Exegesis:
Vv. 1f consist of (a) a series of indications of time, serving to fix the events to be described in vv. 2ff in the setting of world and regional history, the latter both political and religious, and (b) the main clause egeneto rēma theou epi Iōannēn ‘the word of God came to John,’ etc.
en etei de pentekaidekatō tēs hēgemonias Tiberiou Kaisaros ‘in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar.’ de is transitional and serves to introduce a new narrative.
hēgemonia ‘rule,’ here referring to the reign of the Roman emperor but in itself as general a term as the verb hēgemoneuō (used in the next phrase), cf. on 2.2.
Tiberiou Kaisaros ‘of Tiberius Caesar,’ cf. on 2.1.
tēs Ioudaias ‘of Judea,’ cf. on 1.5. Here it is used in an administrative sense, including Samaria but not Galilee, as the next phrase shows.
kai tetraarchountos … Hērōdou ‘and when Herod was tetrarch.’
tetrarcheō ‘to be tetrarch,’ i.e. originally the governor of one of the four provinces of Thessaly, later denoting the ruler of any small country or region who was not a king.
tēs Itouraias kai Trachōnitidos chōras ‘of Ituraea and Trachonitis,’ both going with chōras which admits of many translations, cf. e.g., “district” (Translator’s New Testament), “territory” (Phillips), “country” (Moffatt). Their tetrarch Philippus was Herod’s older brother, of a different mother.
epi archiereōs Hanna kai Kaïapha ‘in the time of the high priest Annas and Caiaphas.’ archiereōs, though in the singular, refers to both names mentioned, and Luke may have thought of Annas and Caiaphas as being a kind of joint high priests.
archiereus ‘high priest.’
egeneto rēma theou epi Iōannēn ‘the word of God happened, or, came to John.’ This phrase occurs frequently in the Septuagint, denoting the divine inspiration of a prophet by God and the entrusting of a divine message or commission (cf. e.g. Gen. 15.1; 1 Sam. 15.10; Jer. 1.2). It implies that the person to whom the word of God comes, comes under the power of that word, not just that the word is communicated to him.
en tē erēmō ‘in the desert’ refers to the same area as hai erēmoi in 1.80.
Translation:
The elaborate way in which Luke states the date of the events to be told has the stylistic function of marking that he now comes to the main part of his narrative. In several languages this can be imitated approximately, but it may be advisable then to divide the one long sentence in small units, introducing the main event (‘the word … came …’) by a recapitulating expression, e.g. “It was the fifteenth year of the rule of Emperor T.; Pontius P. was governor of Judea, Herod was ruler of G…. It was at that time that the word of God came…” (Good News Translation). Other languages may require an introductory word or phrase, such as, ‘To-begin-with’ (Malay; cf. also above on 1.5), ‘What will be told now is this.’ If according to receptor language usage the main event has to be mentioned early in the utterance, the sentence may have to be recast in such a way that first the emperor, next John and what happened to him, and last the secular and religious rulers are referred to (Manobo), whereas in a language as Sateré what happened to John will have to come at the very beginning.
The noun reign may have to be expressed in a clause, e.g. ‘when T. C. had been reigning/ruling, or, had been emperor’; and cf. on 1.33.
Governor, see on 2.2.
Tetrarch. The rendering to be chosen should denote an indigenous ruler that is subject to higher authority, cf. the following renderings of ‘tetrarch’ and ‘emperor’ respectively, ‘prince’—‘king-of-princes’ (cf. Balinese), ‘chief’—‘chief of greatness’ (Kituba), ‘king who has been apportioned a fief,’ i.e. feudal Lord—‘(one who is) on the throne,’ using a well known idiom that expresses sovereiGood News Bibley (Chinese Union Version); in Kekchí the distinction is indicated by a reference to areas of different size, e.g. ‘who had power in Galilee’ (etc.)—‘who had power in all the land.’ A cultural equivalent has been used in, ‘at the time of these four chiefs: Herod in the region G., Phillip in the region I….’ (Batak Toba, adapting an expression employed in several parts of Sumatra for groups of high dignitaries, which are called ‘the four chiefs/grandees,’ even if their number is not complete). Attempts at a literal rendering, often a neologism in the receptor language, usually result in a long and cumbersome phrase, in some cases even a misleading one, suggesting some such meaning as ‘chief over four parts,’ or ‘fourth ruler.’ The renderings of “tetrarch” and “governor” are the same in some languages (e.g. Kituba, Ekari, Sranan Tongo); this is acceptable, because the distinction is of no relevance here (cf. the fact that in Pilate’s case the Greek does not mention his precise rank).
Brother, see below on 6.14.
(V. 2) In the high-priesthood of A. and C., or, ‘when A. and C. were high-priests.’
The word of God came to John. Though the wording of this Hebraistic phrase should preferably be preserved, yet receptor language idiom may compel the translator to the use of more or less radical adjustments. He may have to mark the expression as a simile, e.g. ‘the word of God came, as it were, to/over John’; or to rephrase it so that the connexion between ‘word of God’ and the verb becomes less direct, e.g. by speaking of ‘the power/guidance of God’s word,’ or so that ‘the word of God’ is no longer the agent, e.g. by shifting to a rendering like, ‘John was-commissioned with God’s word’ (Javanese), or, ‘John received the word of God’; or again, he may have to treat the ultimate agent, i.e. God, as subject of the sentence, e.g. ‘God made J. the one to speak his (i.e. God’s) words,’ ‘God made-known his message to him’ (Kituba). ‘God commanded/commissioned/told John to preach.’ — For word of God cf. on 5.1. In some Bantu languages the choice is between two terms for ‘word,’ the one used in contexts of social communication in the meaning voice, ‘word (that is heard and awaits response),’ the other in that of ‘word (as power, or as expression of intention),’ ‘command,’ ‘message’; as the exegesis shows the latter term will usually best fit the present context. — Came to, has been rendered by ‘came over’ (Willibrord), ‘took possession of’ (Schonfield), ‘found’ (Nyakyusa), ‘arrived in the heart of,’ indicating that John is merely an instrument of God in receiving the word (Tzeltal), ‘arrived at/reached’ (Shona 1963, employing a verb that, when given a suffix indicating purpose or aim, is used in ritual contexts of a god, or spirit, that takes possession of a medium).
In such phrases as John the son of Zechariah the appositional phrase functions approximately as does the surname in modern western languages; in some languages it forms a closely knit linguistic unit, signalled as such by a specific term or construction.
When name and apposition do not form such a unit one should make clear that in the wilderness does not go with Zechariah, but with John, cf. ‘then God’s voice found J., the son of Z., it found him in the woods’ (Nyakyusa), .’.. to John there in the wilderness. This J. was the child of Z.’ (Manobo); cf. also, ‘at that time Z.’s son J. was in the desert (and) the word of God came down to him’ (Chinese Union Version, locative clauses in Chinese normally preceding that part they qualify) for wilderness.
Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.