Jewish Law and Johannine Vocabulary: ἀληϑής 93 he may channel requests from Z to his principal (14,13; 15,7-8), naturally at the moment when X is elated (Mt 25,21). In the nature of the relationship, the instructions can imply some discretion in the agent (5,22.27). He may deliver a bill of divorce on a Tuesday rather than a Monday -but the delivery is “legitimate” in either case (cf. Mishnah, Gitt. VI.3). It is not unreasonable, though unnecessary, for the agent to disclose the principal’s motives, within which the instructions have their justification20. Yet his disclosures must not deviate from his instructions, e.g. he cannot make a divorce conditional when it is irrevoc- able. He must not place his principal’s reputation at risk (7,18). Assume Z is satisfied that X exists (though invisible: 7,l8; 8,19!), that he is credit-worthy, and that Y is indeed his agent (10,14). All Y does within his instructions is “legitimate” (qayyām)21. “Legitimate” means binding at law –not merely veridical, though any message may be factually true (8,46). The obvious Greek equivalent is κύριος22, rather than πιστός (“reliable”), which fits a person better than an act. Κύριος occurs in relevant literature (Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich, s.v. κύριος I), but it can be misleading, having “principal”, “dominant” as alternative meanings. I revert to the principal-agent relationship, which, at its best, produces gratification for the former (8,29; 10,17; 14,23). Typically it is personal. An obvious choice for agent is the principal’s son (3,l8): it is assumed his interests (Mt 21,37) coincide more or less with his father’s (3,35)23. As to their testimonies, we shall revert to them. Meanwhile the principal may entrust large and awkward transactions to his agent (Lk 19,13). X may send out more than one Y, as Jesus does, sub-agency being evidenced in Jewry24. X’s intention is always the master of the transaction(s) (l3,l6; cf. Mishnah, Ter. IV.4) though Z may not know exactly who and where he is25. The agent has no initiative26, and no personal authority (6,38). It must have been common for capitalists, especially females, to operate behind a curtain. Agents attend for instructions (9,29) and report personally on the completion of their assignments (Mt 25,19; Lk 19,15). X may have The agent is presumed to know and be governed by bis principal’s advantage. Bab. 20 Talm., B.B. 69b; Ket. 99b; Maimonides, op. cit., XII. IV. i, 2. Aram. šalîhûtā’ can amount to the principal’s intention. Cf. Jn 4,34; 6,39, 10,18. The “works” are his credentials; 5,14.36;9,3-4; 10,37. 21 Liddell-Scott-Jones, s.v. κύριος 11.2. Plato, Leg. 926D (δόγματα); Theaet. 179B 22 (δόξας). Lysias l8.15 (συνθήκας). P. Eleph. 1.14. Mt 21,38 –a dangerous assumption. 23 Jn 4,38; 13,10; 17,18; 20,21 (cf. Bab. Talm., Qidd. 41a). 24 Mt 25,l4,15d; Mk 13,34; Lk 19,12, Jn 8,19 ( Ποῦ; –a reasonable question). 25 Jn 5,30; 7,17-18.28; 8,28.42; 14,10. 26