522. Zehnle, Pentecost Discourse , 122.
See, e.g., 1 En. 6:7, GrSync-a; 8:3 (see comments in Nickelsburg, “Apocalyptic,” 405); Jub. 8:3 (cf. Jacobus, “Curse”); L.A.B. 4:16. See perhaps also Sent. Syr. Men. 292–93.
E.g., y. Šabb. 6:9, §3; Gen. Rab. 44:12; 87:4; Deut. Rab. 8:6. Among Christians, e.g., Did. 3.4 (associating it with idolatry); Aug. Tract. Jn. 6.17.2; Hippol. Ref. Bk. 2.
E.g., Gen. Rab. 6:1; Pesiq. Rab. 15:1. Later some accepted synagogue decorations (as in later synagogue zodiacs), provided no worship was involved (Tg. Ps.-J. on Lev 26:1).
Zehnle, Pentecost Discourse, 121; similarly but slightly differently (Rome as a redaction), see Conzelmann, Acts, 15.
Zehnle, Pentecost Discourse, 122.
E.g., Grant, “Christian and Roman History,” 15.
E.g., LXX Gen 6:17; Exod 17:14; Prov 8:28; Eccl 3:1; Job 1:7; 2:2; Dan 7:27; 9:12; van der Horst, “Parallels to Acts,” 52, cites also Plato Tim. 23C; Ep. 7.326C. Most relevant are the references to “all peoples under heaven” in Deut 2:25; 4:19 (Marshall, “Acts,” 532).
Metzger, “Astrological Geography.”
Barrett, Acts, 121; cf. also Fitzmyer, Acts, 242.
Cf., e.g., Macrob. Sat. 5.15.3 (van der Horst, “Macrobius,” 225); van der Horst, “Parallels to Acts,” 53–54, also cites Quint. Curt. 6.3.3; Ps.-Callisth. Alex. 2.11.2; Xen. Cyr. 6.2.10; Dio Chrys. Or. 9.5, 12; 33.40; Arrian, FGH 156; Darius’s Behistan inscription 1.6; Xerxes’s Daiva inscription 19–28 (cf. also Fitzmyer, Acts, 240).
Gilbert, “List”; idem, “Propaganda,” 247–53; Reid, “Resistance Discourse,” 44. This is a much closer literary analogy than the Achaemenid parallels suggested by Taylor, “List,” though these underline the antiquity of the form. One might compare conquest lists in Josh 12 and ancient Egyptian and other ancient Near Eastern sources (see examples in Younger, Conquest Accounts; Kitchen, Reliability, 168–74, esp. 174), but these samples were less “universal” than here.
Johnson, Acts, 43, cites Sib. Or. 3.160–72, 205–9; L.A.B. 4:3–17; Philo Embassy 281–82; Flacc. 45–46, though noting that no theory of selection has been proven.
Barrett, Acts, 122 (citing Jos. Ag. Ap. 2.282; War 2.398; 7.43; Ant. 14.114–18; Philo Flacc. 45–46; Embassy 281–82); also Dunn, Acts, 26.
See esp. Kraft, “Judaism on Scene,” 82–83 (citing, in addition to the sources above, e.g., Sib. Or. 3.271–72; Jos. Ant. 15.39); Stern, “Diaspora,” 117–22.
Johnson, Acts, 47.
Palestinian Judaism also had access to contemporary Greek geographical views (cf. Jub. 8:12; 1QM X, 13).
See discussion at Acts 1:8 for India, China, and other “ends of the earth.”
See comment on Acts 8:27.
See, e.g., Caesar’s Gallic War; Tacitus’s Agricola and Germania. Some had reportedly sailed north of Germany and Denmark (Pliny E. N.H. 2.67.167).
Also Goulder, Type and History, 153–54; Parsons, Acts, 39. But even some of these included distant lands such as India (e.g., Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 10:7).
For the table-of-nations tradition in Second Temple Judaism, see Scott, “Horizon,” 507–22; idem, “Geographical Perspectives,” 412–13; in Acts, idem, “Horizon,” 525–27. See further Bechard, Walls, 171–231 (173–209 on Jewish use; 209–31 in Acts); Scott, Nations.
Following the Babel narrative, Genesis lists the chosen line of Seth; Luke also recounts the success of the church after his Babel analogy (Acts 2:41–47), though this may be coincidental (he does not develop any parallels).
Ironically, Paul might challenge abuse of tongues in Corinth by the political commonplace that “common language is needed for concord” (Mitchell, Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 172; cf. Witherington, Corinthians, 275; Dio Chrys. Or. 39.3); Luke uses tongues to symbolize cross-cultural unity.
See, e.g., Goulder, Type and History, 153–54, 158; Moule, Messengers, 24. For the continuing tradition of the seventy nations, see, e.g., Jub. 44:34; 3 En. 2:3; 29:1 (cf. 30:2); Pesiq. Rab Kah. 2:7; 28:9; b. Šabb. 88b; Sukkah 55b; y. Meg. 1:9, §1; Gen. Rab. 39:11; Lev. Rab. 2:4; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 11:8; Tg. Rishon on Esth 2:22; the incantation in Deissmann, Light, 262. Luke may play on twelve (Luke 9:1) and seventy (depending on the variant reading of Luke 10:1) elsewhere.
E.g., Tg. Neof. 1 on Gen 10:2–14; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 10:2–14; Tg. 1 Chr. 1:5–17. On updated lists (in various ways) in Jub. 8–9 and Jos. Ant. 1.120–47, see Scott, “Horizon,” 521–22. For that matter, the language in the current text of Gen 10 may represent updating over earlier traditions (cf. Yamauchi, Stones, 43).
Tg. Neof. 1 on Gen 10:2; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 10:2.
Tg. Neof. 1 on Gen 10:3; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 10:2.
Tg. Neof. 1 on Gen 10:4.
Tg. Neof. 1 on Gen 10:14; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 10:14.
Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 10:2.
Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 10:6.
Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 10:6–7. They also include Greece (Tg. Neof. 1 on Gen 10:4; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 10:4), which Luke does not.
Scott, “Horizon,” 529.
With, e.g., ibid., 530. Davis, “Acts 2,” finds plausible allusions to Gen 10–12 in Acts 2.
E.g., Moule, Messengers, 23; Carter and Earle, Acts, 33; Kirby, Ephesians, 117 (citing another commentator in 1904); Bruce, Commentary, 64; Stendahl, Paul, 117; Hill, Prophecy, 95; Shenk and Stutzman, Communities, 19; Dominy, “Spirit, Church, and Mission”; Smith, “Hope after Babel?”; Spencer, Acts, 32–33; Chéreau, “Babel à la Pentecôte”; Venter, Reconciliation, 155; Turner, “Experience,” 32; Kim, “Mission,” 40; Nasrallah, “Cities,” 557; Pervo, Acts, 61–62; Asamoah-Gyadu, “Hearing”; Wackenheim, “Babel”; Green, “Acts,” 739; cf. B. H. Carroll (1916) in Barr, Leonard, Parsons, and Weaver, Acts, 120.
Cyril Jer. Cat. Lect. 17.16–17 (Martin, Acts, 24); Arator Acts 1 (Martin, Acts, 26); Bede Comm. Acts 2.4 (trans. L. Martin, 29; also Martin, Acts, 23); see other patristic sources in Marguerat, Actes, 81n45. Early Pentecostals also read their experience as a reversal of Babel (Anderson, Pentecostalism, 44).
See, e.g., Keener, “Tongues,” 181–82. González, Acts, 39, emphasizes here a “second Babel” with a new scattering, underlining appreciation for cultural diversity as opposed to a demand for uniformity (e.g., by causing everyone to understand Aramaic). Cf. more fully Wagenaar, “Kumba.” Similarly, Macchia, “Babel,” envisions a partial reversal but a partial analogy: “a promise/fulfilment relationship between these events, in which only the folly and threat of Babel is reversed at Pentecost but not God’s providential will and purposes” (51).
