansi, Ali. 2007. Racism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Riches, John. 2000. Conflicting Mythologies: Identity Formation in the Gospels of
Mark and Matthew. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.
Runesson, Anders. 2011. Judging Gentiles in the Gospel of Matthew: Between
‘Othering’ and Inclusion. In Jesus, Matthew’s Gospel and Early Christianity:
Studies in Memory of Graham N. Stanton, ed. Daniel M. Gurtner, Joel Willitts,
and Richard A. Burridge, 133–151. New York: T&T Clark.
———. 2016. Divine Wrath and Salvation in Matthew. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Sechrest, Love L. 2015. Enemies, Romans, Pigs, and Dogs: Loving the Other in
the Gospel of Matthew. Ex Auditu 31: 71–105.
Segovia, Fernando F. 2000. Decolonizing Biblical Studies: A View from the Margins.
Maryknoll: Orbis Books.
Senior, Donald. 1982. The Passion Narrative According to Matthew: A Redactional
Study. Louvain: Leuven University Press.
14 W. PARK

Siker, Jeffrey. 2007. Historicizing a Racialized Jesus: Case Studies in the ‘Black
Christ,’ the ‘Mestizo Christ,’ and White Critique. Biblical Interpretation 15:
26–53.
Teel, Karen. 2012. What Jesus Wouldn’t Do: A White Theologian Engages
Whiteness. In Christology and Whiteness: What Would Jesus Do? ed. George
Yancy, 19–36. London: Routledge.
Wan, Sze-Kar. 2009. ‘To the Jew First and Also to the Greek’: Reading Romans as
Ethnic Construction. In Prejudice and Christian Beginnings: Investigating
Race, Gender, and Ethnicity in Early Christian Studies, ed. Laura S. Nasrallah
and Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, 129–158. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
 CHAPTER 2

Identifying the Dominant Narrative:

Non-ethnoracial Readings of Matthew 26–27

Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to establish the pattern of non-ethnoracial read-
ings surrounding Jesus’ identity as ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων in Matthew’s
passion narrative. I identify two representative trajectories of the dominant
narrative in Matthean scholarship: traditional religious-theological read-
ings and more recent socio-political readings.1 As we shall see, both
religious-­theological and socio-political readings of the title exhibit a pecu-
liar pattern of bypassing and overlooking the title’s ethnoracial dimensions.
Although Jesus is explicitly and repeatedly marked as ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν
Ἰουδαίων in the passion narrative, he becomes ethnoracially unmarked in
scholarly interpretations. To better understand this phenomenon, a larger
view of Matthean scholarship is required. When this curious pattern is con-
sidered within a broader perspective that includes the history of methods,
a more compelling account of their interdependence begins to emerge.
After briefly outlining the uses of the title in Matthew, my argument to
establish the non-ethnoracial pattern proceeds in three stages. First, I
identify two tendencies in traditional religious-theological readings that
constitute the non-ethnoracial pattern. Second, I turn to a socio-political
reading that has expanded the narrow focus of the traditional reading.
While this approach better accounts for the title’s imperial dimensions, the
non-ethnoracial pattern nevertheless continues. Third, I offer a method-
ological analysis of the pattern by contextualizing it within the history of
reading strategies. My assessment is that the dominant trend of producing

© The Author(s) 2019 15

W. Park, The Politics of Race and Ethnicity in Matthew’s Passion
Narrative, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02378-2_2
16 W. PARK

an objective understanding of biblical antiquity has created a rift between

the critic and the act of criticism. Overall, then, the goal of this chapter is
to trace the non-ethnoracial pattern of the dominant narrative surround-
ing ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων in order to show how the history of readings
is invariably connected to the history of reading strategies.

The Title in the Gospel of Matthew

The title ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων occurs a total of four times in the
Gospel of Matthew: once in the infancy narrative and three times in the
passion narrative. Notably, all four uses of the title are attributed to Jesus
from the outside in etic fashion, so to speak, by non-Judean Gentiles. That
the title frames Matthew’s narrative, occurring at Jesus’ birth and death, is
indicative of its significance.
The first occurrence comes from the magi, non-Judean foreigners from
the east, who come to Jerusalem inquiring about ὁ τεχθεὶς βασιλεὺς τῶν
Ἰουδαίων (Matt 2:2). The story of the non-Judean magi foreshadows the
conflict that crystalizes between Jesus who is from Galilee in the north and
the religious leaders who are based in Jerusalem in the south. The strong
parallels between the infancy narrative and passion narrative have led some
to refer to Matthew 2 as a “proleptic passion narrative.”2 Matthew juxta-
poses the kingship of Jesus and Herod through repeated reference to
Herod’s kingship (Matt 2:1, 3, 9) and through the description that Herod
and all of Jerusalem were troubled to hear the news of Jesus’ birth
(ἀκούσας δὲ ὁ βασιλεὺς Ἡρῴδης ἐταράχθη καὶ πᾶσα Ἱεροσόλυμα μετʼ
αὐτοῦ, Matt 2:3). In response, King Herod summons the chief priests and
scribes to inquire about the precise location of Jesus’ birth. The opposi-
tion with Herod is further heightened as Jesus and his family are displaced
and forced to withdraw to Egypt (ἀνεχώρησεν, Matt 2:14).3 When Herod
realizes he has been duped by the magi (ἐνεπαίχθη, Matt 2:16), he issues
a decree to kill all of Bethlehem’s young male children. It is not until King
Herod’s death that Jesus and his family return from exile (Matt 2:19). But
even then, instead of returning home to Bethlehem, Jesus and his family
take up residence in Nazareth, a remote location in northern Galilee, since
Archelaus was king over Judea (βασιλεύει τῆς Ἰουδαίας, Matt 2:22). The
narrative context of the first occurrence underscores ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν
Ἰουδαίων as a signifier over a circumscribed territory and its inhabitants—
namely, Judea and Judeans.
 IDENTIFYING THE DOMINANT NARRATIVE: NON-ETHNORACIAL… 17

