Was Joanna (mentioned in the Gospels) the same person as Junia (mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:7)?

Let’s look at each of them separately, and then see if the accounts (almost literally) add up.

Joanna

Joanna was one of the women who had been healed by Jesus, and travelled with him and the Twelve, providing for them out of their own means (Lk 8:1-3).

She was the wife of Cuza, Herod’s ‘household manager’.  She is therefore likely to have been a woman of some means and influence.

She was one of the first witnesses of Jesus’ resurrection (Mt 28:8-11; Lk 24:1-10).

Bauckham (Jesus and the Eyewitnesses) suggests that an inclusio is formed by Lk 8:1-3 and Lk 24:6, marking Joanna and the other named women out as important eyewitness sources.

Junia

Junia is one of a number of women who are commended by Paul in Romans 16 for their Christian service.

Whereas Paul’s conversion took place just three years after the crucifixion and resurrection, he describes Andronicus and Junia as being ‘in Christ’ before himself.  It follows that they were very early believers, and, from this evidence, may have been so from the days of Jesus’ flesh.

Paul describes Andronicus and Junia as his ‘compatriots’.  Given their very early conversion to Christianity, they were probably Palestinian Jews.

They had been in prison with Paul.

He commends them as being ‘prominent among the apostles’.

They are likely to have been a husband and wife team.

If we accept the translation according to which Andronicus and Junia were ‘well known as apostles’ (rather than ‘well known to the apostles’), then it is reasonable to suppose that their apostleship was of a more general kind.

Joanna = Junia?

Early Christians often had two names.  One was semitic, while the other may have been semitic, Roman or Greek.  It appears that the second name was chosen either

(a) because it sounded similar (Saul/Paul; Silas/Silvanus; Lucius/Luke; Jesus/Justus; Simeon/Simon).  To this category may have belonged Joanna/Junia.

or,

(b) because the new name had a special meaning (Cephas/Peter (Rock); Joseph/Barnabas (Son of Encouragement); Thomas/Didymus (Twin); Crispus/Sosthenes (Saving Strength); Gaius/Stephanas (Crowned).  To this category may have belonged Cuza/Andronicus, the latter meaning ‘Man of Victory’.

Since ‘Junia’ is described as Paul’s compatriot, it is likely that she was a Jew.  Since she was a very early believers, it is likely that she was a Palestinian Jewish believers.  But ‘Junia’ is a Roman name.  Given that less than 5% of Jewish female names in Palestine are Latin, it is probably that  while she lived in Palestine she went by a Hebrew name.  As noted above, alternative names were often adopted because they sounded similar.  The nearest-sounding semitic names to ‘Junia’ is ‘Joanna’.

Her husband Cuza, for his part, may have adopted (or been given) the honourable Roman name of Andronicus.

Richard Fellowes concludes:

So, in our search for Andronicus and Junia we are looking for people who meet the following criteria:

1) They were a male/female partnership.
2) Both were Jews.
3) Both were in Christ before Paul.
4) The man could well have been a benefactor.
5) They were prominent in the church.
6) The woman was probably called Joanna.
7) They had, or could attain, Roman citizenship.

Joanna and Chuza meet the above criteria for Junia and Andronicus:

1) They were a female/male partnership.
2) They were almost certainly both Jews (because of their location and Joanna’s name)
3) Joanna’s financial support of the Jesus movement is easier to explain if Chuza was also a disciple, since husbands generally controlled the resources. Given his position as Herod’s steward, he may have needed to keep his support of Jesus secret (compare Joseph of Arimathea, who was a member of the Council (Mark 15:43) and a secret disciple (John 19:38)). If Chuza was indeed a disciple at that time, he and Joanna, like Andronicus and Junia, were in Christ before Paul.
4) Chuza, if indeed a disciple, would have been a benefactor of the church, and could then have been given an appropriate Greek name, such as Andronicus.
5) Luke mentions Joanna and Chuza by name, perhaps because they became prominent apostles who were known to some of his audience.
6) Joanna would likely have taken the name Junia if she needed a Latin name.
7) Bauckham has shown that Chuza was very wealthy. He and Joanna, if they were not already Roman citizens, would be able to purchase Roman citizenship (which afforded them the necessary legal protection for the dangerous work of evangelism).

This above reconstruction, though admittedly conjectural, is consistent with the known facts about Junia.

(An alternative approach, favoured by Bauckham, is that Chuza may have died, with Junia marrying Andrew, one of the Twelve.  Andrew/Andronicus, being Peter’s brother, may have accompanied him to Rome, along with Junia his wife.)

The above is largely based on this post by Richard Fellowes (who in turn largely follows Richard Bauckham, in Gospel Women, 2002, pp 165-186).