κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων v. ἔχειν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς

[Stephen Hughes]

Looking more closely at the language of this passage ... Is there a noticeable difference between the two κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων v. ἔχειν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς? Here are the two verses:

διὰ τοῦτο ὀφείλει ἡ γυνὴ ἐξουσίαν ἔχειν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς διὰ τοὺς ἀγγέλους.

Πᾶς ἀνὴρ προσευχόμενος ἢ προφητεύων, κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων, καταισχύνει τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ.

Stepping back from the passage for clarification..
How are either of these phrases related to κατακαλύπτεσθαι / ἀκατακάλυπτος or κομᾶν in contexts other than the New Testament?

[Stephen Carlson]

How are either of these phrases related to κατακαλύπτεσθαι / ἀκατακάλυπτος or κομᾶν in contexts other than the New Testament?

Maybe someone happens to know, but it's the kind of question that's hard to answer without doing a lot of work.

[Stephen Hughes]

How are either of these phrases related to κατακαλύπτεσθαι / ἀκατακάλυπτος or κομᾶν in contexts other than the New Testament?

Maybe someone happens to know, but it's the kind of question that's hard to answer without doing a lot of work.

Well, that is what I was hoping someone had either looked into to come across at some point. That is to say that if somebody had thought it important enough to look into, it would have been looked into already. If it had not been considered important to look into with this much detail, that could be an indication that the topic is not so important to spill a great deal of binary keyboard datas over.

[Peter Streitenberger]

Dear friends,

1Kor 11,7: Ἀνὴρ μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ὀφείλει κατακαλύπτεσθαι τὴν κεφαλὴν, εἰκὼν καὶ δόξα θεοῦ ὑπάρχων· a paraphrase of κατακαλύπτεσθαι τὴν κεφαλὴν by Epiphanius Scr. Eccl., Panarion (= Adversus haereses): «Ἀνὴρ οὐκ ὀφείλει κομᾶν, δόξα καὶ εἰκὼν θεοῦ ὑπάρχων».(A man ought not to have long hair, as he is the Glory and image of God).

On another passage the writer repeats that statement: ὁ αὐτὸς ἀπόστολος «ἀνὴρ οὐκ ὀφείλει κομᾶν, δόξα καὶ εἰκὼν θεοῦ ὑπάρχων». (Epiphanius Scr. Eccl., Panarion (= Adversus haereses).

The shame which comes with the κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων describes Gregorius Nyssenus: ἣν κόμην ὠνόμασεν, ἣν ὅταν μὴ ἔχῃ Καταισχύνει τὴν κεφαλὴν ἑαυτῆς, καθώς φησιν ὁ ἀπόστολος.
A man bringes shame on his (own) head, when he let's his hair grow long.(In Canticum canticorum (homiliae 15).

To " κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων" a passsage where an explict object is named:
ὡς εἰς Ἀλεξάνδρειαν ἧκε καὶ τῆς νεὼς ἀποβὰς ἐβάδιζε κατὰ τῆς κεφαλῆς ἔχων τὸ ἱμάτιον, ἠξίουν ἀποκαλύψασθαι παραθέοντες οἱ Ἀλεξανδρεῖς καὶ δεῖξαι ποθοῦσιν αὐτοῖς τὸ πρόσωπον·
Alexander had a coat hanging down from his head. The problem with Paul is that he doesn't give an object, as coat or hat, that's why we have to reconstruct it from the context, which speaks from long hair (in my opinion).

A covering of the head is possible by hair:
"καλύπτεται ὑπὸ τῶν τριχῶν (Scholia in Euripidem)

That's why authors see the long hair as the damanded covering of the head by women:
"οὐκοῦν δόξα μὲν γυναικὸς ἡ θρὶξ παρὰ τοῦ Παύλου ὠνόμασται καὶ ἀντὶ περιβολαίου δεδόσθαι τῇ γυναικὶ τὴν κόμην λέγει." (Gregorius Nyssenus Theol., In Canticum canticorum (homiliae 15))

Is that of any help ?
Yours
Peter, Germany

[Stephen Hughes]

Is that of any help ?

Did you find any relevant instances of ἀκατακάλυπτος?

[Stephen Hughes]

Before this thread sinks into the sunset of the seventh day of inactivity and lies burried and forgotten to all save the forum archeologists, let me put forward the thought that I was wondering whether someone would bring up in discussion.

I have been wondering whether κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων is referring to totality and ἔχειν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς to partiality but within a different frame of reference to the one which we are used to taking them in. I realise that "properly" they are taken as "cover completely" (spatial), and "cover just a bit" (spatial), but I have been wondering if that could be understood temporally.

[cwconrad]

Before this thread sinks into the sunset of the seventh day of inactivity and lies burried and forgotten to all save the forum archeologists, let me put forward the thought that I was wondering whether someone would bring up in discussion.

I have been wondering whether κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων is referring to totality and ἔχειν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς to partiality but within a different frame of reference to the one which we are used to taking them in. I realise that "properly" they are taken as "cover completely" (spatial), and "cover just a bit" (spatial), but I have been wondering if that could be understood temporally.

Do you mean, "with hair streaming behind him in the breeze"? -- as in the vase-paintings of devotees of Dionysus in the mountainside chase?

The more serious question for me is whether either of these expressions carries no implicit object of the verb ἔχειν. That's been argued, but I don't think it's been demonstrated.