The next three occurrences of the title appear in successive fashion in

the passion narrative. Here, the ominous undertones of the title in the
infancy narrative become explicit as Jesus is tried, sentenced, and executed.
The second occurrence, like the first, comes in the form of a question.
During the proceedings of the Roman trial, Pilate asks Jesus a pointblank
question: “Are you ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων?” (Matt 27:11). Jesus’
response is brief and ambiguous: “[If] you say so” (Σὺ λέγεις, Matt 27:11).
The third occurrence of the title comes in the form of a taunt. After being
sentenced to death by Pilate, Jesus is beaten, stripped, and dressed in a
scarlet robe. A garrison of Roman soldiers mock him shouting, “Hail,
ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων!” The fourth and final occurrence of the title
reads as a formal charge fixed above the Roman crucifix for all to see:
“This is Jesus, ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων” (Matt 27:37).
In sum, the title’s four occurrences collectively underscore the fraught
and highly contentious nature of the title in Matthew’s infancy and pas-
sion narrative. Given its usage in Matthew, how has the title been under-
stood in the history of interpretation? Two representative trajectories in
Matthean scholarship may be adduced.

Religious-Theological Readings of the Title

The first major trajectory of interpretation is the traditional religious-­
theological approach. The essence of this reading is rendering the title in
theological terms: Jesus’ crucifixion as ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων confirms
his identity as the Davidic messiah based on Matthew’s genealogy (Ἰησοῦ
χριστοῦ υἱοῦ Δαυὶδ, Matt 1:1). R. T. France is representative of this view,
though there are numerous scholars who follow the traditional
interpretation.4
There are two notable tendencies that elucidate the non-ethnoracial
pattern of the traditional approach. The first is a tendency to emphasize
the theological dimensions of the title (e.g., ὁ βασιλεὺς) over and against
its ethnoracial dimensions (e.g., τῶν Ἰουδαίων). This is made possible by
an overt religious translation of τῶν Ἰουδαίων: Jesus is “King of the Jews.”
The implied contrast of this translation is between a religious Jew and a
non-­Jewish or pagan Gentile. For example, this assumption is clearly con-
veyed by France who, with reference to the title in Matt 2:2, says: “It is the
Gentile way of saying what a Jew would mean by ‘Messiah.’”5 For France,
the title is synonymous with other messianic titles attributed to Jesus in
18 W. PARK

Matthew (e.g., υἱοῦ Δαυὶδ [Matt 1:1]; ὁ χριστὸς [Matt 16:15]; θεοῦ υἱὸς
[Matt 14:33]). This is also confirmed by his comments on the title’s
occurrences in Matt 27:

“But even before that, in the mock homage to the ‘king of the Jews’ by the
non-Jewish soldiers and the laconic charge written above Jesus’ head, and in
the more theologically nuanced mockery by Jewish bystanders and oppo-
nents, Matthew expects his readers to catch the ironical truth of the honors
heaped upon Jesus in jest and mockery: even in a setting of public humilia-
tion and torture, this really is the king of the Jews, the temple builder, the
Savior, the Son of God.” (emphasis original)6

Here France seems to suggest that Jesus’ identity as ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν

Ἰουδαίων is by and large consistent with his identity as “the temple builder,
the Savior, the Son of God.” Further supporting the messianic reading is
the connection between ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων and βασιλεὺς Ἰσραήλ in
Matt 27:42. France argues that although the former is used by Jews and
the latter by Gentiles, the two titles are virtually the same in meaning. He
concludes: “‘King of the Jews’ is thus an appropriate translation of Jesus’
messianic claim into language a Roman governor could understand and
must take seriously.”7 The title communicates the same truth according to
a Gentile audience: Jesus is the Jewish messiah.8
When read alongside other messianic titles, the recurrence of ὁ βασιλεὺς
τῶν Ἰουδαίων in Matthew’s passion narrative is deeply ironic. With refer-
ence to Matt 27:39–44, for example, France notes: “Matthew expects his
readers to recognize that what is being thrown at Jesus in jest is in fact
true…he is the Son of God; he is the king of Israel, though not in the politi-
cal sense his mockers imagine.”9 On France’s reading, the title clearly signi-
fies Jesus’ messianic identity devoid of any ethnoracial, imperial, or political
meaning. In fact, whatever “political sense” the title may have had taken a
back seat, as it were, to its more immediate messianic significance. For in
the end Jesus is ironically crucified for claiming to be who he really was—
just not in the way that the Roman authorities had assumed. Yet what is
notable again is the overall effect: Jesus’ messiahship as ὁ βασιλεὺς obscures
and overshadows his identity as τῶν Ἰουδαίων. Jesus’ ethnoracial identity as
an ethnic Judean is diminished and downplayed.
A second notable tendency of the religious-theological reading is over-
looking the dehumanizing nature of Roman crucifixion. This tendency is
connected to the first insofar as the passion narrative is viewed as a theological
 IDENTIFYING THE DOMINANT NARRATIVE: NON-ETHNORACIAL… 19

resolution to the conflict between Jesus and the chief priests and scribes.
Rome’s involvement, in the end, is minimized. Pilate is rendered a neutral
figure who has to intervene and adjudicate a religious conflict. According to
France, Jesus’ transfer to the Roman authorities in Matt 27:2 is “presented as
a formality required to effect the execution the Jewish leaders have already
decided on.”10 France continues: “Pontius Pilate appears almost as a stooge
rather than as the ultimately responsible authority.”11 Both sentiments effec-
tively diminish Pilate’s role and Rome’s culpability.
Some render Pilate in glowing terms as the first Christian.12 Others
have likened Pilate’s use of the title as the first Christian sermon ever to be
preached. With reference to Matt 27:37, Frederick Dale Bruner writes:

Matthew’s strong demonstrative-cum-indicative “this is” (houtos estin) turns

the sign from an accusation to a proclamation, from a charge to a claim,
from an indictment to a confession (cf. Senior, 131). It is a sermon—per-
haps the earliest written Gospel of all: “The Gospel according to Pilate.”13

For Bruner, the vicious beatings by the Roman soldiers, the torture that
Jesus endures, and the ridicule that is cast upon him reveal, confirm, and
offer proof of Jesus’ messianic identity. So strong are the messianic over-
tones of the title that the salvific significance of Jesus’ crucifixion prevails
not despite, but actually through his brutal crucifixion as ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν
Ἰουδαίων. The theological significance attributed to Jesus’ death seems to
overshadow the dehumanizing aspects of Roman crucifixion—what Cicero
referred to as “the most horrendous torture” (crudelissimum taeteri-
mumque supplicium).14 This reading borders on a glorification of violence
and is yet another instance of how ὁ βασιλεὺς, as a signifier of Jesus’ mes-
sianic identity, overdetermines his identity as τῶν Ἰουδαίων.15
Both tendencies underscore the pattern of how Jesus’ ethnoracial iden-
tity as a marginalized Judean is made peripheral and of little consequence
by the traditional approach. Naturally this raises a number of questions
regarding the origins of the religious-theological reading. For instance, is
it actually the case that the titles attributed to Jesus in Matthew—particu-
larly, ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων—point in the same direction toward Jesus’
messianic identity? Are the two titles, ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων and
ὁ χριστὸς, virtually the same in meaning from two different perspectives—
the former from a “Gentile perspective” and the latter from a “Jewish
perspective”? Moreover, is the conflict surrounding Jesus’ birth and death
20 W. PARK

exclusively religious in nature? These questions gesture towards some of

the limitations of the traditional reading.
Yet there are other factors that call into question the merits of the tra-
ditional reading. Perhaps the most significant clue is the fact that early
Christians did not use ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων as a source of veneration
or worship.16 The absence of such a reference in the extant texts of early
Christianity is sufficient to give one pause at the historical plausibility of
the traditional interpretation. Another challenge to the messianic reading
is that Josephus uses the title as a political, not messianic, designation with
reference to King Herod who was a non-Judean Idumaean ruler appointed
by Rome.17 This fact casts doubt on the messianic reading and points,
instead, to the controversial and highly politicized nature of the title. In
light of these considerations, the messianic reading is not as sound as it
initially appears. To say it another way, while the messianic motif may in
fact loom large throughout the First Gospel, whether Matt 27:37 can be
regarded as a proof-text for Matthew’s messianic portrayal of Jesus is
another matter. Only recently has Matthean scholarship drawn attention
to the limits of the traditional religious-theological reading.

