Iv . Luke ’ Sn Otes ? (27:44)

Iv . Luke ’ Sn Otes ? (27:44)

IV. LUKE’S NOTES? (27:44)

Some scholars have reasonably argued that any of Luke’s notes taken in Judea would have been lost during the attempt to reach shore.1020 Papyrus is not waterproof,1021 and preserving it would require putting the document in a waterproof container “such as a jar with a cork lid, sealed with tar or wax.”1022 Had he carried papyrus with him on the voyage, it would become moldy if it became damp. People recycled papyrus by washing its surface with a sponge.1023 If Luke used papyrus, he could have employed the sort of papyrus, developed in Claudius’s era, that was superior to most of our ordinary papyri,1024 but it was still not waterproof.1025

For several reasons, however, it is better to argue that Luke had notes and that they survived. One argument is an analogy that is at best inconclusive: Caesar is said to have preserved papers while swimming away from the enemy to the nearest ship. He supposedly preserved the papers by holding up his left hand all the way, at the same time pulling his cloak in his teeth lest it fall into enemy hands (Suet. Jul. 64).1026 Even assuming that the water was calm, however, and noting the short distance (two hundred paces), this was an extraordinary maneuver;1027 challenges to its plausibility1028 are reasonable. It is possible that the story depends on a genuine core amplified by Caesar’s typical boasting and others’ praises; at the least, it is another example of someone swimming to safety (or waiting until it arrived). But (assuming a prone position rather than lying on one’s back) even staying afloat in still water while awaiting help appears difficult with one hand kept above water.1029

There are stronger arguments. First, although much of Luke’s account is general enough to simply reflect his memory, his “we” itineraries are more detailed and seem to serve no other purpose than a factual one.1030 This probably includes even the details of the voyage in Acts 27, although it is possible that he could simply reconstruct these from memory because they were recent when he had occasion to record them again afterward. This first argument is the most important because, whereas other arguments establish only the possibility of such notes, this one makes them likely.

Second, Luke has had a couple weeks (27:33) to consider the possibility of (at best) a difficult landing, and at least a night to consider it seriously. He could have obtained a watertight container if he did not have one (there would be sealable containers for other purposes on board, though most in the hold would be too heavy to try to take to shore),1031 and once the stern started breaking up (27:41), he could have secured his most important documents in the container before climbing down into the sea.1032 Mark Wilson suggests that “waterproof skins” could be “used to store and transport fragile documents of papyrus or parchment.” He notes the likelihood of documents transported by sea when great libraries such as those at Alexandria or Pergamum were being collected.1033 The very tendency of papyrus to grow moldy if damp suggests that Luke would have brought a container for a long voyage or that he would have employed some other substance of stronger quality than papyrus, perhaps parchment or vellum.1034 Wood and wax would be more durable but would not contain all of Luke’s notes or be easily carried to shore. In any case, that most writing materials used on ships utilized more waterproof materials than papyrus1035 suggests that Luke would have undertaken this voyage better prepared.1036 (Luke would hardly need notes for the details of the shipwreck itself, which were too graphic and traumatic for a typical survivor of the events to easily forget.)

Third, Luke could be among those floating and swept in on pieces of wood, with his light container on top of the wood; the container’s surface would become wet, but at least it would not be fully submerged for more than a few moments at a time. The distance to shore would not be far. Fourth, even if the papyrus was damaged somewhat in the process, the author might well recall enough of the details of the recent voyage to transcribe, based on whatever may have remained.

Finally and most important, he would likely have back in Syro-Palestine, probably left with Christians in Caesarea, a backup copy (which he could either consult if this one was damaged, or depend on entirely if this one was lost) of his most important notes1037 before the voyage. It was customary to keep multiple copies of important or lengthy works.1038 Cicero left records of his accounts in two cities.1039 Luke would certainly be able to regain access to these before the two-year period in 28:30 ended, and even more certainly before he began writing the book of Acts. This is not strictly an argument for the survival of a manuscript that he had with him, but it does counter the skepticism that the narrator of the storm scene could have also authored the rest of the “we” narrative. Again, in such a situation he could reconstruct the storm narrative from what survived of his notes or from memory; trauma often reinforces memory more deeply.1040

V. LUKE’S POINT

Thus, Luke celebrates, they all came safely to land.1041 God’s favor toward Paul eliminates casualties (27:24), and the voyagers’ obedience to God’s message through Paul plays a role in this survival (27:42–44). A careful hearer of Luke-Acts might recall that heeding Jesus’s words also leads to surviving a flood (albeit a figurative kind, Luke 6:47–49). When one who escaped a battle dove from a bridge into a river, then swam safely to land, others might conclude that the gods were with him (Val. Max. 3.2.1). The survival of all 276 passengers against all odds vindicated Paul’s status as a divine messenger and hence (a fortiori) could have also been used to vindicate Paul’s innocence toward those skeptical about it.1042

8. Ministry in Malta (28:1–10)

One could group the entire ministry in Malta together (Acts 28:1–10) or divide it into two paragraphs: Paul’s surviving a snakebite (28:1–6), and healings and hospitality (28:7–10). God vindicates Paul when Paul is confronted with a snakebite as God vindicated him at sea, for Paul must see Caesar. Both initial verdicts of the “barbarians” miss the mark: Paul is neither being punished by deity nor a deity himself; rather, God vindicates him as his agent. Their faulty understanding in 28:1–6, however, is no doubt corrected through Paul’s continuing ministry in 28:7–10. Paul ultimately endears himself to the hospitable people of the island through benefactions of healing as he had endeared himself to the people aboard the ship by speaking as God’s agent.

a. Some Introductory Issues

Many ancients believed that gods punished malefactors at sea (often destroying innocent seafarers who were with them); this was true not only in Greek but also in Jewish texts (Jonah 1:1–2:1). Paul’s survival at sea and from the snakebite showed that Paul was not only innocent but divinely vindicated.1043 From the most important perspective—the divine one—Luke’s audience recognizes Paul’s vindication whatever the later outcome of his trial before Nero’s court. (By the time Luke likely writes, Nero is not well thought of, anyway, though he is much better liked in Greece, where I locate Luke’s central audience, than in Rome.) Paul may have been criticized after his death for his Roman custody and execution, as Jesus was; thus it is important for Luke to reiterate how often God did in fact deliver Paul before Paul finally died (even that death fulfilling God’s will). This is also an important reason for the parallels between Jesus and Paul: both suffered for God’s purposes, and God vindicated both of them.1044

Some commentators have observed traces of medical terminology in Acts 28:1–10; some of the suggestions are more defensible than others. Dioscorides uses καθάπτομαι (nowhere else attested in the NT, the LXX, or the Apostolic Fathers) for toxins entering the body;1045 πίμπρημι is likewise a rare term,1046 employed most often (though not exclusively) in medical texts, for a swelling.1047 (The other sense listed in BDAG, to “burn with fever,” might be particularly relevant here: the snake does not cause Paul to “burn” [28:6], but he drops it into the fire [28:5] and cures someone else who is “[aflame with] fever” [28:8].)1048 Other terms, such as καταπίπτω (Acts 28:6; 26:14; Luke 8:6),1049 are simply not rare enough or medical enough to suggest a specifically medical connection.1050 Even if the cumulative use of particularly medical terminology in Luke-Acts is consistent with the tradition that Luke was a doctor (without its proving so),1051 we may presume that his general sense remains intelligible to his audience.1052

b. Malta (28:1)

Paul’s sea travels left him with many experiences on islands (e.g., Acts 20:15; 21:1; cf. 16:11).1053 Malta is called Μελίτη (as here) in a range of ancient sources;1054 in Latin it was Melite Africana.1055 Again Luke is dealing with the real world, not fictitious geography.1056

I. MLJET OR KEFALLINÍA?

As early as the eighth century C.E., an interpreter suggested the island today called Mljet (earlier Melita Illyrica [Latin], Meleda [Italian]) as an alternative to Malta, and it remains an alternative today.1057 This interpretation of a Dalmatian island near modern Dubrovnik rests on a narrower construal of “Adria” (27:27) as what we call the Adriatic today, but usage was wider in Luke’s day. This Dalmatian site is unlikely. A northeaster would hardly blow a ship from Crete and Cauda to Mljet in the north, especially if the sailors feared the Syrtis in the south (27:17).1058 Further, a ship bound for Rome from Mljet would sail to Italy’s western coast, not (as from Malta) to Syracuse (28:12).1059

Most scholars therefore reject this identification in favor of Malta.1060 Granted, Ptolemy (Geog. 2.16.9) apparently called it Μελιτήνη, but it was far less known than the Maltese Μελίτη. Pliny the Elder calls it Melite and attributes Maltese terriers to this location, probably confusing it with the better-known Malta,1061 but he speaks of a thousand islands in this Illyrian region.1062 Simply bearing this name no more makes Mljet the right site than Samothrace in the north Aegean (Acts 16:11), which some ancients claimed once bore the name Μελίτη because of its wealth,1063 or another Melite among many towns of Magnesia adjoining Thessaly.1064

Similar problems hold for the proposal of Kefallinía (Cephalonia),1065 which again is usually rejected in favor of Malta.1066 In its favor, this would be a way to fit the events presupposed in the Pastorals into the narrative of Acts (though the fit is not very persuasive, since 1 Timothy and Titus offer no real hint of Roman custody). It was a free island off the coast of Greece.1067 But this island was never clearly known as Melite.1068 Ancient Cephallenia (if it is the same Kefallinía) lacked sufficient drinking water, creating difficulty for the many goats there for half of every year1069 (though this is the rainy season).1070 It will hardly do to press “Adriatic” in its narrowest sense (Acts 27:27) while ignoring the island’s name in 28:1.