For this connection in the church’s theology (whether or not Luke noticed it), see, e.g., Cloete and Smit, “Name Called Babel.” Arrington, Acts, 20, treats the allusion as a strong but uncertain possibility; Marshall, “Acts,” 532, finds evidence for a deliberate connection weak but allows that such canonical connections may be helpful to modern readers.
Polhill, Acts, 105. Dunn’s objection (Acts, 24; cf. also Willimon, Acts, 32) that “Luke evidently did not think of the tongues as a single language” presses details more than most biblical allusions require.
Barrett, Acts, 112, 116; cf. 119: “confounded” could suggest Babel, but the phrase is common even in Acts.
Ibid., 112.
Also Goulder, Type and History, 158; Scott, “Horizon,” 530. Compare unity of mind in Acts 1:14; 2:46 with “one tongue and voice” in the LXX of Gen 11:1; “every nation under heaven” in Acts 2:5 with “all the earth” in Gen 11:1, 8; the elaboration of Mesopotamian peoples not emphasized elsewhere in Luke-Acts in Acts 2:9 with Gen 11:2, 9; perhaps the honoring of Jesus’s name (Acts 2:21, 38) with those honoring their own in Gen 11:4 (a deliberate contrast with 12:2). It is also Scripture’s seminal “language miracle.”
For later Jewish comments on the Babel narrative, see, e.g., Jos. Ant. 1.116–18 (with the “Sibyl” quoted as describing it in 1.118); L.A.B. 7; Sib. Or. 3.98–107; 8.4–5; 11.9–13; y. Meg. 1:9, §1; cf. the incantation in Deissmann, Light, 262.
Inowlocki, “Rewriting,” finds such a rewriting, for a Gentile audience, in Josephus (who here, as elsewhere, opposes tyranny and prefigures God’s judgment on Jerusalem).
See, e.g., comments on Acts 7:20.
See, e.g., Safrai, “Synagogue,” 927 (doubting any fixed sequence in the early period); Perrot, “Lecture de la Bible” (some principles of later lectionaries used even if the cycle was not yet in use); Patte, Hermeneutic, 37 (dating uncertain, since Tanḥ. 7 is a late source). Refuting lectionary theses for the Gospels, see Morris, “Lectionaries”; idem, Lectionaries, passim, esp. 16 (noting that they are too late for relevance to Jesus). Second-century Christians may not have been interested in Jewish lectionary readings (Morris, Lectionaries, 25, citing Justin 1 Apol. 67).
See Charnov, “Shavuot”; cf., cautiously, Moule, Messengers, 23.
Cf. the end of Babel’s curse in the day of judgment (Jub. 10:22), but we should probably not read much into this. Plutarch apparently borrows a hope for future world unity from Persian eschatology (Boring, Berger, and Colpe, Commentary, 309–10, cite Plut. Isis 47); cf. Rev 5:9; 7:9.
Some later rabbis emphasized that God invited their repentance (Gen. Rab. 38:9).
Possibly Acts 19:32 and 21:27, 31 could also evoke Babel (cf. Hamm, Acts, 91, contrasting ἐκκλησία in Acts 19:32, 39, 41), though that appears much less likely than here and, so far as I can discern offhand, could be defended only by way of allusion to Luke’s usage here.
With, e.g., Hamm, Acts, 18–19.
Gen 11:7, 9; 1 Sam 7:10; 1 Kgs 20:43; Amos 3:15; Mic 7:17; Joel 2:1, 10; Jonah 4:1; Nah 2:5; 1 Macc 4:27; 2 Macc 10:30; 13:23; 14:28; Wis 10:5.
Philo uses the verb frequently but, apart from Special Laws, nowhere so often as in On the Confusion of Languages (Conf. 1, 84, 152, and esp. 168, 182, 189, 191), about 15 percent of his uses; he employs the cognate noun sixteen times there (Conf. 1, 9, 43, 109, 158, 183, 184, 187, 188, 191, 192, 195, 198), more than 48 percent of his uses. Josephus does not employ the verb, but he twice uses the noun for Babel in Ant. 1.117 (about 9 percent of his uses).
Dupont, Salvation, 58.
E.g., Dibelius, Studies in Acts, 106; Foakes-Jackson, Acts, 11; Robinson, Studies, 167. Bruce, Commentary, 64, suggests that the narrative also reverses local expectations that Diaspora pilgrims would be the ones worshiping in various languages. Aune, Environment, 130, sees the list (Acts 2:7–11) as an “awkward insertion” (by Luke) into the surrounding context; be that as it may stylistically, Luke makes it theologically crucial.
Mek. Bah. 5 (in Urbach, Sages, 1:532); Sipre Deut. 343.4.1; later, b. ʿAbod. Zar. 2b; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 2:1; 12:10; Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 1:15; Exod. Rab. 17:2; 30:9; Num. Rab. 14:10; Pesiq. Rab. 15:2; 21:2/3; 30:4; cf. Pesiq. Rab Kah. 2:7; 12:20. See discussion in Keener, John, 398 (on John 1:11).
See, e.g., the documentation in Shiell, Reading Acts, 12–14; the brief observation of Toner, Culture, 1. Naturally the official languages dominate epigraphic and literary sources, but the language of markets and ethnic enclaves, reflecting mother tongues from the countrysides, may have been more diverse.
As commentators regularly note here (e.g., Bruce, Acts1, 84).
Excluding a small outpost such as Elephantine in Egypt. On Babylonian and Parthian Jewry, see Stern, “Diaspora,” 170–79.
Bauckham, “East Rather Than West?” 180 (citing also Jas 1:1).
Luke focuses on the Roman Empire, particularly the Aegean region and Rome, in order to be relevant to his ideal audience (see our introduction, , ); only at points do we receive brief examples of where the larger mission must have carried others (e.g., Acts 1:8; 8:27).
Neusner, Sat, 32. Stark, Cities, 39, estimates Edessa’s population at seventy-five thousand, a sizable community by ancient standards.
Neusner, Sat, 48. For an example of concern about Parthia, see 1 En. 56:5 in Bruce, Commentary, 61n21; for massacres of Babylonian Jews, see Jos. Ant. 18.310 (for a Roman audience).
Cf., e.g., Sall. Mith. 1–23; Hor. Sat. 2.1.15; Odes 1.19.12; 2.13.18; Lucan C.W. 2.552–53; 10.48–51; Mart. Epig. 2.53; Suet. Jul. 44.3; Aug. 8.2; Nero 57.2; Tac. Hist. 1.2; Hdn. 6.3.2 (Persia); for Jewish fears, 1 En. 56:5–7; Sib. Or. 4.139; 5.438 (they tried to seize Judea in 40 B.C.E., Tac. Hist. 5.9). For their strength, e.g., Fronto Ad verum imp. 2.3. On Parthia in general, see Pliny E. N.H. 6.29.112–6.31.141.
E.g., Cic. Fam. 8.10.1–2; Appian Hist. rom. pref. 9; 12.15.105; 12.17.116; Lucan C.W. 8.354–58; Sen. Y. Nat. Q. 1.pref. 9; Pliny E. N.H. 6.29.116; Tac. Ann. 12.11; 15.9; Suet. Calig. 14; Char. Chaer. 5.1.3; Hdn. 4.10.2; Jos. War 1.5, 179–80; 7.105; Sib. Or. 4.119–20, 124; b. B. Meṣiʿa 28a; cf. Virg. Georg. 4.561; Rev 9:14; 16:12; earlier, for Persia, cf. Plut. Alex. 29.4; Ps.-Callisth. Alex. 2.9.