[Stephen Carlson]

There is a discussion about this in Preston T. Massey, "The Meaning of κατακαλύπτω and κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων in 1 Corinthians 11.2–16," NTS 53 (2007): 502-523. For what is worth. here is the relevant paragraph and footnotes:

At this point a final conclusion may be drawn with regard to the expression κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων as used in 1 Cor 11.4. This idiomatic phrase does not mean ‘letting down the hair’. This expression, though generally used with an object (but understood without the object), always implies some kind of garment or cloth coming down from the head.[71] Furthermore, κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων approximates the nearly identical expression in 1 Cor 11.10 of ἔχειν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς, which also employs terminology characteristic of a head covering.[72] This expression is normally used with the familiar textile garment himation.[73] The himation is a synonym for the περιβόλαιον mentioned at v. 15. Therefore, the text is talking about veils or material head coverings, a subject perfectly familiar to native Greeks.

71. Besides the references already cited, κατὰ τὴς κεφαλῆς τὸ ἱμάτιον (a covering down from the head) may be found in the following texts: Dionysius of Halicarnassus The Roman Antiquities III.71, VI.3.3, XI.26.4, XII.16.4, XV.9.7, XIX.8.3; Plutarch Pompey XL.4; Caesar LXVI.12 The Sayings of the Romans 200F; The Roman Questions 266C and 267C; Fortune of the Romans 319C (which has the similar ἀφεῖλεν ἀπὸ τῆς κεφαλῆς τὸ ἱμάτιον; and Josephus, Ant. III.270. See also in similar but not identical language Josephus J.W. VII.128 and Plutarch’s Pompey VIII.3. These texts all describe a veil or head covering. Going back further to archaic times, the Hymn to Demeter (180) contains the line στεῖχε κατὰ κρῆθεν κεκαλυμμένη.

72. Diodorus Siculus Histories I.62, uses the exact phrase ἔχειν ὲπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς (‘to wear upon the head’). The object worn upon the head in this instance is the head of an animal. The use of the infinitive ἔχειν combined with κεφαλή in the genitive case describes some artificial object placed upon the head; it does not describe long hair hanging down. The very same expression is also found in Pausanias Description of Greece (Achaia) VII.5.9 and (Arcadia) VIII.32.1. Plutarch uses a participial phrase in The Roman Questions 266C: τύχωσιν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς ἔχοντες τὸ ἱμάτιον. The use of the verb ἔχειν as conveying a temporary condition is perhaps intended as a contrast to a more permanent condition as reflected in the verb εἶναι (as in Pausanias Description of Greece [Phocis] X.30.8).

73. Such as Pausanias Description of Greece (Laconia) III.15.11, who describes Aphrodite as κάθηται δὲ καλύπτραν τε ἔχουσα (‘who sits wearing a veil’). There is one very anomalous construction in Josephus: τὴν κόμην. . .ἔχων (Ant. VII.267). This rare reference, however, is not associated with the adjective ἀκατακάλυπτος. Josephus, in accordance with convention, uses the appropriate verb ἀνίηνι (V.347) and the noun ἂνέσις (V.285) to describe loosened
hair.

In my view, there is an implicit object with ἔχειν, and supplying that object, whether a coverning or hair, requires cultural knowledge we may not have access to.

[Stephen Hughes]

The only verse of the New Testament with ἔχειν and τρίχας together is

Καὶ εἶχον τρίχας ὡς τρίχας γυναικῶν, καὶ οἱ ὀδόντες αὐτῶν ὡς λεόντων ἦσαν.

Apart from this New Testament passage, does ἔχειν collocate with τρίχας in the wider Greek literature?

The use of the verb ἔχειν as conveying a temporary condition is perhaps intended as a contrast to a more permanent condition as reflected in the verb εἶναι (as in Pausanias Description of Greece [Phocis] X.30.8).

The collocation of τρίχας and ἔχειν in Revelations is against what is suggested about temporality in Massey.

[Jonathan Robie]

There is a discussion about this in Preston T. Massey, "The Meaning of κατακαλύπτω and κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων in 1 Corinthians 11.2–16," NTS 53 (2007): 502-523.

Here is an interesting article from someone who disagrees with Massey.

Chrysostom & Epiphanius: Long Hair Prohibited as Covering in 1 Cor. 11:4, 7
Evangelical Theological Society
November 16, 2011
A. Philip Brown II, PhD

Contrary to Massey’s claim, as noted before, the phrase κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων does not occur in the extant literature unless it has an explicit direct object. It is, therefore, illegitimate to claim that it is “understood without the object” to always imply “some kind of garment or cloth coming down from the head.” Nonetheless, Massey’s footnote appears to be an impressive list of citations supporting his conclusion that κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων refers to a material covering.

Upon inspection, however, two major problems appear. First, three of the six references to Dionysius of Halicarnassus do not contain the phrase κατὰ τῆς κεφαλῆς τὸ ἱμάτιον as was claimed. In fact, they have nothing to do with head coverings. Specifically, in Roman Antiquities, VI.3.3, Dionysius refers to Postumius “setting up camp high above” (lit. on the head of; κατὰ κεφαλῆς) his enemies; Roman Antiquities, XI.26.4, line 6, describes how Siccius’ enemies got above him (κατὰ κεφαλῆς) and rolled stones on him, killing him; and Roman Antiquities, XIX.8.3, line 6, describes Meton being thrown out of the theater head first (κατὰ κεφαλῆς).

The second problem is that citing texts that contain terms such as ἱμάτιον (“toga”) or περιβολὴν (“garment, mantle”) does nothing to prove that the phrase κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων, which does not contain such terms, refers to a material covering. That is similar to saying that since the phrase “with a hat on his head” occurs frequently in English literature, the blank in the phrase “with on his head” must refer to a hat.