II. MALTA

Malta is about 58 miles south of Sicily,1071 180 miles east of Tunisia, and 220 miles north of the Libyan coast. Malta is 16 to 18 miles long (northwest to southeast) and 8 to 9 miles wide at its widest point, for a total of fewer than 100 square miles (considerably larger than Cauda, though closer to one-tenth the size of Sicily). This is therefore no small island. (Today it supports a population of more than 400,000.) Saint Paul’s Bay, the most commonly proposed site of landfall, is 3 to 4 miles (ca. 5 km.) from the northeast tip of the island.1072

Malta was known for its temple of Juno (Val. Max. 1.1.ext. 2) in the town “also called Melita” (Cic. Verr. 2.4.46.103), which Verres reportedly looted while governor of Sicily (2.4.46.104).1073 The island was also known for its small dogs (Strabo 6.2.11),1074 and it “prospered from olive-oil and textile production.”1075 Collections of Jewish catacombs on the island are estimated to be from the second to the fifth centuries C.E.1076

It may seem odd that the sailors had recognized the much smaller Cauda (Acts 27:16) more quickly than Malta (27:39), but they recognized Cauda by its location south of Crete before they lost their bearings, and even apart from the dim morning light and current rain, the approach to a northern bay was not the usual approach of ships to this island. Because Phoenicians named the island Melita for the Canaanite word for “refuge,” some scholars have suggested that 28:1 means that “after we were all safe, we understood ‘Melita’ to be well-named.”1077 But Luke and his companions do not know the local language (28:2), and a Greek might well think the island named for honey (μέλι) or sweetness.

c. Barbarian Benevolence (28:2)

In this passage, “barbarians” (possibly meaning here those not conversant in Greek) display the highly regarded virtue of kindness toward other people, and in the following context, they will prove extremely receptive to Paul’s ministry. A book emphasizing the good news for all peoples (1:8) might here subvert a particular Greek stereotype possibly held by some of Luke’s audience (cf. analogously Luke 10:29–37).1078

I. HOSPITALITY

Ancient Mediterranean culture was notably hospitable (see comment on Acts 16:15),1079 and this was probably truer of sedentary traditional areas than of faster-paced cities. One basis for praising a location in antiquity was its hospitality (Men. Rhet. 2.3, 384.22),1080 and by that criterion the “barbarians” of Malta fare far better than elite Philippi, cultured Athens, or sacred Jerusalem.1081 Sharing one’s food and drink was considered particularly kind (Xen. Cyr. 8.2.2).

Such hospitality was particularly necessary to victims of shipwreck.1082 Receiving shipwrecked strangers hospitably was a widespread human law (Eurip. Cycl. 299–301). Helping a shipwrecked person was an act of kindness comparable to showing the right path to a wanderer or sharing bread with the hungry (Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 95.51). Thus Dio Chrysostom reports local, rural hospitality when he experienced shipwreck (Or. 7.5–6, 55–58).1083 Locals did not always receive survivors so hospitably, however. Thus, in one novel a shipwrecked doctor had to beg for clothing and funds (Xen. Eph. Anthia 3.4); in other settings, too, because the shipwrecked lacked possessions, they might need to beg for their living (Phaedrus 4.23.24–25). Survivors of war could be compared to someone rescued “from a shipwreck, in nakedness and destitution” (Plut. Cam. 31.5).1084

II. BENEVOLENT KINDNESS

Orators also praised cities on the basis of their φιλανθρωπία (the term Luke uses here),1085 and Luke’s narrative reveals his gratitude. Such praises most often appear when a speaker is honoring benefactors or potential benefactors—that is, those in a superior position for providing aid. Those needing an official’s favor would praise his φιλανθρωπία;1086 one should praise a governor’s φιλανθρωπία to his subjects as part of his justice (Men. Rhet. 2.10, 416.5–12, esp. 416.6). Deities were also known for their φιλανθρωπία, or love of humanity;1087 this was also true of the supreme deity (Mus. Ruf. 17, p. 108.14),1088 who set the example for humans (p. 108.14–16).1089 This virtue1090 was characteristic of those who would show kindness when wronged (10, p. 78.33), like (in principle) philosophers (p. 78.34) and in contrast to beasts (p. 78.28). See further discussion at Acts 27:3.

Here again Luke provides an example of nonbelievers’ kindness (cf. Luke 10:33–35; see comment on Acts 27:3).1091 It is possible that Luke might concede to John’s radical moral dualism (cf. John 15:18–25) in principle (cf. Luke 11:23; 16:13), but he certainly qualifies such dualism in practice (as even John does, to an extent; cf., e.g., John 7:12, 31, 43, 51). That they are Gentiles provides a fitting climax to Luke’s paradox regarding the Gentile mission: rejected by Israel’s leaders (Luke 22–23; Acts 21–26), both Jesus (Luke 23:47) and Paul are esteemed by strangers. But while the local people are Paul’s benefactors here, he more than returns the kindness (as befits ancient reciprocity conventions) in Acts 28:8–9,1092 in turn becoming something like their benefactor (and hence receiving their honor, 28:10).1093

Though “philanthropy” was a more conventional Greek virtue, Greeks sometimes applied their virtues to barbarians (27:3), even projecting on them virtues in which they felt themselves wanting.1094 Though Persians were “barbarians” and enemies of Greeks, Musonius pointed out, they treated Themistocles kindly.1095 Of course, “barbarian” could have harsher moral connotations; some recounted the cruelty of barbarians1096 or spoke of cruel behavior as barbarous.1097 Romans praised the emperor for subduing “barbarians.”1098 One might expect to find “barbarous” peoples in a remote area, away from (Greco-Roman) “civilization.”1099

III. “BARBARIANS”

Ancient writers sometimes categorized humanity into two groups,1100 Greeks and barbarians,1101 so that the mention of both groups together comprised all humanity, whether in philosophers,1102 rhetoricians,1103 historians,1104 or elsewhere.1105 Thus Greeks could consider wholly “civilized” groups such as Trojans1106 and Persians1107 “barbarians.” Although this dichotomy was originally Greek, Romans1108 and Jews1109 often simply adapted it as conventional language. Even Greeks did not always use it in a derogatory sense; after advising that one distinguish between Greeks and barbarians,1110 a rhetorician explains how to praise barbarians.1111 The basis for the contrast was often (though not by any means always) primarily linguistic.1112

Some scholars think that Luke’s designation of the indigenes as “barbarians” reflects Greek cultural snobbery,1113 and Greeks could certainly so employ “barbarian” at times.1114 (That was in fact the most common usage after the Persian Wars.)1115 But Luke portrays them as benevolent (28:2) and at least some people there as elite (28:7) and hence might think primarily of linguistic barbarism—that is, those who do not speak Greek.1116 (Romans adapted the nomenclature for their own purposes.)1117 Granted, Greeks could contrast themselves with barbarians in terms of genuine (Greek) education;1118 in earlier times, they could also protest that barbarians ought not to rule Greeks1119 but, rather, Greeks barbarians.1120 But the linguistic difference may be the primary point of the term in this context (cf. discussion of the Maltese language below) and would be sufficient by itself to merit the title. Those lacking Greek language normally also lacked its culture as well.

Some find it odd that Luke would regard Paul as a nonbarbarian, distinct from the Maltese locals; after all, he was Jewish and not Greek.1121 But if we think of the language only, the differentiation makes good sense: Paul’s Greek was notably fluent (21:37),1122 and those who voyaged on the ship from the East were also Greek-speakers, in contrast to the Maltese.

It is also possible, however, that Luke does call attention to traditional Greek expectations about “barbarians.” He does not apply this label to peoples in respected Asia Minor, even when they do not speak Greek (or at least not as a primary language, 14:11). If Luke does evoke Greek sentiments about Greek versus barbarian culture, he quickly subverts them by underlining the Maltese people’s virtue of hospitality, part of the repertoire of Greek virtues.1123

IV. THE MALTESE PEOPLE

Carthaginians controlled Melita from the sixth century B.C.E., and “Punic traditions remained strong throughout the Roman period.”1124 The Maltese descended from Phoenician settlers, and their indigenous language in Paul’s day remained a Punic (Carthaginian) variety of the ancestral Phoenician tongue.1125 Bilingual inscriptions from Malta in this period include Punic (CIS 1.124; CIG 3.5753), which was apparently the sole language of the majority of people.1126 (Aristocratic Romans would not have approved.)1127 Their ethnic identity was also Phoenician, like that of the descendants of Phoenicians in North Africa;1128 Punic culture continued for at least two centuries after the Roman conquest.1129 (Even today Malta’s location and history lead to linguistic fusion. The modern Maltese language fuses Arabic from North Africa with a Sicilian dialect of Italian; though considered a Semitic language, it is written with Latin script.)1130

The dominant Punic language of the Maltese would not have created a barrier for the communication occurring in Acts 28:7–10.1131 Finding Latin-speakers who could interpret for the less educated locals would not have been difficult. Publius (28:7) would speak Latin, as would others. Because Caesar settled veterans there, a number of families on the island would have spoken Latin as a first language, even if none are here on the beach.1132 (Prominent Romans had stayed on Malta; e.g., Cic. Att. 10.9.)

