Abstract

The information about the apostle Bartholomew in the Synoptic lists and about Nathanael of Cana in Jn 1:45–51, already in antiquity led to interest in the identity of these two figures. They were mutually identified as a single character on the basis of the presumed common link with Philip. Although ancient sources attest many other identifications for Nathanael, the one with Bartholomew has always been at the heart of the interest of modern critics, who closely analyzed its historical plausibility, even more than the reasons why, and ways in which, it might have been produced, and firmly established. After a broad presentation of the ancient testimonies, this paper focuses on the different positions of modern scholars, and finally brings some methodological conclusions: on the one side, sources external to the New Testament are indispensable for understanding the data transmitted within it. On the other side, the problem of the actual historical reliability of the information conveyed by the ancient authors and works must be clearly distinct from that of their "internal" literary understanding and their own interpretation of facts and events.