See, e.g., van Wickevoort Crommelin, “Euphrates,” 188; for Armenia’s frequently shifting status as a border kingdom, see, e.g., Tac. Ann. 13.34, 37; 15.24; Suet. Jul. 44.3; Aug. 21.3; Tib. 41; Ps.-Callisth. Alex. 2.9. Some provinces beyond the Euphrates and the Danube were annexed in the second century (Fronto Pr. Hist. 10).
E.g., Jos. Ant. 20.69–73; Suet. Aug. 21.3; Fronto Pr. Hist. 14; cf. Cic. Fam. 3.8.10; Hor. Ep. 2.1.256; Odes 1.12.53; 1.21.13–16; 3.5.3–4; 4.4.25–27; Epodes 7.9–10; Plut. Pomp. 70.3. Cf. Parthians as peaceful in Augustan art (Rose, “Parthians”); peace discussions in Jos. Ant. 18.101–2; as possible hosts for a fugitive Nero (Suet. Nero 47.2) and as allies of Vespasian (Vesp. 6.4).
Fitzmyer, Acts, 240–41. But cf. the general usage in Jos. Ant. 20.74; War 7.246.
As in Esth 1:9; Dan 5:28; 6:8, 12, 15; Jdt 16:10; 1 Macc 1:1; 2 Esd 1:3; Jos. Ant. 10.113, 244, 272; 11.33, 203; 12.257; Ag. Ap. 1.64; Test. Naph. 5:8; Sib. Or. 4.62; 5.147, 441; 4Q550e 1 4. For the Parthians and Medes, see 1 En. 56:5.
Jos. Ag. Ap. 1.64; cf. also Ant. 10.74. For ancient Media, see, e.g., Young, “Media.”
Fitzmyer, Acts, 241.
Le Cornu, Acts, 67, citing b. Meg. 18a, bar. This language, written in cuneiform, has no close linguistic analogues today (Le Cornu, Acts, 67; Vallet, “Elam,” 423).
On Mesopotamia, see Pliny E. N.H. 6.30.117–20. Pliny thinks that the Assyrians had few cities until Macedonian times (6.30.117). On the history of Mesopotamia, see Nissen and Oelsner, “Mesopotamia,” esp. (for this, the Parthian, period, 141 B.C.E.–226 C.E.) 744–45.
Jos. Ant. 1.152, 187, 244, 276, 278, 281, 285, 341, 342; 2.173, 177, 213; 8.61; 12.149, 393; 13.184; 18.310, 339; War 4.531. Cf. also nine uses in Philo (Posterity 76; Conf. 65, 66; Prelim. St. 70; Flight 48–49; Abr. 188; Mos. 1.264, 278).
Cf., e.g., Jub. 9:5; 27:12; 29:12; 44:18; 1QM II, 10; 4Q496 II, 3.
De Ridder, Discipling, 10n33 (following Grayzel, History of Jews, 138). Babylonian Jews were probably also open to oracles, but the testimony in Sib. Or. 3.809–10 is Hellenistic.
Stern, “Diaspora,” 170–71.
De Ridder, Discipling, 10n33 (following Grayzel, History of Jews, 138). On Jews in Syria and Phoenicia, see Stern, “Diaspora,” 137–42.
Knox, Jerusalem, 32.
Fitzmyer, Acts, 241.
Hengel, “Liste”; translated as idem, “List.”
For a summary of 1990s archaeological publications on Cappadocia and Isauria, see Mitchell, “Archaeology,” 186–88; on Cappadocia, see further Sullivan, “Cappadocia”; Edwards, “Cappadocia.” Cappadocia was less urbanized than the rest of Anatolia in this period (Mitchell, Anatolia, 1:98). Pliny E. N.H. 6.3.8–6.4.14 deals with Cappadocia (24.102.162 also mentions a plant from there that supposedly could make lions lie on their backs).
Tac. Ann. 2.42.
On Jews in Cappadocia and nearby Armenia, see Stern, “Diaspora,” 153; cf. Bruce, Commentary, 62; Harrill, “Asia Minor,” 135; perhaps 1 Pet 1:1. Some Cappadocian Jews apparently settled in Joppa (Hemer, Acts in History, 223, cites CIJ 2:128, §910; 2:137, §931).
Jos. Ant. 16.23; War 4.632; Pliny E. N.H. 5.41.145; 5.42.146. Cappadocia could be grouped with other Asian regions to its north and south (Jos. War 2.368) but also with Armenia on its east (7.18), placing it among the easternmost, hence less romanized, parts of Asia Minor.
Jos. Ant. 16.11, 74, 131, 261, 269, 302, 309, 325, 357; 17.350; 18.139; War 1.446, 499–501, 530, 553; 2.114.
Jos. Ant. 13.286; 14.35, 104, 111, 138; 15.9; Ag. Ap. 2.84.
For the geographic relationship, see Hemer, “Address”; Ramsay, “Roads and Travel,” 402. Pontus was, in fact, formed from part of old Cappadocia (Strabo 12.1.4).
For the Bithynian connection, see, e.g., Strabo 17.3.25. On Pontus, see further Sullivan, “Pontus.”
See further Stern, “Diaspora,” 153; Harrill, “Asia Minor,” 135.
For associations with peoples considered less romanized, see Jos. Ant. 19.338; War 2.366; Ag. Ap. 1.64.
Lucian Alex. 17. A Pontic inscription also critiques religious quacks as Lucian does (Grant, Paul, 58–59).
Nevertheless, some later claimed that the numbers of Christians were sparse in central Pontus (Basil On the Holy Spirit [Pruche, 511–13], in Grant, Paul, 59).
De Ridder, Discipling, 10n33 (following Grayzel, History of Jews, 138). For Jews in Asia, see, e.g., Jos. Ant. 16.160; Philo Embassy 245; Stern, “Diaspora,” 143–55; further on Ephesus in comments on Acts 18–19.
See Jos. Ant. 12.147; Stern, “Diaspora,” 149–50; Kraabel, “Judaism in Asia Minor,” 61ff. (for syncretism, see, e.g., 81–86, 142, 146); Bruce, “Lycus Valley”; cf. Meyers and Kraabel, “Remains,” 191; in general, Harrill, “Asia Minor,” 134–35. On Phrygia, see, e.g., Bruce, “Phrygia.”
See, e.g., Stern, “Diaspora,” 148. For Pamphylia, Carroll, “Pamphylia.”
This evolved into Coptic, which long persisted until replaced, after centuries of Islamic rule, with Arabic even in the churches, which retained a very limited role for Coptic (Emmel, “Coptic Language”).
Sandmel, Judaism, 257.
On Jewish people in Egypt, see Stern, “Diaspora,” 122–33; comment on Acts 18:24.
De Ridder, Discipling, 10n33 (following Grayzel, History of Jews, 138).
See Foakes-Jackson and Lake, “Dispersion,” 151. Later rabbis permitted the use of Coptic as a translation language for the Esther scroll (b. Meg. 18a, bar.; so Le Cornu, Acts, 67).
See Sherk, Empire, §129, pp. 169–73. The line between Jewish Philo and Christian Clement of Alexandria may suggest some hidden continuities, but whatever of a Jewish presence reemerged must have been initially at best a shadow of its former existence.
Trans. H. Rackham, LCL, 2:241.
That Cyrene was in “Libya” was widely known (Sib. Or. 5.198). For a summary of archaeological data about Cyrene, see Yamauchi, “Cyrene in Libya”; for early Christianity there, Oden, Christianity.
Hemer, Acts in History, 222, notes at least 124 inscriptions not included in CIJ. For archaeological evidence on Roman Africa, especially Carthage, see Mattingly and Hitchner, “Roman Africa”; this area was largely Carthaginian before Roman conquest (Strabo 3.2.14).
De Ridder, Discipling, 10n33 (following Grayzel, History of Jews, 138); on Cyrenian Jewry, see further Foakes-Jackson and Lake, “Dispersion,” 151; Stern, “Diaspora,” 133–37; most fully, Applebaum, Jews and Greeks in Cyrene, esp. 130–200. On Cyrene generally, see, e.g., Gasque, “Cyrene.”