This was not unusual in the West. In contrast to Rome’s pro-Greek policy in the East,1133 Rome used Latin for the cities it founded in the West, “ignoring all local languages, whether Iberian, Celtic, Punic, or Libyan.”1134 These societies included a romanized elite, some who retained indigenous culture fully, and others (ideally many) who were partially romanized.1135 Roman-period texts in Punic are sometimes bilingual (with Latin) and use Latin loanwords.1136 First-century Malta produced inscriptions with both Greek and Latin, and excavators have found distinctly Roman architectural remains (such as baths and villas).1137

Still, the “barbarian” linguistic claim of Acts 28:2 is entirely probable. On Malta (as on the other proposed island), educated people spoke Greek and/or Latin whereas most of the inhabitants could not, as both inscriptions and literary sources attest.1138 Because most first-century inscriptions there are bilingual with Punic and Greek (the latter perhaps because of the Eastern grain traffic), some scholars suggest that the islanders likely spoke Punic with one another but Greek to their shipwrecked guests.1139 Probably most of the nonelite persons present did not even speak Greek (hence the label “barbarians”; but cf. their apparent intelligibility in 28:4, 6), but only a few of those present would need to know some for communication and interpretation to occur. Once the voyagers made contacts of higher status (28:7), communication would be more fluent.

V. STARTING A FIRE

As noted above, orators praised cities for their hospitality and philanthropy; when possible, they also liked to praise them for their good weather,1140 an option that Luke does not have for this narrative! The rain is expected during this season (see comment on Acts 27:9) and reflects the same hostile weather that kept skies continually overcast for days (27:20).1141 Commentators suggest that the temperature in Malta during this time of year is normally about 50º F.1142 Modern websites suggest an average closer to 60º F (about 15º C),1143 but in any case the temperature would be lower and would feel cooler in the rain, especially to those who had come ashore in their barest garments and now had nothing dry to wear.1144 Everyone would recognize that those soaked with water would feel cold (cf. Polyb. 3.71.11–3.72.6).1145 The first attempts to bring the ship to land, and hence probably the arrival of the first swimmers ashore, came in the early morning light (Acts 27:27, 33, 39), and even normal mornings were cool.1146

Once they were on land, the first act of those drenched during a storm at sea might be to start a fire (Virg. Aen. 1.174–76). It is possible (though no more than that) that Luke’s audience might recall another fireside scene: whereas Peter denied Jesus at a fireside (Luke 22:56–57), Paul here honors Jesus. The fire itself is not unusual, and readers of Acts would not necessarily think of Luke 22 (both indicate cool weather, but Luke words them differently);1147 still, these are the only two explicit fireside scenes, and both events are roughly parallel in literary location, placed near the ends of their respective books. The cock reveals Peter’s failure (22:60–61) whereas the viper in Acts 28:5 reveals Paul’s “power.”

d. Paul Survives a Snakebite (28:3–6)

When a viper bites Paul, locals apparently expect him to die from the bite, offering the popular association of divine vengeance as the cause. Paul’s survival of the bite, however, convinces them of something more positive but with them erring in the opposite direction, that he is divine instead. Here, as elsewhere in Acts, signs testify to God’s power; apart from the gospel message, however, signs can be misinterpreted (cf. 14:11–13). Some scholars view this passage as a power encounter, with the serpent representing evil forces (cf. Luke 10:19; discussion below); a literal serpent, however, still allows the usual point of signs in Acts.

I. THE SETTING (28:3)

Paul’s snakebite occurs when he is helping gather sticks1148 for a fire, a menial task perhaps considered more appropriate for those of inferior status. Paul, however, is willing to work with his hands (as in Acts 20:34 and in Paul’s own letters; see discussion at Acts 18:3). Paul cares for others’ needs throughout the voyage (27:10, 22, 31, 34), drawing no distinction between Christians and non-Christians in his service.1149

When stiff from cold, snakes can easily be mistaken for twigs until revived by heat.1150 (Egyptian snake charmers had long exploited this characteristic of snakes.)1151 Some ancients told a fable about a farmer who warmed a viper nearly dead from the cold (Babr. 143.1–2), as Paul inadvertently does here. The viper then stretched itself out, fastened to his hand, and bit the farmer fatally (143.3–4). As the man was dying, he realized his story’s moral: never show mercy to the wicked (143.5–6).1152

II. HARMFUL SNAKEBITES AND CURES

Snakebites appear as a frequent cause of suffering in antiquity,1153 and they sometimes proved fatal.1154 In Dioscorides’s De materia medica, bites and stings appear frequently: scorpion stings account for 11.9 percent of cases; rabies, 10.42 percent; spider bites, 7.36 percent; and snakebites, 7.66 percent.1155 An island snakebite on the foot lamed the legendary Philoctetes, who was abandoned because of his cries;1156 Jewish teachers also viewed serpents as dangerous (e.g., t. B. Qam. 1:4).1157

Even piety did not always protect from snakebites,1158 but extraordinary piety was thought to sometimes have that effect.1159 When once a poisonous reptile bit R. Hanina ben Dosa while he was praying,1160 he did not interrupt his prayers, and only the reptile died.1161 In a later version, R. Hanina deliberately provoked a hostile reptile to bite him, so that the reptile died; he then lectured, “It is not the lizard that kills, it is sin that kills!”1162

Greeks told wonder stories about snakes and associated them with particular cults.1163 Thus, if the snake in a frieze at Eleusis is intended literally, Eleusinian initiates ideally needed not to fear snakes (to whatever extent such an ideal was realized).1164 Snakes could be associated with Asclepius (and hence healing);1165 with Apollo slaying the serpent Python (see comment on Acts 16:16), the Furies, or other terrifying monsters with snake “hair”;1166 and perhaps with Orphic or Dionysiac rites in older Macedonia.1167 In mythology, killing snakes even caused one man a magical transgender experience.1168

Snakebites were among maladies not easily cured.1169 Many cures and preventions reflect folk traditions. For example, Lemnian soil supposedly cured one’s snakebite (Philost. Hrk. 28.5); stag’s tooth or stag’s testicles protected against snakebite;1170 Egyptian priests provided spells against them from the pharaonic period to late antiquity.1171 The Asclepius temple in Cos recommended a particular mixture to cure all venomous wounds except that caused by the asp.1172 Remedies also included the following:1173

One folk cure, then viewed as religious, for snakebite in Jewish sources would also be viewed as sympathetic magic from a modern vantage point.1189

III. AUTHORITY OVER SNAKES

Slightly closer to this narrative might be claims of people immune to snakes. Pliny the Elder claims that some people have magical powers—for example, those who can scare away serpents and, by touch or suction, can cure those bitten by them. Sometimes this property ran in the family; to test this claim empirically, Romans threw one of these people into a container with snakes, which did not harm him; the drawback of this gift is that these people emit a foul odor during the spring.1190

Greeks and Jews, however, had other accounts that, like Jewish stories about R. Hanina ben Dosa, are much closer to this narrative; they emphasize a holy person’s divine protection from or power over animals. Pythagoras allegedly subdued snakes and sent them away pacified (Iambl. V.P. 28.142), as part of his ability to soothe (13.60) and persuade (13.61–62) animals. He believed that all creatures were linked in “brotherhood” because they were composed of the same elements; thus, rather than harm animals, he sought to educate them (24.108). Beasts were also supposedly harmless to other “divine men.”1191 The Pythagorean Apollonius was said to tame fierce dogs (Philost. Vit. Apoll. 6.43; 8.30). Some writers could also romanticize about the devout being safe from animals (Hor. Odes 1.22.1–16, noting the retreat of a wolf).

A plausible biblical background is Moses’s divinely given authority over serpents, and divine protection against (or healing for) the bites of serpents (Exod 4:3; 7:9–12; Num 21:6–9; cf. Deut 8:15).1192 Somewhat less likely, Paul’s authority over the viper might also evoke humanity’s original authorization over all creatures, including “creeping things” (Gen 1:28).1193 Jewish traditions sometimes viewed this mandate as continuing after the fall; thus, for example, God’s people would subdue all wild animals so long as they followed God (Test. Iss. 7:7).1194 In some Jewish traditions, creatures of the earth still obeyed Adam after the fall (Apoc. Mos. 29:13–14), although this is not a permanent arrangement (24:4). Adam’s son Seth orders the beast (a serpent; cf. L.A.E. 37:1–3) to stand back from himself, God’s image (39:1–2), and it obeys (39:3; cf. also Apoc. Mos. 12:1–2).