Socio-Political Readings of the Title

A second major trajectory of interpretation is the socio-political reading,
which has challenged the myopic focus of the traditional approach. These
salutary criticisms have opened the way towards a reading of Matthew
with a renewed focus on the Roman imperial horizon of the first century.18
Warren Carter, who is representative of this approach, rejects the conven-
tional depoliticized reading of the First Gospel. On balance, Carter
acknowledges the validity of religious concerns and expresses appreciation
for the rich insights they have yielded in the history of Matthean scholar-
ship. Nevertheless, he maintains that approaching Matthew exclusively
with religious questions neglects the Roman imperial context in which the
New Testament writings took shape. Indeed, Carter contends that much
of Matthean scholarship is depoliticized and has overlooked the simple
fact that Matthew addresses a marginalized community subject to Roman
imperial power. Carter develops his case in four works, including a the-
matic study, introductory volume, chapter-length commentary, and book-
length commentary.19 I refer to Carter’s approach as “socio-political”
because although he makes use of Empire studies, he does so primarily
within the framework of historical criticism to reconstruct Matthew’s
 IDENTIFYING THE DOMINANT NARRATIVE: NON-ETHNORACIAL… 21

authorial audience. Carter’s earlier works on Matthew are explicitly his-

torical critical, while his later work on Matthew leans in a more ideological
direction (especially his contribution in A Postcolonial Commentary on the
New Testament Writings). But even there his reading of the title has not
significantly changed from his earlier commentary.
Carter’s methodology is worth examining as a point of entry to his
socio-political reading. Carter locates the authorial audience as a small
marginalized community in post-70 Antioch and proceeds to read
Matthew in light of this reconstruction. The justification for this method-
ology, Carter argues, is the Matthean text itself which presupposes inti-
mate knowledge of the world of the Roman Empire.20 He maintains that
an anonymous author wrote the Gospel in the 80s to a Christian commu-
nity in Antioch of Syria.21 During the first century C.E., Antioch was the
third largest city of the Roman Empire after Rome and Alexandria.22 The
socio-political hierarchy of the Roman Empire started with the ruling class
at the top and the merchants, traders, artisans, day laborers, slaves, and
expendables at the bottom. Carter rejects the view that Matthew’s com-
munity consisted primarily of “involuntary marginals”; rather, he locates
the authorial audience of Matthew’s Gospel within a cross-section of
urban society consisting of people from both lower and higher social
strata.23 The authorial audience was small in number compared to the
population of Antioch of approximately 150,000 people. Socially, the
authorial audience experienced tension with, but not separation from, the
Jewish synagogue.24 Moreover, the authorial audience faced opposition
from the Roman imperial world whose claims conflicted with the story of
Jesus.25 In response, Matthew’s Gospel advocated a marginal identity and
lifestyle that runs counter to the Roman imperial system.
A second aspect of Carter’s methodology is a form of reader-response
theory. Having established the socio-political world of the Roman Empire
and Matthew’s authorial audience, Carter correlates these two reconstruc-
tions through “audience-oriented criticism.” That is, Carter locates the
authorial audience in post-70 Antioch and re-reads Matthew’s Gospel in
light of his reconstruction of the Roman imperial context. Therefore, by
locating Matthew’s authorial audience within the Roman imperial situa-
tion, Carter teases out important socio-political implications of Matthew’s
Gospel. The advantage of this approach is that it makes explicit what the
text of Matthew implies and draws connections that the text of Matthew
assumes the original audience would have made. The other advantage is
that the modern interpreter can become attuned to the ways in which the
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
vielfachen Krankheiten und Plagen des Erdteils, erschöpfend
ausgesprochen; ich habe nichts weiter hinzuzufügen.
In Europa gibt es dumme, mäßig begabte und ganz kluge
Menschen; in Afrika ist es nicht anders. Wohl konnte gerade die
ungeheure Lippenzier der Frauen da unten zuweilen den Eindruck
hervorrufen, als hätte man es mit dem vielgesuchten Bindeglied
zwischen Affe und Mensch, dem missing link der Deszendenzler, zu
tun; auch manches Negerbübchen konnte zu deszendenz-
theoretischen Vergleichen anreizen. Damit war indessen auch die
Veranlassung, hochnäsig von oben herab zu schauen, zu Ende. In
meinem während einer ganzen Reihe von Monaten durchgeführten
Zusammenleben mit den Völkern des Rovumagebietes habe ich den
Eindruck der Albernheit, den wir mit dem Neger gar zu gern
verbinden möchten, niemals entdeckt; im Gegenteil, man konnte das
Benehmen, mit dem nicht nur die würdigen Alten, sondern auch die
feurigen Jungen mit uns beiden Europäern verkehrten, mit Fug und
Recht als wohltuende Gesetztheit bezeichnen. Europäische
Volkskreise von gleicher sozialer Stellung hätten sich ein Beispiel
daran nehmen können. Auf Grund dieser guten persönlichen
Erfahrungen glaube ich auch nicht an das Dogma des Mangels jeder
Entwicklungsfähigkeit beim Neger; eine geistige Entwicklung ist ihm
nicht einmal in Nordamerika abzusprechen, trotzdem die
Hindernisse dort sicherlich größer sind als die
Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten; warum sollte er also nicht auf die
aufsteigende Bahn gelangen, sobald wir ihm die Gelegenheit dazu in
richtiger Weise bieten? Nur nicht von heute zu morgen sollen wir das
verlangen, das geht wider alle biologischen Entwicklungsgesetze;
ganz ebenso wie die Erwartung einer wirtschaftlichen Blüte von
heute zu morgen gegen jede geschichtliche Gesetzmäßigkeit
verstößt. —
Es ist längst Nacht geworden; der „König“ muß den Kurs
gewechselt haben, denn der Sturm faßt uns nicht mehr von vorn,
sondern stark backbords; sicherlich geht es jetzt auf Kreta zu;
morgen oder übermorgen werden wir an Griechenland
vorüberfahren. Ich freue mich, offen gestanden, auf den Anblick des
Landes, dessen antike Bevölkerung ich nicht so maß- und kritiklos
verhimmele wie so viele Männer bei uns daheim, denen der alte
Grieche die Verkörperung aller geschichtlichen und kulturellen
Tugenden ist. Nur eins wird den alten Hellenen auch der Neid lassen
müssen: kolonialen Unternehmungsmut haben sie in einem Ausmaß
besessen, daß sie uns in dieser Beziehung für unsere ganze Zukunft
als Vorbild dienen können.
Über dieser Zukunft liegt ein dichter Schleier. Wird uns Deutsch-
Ostafrika ein zweites Indien werden? Nicht einen Augenblick
bezweifele ich das; mein Auge sieht das weite Land durchzogen von
Schienensträngen. Der eine folgt der alten, großen
Karawanenstraße von der Küste bis zum Tanganyika. Den alten
Trägerverkehr hat das schnaubende Dampfroß lahmgelegt; dafür
beherbergt der ratternde Zug jetzt die früheren Träger selbst,
außerdem Massengüter, denen bei der alten Art des
Karawanenhandels der Weltmarkt verschlossen war. Zum Victoria-
Nyansa läuft ein Schienenstrang und auch zum entlegenen Nyassa;
wir gewinnen Anschluß an das britische Netz Südafrikas, an die
Fahrstraßen des Kongostaates, an das Niltal. Vor dreißig Jahren
noch war Stanleys Marsch zum Seengebiet und die Fahrt den Kongo
hinab eine entdeckerische Großtat: wir Leute von heute fahren
vielleicht noch mit dem Luxuszuge vom Kap bis Kairo, von
Daressalam bis Kamerun.
 Register.