For earlier civil strife there, see Jos. Ant. 14.114; for Jewish animosity probably in the early second century C.E., Sib. Or. 5.198.
By Greek and Greco-Jewish standards, inner Libya’s residents were also dark skinned (Sib. Or. 11.289), though not as much as “Ethiopians” (see comment on Acts 8:27).
Cf. Pindar Pyth. 4.16; Diod. Sic. 17.51.1–2; Plut. Alex. 27.5–11; S. Kings, Alexander 15, Mor. 180D; Lucian Dial. D. 395 (12/14, Philip and Alexander 1); Ps.-Callisth. Alex. 1.30; Olmstead, Persian Empire, 511; apparently transferred to the Caesars (P.Fouad 8, in Sherk, Empire, §81, p. 123). On the oracle, see also, e.g., Pindar Hymns frg. 36 (from scholion on Pyth. 9.53). Egyptian Jews rejected the claim (Sib. Or. 5.7; 11.197–98; 12.7). On some pagan sanctuaries in Cyrene, see Rose, “Return to Cyrene.”
Polyb. 12.3.1–6; by the empire, most of the “exotic” creatures would come from trade farther south.
De Ridder, Discipling, 10n33 (following Grayzel, History of Jews, 138); Jewett, Chronology, 37.
E.g., Brändle and Stegemann, “Formation,” 120, estimating some twenty thousand. Both estimates are within at least the same order of magnitude; estimates range from ten thousand to sixty thousand (Levinskaya, Diaspora Setting, 182). On Rome and population figures, See comment on Acts 28:16–17.
Bruce, Commentary, 63.
See comment on Acts 28:17.
For Roman citizens, see Judge, Pattern, 55; idem, First Christians, 444 (citing inscriptions regarding groups of Roman citizens outside Rome, though these normally involved long-term residents); Hanson, Acts, 64 (Acts 16:21, 37–38; 22:25–29; 23:27).
Stambaugh and Balch, Environment, 162; Das, Debate, 25.
See comment on Acts 16:20; cf. Juv. Sat. 3.60–63.
See Safrai, “Relations,” 199–200.
With, e.g., Fitzmyer, Acts, 243. On “converts,” see, e.g., Keener, John, 445–46, 542–44.
Hengel and Schwemer, Between Damascus and Antioch, 257–58.
For Jerusalemite ties with Rome, see, e.g., the synagogue of freedpersons in Acts 6:9; Theodotus’s father’s Roman gentilic name; and early Aramaic-speaking Jewish community in Trastevere (cf. Hengel and Schwemer, Between Damascus and Antioch, 258).
On the significance of proselytes and God-fearers among hearers in Acts 2:11; 13:43, cf., e.g., discussion in Koch, “Proselyten.”
Metzger, “Astrological Geography,” 132. Hengel, “Liste” and “List,” applies it to “Greater Judea’s” immediate eastern and western neighbors, but Cyprus would fit better than Crete here.
The larger blocs may appear in roughly those areas: perhaps Galileans (Acts 1:11; 2:7); Judea (2:9, 14); in Asia Minor (should we count Pontus in 18:2?), Asia (2:9; 6:9; 16:6; 19:10), Phrygia (2:9; 16:6; but perhaps Acts 14), and Pamphylia (2:10; 13:13); with Romans (2:10) and Cretans (2:11) toward the end (but in reverse order). But this apparent pattern does not account for Cyrene (2:10; 6:9; 11:20; 13:1).
See also Philo Embassy 282; 1 Macc 15:23; van der Horst, “Jews of Crete”; cf. also the later IC 1.5.17 (in Hemer, Acts in History, 222–23). It may be only coincidence that Cretan Jews appear in literature often in the context of being deceived, sometimes by fellow Jews (Jos. War 2.103; Ant. 17.327; Titus 1:10–14), and Cretans in general had a reputation for dishonesty (e.g., Lucian Lover of Lies 3; Sacr. 10; Winter, Wives, 149; commentaries on Titus 1:12, and, e.g., Dibelius, Studies in Acts, 49). Some Jews there were also well-to-do (Jos. Life 427).
For a suggested connection between Cretans and Arabs, see Scott, “Horizon,” 529–30.
Bruce, Acts1, 86.
Bruce, Commentary, 64.
E.g., Guillaume, Islam, 12. For Idumean and Perean Arab converts here, see Grafton, “Arabs.”
Le Cornu, Acts, 67. Some scholars argue from inscriptions that the later classical Arabic, the Arabic of the Qur’an, apparently dates to a generation after Muhammad, when conquests had invited loanwords, in Muslim-controlled Syria (Koren and Nevo, “Approaches,” 104–5). (Late seventh-century coins and inscriptions with Qur’an quotations differ from the current text, which, some also hold, suggests that standardization occurred later; Cook, Muhammad, 74.)
González, Acts, 37, speaks of “the disadvantage of the advantaged”; because the locals expect to understand, they cannot recognize their own linguistic limitations and hence fail to appreciate the miracle.
See, e.g., Anderson, Glossary, 78 (a “sneering remark” with the “drawing together of the nostrils”), 126.
E.g., Rhet. Alex. 18, 1432b.35–40; 1433a.14–25; Caesar C.W. 2.33 (favorably); Cic. Or. Brut. 40.138; Prov. cons. 8.18; Sen. E. Controv. 3.pref. 4–5; Plut. Lect. 4, Mor. 39CD; 11, Mor. 43BC; 18, Mor. 48AB; Demosth. 6.3; 8.5; Cic. 16.3; Dio Chrys. Or. 15.26–32; Aul. Gel. 8.10; 16.6.1–12; 18.13.7–8; 20.10.1–6; Pliny Ep. 3.9.25; 3.20.3–4; 9.13.19–20; Lucian Dem. 14; Z. Rants 41; Diog. Laert. 7.1.19; Philost. Vit. soph. 2.30.623; Eunapius Lives 460; cf. also ʾAbot R. Nat. 6 A.
E.g., Mus. Ruf. 3, p. 38.25–26; 4, p. 42.34–35; 14, p. 90.24–25 (cf. 14, p. 96.4); 16, p. 101.20–21; 17, p. 106.20–21.
Others also cite 1 Cor 14:23 here (e.g., Zehnle, Pentecost Discourse, 119; Barrett, Acts, 125), and John Chrysostom also drew the connection (Hom. 36, PG 61:305–9; in Kovacs, Corinthians, 236); for outsiders construing tongues in terms of pagan ecstasy, cf. also Smit, “Tongues.” Ecstasy in the Cybele cult could generate temporary “madness” (Ovid Fasti 4.236, 243, 245–46); mystic revelations could produce (b. Ḥag. 14b) or, more often, resemble (2 Kgs 9:11) madness; see further comment on Acts 26:24.
So the language was used (e.g., Dio Chrys. Or. 17.21; Alciph. Fish. 12 [Charopê to Glaucippê], 3.2, ¶1); cf. Keener, Corinthians, 184.
First Corinthians 12:2–3 refers not to tongues but to pagan prophetism, and Paul clearly ruled out prophetic possession trance for believers (14:32). See discussion at Acts 2:4.
See, e.g., Pliny E. N.H. 28.3.11; 28.5.25; Klauck, Context, 30. It is possible that the unknown language alone would accomplish this, but an unintelligible utterance might simply lead outsiders to suppose that members of the cult recited in their sacred language (e.g., Hebrew; such was my own assumption during my first naive experience with tongues and interpretation in a modern Pentecostal meeting in Massillon, Ohio, on November 2, 1975).