Other Jewish texts refer to human rule over animals. In an earlier text, crows obey Abram (Jub. 11:20).1195 Human peace with animals would be restored in the eschatological era of Isa 11:6–9 (see, e.g., Sib. Or. 3.788–95); regarding snakes in particular, some rabbis expounded Isa 11:8 (children unharmed by snakes) as children pulling the poison from adders’ mouths (Sipra Behuq. pq. 2.262.1.3). Christian tales about the apostles also gave them remarkable authority,1196 such as John’s authority over obedient bedbugs (Acts John 60–61). More important than such sources would be the widely known story of God protecting Daniel from lions (Dan 6:22) and especially the psalmist’s confidence of safety with regard to lions and serpents (Ps 91:13).1197 Some ancient interpreters treated Paul’s victory here as a model, arguing that holiness or faith could protect the virtuous from snakebites, as they protected Paul.1198

At least some early Christians viewed picking up serpents (presumably unintentionally, as here) without suffering harm as a sign of divine power (Mark 16:18).1199 Luke curiously omits a Markan statement, which he could have developed into a parallel for Acts 28:3–9 (Mark 1:13), about safety among animals. Luke earlier presents Jesus as authorizing the Seventy or Seventy-Two to tread on serpents and scorpions uninjured (Luke 10:19); although that text uses this image symbolically for power over evil spirits (10:17–18, 20), it implies that Paul shares the same measure of authority delegated from Jesus.1200

Some scholars thus suggest a corresponding allusion to Satan’s work here.1201 Luke does not always employ the image of a serpent thus; probably the image in Luke 3:7 evokes parent murder.1202 Although there is no thought that the viper represents a demon, Luke’s audience could easily believe that its fixing on Paul (who alone is bitten, as the observers notice, Acts 28:4) constitutes an attack from Satan, who is a very personal character in Luke-Acts (Luke 4:2–13; 8:12; 10:18) and can cause physical suffering (13:16; Acts 10:38).1203 What would be the coincidence that the narrative’s hero, the one on whose behalf all the voyagers were preserved, would be the one bitten?

IV. THE VIPER IN MALTA (28:3–6)

There are no poisonous snakes in Malta today1204 (an argument that some have used for the island being Kefallinía, where snakes include a poisonous viper).1205 Of Malta’s four varieties of snakes, only one is common, the nonpoisonous western whip snake. The other three are likewise not poisonous, though they look something like vipers.1206 Some scholars thus suggest that the viper in the narrative was a nontoxic snake, such as Coronella austriaca, which resembles a viper and can fasten on to its victim as Acts 28:3–4 suggests.1207 It is attested in Sicily and surrounding islands, and one was once identified on Malta in modern times. It also is known to irritate easily and fastens its teeth on people,1208 but it can be easily pulled off without much damage to the skin.1209 We could readily forgive Luke, not being from Malta, for not knowing local snakes (or understanding the conversation in 28:4–6).

Since even gestures and expressions might imply the responses of 28:4–6, it seems that the locals expected the viper to be toxic,1210 but many people in snake-infested areas may simply avoid all snakebites instead of developing expertise in distinguishing similar forms of snakes from one another. In popular belief, even among the educated, all snakes were poisonous (Pliny E. N.H. 8.35.85).1211 Luke reports the incident without passing verdict on the toxicity of the snakebite (though presumably Luke values it as a miracle example, in addition to valuing the opportunity to report the Maltese audience’s response; ἔχιδνα also is normally viewed as a poisonous snake).

Nevertheless, would locals assume toxicity if no snakes on their island were known to be poisonous? Commentators often note that there may have been more kinds of snakes in Malta two millennia ago than are there today.1212 Malta is heavily inhabited (with some 400,000 residents), and the forest cover is now gone.1213

Since humans are poisonous snakes’ enemies, we should not be surprised if such snakes went extinct here; this has commonly occurred in many parts of the world as human expansion displaced snakes from their natural habitat. (Ancient capture of elephants for Roman spectacles, for example, drove North African elephants extinct.)1214 Likewise, during my stays in Africa, locals have sometimes informed me about the disappearance of some snakes and dangerous animals in their region over the previous generation or two, as humans have expanded their settlement and eliminated possible dangers and competitors; killing snakes was often considered a duty.

V. SNAKEBITE AS DIVINE VENGEANCE? (28:4)

Cadbury catalogues some of the events implying divine providence in the narrative: Paul escapes from Judean demands for his execution; from the soldiers’ judgment that they should kill the prisoners; from the Syrtis; from shipwreck; “from the savages, dreaded as pillagers of shipwrecks”;1215 and from harm from the snakebite.1216 Many scholars today argue that Luke presents Paul’s survival as vindicating his innocence.1217 A survivor of shipwreck could be viewed as having divine favor.1218 Although the local people draw the wrong conclusion from Paul’s immunity to the snakebite in Acts 28:6, they rightly reverse their negative verdict in 28:4. This reversal underscores an implicit theme of Luke in these final chapters: Paul is vindicated by a justice greater than that of the Sanhedrin, Felix, Festus, Agrippa, or even the emperor before whom Paul is destined to appear.1219

Ancients would not view as a coincidence one’s death by snakebite after escaping from shipwreck. Shipwrecks were often viewed as signs of divine punishment,1220 a perspective that could be raised even in court.1221 Indeed, some viewed it as just that the gods sink an entire ship, drowning all aboard, to punish a single impious person on board (Babr. 117). But an impious person who survived a shipwreck was not therefore guaranteed survival. Whoever suffered shipwreck more than once was said to blame Neptune wrongly; the fault lay with the person who invited such calamity.1222

Novels developed this expectation. Pirates who sold a pious captive and then faced terrible storms might realize that they had experienced fair sailing only for their captive’s sake (Char. Chaer. 3.3.9–11). A survivor might be viewed as pious unless he survived only for a worse fate. One pirate claimed that he was spared death at sea only because of his piety (3.4.9); he was, in fact, spared for his impiety, however (3.4.10), so that he might face a worse fate (3.4.18).1223 Evildoers who seemed to escape death in the short run would suffer their just deserts afterward.1224

Mere change in means of death would likewise simply signal that vengeance was inevitable, coming by one means or another (see discussion on Acts 28:4–5).1225 This very circumstance of someone escaping shipwreck to die of snakebite is attested in an epitaph in Gr. Anth. 7.290, as commentators widely observe;1226 the principle of escaping one trouble to face another is even older.1227 Biblically literate readers might think more immediately of the more distant but better-known image in Amos 5:19, where one who escapes from a lion suffers divine judgment through a serpent.1228

It was often assumed, however, that those who genuinely survived and prospered must not be guilty of murder, for otherwise the gods would have taken advantage of their sea voyage to punish them (e.g., Antiph. Her. 82–84;1229 cf. also Andocides Myst. 137–39).1230 (It was not, therefore, surprising that many ancients preferred to sail with virtuous rather than with impious comrades [Xen. Cyr. 8.1.25].) In one novel, the Nile twice rescued Habrocomes from death, persuading onlookers and the prefect that the gods favored him and he might be innocent (Xen. Eph. Anthia 4.2).1231 A person could appeal to how well the gods were treating him, to defend his character.1232 Naturally, speakers for the defense and prosecution would interpret the same events quite differently.1233 One could argue in court that another’s sufferings at sea testify to his wickedness,1234 a good reason for Luke not to invent the storm and shipwreck to begin with. One could also compare the joy of an acquitted person to that of someone who had escaped from a storm at sea (Max. Tyre 3.4). Helpfully for Luke’s apologetic, Paul’s survival of snakebite as well as storm attested his innocence.1235 This survival would confirm that Paul, unlike Jonah (Jonah 1:7–9), was not the cause of his ship’s calamity, even though prisoners might be the first voyagers to whom critics would want to assign the guilt.

Jewish people viewed beasts as one divine means of judgment,1236 and this included snakes.1237 Greeks and Romans could view snakes similarly (cf. perhaps Gr. Anth. 7.290, above);1238 even Pliny the Elder viewed snakes as executing revenge on anyone who killed their mates (N.H. 8.35.86).1239 A snakebite on the hand might seem poetic justice for a “murderer” who used his hand for evil.1240

The “barbarians” (Acts 28:2) viewed Paul as a murderer facing justice. (On their view at this point, he would thus have been responsible for the shipwreck rather than for its passengers’ survival.) Ironically, he had once been a murderer at least indirectly (26:10) but had become an agent of life (13:46, 48; 27:24). From Luke’s perspective, murderers in fact sometimes escaped justice in this life (3:14–15), but Jesus’s resurrection provided the paradigm (albeit not always the schedule) for divine vindication. This narrative at least obliquely critiques the assumption that one can infer sin from tragedies.1241

VI. PERSONIFIED JUSTICE (28:4)

Most scholars argue that by “justice” the Maltese residents refer to a goddess of justice.1242 Justice was often personified, for example, alongside the Fates (Hor. Odes 2.17.15–16) or in a picturesque manner as a female deity (Chrysippus in Aul. Gel. 14.4).1243 One facing unjust death at others’ hands could depend on Justice to favor him (Philost. Hrk. 33.37). Commentators cite numerous examples of Justice as a goddess personifying revenge;1244 perhaps most relevant is that Justice watches “over all that happens at sea” (Plut. Dinner 18, Mor. 161F).1245 The Roman equivalent of the Greek Dike was Justitia; she appears primarily in poetry, but she also had a temple, and Augustus celebrated her as a virtue.1246

In Jewish thought, of course, justice was subordinate to God; when God brings judgment, evildoers face “terrifying justice” (δίκης, Sib. Or. 3.634).1247 But along with mercy, justice was often personified as one of God’s chief attributes.1248 As among Greeks, so in Hellenistic Jewish sources, Justice pursued sinners and executed vengeance (Wis 1:8; 4 Macc 18:22).1249

Although syncretism and the blending of deities were common (see comment on Acts 8:10), these local residents, outside major harbors or cities, were probably minimally hellenized or romanized themselves.1250 Punic religion persisted in Punic areas in the Roman period.1251 Would the Maltese here have spoken of anything like a Greek goddess? Although Lake and Cadbury, for example, envision a Semitic deity of the Maltese that Luke has translated,1252 Conzelmann doubts the need to seek “a Punic equivalent” to the Greek deity Justice.1253 Since Luke would not likely know any Punic, Conzelmann’s skepticism is understandable here. Nevertheless, sources indicate that the Phoenicians did have a divine or semidivine Justice; in Philo of Byblos, Sydyk (Justice) was a sort of demigod.1254 Even had this not been the case, however, Luke could have presented in a more Hellenistic way a more abstract justice executed by a larger pantheon.1255

If Luke does report the locals’ intention accurately, how would he know what they were saying?1256 He could probably extrapolate the basic ideas (though more in Acts 28:4 than in 28:6) from their gestures and expressions; historians could use inference to fill in dialogue and speeches. Probably some of the locals knew rudimentary Greek or Latin; but they probably communicated to one another in Malta’s Punic dialect (see comment on Acts 28:2), and so Luke might gain a more precise idea of their discussion only if he asked or was later (perhaps after 28:8–9) informed. (Publius and other members of the island’s elite certainly would have spoken Latin and probably, in many cases, Greek.)