Abdallah bin Malim, Wali von Mahuta 429. 430.

Aberglauben 230. 231. 232. 353. 484. 485.
Achemtinga 381.
Achinamakanjira 380.
Achinamataka 380.
Achingalla 382.
Adams, Pater 317.
„Admiral“ 498.
Affen 256.
Afrika, Bevölkerung 23. 24.
Afrikafonds 17. 18.
Alamande 382.
Alaun 191. 192.
Akuchigombo 390. 391.
Akuchikomu 271. 283. 356.
Akumapanje 230. 232. 233.
Akundonde 177. 178. 182. 230. 232. 233. 234. 237. 254.
265. 278. 361. 363.
Altersklassen 369.
Amachinga 380. 381.
Amakale 380.
Amali 275.
Amassaninga 380.
Amiraji 382.
Amulette 231. 384.
Anamungwi 234. 269. 274. 275. 276. 362.
Antilopen 250.
Araber 4.
Arbeitsrhythmus 471. 472.
Askari 44.
Assuan 502.
Atlantischer Ozean 10.
Aufstand in Ostafrika 69.
Aussatz 139. 241. 242.

Bab el Mandeb 24.

Bafta 121.
Bagamoyo 2.
Bakiri 178. 179.
Bambusfrucht 382.
Bangala 262. 265. 422.
Bantuneger 20. 24. 72. 177.
Bantusprache VII.
Baobab 256.
Barasa 81. 88.
Barden s. Chelikosoe, Sulila.
Barnabas 448.
Barrabarra 70. 293. 407.
Basi-Erbse 92. 119. 201.
Bastian, Adolf 22.
Bauchtanz 275.
Baumgrassteppe, lichte, s. Pori.
Baumkultus 396. 398.
Baumwolle 281. 401.
Beerdigung 481. 482.
Benediktiner, Mission 69.
Bergbaufeld Luisenfelde 104.
Beriberi 241.
Beschneidung 229. 268. 269; s. Unyago.
Bismarckburg 455.
Blantyre 380.
Blasbalg 326.
Blasrohr 246.
Bogen 99. 100. 347. 348;
Spannweisen 99.
Bornhardt, Geologe 82. 89. 90. 91.
Botokuden 75.
Briefträger 143. 144.
Buchner, Max 79. 80.