The connection with Eph 5:18 is also noted by others (e.g., Talbert, Ephesians, 129, also citing 1 Sam 1:12–18). Some view Dionysiac ecstasy as the background in Eph 5:18 (Rogers, “Background,” esp. 257; cf. Leonard, “Status,” 318; Kroeger, “Cults,” 34). We should note, however, that the NT never uses the usual Greek terms for possession by the Spirit (Nock, “Vocabulary,” 134).
E.g., Strabo 10.3.13; Dio Chrys. Or. 27.2; van der Horst, “Parallels to Acts,” 55. Associated with the Bacchic cult, e.g., Val. Max. 1.3.1; Lucian Gout 38; Dio Chrys. Or. 32.58–59; Arrian Alex. 5.2.7; Orph. H. 50.8; Tert. Apol. 6.10; Klauck, Context, 107; Guthrie, Orpheus, 32–33; Burkert, Religion, 109–11, 292; idem, Mystery Cults, 112–13; Martin, Religions, 93–94; Otto, Dionysus, 54. Dionysus could madden one with drunkenness as a punishment (e.g., Plut. Par. St. 19, Mor. 310B).
See, e.g., Apollod. Bib. 2.2.2; Philo Plant. 148; Statius Theb. 7.649–51; 9.479–80; Plut. Rom. Q. 112, Mor. 291AB; Lucian Dial. G. 247 (22/18, Hera and Zeus ¶1); Dion. 1–4; Otto, Dionysus, 94; cf. Lucian Dial. G. 272 (2/22, Pan and Hermes ¶4); Klauck, Context, 120. In artwork, e.g., Philost. Elder Imag. 1.18; 2.17; Callistr. Descr. 2. Allusions to Euripides’s scene of tearing apart Pentheus are many (Lucian Sat. 8; Peregr. 2).
Although mantic (associated with Apollo) and initiatory (associated with Dionysus) ecstasies were usually distinct (cf., e.g., Dio Chrys. Or. 32.56–58; Iambl. Myst. 3.25), they sometimes overlapped (Philost. Hrk. 7.3) or were confused (so Aune, Prophecy, 21, 42; cf. Lucan C.W. 1.673–95) in antiquity. For the usual categories (following Plato), see Plut. Dial. L. 16, Mor. 758EF; Graf, “Ecstasy,” 800–801. For prophetic frenzy, see the excursus at Acts 2:17–18 on prophecy, especially the nature of pagan prophecy.
E.g., Plut. E Delph. 9, Mor. 388E; Men. Rhet. 2.17, 446.4–6; cf. further Detienne, “Polythéisme”; Otto, Dionysus, 202–8. Orpheus and Apollo are also connected (Men. Rhet. 2.17, 443.3–6; Philost. Vit. Apoll. 4.14), and Orpheus and Dionysus (Guthrie, Orpheus, 42–48, 258).
E.g., Orph. H. 11.21; 18.17; 27.13.
Val. Flacc. 7.635–36; Strabo 10.3.13; Lucian Alex. 13; probably Sen. Y. Dial. 7.26.8; but contrast Dio Chrys. Or. 1.56.
E.g., Caird, Apostolic Age, 60.
Iambl. Myst. 3.25.
Especially Philo; e.g., Philo Creation 71; Alleg. Interp. 3.82; Drunkenness 147; Dreams 2.190; Flight 166; Contempl. 84; Isaacs, Spirit, 50. For the contrast between physical and spiritual inebriation (cf. Eph 5:18), see later Cyril Jer. Cat. Lect. 17.19 and Eastern and Western Christian mysticism (Pelikan, Acts, 50).
See Epict. Diatr. 2.20.17 (on the Galli); Graf, “Ecstasy,” 801; Huffmon, “Prophecy,” 112. In Hellenism, drunkenness could be used to induce ecstasy, but not for oracles (Forbes, Prophecy, 282).
Lucian Dion. 5.
Dancing frequently occurred at banquets (e.g., Hom. Od. 18.304–5; Eurip. Heracl. 892–93; Xen. Symp. 2.1; Babr. 80.1–2), although the dancers were usually the entertainers; communal dancing was common, however, at celebrations (Song Rab. 7:1, §2; Eccl. Rab. 10:19, §1), notably at weddings (Dion. Hal. Epid. 2.260–61; Men. Rhet. 2.7, 409.11–13) and certain festivals (Lucian Sat. 4; t. Sukkah 4:4; Lam. Rab. proem 33; Safrai, “Religion,” 812); a circumcision party in y. Ḥag. 2:1, §9. It could also be associated with Dionysus worship (Eurip. Bacch. 62–63; Arrian Ind. 7.8).
Gutsfeld, “Beer”; Burkert, “Symposia,” 8; Cary and Haarhoff, Life, 94–95 (this is not to discount wine use in Hellenistic Egypt; e.g., P.Tebt. 118). For the history of wine, see Forbes, Technology, 3:106–25; on its preparation, see 3:70–78. Palestinian Jews also knew locally produced date “beer” (Broshi, “Date Beer”).
So, e.g., Paterson, “Wine.”
See, e.g., John 2:3 (and Keener, John, 498–501); Men. Rhet. 2.7, 408.32–409.1.
On viticulture and various kinds of wine, see Pliny E. N.H. 14. In Jewish sources, see b. ʿAbod. Zar. 30a; Paul, “Wine.”
E.g., Ovid Pont. 4.2.9; Catull. Carm. 27.1; Fronto Ad verum imp. 1.1.4; cf. Fronto Fer. als. 3.2.
E.g., Pindar Encomia frg. 124; Apollod. Bib. 3.5.1; Hor. Odes 1.18; Ovid Pont. 4.2.9; Sil. Ital. 11.285; Plut. Table 3.2.1, Mor. 648E; Dio Chrys. Or. 64.20; Phaedrus 4.16; Lucian Icar. 27; Ach. Tat. 4.18.5; Orph. H. 47.1; 50.1; Athen. Deipn. 4.148bc; 15.675BC; Gr. Anth. 4.3.132–33; 6.257. Bacchus was, naturally, popular in a wine-producing area such as Pompeii (Massa, Pompeii, 108).
So Diog. Laert. 3.39 (on Plato).
E.g., Theophr. Char. 30.5.
Unless one wished to achieve drunkenness quickly (cf. Catull. Carm. 27.1; Athen. Deipn. 14.653E). But this led to foolish behavior (Ap. Rhod. 1.473; Anacharsis Ep. 3.1–3). Rabbis had blessings over both forms of wine, allowing handwashing with the undiluted form (t. Ber. 4:3).
E.g., Lucian Lucius 47.
Forbes, Technology, 3:98.
Smith, Symposium, 32. Hesiod recommended one part wine to three parts water (W.D. 596; Athen. Deipn. 10.426C), but for various other mixtures, see, e.g., Athen. Deipn. 10.426DE, 430A; for one part wine to two parts water, Pliny E. N.H. 23.25.51.
Smith, Symposium, 32 (with sources); cf. Theophr. Char. 4.6; Avi-Yonah, Hellenism, 137. It resembled the behavior of Scythians (Athen. Deipn. 10.427AB, 432A), reputed for their heavy drinking (Hdt. 6.84). Mediterranean peoples also associated drunkenness with Germans (Tac. Germ. 22) and Ethiopians (b. Qidd. 49b); each place had its own customs regarding wine (Esth. Rab. 2:13).
E.g., Diod. Sic. 4.4.6.
So Ruck, “Mystery,” 42; Wasson, Hofmann, and Ruck, Eleusis, 89–90. Against Ruck, “Mystery,” 47, however, narcotics were probably not used in the Eleusinian rites (Burkert, Mystery Cults, 108–9; Klauck, Context, 96; cf. Schulze, “Intoxicating substances,” 880).
Pliny E. N.H. 14.28.138. As early as Hom. Od. 4.219–26, Greeks wrote of drugs mixed in wine (here from Egypt, perhaps magical).