VII. VIEWING PAUL AS A GOD (28:6)

Paul does not merely escape being bitten, suggesting innocence; rather, he fails to suffer the expected effects of a bite, suggesting special divine protection. Mistaking a mortal for a divinity appears commonly enough in ancient sources, especially novels (see comments on Acts 10:26; 14:11). Supernatural power bestowed by a god would make one appear as a god.1257 Sometimes it is portrayed as humorous—for example, when Dionysius thinks that his slave Callirhoe is Aphrodite (Char. Chaer. 2.3.6–7), just as, on another occasion, some others thought that she was Aphrodite (1.14.1).

When the “barbarians,” seeing Paul’s immunity to the snakebite, change their mind from thinking that he is a murderer to thinking that he is a god (Acts 28:6), Luke offers some comic relief at the “barbarians’” expense. Whereas he was not making fun of them in 28:2, he is making fun of them here. This would be especially the case if his humor plays on Greek stereotypes of barbarians;1258 Greek writers could portray barbarians as “superstitious by nature” (Xen. Eph. Anthia 3.11)1259 or non-Greeks as too ready to worship mortals.1260 (When it was useful for their purposes, however, Romans could also portray Greeks as fickle,1261 a vice relevant to the radical change of mind here.1262 The elite also could view the “masses” as superstitious and fickle.)1263

If Luke views the “barbarians” as superstitious or credulous (esp. in Acts 28:6), however, he does so no more than he views the people of Lystra (a Roman colony!) in 14:11 as such (and as fickle “masses” in 14:19).1264 The change of mind here is precisely the opposite of what is encountered in 14:11–19: from wrongdoer to deity in this case, and from deity to wrongdoer in the other.1265 If Luke displays any prejudice, it could be along the lines of rural versus urban;1266 but the Maltese here are kind, and his only real complaint is most likely anti-pagan instead (cf. 17:18; 19:32).1267 A chief reliable character in his narrative detests paganism in cultured Athens no less (17:16).The anti-pagan humor touches on a motif running throughout Acts.1268 Whereas Jesus does receive adoration of sorts in the Gospel, it is inappropriate for other mortals. Peter rejects it (10:26), as do Paul and a companion on an earlier occasion (14:11). By contrast, Simon claims it (8:9–10), and Herod Agrippa I accepts it (12:22) with disastrous consequences (12:23). The only approved human recipient of veneration in Luke-Acts is Jesus (Luke 24:52, according to the best-attested reading; cf. 5:8; 17:16). Luke does not narrate Paul’s response to the perspective here (he does not appear even cognizant of it), but the competent reader will infer his expected response from the previous occasion (Acts 14:14–18).

Recently Joshua Jipp has offered a strong argument concerning how Luke’s first-century audience would have construed the “barbarians’” understanding of Paul as divine in connection with the hospitality offered before and after this turn in the narrative.1269 Ancient narratives about theoxenies—unwitting hospitality or inhospitality toward a deity, with appropriate rewards or punishments following—were common; sometimes in Greek circles and regularly in Jewish circles analogous narratives also apply to divine agents, which Paul is here.1270 Jipp notes that Jesus, too, was recognized in a setting of hospitality (Luke 24:29–32).1271 He argues that in contrast to Jewish rejection in 28:17–25, Paul’s last major scene of ministry among Gentiles in Acts is one of welcome, suggesting the trajectory for the continuing Gentile mission.1272

e. Healings and Hospitality (28:7–10)

Paul is exalted even in his continuing captivity; such exaltation within hardship reflects a common feature of biblical narratives. Joseph was exalted in Potiphar’s house (Gen 39:2–6) and in prison (39:20–23); David was exalted as a bandit leader (1 Sam 22:2) or mercenary for the Philistines (27:5–7) even while fleeing King Saul.

Just as Greeks might praise Poseidon for fair weather after a winter storm,1273 Luke implicitly praises God’s providential care for the anticlimax that reduces the dramatic intensity by which the storm has dominated the narrative. God, who has watched over every point in the spread of the gospel to the Gentiles (e.g., Acts 10–11), has preserved the apostle for his witness in Rome; in the West God uses him first in Malta. From the standpoint of Acts 28:8–10, it is evident that the storm was no disaster, as it first appeared (and might well continue to appear from the standpoint of the owner’s or underwriter’s losses), but God’s plan to lead Paul to such open people.1274

I. PUBLIUS’S HOSPITALITY (28:7)

Luke says that Publius lived in the vicinity of the shipwreck. Although he does not specify the “neighborhood” in view, we do have some details about Malta’s habitation. Most prominent among such details is that one major inland city, founded by Carthaginians, was Melita, which Muslims later named Medina, with a suburb named Rabat.1275 From Roman times until 1570 (when Valetta became the capital), Malta’s capital was Medina/Rabat.1276 The area around modern Valetta (today’s capital) was also inhabited in the Punic and Roman periods.1277

Although most of the people who first helped the wrecked seafarers were poor, probably peasants, Luke indicates that many of the nearby estates belonged to Publius, who (wherever on the island his main residence was located) owned much of the nearby land. His name suggests, as does his status as the “first” citizen (see comment below), that he was a Roman citizen,1278 as were many members of local elites in the western empire. Whether or not the “barbarians” who first welcomed the voyagers were his clients, Publius surely had many tenant farmers working his land and probably many clients in something closer to the more traditional urban sense as well. Word about Paul would therefore spread quickly. The system of landowners and tenants characterized most of the ancient Mediterranean world (e.g., Mark 12:1–2; see discussion of rural poverty at Acts 3:2).

Luke calls Publius the “first” man of the island—that is, one of its most influential citizens (see Luke’s usage of πρῶτος in Acts 13:50; 28:17). The phrase “first” for a “leading citizen” is common in Latin1279 and in Greek.1280 When Augustus chose the fictively innocuous self-designation princeps (“first”), he borrowed a title from the republic (still used in the empire) for people of rank (see, e.g., Suet. Aug. 66; Res gest. 12).1281 Officials in Asia employed the title “first,”1282 as did those in Achaia;1283 princeps is also a chief man in a town in Sicily (Cic. Verr. 2.3.23.56). It is also attested in inscriptions from Malta itself for the chief (πρῶτος, IG 14.601 = IGRR 1.512), and perhaps the foremost, citizen (primus, CIL 10.7495 = ILS 5415) of the Maltese.1284

Some scholars suggest that the title might mean that Publius was the praetorian legate (the administrator of Malta), since the legate’s title was Melitensium primus omnium;1285 but probably by now a procurator governed Malta (CIL 10.7494).1286 Luke would not normally refer to a Roman official by his praenomen alone (Publius);1287 and the question arises whether a legate would own so much of the local land. (That his father is present suggests that Publius is from Malta, since Roman officials did not bring their parents on such administrative assignments.)1288

In any case, we perhaps should not make too much of Luke’s usage, as if the designation is uniquely superlative; although the singular and the article make sense this way, Luke might simply rank him among the foremost citizens, as in Acts 13:50, 17:4, and (in the nearer context) 28:17.1289 These examples are plural, but Luke uses an articular singular in 16:12, where he also probably means “first” loosely.

Luke surely does not mean that Publius welcomed all 276 persons to his table; rather, he invited the people of rank. The most prominent of the seafarers would include the centurion (showing hospitality to a representative of the Roman military was showing respect to Rome; cf. Luke 7:8) and perhaps Paul as a Roman citizen. But by now Paul’s status is so secure with the centurion (and everyone else on board) that, citizen or not, he would likely be invited, and his companions with him.1290 If conversation included the events leading up to their arrival on Malta (as it surely would; cf. Odysseus’s accounts of his travels to hosts), the topic of Paul’s divine favor and abilities would arise. This in turn could raise the issue of Publius’s sick father (although this matter could have come up in conversation anyway), in Acts 28:8 (cf. Mark 1:30).