Carnon, Reverend 65. 98.

Chelikosoe 220–222.
Chihero 368.
Chikugwe 72. 153.
Chingulungulu 136. 140. 162. 169. 171. 175. 188. 213. 220.
238. 243. 254. 256. 319;
Bevölkerung 176.
Chipini s. Nasenpflock.
Chiputu s. Echiputu.
Chironji 91. 456.
Chissi 184.
Chiwata 140. 148.
Chiwäula 183.
Collinscher Kraftmesser 13. 58.
Cromlech 366. 367.

Daggara, Beschneidungshütte 268. 362.

Dampfer der Regierung 487.
Daressalam 1. 2. 29. 41. 42. 43. 44. 59. 60. 62. 68. 496.
497. 498. 500.
Daua, Zaubermittel 69. 70.
Daudi, Prediger 194. 232. 305. 381. 482.
von der Decken 66.
Dernburg 509.
Deutsche, Kastengeist 59.
Deutsche und Engländer 12. 13.
Diabolospiel 458. 459. 460.
Diluvialmensch 25.
Doherr, Kapitän 499.
Drehscheibe 334.

Echiputu 271. 274. 292. 361. 371.

Eherecht 382. 383.
Eheverbot 236.
Einbaum 260.
Eisenbahnen in Ostafrika 3. 514.
Eisenstein 325.
Eisentechnik 325. 326.
Elefanten 262. 417. 419. 420. 421. 427. 428. 476;
Jagd 251–253.
Elendantilope 250.
Embe s. Mango.
Engelhardt, Hauptmann 67.
England 507;
Kolonialkriege 507. 508.
Engländer 13. 14.
Ernährung in Ostafrika 61. 62.
Ethnologie 22.
Euphorbien 323.
Europäerleben in Ostafrika 59. 60. 61. 62.
Ewerbeck, Bezirkshauptmann 42. 62. 63. 66. 80. 82. 94.
96. 97. 102. 144. 178. 239. 240. 257. 409. 496.
Exogamie 342.
Eyassi-See 19. 20.

Fallen 125. 127. 128.

Feuererzeugung 231. 243. 244–248.
Feuerkultus 369.
Feuerlose Völker 244.
Feuerpumpe 246.
Fieber 168. 169. 170. 239. 240. 241. 308. 309.
Fliegen 186.
Frauenarbeit 331.
Frauentriller 285.
Fundi, Handwerksmeister 158.
Funsa s. Sandfloh.

Geheimbünde 370.
Gelbgießer 326. 327. 328.
Geld in Ostafrika 131. 132.
Gerichtsbarkeit 154. 155. 156.
Geschlechternamen, Erklärung 378.
Geschlechtsverband s. Litaua.
Gespenstergeschichten 399. 400.
Getränke in Ostafrika 62.
Gneiskuppen 89. 90. 91. 92. 141.
Grabbäume 398.
Gräber 73. 243. 323;
für Kinder 168.
Granaten 262.
Guillain, Admiral 3.

Haber, Geheimrat 31.

Hackbau 126. 510. 511.
Hakenkreuz s. Swastika.
Hamiten 20. 23. 25.
Hammer 337.
Hängebauch der Knaben 187.
Hanno der Karthager 81.
Hatia 72. 73. 74. 323;
Grab 73. 243.
Haus, Ursprung 331.
Hausverschluß 319. 320–322.
Heirat bei den Makonde und Makua 373;
bei den Yao 371. 372. 373.
Heller 132.
Helmolt, Weltgeschichte 9.
Hemedi Maranga 300. 481.
Hendereras Dorf 408.
Hinrichtung 43. 44.
Hirse 207.
Holland 507.
Holzskulpturen 317. 444. 445.
Hüttensteuer 219.
Huwe 326.

Ikoma, Tanz 277. 278.

Indischer Ozean 3. 9. 10. 311.
Inselberge 88. 89. 90. 91. 141. 146. 254.
Ipiviflöten 356.
Iraku 151.
Irangi, Aufstand 31. 32.
Islam 243. 339. 486.
Italien 5. 6;
Landschaft 7;
Völkerschichten 5;
 in Afrika 29.
Itona s. Lippenscheibe.
Itondosha 399. 400.

Jagdabenteuer 483. 484.

Jagdwaffen 248. 249.
Jagdzauber 249. 250. 251. 252.
Jaeger, Dr. 18. 310.
Jägervolk 222. 223.
Jumbe Chauro, Ort 319. 320.

Kaffern 177. 406. 412.