E.g., Socrates in Xen. Symp. 2.24–26; Plato in Aul. Gel. 15.2.4–5.
See, e.g., Fleming, “Savoring.”
Plut. Table 3.intro., Mor. 645A.
E.g., Crates Ep. 10.
E.g., in Athen. Deipn. 2.36–37.
E.g., Tibullus 1.7.39–42; Sir 34:27–28 [31:27–28]; cf. Prov 31:4–7. On peasants wanting to forget their toils, see MacMullen, Social Relations, 27; some thinkers regarded drunkenness and other aspects of wild partying (gluttony and promiscuity) as mere diversions from the depressing existence of the philosophically unenlightened (Max. Tyre 36.4).
Tibullus 2.1.27–30; forgiving even drunkenness there, Libanius Descr. 5.12; 29.10. Even the gods were supposed to banquet, in various ancient cultures (Burkert, “Symposia,” 10–11).
E.g., during Saturnalia (Statius Silv. 1.6.8; Lucian Sat. 2, 25).
O’Brien and Rickenbacker, “Alcoholism.”
Athen. Deipn. 10.443.
E.g., Eurip. Cycl. 678; Pliny E. N.H. 14.28.137–48; Max. Tyre 25.6; a writer in Athen. Deipn. 10.443E.
E.g., maxims of Menander 2, 5 in SPap 3:260–61.
So Dion. Hal. Ant. rom. 7.11.3 (with fatal consequences).
E.g., Suet. Jul. 53; cf. Vell. Paterc. 2.41.1–2 (contrasting Caesar favorably with Alexander). Cf. also Augustus’s sparing use of alcohol in Suet. Aug. 77.
Xen. Lac. 5.4–7.
Plut. Alc. 16.1; Luc. 39.1–2. Those who inherit (as opposed to those living by flattery) should maintain sobriety (Plut. Educ. 17, Mor. 13A).
Diluting it, Plutarch said, removed its harmfulness without removing its benefit (Poetry 1, Mor. 15E; Table 1.4.3, Mor. 621CD). For protection against drunkenness (magically), see Pliny E. N.H. 30.51.145; for a plant helpful for dissipating drunkenness, see 24.92.148.
Pliny E. N.H. 14.28.137 (for various dangers and problems with excessive drinking, see 14.28.137–48). Cicero jested that he might be prosecuted for drinking too much water, as a way of criticizing another’s use of wine (Plut. Cic. 27.2). One should avoid drunkenness before conceiving (Iambl. V.P. 31.211). Although some considered wine a (relative) luxury (4Q416 2 [+ 4Q417] II, 19–20), it was pervasive.
Alciph. Farm. 30 (Scopiades to Cotion), 3.32.
Plut. Alex. 70.1. Alexander himself contracted a fever from an entire day of drinking on another occasion (75.3) and reportedly eventually drank himself to death (75.4); Alexander Jannaeus contracted a quartan fever for three years after overdrinking (Jos. Ant. 13.398).
Diod. Sic. 15.74.2.
Philost. Vit. soph. 2.10.588.
E.g., Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 58.33; 83; Dial. 7.12.3. It kills by pleasure (Dial. 1.3.2).
Arius Did. Epit. 2.7.11m, pp. 88–89.34–39 (esp. 34); Diog. Laert. 7.1.118. Stories about the early Stoic Zeno suggest that he might have disagreed (Diog. Laert. 7.1.26).
Arius Did. Epit. 2.7.10e, pp. 62–63.20–23 (cf. 2.7.5f, pp. 30–31.31). For the disease concept of alcoholism in late antiquity, see further Keller, “Disease Concept.” Lovers of wine should take special precautions against overindulgence (Plut. Poetry 11, Mor. 31C).
Epict. Diatr. 3.12.11.
Dio Chrys. Or. 66.1, 7.
Dio Chrys. Or. 32.91.
Iambl. V.P. 3.13; Philost. Vit. Apoll. 2.7, 36 (also citing Indian Brahmans for this, 3.40); 6.11. This appears more mildly in Diog. Laert. 8.1.9, 19.
E.g., Tob 4:15; 1QpHab XI, 13–14; 4QpNah 3–4 IV, 4–5; Jos. Ag. Ap. 2.195, 204; Philo Flacc. 4, 136; Mos. 2.162 (though cf. Plant. 139–42, 174, 177); Test. Jud. 16:1; Sipra Sh. par. 1.100.1.2–3 (where R. Judah hyperbolically suggests capital punishment); Pesiq. Rab Kah. 4:4; b. Pesaḥ. 113b; Gen. Rab. 43:6; Lev. Rab. 12:1–5 (though cf. the Lord drinking in Pesiq. Rab. 16:3!). Cf. also the warning in Ahiq. 2.9–10 (so Syr. A; Syr. B has only 2.9; Arabic is 2.12–13), though its focus is one’s drinking companions.
E.g., Sir 31:25–31 [34:25–31]; Sent. Syr. Men. 52–58; Test. Jud. 16:1; ʾAbot R. Nat. 37 A; b. Ker. 13b. Rabbis sought to quantify the amount of wine the drinking of which constituted drunkenness (y. Ter. 1:6); sages could drink wine well, but not the ignorant (Gen. Rab. 89:8).
So y. Ter. 1:6.
Test. Jud. 16:3; Iss. 7:3. Naturally, priests in the temple had to practice abstinence (Lev 10:9; Ezek 44:21; Jos. Ag. Ap. 1.199).
Test. Naph. 1:2.
E.g., Demosth. Con. 7; Hor. Sat. 1.3.90–91; Sen. Y. Dial. 5.37.1; Dio Chrys. Or. 32.55. It was thought to change a person by warming one internally (Plut. Statecraft 3, Mor. 799B; cf. Cic. Tusc. 5.41.118; Sen. Y. Dial. 4.20.2; Pliny E. N.H. 14.7.58; Char. Chaer. 4.3.8; Athen. Deipn. 5.185C); for wine’s power to control, see, e.g., 1 Esd 3:17–24. Dionysus would stir those who consumed his wine immoderately to act indecorously (Dio Chrys. Or. 27.2).
Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 83.19–20. Cf. the story of Noah (Jub. 7:7; Jos. Ant. 1.141; Gen. Rab. 36:4; Num. Rab. 10:2); also Eve in Num. Rab. 10:8.
Sext. Emp. Pyr. 1.109; Mart. Epigr. 3.16.3; 3.48.5–10. Thus one lawgiver on an island with much wine doubled all penalties for crimes committed when drunk (Diog. Laert. 1.76; also in the third-century B.C.E. P.Hal. 1.193–95).
E.g., Plut. Table 3.intro., Mor. 645A; Dio Chrys. Or. 27.2; Sipre Deut. 43.8.1.
Polyb. 31.13.8; cf. many trampled when fleeing a banquet drunk in Polyb. 14.4.9–10. Better to leave early, Isocrates suggested, if one had to attend at all (Demon. 32); a banqueter unable to defend himself would need to at least be able to flee (Polyb. 8.30.6).
E.g., Libanius Encomium 5.14; b. Pesaḥ. 110b; y. Ter. 1:6.
So, e.g., Val. Max. 6.2.ext. 1 (judging); Phaedrus 4.16 (creation); Anacharsis Ep. 3.1–3.
E.g., breaking up someone’s property (Aeschines Tim. 59–61).
Plut. Alc. 19.1.
E.g., Isoc. Demon. 32; Anacharsis Ep. 3.1–3; Aul. Gel. 15.2.4–5; Philost. Vit. Apoll. 2.36; Song Rab. 2:4, §1. It weakens both mind and body in Lucret. Nat. 3.476–83; Val. Max. 9.1.ext. 1; that a physician condemns it (in Plato Symp. 176D) does not surprise us.
Pindar Encomia frg. 124.