It is unlikely that for three days Publius would have considered, or been able to accommodate, Paul’s Jewish purity regulations, which were required for a kosher diet as strictly interpreted.1291 Attentive readers of Luke-Acts, sensitive to normal Jewish dietary constraints, could have recognized in this passage Luke’s emphasis on table fellowship with Gentiles.1292 If Jesus ate with sinners (Luke 5:29; 15:1–2),1293 then Jewish Christians could eat with Gentiles (Acts 11:3–12; 15:20, 29; 16:4). Following the principles of Jesus (though Luke omits Mark 7:1–23) and the Spirit’s revelation in Acts, Paul could (from Luke’s perspective)1294 honor building relationships for the gospel’s sake (Acts 28:8–10) as a higher value than attending to his diet.1295

Most of the survivors would lack immediate means to pay for their lodgings;1296 finding temporary employment during this rainy season might be more difficult than usual. (Ancient customs of hospitality would have probably smoothed their transition, however. Hospitality to strangers of shipwreck was not unusual.)1297 But the centurion could “impress” locals to provide lodging for his soldiers and prisoners (see comment on Acts 27:2)1298 after Publius’s three days of full hospitality had ended (on temporal limits to hospitality expectations, see comment on Acts 16:15). Given Paul’s ministry, however, the local people seem eager to serve them (28:8–10); Julius the centurion cannot help but note that Paul achieves voluntarily what Rome would have to achieve compulsorily by requisition.

II. HEALING PUBLIUS’S FATHER (28:8)

Although Publius is the patron of the company in 28:7, Paul becomes his benefactor in 28:8, healing his father. Luke’s ideal audience might think here of Luke 4:38–39, where Simon welcomes Jesus and Jesus heals Simon’s mother-in-law (cf. Mark 1:29–31). (These two Lukan passages contain Luke’s only two uses of πυρετός.) Jesus is Simon’s guest; Paul is Publius’s guest. In both cases, the healing apparently leads to many crowds seeking healing for themselves (Luke 4:40; Acts 28:9).1299

Reciprocity relationships were standard for benefaction in antiquity, and Luke here demonstrates his view that they were appropriate between Christians and non-Christians.1300 Paul’s expression of his apostolic authorization also differs starkly from the Roman imperial authority; whereas Romans may impress services (Luke 23:26), Paul works within the networks of Christian love (Acts 27:3; 28:14) and Mediterranean hospitality (Luke 9:4; 10:7; Acts 28:7). Although Rome saw itself as providing roads, law, and (to most cultures apart from Greeks) civilization,1301 it imposed its will by power; Paul simply offers benefaction to those willing to receive it. Thus, whereas Julius probably requisitions for his group housing and food from locals, Paul becomes an object of voluntary gratitude and gifts (Acts 28:10).

Paul heals by laying on hands, as did Jesus (Luke 4:40; 13:13; cf. Mark 5:23; 6:5; 8:23, 25) and others (Acts 9:12, 17);1302 the Spirit was also bestowed this way (8:17–19; 9:17; 19:6; cf. 6:6; 13:3). This benevolent use of hands may be contrasted with the hostile hands of those who persecuted God’s servants in the Gospel (Luke 20:19; 21:12; 22:53) and Acts (Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1; 21:27). In the immediate context, it also contrasts with the snake dangling harmlessly from Paul’s hand (28:4).1303 Prayer often accompanied the laying on of hands (6:6; 13:3) and healings (9:40). On beds, see comment on Acts 9:34.

III. FEVERS

Not only did Paul not “burn with fever” (a possible meaning of a verb in 28:6) when the snake bit him, but God used him to cure another’s fever (28:8, albeit a different term).1304 Understanding the depth of danger potentially involved in fever and dysentery can help us appreciate the degree to which the present healing would be valued as a sign of God’s working.1305 Fever, most commonly due to malaria (but sometimes typhoid), was widespread in Mediterranean antiquity.1306 Malaria includes a variety of febrile diseases spread by the anopheles mosquito.1307 Of diseases appearing in ancient medical literature, malaria and tuberculosis are the most common.1308 (In citing ancient medical literature, I am not preferring it to modern empirical medicine but using it to provide the context for how ancient audiences likely viewed such ailments.)1309 In biblical Greek, only Luke (and only in this passage) employs a plural form of πυρετός—that is, “fevers.”1310 The plural frequently appears this way for a single person and is especially noteworthy in medical writers.1311 Presumably Luke means that the father’s fevers were intermittent, coming and going, as fevers often were (and as malaria commonly is in its earlier stages).1312

One form is nocturnal malaria; one ancient physician wrote of someone with a fever that occurred on and off for fifty-two days, delirious and unable to sleep at night but sleeping the rest of the time.1313 Others had their worst fever attacks at midday.1314 (Again, in this section I am concerned primarily with ancient views of sickness possibly familiar to Luke and his audience, not with empirical diagnoses. Ancient reports of observations remain useful, though they often address concerns different from medical interests today.)1315 In a winter fever1316 (the season, at least, depicted here), the fever would usually abate if the patient lost consciousness, but it might afterward return dangerously.1317 Many physicians treated winter fever with water and perhaps juices, but they significantly reduced food.1318 Sponging a fevered person to cool him or her was also a useful treatment; in urgent cases, this could take precedence over observing the Sabbath.1319

Fevers could be seasonal, and ancient writers often distinguished four types.1320 “Quartan” fevers, though milder than some others, were the longest,1321 but they were said not to last more than a year.1322 Although usually striking men between the ages twenty-five and forty-five (given Publius’s status, his father is surely older), such a fever was said to come most often in autumn and persist only if accompanied by another sickness.1323 In a quartan fever’s early stages, one had no appetite, but one regained it; the sufferer produced white mucous and sometimes a noisy stomach and bloody stool; after the fever, one remained weak and light-headed (Hippocr. Epid. 7.45). Another kind of fever was “semitertian”;1324 still another category consisted of “summer fevers.” On the seventh through the ninth days, rough bite-like (yet not itchy) bumps appeared on the skin; sometimes the person became comatose and often was sleepy through the summer. This form of fever was rarely fatal, but no treatment was effective (2.3.1).1325 “Tertian” fevers were accompanied by nightmares, hemorrhages, and sometimes delirium (4.20); the night preceding an attack was usually more difficult than the night afterward (6.2.10).

Fevers proved fatal to some, but others survived; some fevers were milder than others (Hippocr. Progn. 20.1–3). In the most dangerous cases, a person would die on the fourth day or earlier (20.4–5). The assault of some fevers decreased at the fourth day, but the second bout would run until the seventh day, the third until the eleventh, and so on, up to twenty days (20.5–18). They could also last longer, through sixty days (20.19–22).

Ancient medical writers described “fever” in various ways. Some writing in the Hippocratic tradition depicted fevers as coming in various colors, feeling different to those touching the afflicted.1326 Quartan fever could produce a coma (Hippocr. Epid. 4.13). The various speculations about causes and cures suggest how uncontrollable these maladies were. Excess wine or exhaustion could produce winter fever, but it could become other diseases (Hippocr. Aff. 12). As one might guess from the etymology of πυρετός, many connected it, at least figuratively, with an internal fire (πῦρ). Thus fever may be “kindled” and glands “inflamed,”1327 and a sick person burns with a heavenly fire (b. Ned. 41a). Some opined that excess phlegm produced the fever by swelling tissues;1328 they believed that one could treat this condition by warming the body for three or four days (so that sweat would relieve the fever), not cooling the person until the fourth day.1329 It was a good sign when jaundice and chills relieved a fever before the seventh day, but if jaundice occurred without chills and at a different time, the patient would likely die.1330 Some opined that quartan fever was incompatible with epilepsy and that it even cured it (Hippocr. Epid. 6.6.5).1331

IV. TREATMENTS FOR FEVER

Treatments of malaria focused on symptoms, especially the fever itself and the spleen.1332 Aulus Cornelius Celsus lists many different Greek medical opinions on how to treat fever and so suggests “trying them all (De medicina 3.14).”1333 Ancients proposed various treatments of fever’s attendant chills, such as agaric mixed with hot water, or (in the case of tertian fevers) siderite (a mineral) with oil.1334 Some physicians sought to treat some kinds of fever by keeping the patient awake.1335 Other alleged cures included the following:

Elsewhere Pliny the Elder notes that medicines afford little help against quartans; thus he notes some remedies proposed by magicians, starting with recommended amulets.1341 Some who recovered also undoubtedly claimed supernatural cures; Lucian complains that, given all the ignoramuses in circulation, it would not be surprising if some claimed healing through a revelation of the deceased charlatan Peregrinus (Peregr. 28).

V. DYSENTERY

Hippocratic writings sometimes mention fever and dysentery together.1342 Dysentery sometimes accompanied other symptoms,1343 including fever and pain, and in such cases could lead to death.1344 In one case, a patient had dysentery, fever, and bloody stool, with pain in the belly growing from the thirtieth to the fortieth day, but the patient eventually recovered.1345 Often this combination of symptoms occurred during the hot summer, when dysentery was most common.1346 Summer fevers (see the brief discussion above) could be linked with diarrhea (Hippocr. Epid. 7.39);1347 in summer, drinking water often sickened with dysentery, diarrhea, and quartan fever those living near marshes.1348 Dysentery and fever were most common in summer after a particularly rainy spring.1349 But the father of wealthy Publius would probably not live near a marsh, and the weather is now cold. It is possible that the symptoms have continued since the summer or that one ailment has weakened his body to another.