Kaiserhof, Hotel 497.
„Kaiser Wilhelm II.“ 487.
Kakalle 356.
Kalanje 183.
Kamuma-Baum 398.
Kandulu 415.
Kanga 68.
„Kanzler“ 496.
Kap Banura 39. 40.
Kap Guardafui 22. 27. 28;
Leuchtturm 29.
Kaprubine 262. 263.
Kartenzeichnen der Neger 453. 454. 455.
Kasi Uleia 112. 113.
Kattune 335.
Katuli 183.
Kettengefangene 44. 45. 451.
Kiboko 145.
Kibwana 34. 53. 105. 109. 204. 210. 212. 266. 271. 277.
299.
Kieselsteine unter der Zunge 394. 395.
Kigelia 164.
Kiheru 489.
Kilimandscharo 151.
Kilwa 36. 66.
— Kisiwani 38. 41.
— Kiwindje 34. 38.
Kinambarre, heiße Quellen 70.
Kinematograph VII. 50. 222. 223. 271. 466.
Kipini s. Nasenpflock.
Kirchhoff, Alfred, Geheimrat VI.
Kirongosi, Führer 96.
Kitanda, Bettgestell 172.
Kitulo, Berg 63. 490. 491.
Kilututu, Berg 91.
Kiyao, Sprache der Yao 68.
Klima in Massassi 146;
in Newala 254. 255. 298. 299. 395;
am Rovuma 428.
Knabenbeschneidung s. Unyago.
Knotenknüpfen 232.
Knotenschrift 401. 402.
Knudsen, Nils 82. 102. 103. 104. 137. 140. 148. 154. 163.
164. 168. 169. 171. 184. 186. 208. 212. 233. 234. 236.
239. 249. 255. 256. 257. 260. 261. 262. 293. 309. 310.
311. 343. 373. 374. 376. 379. 388. 390. 407. 417. 419.
420. 422. 428. 476. 479. 480. 483. 484. 485. 492.
Koch, Geheimrat 138.
Kochkunst 329. 330. 332.
Kofia tule 141. 142.
Kohlenlager 178.
Kolonialkongreß 18.
Kolonien, deutsche, Erforschung 17. 18.
Kondoa-Irangi-Expedition 17. 19. 30. 31.
Konservieren des Fleisches 253;
des Getreides 117. 118. 173.
Kontinente, alte 25. 26.
Korsett 78. 79. 80.
Krankenpflege 242.
Krankheiten 112. 113. 114. 156. 241. 395. 396. 411.
Kreisel 350. 351.
Krokodile 259. 422. 423.
Kuhn, Sprachforscher 245.
Kulturpflanzen 92. 256.

Labia minora, Verlängerung 371.

Langheld 413.
Leben nach dem Tode 396.
Leberwurstbaum s. Kigelia.
Lichehe-See 256.
Lidede-See 405. 409. 419.
Liebeszauber 232.
Lieder VII. 47. 48. 49. 50. 86. 196. 197. 198. 199. 200. 217.
218–222. 286. 287. 295. 324. 399. 400. 471. 474. 475.
476.
Lieder, Geologe 66.
Likopoloe 184.
Likosoe s. Chelikosoe.
Likuku 294.
Likumbi 367.
Linder, Wirtschaftsinspektor 221. 490.
Lindi 32. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 59. 62. 380. 401. 477. 478.
492. 496.
Lippenpflock s. Lippenscheibe.
Lippenscheibe 75. 76. 77. 273. 274. 416. 436. 437. 438.
439;
Einfluß auf Sprache 463.
Liquata, Tanz 85. 433. 451.
Liquiqui, Eule 264. 453.
Lisakassa 361.
Litaua 376. 377. 378. 379.
Litotwe 354. 445.
Livingstone 66. 149. 257. 258.
Löwen 74. 75. 205. 262. 300.
Luagala 44. 488. 489.
Lubbock 244.
Ludjende 177. 178. 380. 382.
Lugombo 351.
Luisenfelde, Bergbaufeld 262. 263. 265.
Lukimua, Fluß 414. 415. 416.
Lukosyo 380.
Lukuledi 40. 63. 81. 83. 88. 242. 311. 325. 476. 489. 490;
Tal 66. 69;
Niederung 73. 318.
Lumesule 177.
Lupanda 270. 272. 363. 366.
Luwanja, Tanz 226.