Plut. Isis 6, Mor. 353C; Heracl. Hom. Prob. 35.3. The continuing practice might produce long-term insanity (Hdt. 6.84).
E.g., Mart. Epig. 3.82.
E.g., Suet. Tib. 42.1.
So Epicurus Symposium, according to Diog. Laert. 10.119.
So Zeno (acknowledging that his feet might trip) in Diog. Laert. 7.1.26. A sophist with a weakness for wine nevertheless “controlled” it so well that he could study before sleeping (Philost. Vit. soph. 2.11.591). Philo warned that if compelled to be drunken, one should not relinquish moral self-control (Flight 32).
Test. Iss. 7:3; Test. Jud. 14:7–8.
Hor. Ep. 1.5.16–20; Plut. Table 3.intro., Mor. 645AC; cf. Plut. Dinner 12, Mor. 156C.
E.g., Plut. Table 3.intro., Mor. 645A; Athen. Deipn. 10.427EF.
E.g., Mart. Epig. 12.12; cf. Mark 6:22.
Dio Chrys. Or. 30.35–36.
Char. Chaer. 4.3.8.
Philost. Hrk. 18.5.
Jos. Life 225.
Diog. Laert. 1.92.
E.g., Hor. Sat. 2.1.9; Ovid Her. 14.42; Tibullus 1.2.1–2; Libanius Encomium 2.17; further soporific substances could be added (Pliny E. N.H. 24.51.88; 28.79.260). To deaden pain, see Prov 31:6–7; Tibullus 1.2.1–2. Wine created unnatural dreams not susceptible to normal interpretations (b. Maʿaś. Š. 4:6, §5).
Ovid Her. 14.42. Humorously, drunkenness could put to sleep an entire company, rendering them susceptible to the theft of expensive napkins (Alciph. Paras. 10 [Stemphylochaeron to Trapezocharon], 3.46, ¶¶2–4).
Polyb. 8.30.6.
E.g., Livy 33.28.2; Jdt 13:2, 15; L.A.B. 43:6 (Samson).
E.g., Hdt. 1.211–12.
E.g., Jos. Life 388. See esp. the Cyclops (e.g., Hom. Od. 9.105–542; Eurip. Cyclops 488–94; Apollod. Epit. 7.6–7); many drew the moral from the story (e.g., Eurip. Cyclops 678; Crates Ep. 10; Athen. Deipn. 1.10E).
Livy 23.18.12; Tac. Hist. 2.68; cf. Hom. Il. 6.264–65.
E.g., Xen. Cyr. 7.5.21; Polyb. 8.27.1; 11.3.1; Dion. Hal. Ant. rom. 7.11.3; Jos. Ant. 18.370; Plut. Cam. 23.6; Xen. Eph. Anthia 1.13.
E.g., Tac. Hist. 1.80.
Polyb. 20.8.2, 4.
1 Kgs 20:16; cf. Herodotus’s characterization of Persian leaders (Hdt. 1.133, although at least he allows them to evaluate the decisions after becoming sober; cf. Esth 1:10; 2:1).
Plut. Alex. 9.5. Historically, Philip’s drunkenness elicited criticism from contemporaries (e.g., Demosth. Olynth. 2.18–19).
E.g., Eurip. Cycl. 534; Aeschines Tim. 59; Lysias Or. 3.6, §§96–97; 3.11, §97; Diod. Sic. 4.4.6; Philo Contempl. 40–47; Lucian Dial. G. 248–49 (22/18, Hera and Zeus ¶2); Diogenes Ep. 20. People who could drink without any violence were considered exceptional (Tac. Germ. 22).
Plut. Alex. 51.1–6.
Cf. Hor. Odes 1.18; Val. Max. 4.3.ext. 3a; 9.1.8; Lucian Nigr. 15; True Story 2.46; Char. Chaer. 4.3.8; Athen. Deipn. 15.668B; discussion in Winter, Wives, 153. Courtesans might use it to loosen up (Aelian Farmers 9 [Chremes to Parmenon]), and its potential for sexual mixing discredited early Dionysiac Mysteries in Rome (Diod. Sic. 4.4.1). Gluttony and sexual license, as two expressions of the lack of self-control, are likewise often linked (e.g., Corrington, “Defense”; Winter, Left Corinth, 82–85; Mus. Ruf. 4, p. 44.16–18; 1 Cor 6:13). The phallic deity Priapus was also associated with Dionysus (Diod. Sic. 4.6.1–2).
Sir 19:2; Test. Jud. 14:1–8.
So Val. Max. 2.1.5b. One husband allegedly cudgeled his wife to death for drinking wine (6.3.9).
Athen. Deipn. 10.444D.
Alciph. Court. 13, frg. 6, ¶¶11–18, esp. 18 (though this is fictitious).
Polyb. 6.7.5.
Smith, Symposium, 36.
E.g., Apoll. K. Tyre 39; Libanius Descr. 29.8; cf. Mikalson, “Festivals.” Festive occasions also demanded, where possible, bright and colorful garments (Cary and Haarhoff, Life, 97).
E.g., Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 95.20–21.
Y. Ter. 1:6.
E.g., Max. Tyre 3.7; Hermog. Inv. 4.10.200.
E.g., Philo Creation 69–71; Alleg. 3.82; Drunk 146–47; Dreams 2.190; Flight 166; Contemp. 84.
Fitzmyer, Acts, 243–44, cites Job 32:19 (in light of 32:18; 33:4), which is unclear but possible. An allusion to Joel’s wine (Joel 1:5) in light of Peter’s quotation in Acts 2:17–21 is also possible (Evans, “Prophetic Setting,” 217; see also below), but we should note that Joel does not connect drunkenness with inspiration. Prophesying from drunkenness was, however, a negative biblical image (Isa 28:7; Mic 2:11; differently and not related, Jer 23:9 and Amos 2:12).
Van der Horst, “Parallels to Acts,” 55 (Plut. Rom. Q. 112, Mor. 291B; Obsol. 40, Mor. 432E; Dinner 4, Mor. 150C; Lucian Nigr. 5; Iambl. Myst. 3.25; cf. wine inducing ecstasy in Eurip. frg. 265; Macrob. Sat. 1.18.1).
E.g., Ovid Fasti 4.237–46; Livy 38.18.9; Strabo 10.3.13; Val. Flacc. 7.635–36; Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 108.7; Epict. Diatr. 2.20.17; Juv. Sat. 2.110–16; Lucian Alex. 13; Lucius 37; Gout 30–32; Syr. G. 51; Iambl. Myst. 3.10. Cf. further comment in Burkert, Mystery Cults, 36.
Dio Chrys. Or. 1.56 (with “self-control and moderation,” ἐγκρατῶς καὶ σωφρόνως).
Forbes, Prophecy, 282.
Lucian Nigr. 5 (LCL, 1:104–5); cf. Nigr. 37.
Lucian Nigr. 6, νήφειν τε καὶ σωφρονεῖν (LCL, 1:104–5).
Cf. also Song 5:16 LXX; Jos. Ant. 2.64; Philost. Hrk. 1.4; Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 20 (citing Lucian Lover of Lies 39, which Barrett, Acts, 125, takes as referring only to indigestion); Bruce, Acts1, 87 (citing usage as early as Aristotle); see the term in LSJ. Contrast the sour wine in Luke 23:36.
See Mayerson, “Translations”; BDAG.
With, e.g., D. Williams, Acts, 47. The vintage was August-September in Egypt (Lewis, Life, 125) and Palestine (Hepper, Plants, 99); likewise, in autumn in the northern Mediterranean (Longus 1.28; 2.1), including September in Italy (Gutsfeld, “Wine,” 662). On viticulture, see sources from Columella’s On Trees; Theophr. Caus. Plant.; Pliny the Elder’s Natural History; and others in Keener, John, 989, 993–98.