One writer described dysentery as accompanied by pain and colic inside, ulcerated intestines, with the passing of phlegm and bloody stools; “The disease is long, painful, and usually mortal” (Hippocr. Aff. 23).1350 Some did recover from dysentery,1351 but others died; one patient swelled up, had diarrhea, and died.1352 Hippocrates reportedly claimed that one would die from dysentery if the bile was black but usually not if it was yellow (Galen N.F. 2.9.131).1353 Despite the relative silence of ancient physicians about childhood sickness, “enteric diseases such as infantile viral diarrhoea and amoebic dysentery probably accounted for most of the high infant mortality observed in cemeteries.”1354 Presumably dysentery was also hard on older persons, as here.

Hippocratic writers supposed that dysentery sometimes had beneficial effects. Painless dysentery with fever could help relieve intestinal blockage (Hippocr. Epid. 2.6.26); fevers (1.20.1) might be finally “cured” by diarrhea and dysentery that ended the sickness (1.20.4); and fever might be rare when the bowels were loose (Hippocr. Airs 3.27–29). Likewise, another text concludes that dysentery could cure some diseases by passing them off in the stools (Hippocr. Prorr. 2.22).1355 But they recognized that dysentery normally weakened patients rather than helped them.1356

Various folk cures for dysentery existed:1357

One supposed cure proposed for dysentery and that Paul and Luke certainly would have rejected was unbridled sexual activity (πορνείη, Hippocr. Epid. 7.122). Traditional magical cures also existed.1367

VI. HEALING THE FEVER HERE (28:8)

Scholars have often linked the specific fever here with a kind traditionally associated with Malta and known as “Malta fever.” In 1887 scientists discovered its cause, a microorganism called Micrococcus melitensis, found in the milk of goats on the island. The recurrent and intestinal character of the ailment fits this description.1368 Untreated, it usually lasts about four months, but it could last two to three years.1369 Barrett’s caution is prudent: this proposal is plausible and may be accurate, but it is not completely certain because “there are other causes of fever.”1370 Wilkinson is more skeptical: Luke mentions dysentery, which is not part of Malta fever;1371 rather, the real diagnosis is “acute bacillary dysentery with fever and diarrhoea with blood and mucus in the stool, the result of his consumption of infected food or contaminated water.”1372

Although ancient writers describe occasional miracle workers who healed by means of prayer,1373 they also report other religious remedies (in addition to the medical treatments noted above). Old Romans worshiped Febris, goddess of Fever (to reduce her malevolence); three temples to Fever continued to exist in Paul’s day in Rome (Val. Max. 2.5.6).1374 Undoubtedly a fever that often concerned Romans was malaria; apparently the sick used charms that touched their bodies, which they afterward deposited in her sanctuaries.1375 People used incantations against fever and fever demons;1376 because erotic magic was thought to cause “burning,”1377 fever might also originate from such sources.1378 Hero cults also offered healings in answers to prayer, including for “quartan fever” (Philost. Hrk. 16.1).1379 Here, however, the true God provides healings through his agent, just as he has provided healings elsewhere in Acts.1380

Some scholars have argued (probably at least partly for theological and apologetic reasons) that signs gradually decreased after Pentecost, contending for their cessation at the end of the apostolic or subapostolic era.1381 Such a position cannot, however, be argued from Acts (or, in my opinion, from any first- or second-century Christian texts).1382 One dissertation charts signs in Paul’s ministry as follows and observes that, if anything, Paul’s signs increased rather than decreased in Acts:1383

Location in Acts

General Period in Paul’s Ministry

Activity

Signs

Estimated Date

13–14

“First Missionary Journey”

Evangelism, church planting

Elymas blinded; paralytic at Lystra walks (and those summarized in 14:3)

C.E.

16:1–18:23

“Second Missionary Journey”

Evangelism, church planting

*

C.E.

19:1–21:15

“Third Missionary Journey”

Evangelism, church planting

Extraordinary miracles (19:11–12); Eutychus raised

C.E.

21:16–28:31

Voyage to Rome

†

Publius’s father and numerous others

C.E.

*The miracles in Corinth are from 2 Cor 12:12, not mentioned by Luke.

†Though still in the context of his witness.

Paul naturally had less opportunity to perform signs while in detention in Caesarea (Acts 22–26;1384 though Luke does not report his signs in every location, even when we may infer from other sources that they happened, 2 Cor 12:12; cf. Rom 15:19), but the voyage to Rome demonstrates that he had not “lost his touch.” Even had he not provided this demonstration, Luke did not need to repeat signs in every location to leave his readers with the impression that they remained a regular occurrence in Paul’s ministry. As one narrative critic points out, repetition provides an “aggregative” effect;1385 “new information does not negate earlier information; it is added to it.”1386

VII. HEALINGS AND HONORS (28:9–10)

The paragraph opens with Publius’s hospitality (Acts 28:7), then narrates Paul’s benefaction (28:8–9), then returns to the kindness of the Maltese to Paul and his companions (28:10). By portraying a people so open and charitable, Luke may subvert some cultural expectations set up by his use of “barbarians” in 28:2, 4.1387 It was also recognized that sages or those with other education might lose other possessions at sea but could quickly begin anew once on land.1388

Later tradition claims that Paul’s stay led to the conversion of Malta’s people.1389 Although Luke is not specific about evangelism, he normally presents signs as a result of the message (14:3), and so he probably expects us to infer that Paul proclaimed Christ alongside performing healings. That the island was converted so quickly as later tradition suggests is highly doubtful; that a number of those experiencing or witnessing healings would have responded to Paul’s message with faith1390 seems likely. Language barriers would have limited the extent to which Paul could communicate (cf. the need for translation in 14:14), but given the eagerness of the local people to help him, some probably tried to translate for him.

Luke’s claim here should be approached with the same degree of confidence a majority of interpreters accord to other claims in the “we” material, without prejudice against claims involving healing. Regardless of one’s presuppositions regarding supernatural or divine activity, an abundance of modern global analogies suggest frequent cures in faith contexts, however explained.1391 In his comments on this passage, William S. Kurz notes that one of his former doctoral students reported his experience of large-scale evangelism in India and Africa, made “particularly persuasive” by “the many healings that occur through their preaching and prayer with the sick. I was surprised to be reminded that numerous healings like those of Paul on Malta are still occurring, often” in parts of the world where people recognize “their need for God’s help and have not raised rationalist barriers to divine intervention.”1392

One seasoned scholar has recently expressed skepticism regarding a number of Luke’s reports about Paul’s healings in Acts,1393 although the scholar emphasizes that he has sought merely a historical minimum and is not claiming that none of the other data is reliable.1394 That what the scholar does find as reliable corroborates what he already noted in Paul’s letters1395 is not surprising, given his method throughout. Consistency with what he had already found in Paul’s letters functioned as a major criterion for what he would accept. Yet Paul addresses the topic in such a cursory manner that excluding Luke’s reports based on such limited data will undoubtedly exclude genuine material rather than highlight it. By contrast, some other recent scholars continue to recognize various reasons for the two authors’ different emphases and do not screen out Luke’s claims that differ from Paul’s.1396 Again, Paul seems to have expected signs and wonders where he preached the gospel, including in places that Luke does not mention them (Rom 15:19; 2 Cor 12:12).

Because Luke claims that the Maltese highly honored “us” (28:10), some scholars have argued that Luke (i.e., Luke the physician of Col 4:14) practiced his medical art alongside Paul’s supernatural healing.1397 Although we cannot rule out such medical practice, nothing in the text suggests it.1398 Paul’s companions were honored as a group because they were with him. Moreover, those who were coming in Acts 28:9 undoubtedly did so in response to Paul’s sign in 28:8.

The argument that ἰάσατο in 28:8 refers to Paul’s activity whereas ἐθεραπεύοντο in 28:9 refers to Luke’s1399 has nothing to commend it. Granted, the former term appears for miraculous healings, both those performed by Jesus (Luke 5:17; 6:18–19; 7:7; 8:47; 9:11, 42; 14:4; 17:15; 22:51; Acts 10:38) and those performed through his agents (Luke 9:2; Acts 9:34)—though nowhere else for Paul. But θεραπεύω also applies to divine healing, through Jesus (Luke 4:40; 5:15; 6:7, 18; 7:21; 8:2; 13:14; 14:3) and his disciples (9:1, 6; 10:9; Acts 4:14; 5:16; 8:7). It applies to physicians only once (Luke 8:43), and there as a contrast between their inability to provide a cure and Jesus’s success.1400

Honoring benefactors was of paramount importance and was, indeed, beneficiaries’ primary responsibility in most transactions.1401 Grateful healed patients sometimes honored Asclepius by dedicating models of their healed parts at some of his sanctuaries;1402 undoubtedly Paul and his companions received more useful honors. Indeed, Luke likely means something more substantive than abstract “honors”; he always uses τιμή in the monetary sense (Acts 4:34; 5:2–3; 7:16; 19:19).1403 Still, the notion of honor is likely present, since the verb τιμάω, also used here, normally means “honor” (Luke 18:20); our conception of “valuing” may connect the concepts (see BDAG).

These “honors” or gifts are complemented by the supplying of Paul’s and his companions’ needs when they travel1404—that is, by sending them off with provision.1405 Undoubtedly Julius the centurion could only wonder at his prisoner being sent away with such honors, helping to explain his openness to others supporting Paul in Acts 28:14. (For the departure here, see comment on Acts 28:11.) The narrative has moved from Paul and others receiving expected hospitality as shipwreck survivors (28:2) to Paul receiving honors and gifts as a benefactor.