Machemba 488.
Madjedje, Landschaft 90;
Berge 312.
Madyaliwa 413. 414. 415. 425. 426.
Mafia, Insel 39.
Mafiti 150. 406. 416.
Magwangwara 150. 406.
Mahuta 316. 318. 406. 407. 408. 409. 417. 430. 431. 435.
486.
Majimaji, Aufstand 48. 69. 70. 72. 73. 433.
Mais 207.
Makachu, Jumbe 411. 412. 413. 414. 415. 440. 441.
Makale 414.
Makatta-Ebene 454.
Makonde 72. 93. 176. 258. 284. 304. 314. 319. 320. 325.
367. 379. 382. 409. 506;
Feldbau 305. 314. 315. 407;
Geschichte 315;
Häuser 319;
 Hausfresken 446. 447;
Hausverschluß 319. 320. 321. 322;
Heirat 373;
Lippenscheibe 77. 439;
Masken 289. 290;
Maskentanz 370;
Namen 315. 316. 317;
Siedelungen 446;
Sprache 462. 463;
Stammessage 316;
Stammgesetze 316;
Ursprung 317. 318;
Volksfeste 456. 457;
Ziernarben 440;
Zwillinge 344.
Makondebusch 292. 293. 311. 312. 313. 314. 410;
Entstehung 313. 314. 315.
Makondeplateau 66. 73. 76. 77. 82. 88. 89. 146. 163. 303.
311. 370. 401. 405. 418. 424. 505;
Bevölkerung 304;
Flüsse 190;
Wasserverhältnisse 303. 304.
Makondeschichten 303. 312.
Makosyo 380.
Makua 93. 126. 176. 177. 179. 218. 258. 304. 314. 319.
377. 379. 382. 393. 506;
Leben nach dem Tode 399;
Häuptlinge 73;
Hautfarbe 72;
Heirat 373;
Hütten 323;
Jäger 222. 223;
Tänze 223–226;
Wanderung 151.
Makwaru, Tanz 223. 224. 225. 226.
Malambo 177.
Malaria 138. 241. 318.
Maluchiro 243.
Mambo sasa 412. 413.
Mango 380. 488. 496. 497.
Mangroven 35. 36.
Mangupa 292. 356. 367.
Maniok, wilder 382.
Mannbarkeitsfest s. Unyago.
Manyara-See 19.
Marenga Mkali 454.
Marquardt 262. 263. 453.
Marschleben 104. 105. 106. 108. 109. 110.
Masewe, Rasseln 226;
Tanz 226. 361.
Masimbo 382.
Masitu 150. 179. 218. 406.
Masken 289. 290. 444.
Massai 23. 151;
Hütten 110. 111.
Massai-Affen 151.
Massanje-Heirat 371. 372.
Massassi 64. 74. 87. 88. 92. 93. 110. 136. 139. 173. 176.
177. 178. 213. 254. 319. 335;
Boma 124;
Gebiet 88;
Gräber 243;
 Klima 146;
Militärstation 65. 87. 89;
Mission 64. 65. 94. 96;
Stämme 92. 93;
Vegetation 92.
— -Berge 88. 89. 91. 455. 456;
Entstehung 90. 91.
Massekere-Matola 120. 135.
Masumgumso V.
Mataka 380.
Matambwe 72. 176. 179. 258. 292. 304. 325. 416. 422;
Frauen 294. 295;
Auflösung des Stammes 258;
Schwimmkunst 422. 423.
Matola 140. 169. 171. 176. 177. 179. 180. 184. 185. 194.
195. 201. 222. 264. 291. 357. 358. 406;
Haus 171. 172. 173.
Mawia 319. 418. 445. 446;
Zopf 445;
Tätowierung 446.
Mawiaplateau 409. 418.
Mbemkuru 316. 318. 505.
Mchauru 279.
Medizinen 231. 396.
Medulla, Zauberer 279. 280. 281. 282.
Mehlbereitung 207. 208.
Mehlopfer 396. 397. 398.
Menschheit, Herkunft 23;
Entwicklung 25.
Menstruation 383. 384.
Mentore der Knaben 234;
Ansprache 234. 235. 236.
Merker, Hauptmann 23. 31.
Messing 328.
Meteore 230.
Meyer, Prof. Dr. Hans 18.
Mgoromondo 351. 389.
Mhogo 92. 119.
Mikindani 32. 41. 315. 401.
Mikindanischichten 303.
Mirambo 488.
Mischrassen 25. 26.
Mission, englische 64. 65. 93. 98. 305. 391.
Missionare 75.
Mitete 444. 445. 446.
Mkomahindo 91.
Mkululu 161. 162.
Mkwera 91.
Mlila 264.
Mlipa 323.
Mluhesi 414.
Mnyampara, Trägerführer 38. 106. 107.
Mombassa 2. 3. 29. 44.
Mondfinsternis 230.
Monsun 29.
Moritz 34. 104. 109. 160. 210. 212. 213. 266. 271. 277.
379.
Morse 99.
Moskitonetz 138.
Moskitos 36.
Mpapua 454.
Mputa 184.
Mrogoro 454.
Mrweka 490.
Msollo-Baum 396. 397. 398.
Mtama 72.
Mtandi 91. 94;
Besteigung 94. 95. 96. 97.
Mtarika 177. 179. 264. 265.
Mtschingabai 40.
Mtua 66. 72.
Muerahochland 505.
Muhesa 499.
Munchira 367. 368.
Mundsteine 393. 394. 395.
Muschel 382.
Musikinstrumente 214. 215. 226. 227. 268. 351.
Musik in Südostafrika 218.
Musikkapelle 214. 224. 226. 227. 500.
Mutterrecht 236. 426.
Mwiti 141. 145. 146. 147. 154. 243. 382.
Myombowald 82.

Nachtlager 153.