11QTa XIX, 9–XXI, 10 (esp. Maier, Temple Scroll, 80n). Likewise Fitzmyer, Acts, 235, on 11QTa XIX, 11–14 (with XVIII, 10–13; XXI, 12–16), who even suggests that Luke “alluded to the Pentecost of New Wine when speaking more properly of the Pentecost of New Grain.” Malina and Pilch, Acts, 30 (cf. 230), jest that some of the festal visitors “have their calendar mixed up.” Luke could be mocking the mockers (cf. comment on Acts 17:18), but this solution does not seem obvious enough to be deemed likely.
Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 20; Bruce, Acts1, 87 and Bruce, Commentary, 65 (citing Cato E. Agr. 120 for storage in a sealed container in a cool pond); Bishop, Apostles, 34 (citing a twentieth-century Palestinian village practice of adding sugar to new wine to preserve it).
Likewise, storing wine cool in the ground prevented its turning to vinegar (Pliny E. N.H. 14.26.131–35).
Aelian Farmers 8 (Opora to Dercyllus).
Plut. Table 3.7.3, Mor. 656B. For sweet wine being thicker and with less aroma, see Pliny E. N.H. 14.11.80; on sweet wine more fully, 14.11.83–85.
Athen. Deipn. 2.45e, βαρύνει (citing Hippocr. Diet 2.332; Hippocrates also uses sweet wine medicinally, e.g., Use of Liquids 5).
Cf., e.g., Le Cornu, Acts, 88. Cf. spices in Mark 15:23; 3 Macc 5:2, 10; Pliny E. N.H. 14.15.92; sweet spiced wine in Eunapius Lives 463; honey in Pliny E. N.H. 13.20.113; esp. 22.53.113–22.54.115; honey in aged wine in Athen. Deipn. 10.432C.
Paterson, “Wine,” 1622; for stored, aged wine cf., e.g., Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 114.26. The sweet wine (ἡδυοίνους) of Philost. Hrk. 17.2 may be due to the kind of vine or the care of cultivation.
Wine was often diluted with two to four parts water per every part wine (Ferguson, Backgrounds, 80; cf. Plut. Bride 20, Mor. 140F; Philost. Hrk. 1.6; Sipra Sh. par. 1.100.1.3; b. ʿAbod. Zar. 30a; Num. Rab. 10:8; see esp. various mixtures in Athen. Deipn. 10.426CE, 430A). See the excursus on wine and excess drinking, above. Wine was supposed to be sold unmixed (Mart. Epig. 1.56; 9.98; cf. Theophr. Char. 30.5; but one said blessings over either mixed or unmixed wine, t. Ber. 4:3); water, of course, was normally cheaper (Mart. Epig. 3.56; Hor. Sat. 1.5.88–89).
Drinking wine that was too strong, however, served as a mark of ignorance (Theophr. Char. 4.6); drinking undiluted wine was viewed as dangerous (Ap. Rhod. 1.473; Diog. Laert. 7.7.184; 10.1.15; Apul. Metam. 7.12; Plut. Poetry 1, Mor. 15E; Table 1.4.3, Mor. 621CD; Diod. Sic. 4.4.6; Philost. Vit. soph. 2.10.588; Athen. Deipn. 10.427AB, 432A). Though one might devote undiluted wine to Dionysus, one might dilute wine dedicated to Zeus (as in Diod. Sic. 4.3.4). To become drunk at parties, mixers could dilute the wine less (Ferguson, Backgrounds, 80; cf. Catull. Carm. 27; Athen. Deipn. 14.653E) or add various herbal toxins (Ruck, “Mystery,” 42; Wasson, Hofmann, and Ruck, Eleusis, 89).
See, e.g., Xen. Cyr. 1.2.8; Lac. 5.4–7; Mem. 2.1.1; Eurip. Cycl. 334–35; Aeschines Tim. 42; Arist. Pol. 1.1.12, 1253a; Pindar Ol. 1.52–53; Polyb. 12.8.4; Sall. Sp. Caes. 8.2; Rhet. Her. 4.28.39; Val. Max. 9.1.ext. 1; Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 60.4; Mus. Ruf. 4, p. 44.18; 16, p. 104.18; 18A, p. 112.6–7, 29; 18B, p. 116.4–22, 25–33; 18B, p. 118.4–5, 9, 16–19; Pliny E. N.H. 11.119.284; 28.14.56; Epict. Diatr. 2.9.4; Plut. M. Cato 9.5; Dio Chrys. Or. 32.90; 77/78.28; Aul. Gel. 6.16; Max. Tyre 7.7; 25.5–6; 36.4; Diog. Laert. 1.104; 2.34 (Socrates); Iambl. V.P. 31.203; Philost. Vit. soph. 1.20.512–13; Vit. Apoll. 1.7; Porph. Marc. 33.506; Babr. 34; Longus 4.11; Ach. Tat. 2.23.1. This includes those who vomit to make room for more (e.g., Hipponax frg. 42; Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 108.15), though people valuing decorum viewed drunken vomit in public as shameful (Cic. Phil. 2.25.63; Sipre Deut. 43.8.1). Satirists often targeted gluttony (Mart. Epig. 2.40.1–8; 3.17.3; 3.22.1–5; 5.70, 76; 7.20; 11.86; 12.41; Juv. Sat. 2.114).
See, e.g., Smith, Symposium, 36; Ruscillo, “Gluttony.” Cf. Suet. Claud. 33.1 (but contrast Jul. 53).
E.g., Rom 16:18; 1 Cor 6:13; Phil 3:19; Matt 11:19; Syr. Men. Epit. 6–8; 4 Macc 1:3; Test. Mos. 7:4; Apoc. Elij. 1:13. See esp. Philo on the “belly” (Creation 157–59; Spec. Laws 1.148, 192; 4.91; Dreams 2.155; Alleg. Interp. 3.159, 161, 221; Migr. 66; Rhodes, “Diet”).
Barrett, Acts, 125 (citing Lucian Ep. Sat. 22 for the implication of γλεῦκος as cheap wine).
E.g., Hom. Il. 1.249 (a model for some later quotations); Val. Max. 1.7.ext. 3; Pliny Ep. 4.3.3; Lucian Portr. 13; Philost. Vit. soph. 1.8.490; 1.21.521; 1.22.522; 2.1.561; 4Q372 3 5; cf. Sen. E. Controv. 3.pref. 3. Some enjoyable kinds of content make speech “sweeter” (Dio Chrys. Or. 33.10; Men. Rhet. 2.4, 388.13–14, 27; 392.18); for songs, Pindar Isthm. 2.3; Paeans 6.59; 8.78.
So Wisdom or God’s message in Prov 24:13–14; Ps 119:103; Ezek 3:3; God’s message mixes sweet and bitter in Rev 10:9–10; cf. philosophic wisdom in Dio Chrys. Or. 33.16; the claim about truth in Egyptian religion in Frankfurter, Religion in Egypt, 53–54.
Herodas Mimes 3.93.
Thebaid frg. 4 (from Plato Phaedr. 269A); cf. Pindar frg. 152.
Locusts ravage the crops (Joel 1:4), including new wine (1:10), leaving no “sweet wine” (though the LXX has here simply οἶνος) for the drunkards (1:5). If Israel turns to God, however, God will send new wine and other fertility (2:19, 22, 24), making up for what the locusts had destroyed (2:23). After this, the Spirit will be poured out (2:28 [3:1]), and eschatological wine will be available (3:18 [4:18]). The wine press of judgment (3:13 [4:13]) is probably not relevant here. Cf. also Evans, “Prophetic Setting,” 217.
Some ancient commentators also relate this to Jesus’s promise of new wine with new wineskins; e.g., Bede Comm. Acts 2.13 (who contends that the mockers ironically speak truth); cf. Cyril Jer. Cat. Lect. 17.18 (Martin, Acts, 26).