9. Final Voyage to Rome (28:11–15)

Brief travelogues (27:1–8; 28:11–16) frame the shipwreck story1406 because Luke must summarize how Paul and his companions came to undergo the storm and how they reached Rome afterward. Luke also uses some of the stops, however, to show the unity of Diaspora Christians with Paul and his mission (27:3; 28:14–15).

Despite the considerable distance remaining, most of the rest of the voyage to Rome, proving relatively uneventful, is summarized in the usual manner of Luke’s travel itineraries. That the believers in Rome come to meet and welcome Paul a considerable distance from the city does, however, reinforce Paul’s ēthos by reminding us how well loved Paul was by many of his contemporaries (see comment on Acts 20:36–38).1407

a. Departing on Another Pagan Vessel (28:11)

The travelers return to their objective of reaching Rome as soon as possible. The ship has a figurehead of deities that were supposed to provide protection at sea; Luke’s audience knows, however, from the foregoing narrative that it is really Paul’s God who provides protection at sea, here especially to protect his agent for his purposes in history.

I. AFTER THREE MONTHS

If Luke begins counting the three months after the events of 28:8–9 (or at least 28:8), a greater margin is available for calculating their winter stay, but Luke may mean three months after the shipwreck (and the difference may be slight in any case, if 28:8 occurs during the “three days” of 28:7). The three months on Malta presumably would correspond roughly to the three winter months most difficult for sailing. Even the most urgent business could be detained at sea for three months (Jos. War 2.203).1408 Determining precise dates is impossible, but general considerations allow an estimate. Sailing season opened fully around March 10 (Veg. Mil. 4.39),1409 but this date for renewed sailing starts the preceding three months on Malta too late (especially given the custom of counting part of a period of time as the whole). Even if the “fast” (Acts 27:9) began late in autumn,1410 December 10 is too late for their arrival on Malta. Sailing could begin as early as the west winds began blowing, usually around February 7 or 8 (Pliny E. N.H. 2.47.122),1411 a date that some think even more common in this period.1412 In some years west winds might blow earlier than in others, and a winter that started early and with undue severity would not necessarily persist with that character. The variation between the proposed dates may depend on the economic urgency and daring of the captains and on the weather in a given year. Given the “extra initiatives” offered by Claudius and Nero, a ship bound for Rome might leave as soon as weather allowed.1413

Sailors could celebrate once winter was past and sailing became possible again (Apul. Metam. 11.5, on the dedication of a ship in Isis’s name). For the general avoidance of winter travel, duration of the season, and exceptions, see the extended discussion at Acts 27:9.

II. THE VOYAGE

The travelers sailed on an “Alexandrian ship,” probably a late-season1414 grain ship that had wintered in Malta rather than risk the seas (or more of the seas) that wrecked Paul’s previous vessel.1415 (On Alexandrian grain ships, see comment on Acts 27:6.) It is surely too early in the season for the ship to have come directly from Alexandria immediately beforehand.

Some commentators suggest that the company sailed from Malta’s primary port, near what is now Valletta.1416 Valletta is some ten miles (17 km.) south of Saint Paul’s Bay and perhaps closer to where they spent much of their sojourn on the island; today Valletta is Malta’s capital and the ideal port for ships traveling to nearby Syracuse in Sicily.1417 The area around modern Valletta was also inhabited in the Punic and Roman periods.1418

Considering the distance they had come, Syracuse (Acts 28:12) was not far from Malta,1419 and if the weather was reasonably good, they might set out. Presumably Paul has no premonitions of danger on this voyage (in contrast to 27:10); the previous ship’s experience would not be relevant to any reservations of the new captain, and Julius might depend on this captain’s assurances (along with Paul’s lack of objection) that weather patterns were less risky here than in late-autumn Crete. Once in Italy, Julius seems in no hurry (28:14), but he may have felt a greater urgency about reaching Italy. One possible reason could be that in Malta they were dependent on requisitioned hospitality and reciprocated benefaction (to Paul) whereas in Italy Julius, at least, might be less likely to feel “stranded.”

Julius could requisition passage on a vessel to Italy,1420 and once he reached Rome he would no longer require it; even once in Italy, Paul’s friends there (28:14), from whom nothing needed to be requisitioned, allowed an excuse to stay without the inconvenience of requisitioning. Granted, Paul’s ministry may provide equivalent signs of hospitality in both Malta and at Puteoli, but the stay in Puteoli was well within the normal bounds of ancient hospitality whereas the stay in Malta stretched far beyond it (on the normal expected duration of ancient hospitality, see comment on Acts 16:15).

III. DIOSCURI AND PROTECTION AT SEA

This ship was dedicated to “the Twin Brothers”—that is, Castor1421 and Polydeuces (in Latin, Pollux).1422 Most translations and commentators take Luke’s term παράσημος as “figurehead,”1423 though Luke does not specify whether this image was literally carved to constitute the beak of the prow (difficult, since there were two of them),1424 was simply figures set up at the prow,1425 or was even more simply figures painted on both sides of the prow (as in the Isis depicted by Lucian).1426 The term can mean that the prow was “marked” by the Twins, and it probably functions as the equivalent1427 for τὸ παράσημον, the “insignia” or “emblem” found on both sides of a ship’s prow.1428 Most scholars note that ships, like inns, were named for their figureheads.1429 Figureheads’ implied religious patronage was significant; the first Athenian to capture a Persian ship severed its figurehead and consecrated it to Apollo (Plut. Themist. 15.2).

Some point to the ancient function of these brothers as vindicators of truth and argue that Luke thereby implies for Hellenistic readers Paul’s authenticity or even the Twin Brothers’ favor on the voyage.1430 Suiting this association with truth, sailors may have often sworn by the Dioscuri.1431 But while it is possible that this insignia reinforces the notion of Paul’s authenticity, it is not likely; the Dioscuri were far more often associated with safety at sea (see discussion below). No such insignia is mentioned on earlier voyages, and a major point of the storm narrative is that only the true God brings protection, partly through his loyal servant.

Given the anti-pagan polemic in Acts (Acts 7:43; 14:15; 17:16, 29; cf. 8:9–11; 19:26), Luke’s theological point1432 in mentioning the Dioscuri is, if anything, ironic: after God wrought a great deliverance, Paul’s company sails on another ship that trusts in false gods. The practical offshoot of such irony is theological realism: no matter what the initial triumphs (such as in 27:43–28:10), most of the world remains unconvinced and perhaps even unaware of the truth (cf. 1 Kgs 19:1–4), yet God accomplishes his purposes nonetheless. Moreover, there was a wide range of associations with the Dioscuri (the most obvious and relevant here being sailors’ dependence on them for protection), not a single one (see the discussion below).

Naturally, voyagers invoked divine help before sailing.1433 Often they invoked deities such as Isis, considered a protectress from storms and dangers (Apul. Metam. 11.25); thus a ship could be consecrated in her name (11.5) or even be named for her, with a figure of her on either side of the prow (Lucian Ship 5).1434 But the Dioscuri (a pagan designation that Luke does not hesitate to use), also known as the Twins, were more prominent. Navigators could be associated with the Dioscuri as easily as with Poseidon and the Nereids.1435

Commentators often note that sailors viewed the Dioscuri as providing protection at sea.1436 From an early period, they were thought to subdue the sea’s raging, which wrecked ships.1437 They were considered “saviors” at sea;1438 someone who denied their help during a storm at sea would frighten his hearers.1439 Thus sailors invoked them in storms or other troubles at sea.1440 Poets claimed that both brothers (as “stars”) helped ships facing storms.1441

The Twins were thought to intervene and appear in desperate situations (cf. Hom. Hymns 33.12 [to the Dioscuri]), and some claimed to have seen them as stars during a storm;1442 this conception may have originated in “the sudden appearance of the stars when the clouds and storm have cleared.”1443 Sailors believed that the Dioscuri came to their aid during storms also when lights settled on the sails (Sen. Y. Nat. Q. 1.1.13), presumably the phenomenon of corona discharge (a luminous discharge caused by increased electrical activity from the storm) that later European sailors called Saint Elmo’s fire.1444 Sometimes in antiquity, seafarers might claim that this appearance of a star on the masthead during a storm guided their ship safely to port.1445 One might claim that the Dioscuri, appearing on the sails to bring deliverance, commanded him to compose an encomium about them.1446 In dreams they symbolized bad weather but also safety in the midst of it.1447 They also allegedly appeared as stars on both sides of a Spartan ship destined for victory in battle.1448

IV. BACKGROUND OF THE DIOSCURI

In ancient mythology, the Dioscuri were sons of Leda (e.g., Sil. It. 15.82–83). They were noted for their participation in the voyage of the Argo, and in some traditions, they sojourned in the region of Colchis.1449 Although their title, “Dioscuri,” implies that they were both sons of Zeus, only Pollux was genuinely born from him; thus Castor was mortal.1450 When Castor was slain (Ovid Fasti 5.709–10),1451 Pollux avenged him (5.711–12), then prayed that he would not be deified without his brother. Rather they should let their heaven be shared (5.715–18); thus the brothers alternated in heaven (5.719–20).1452 Their love for each other became proverbial.1453 The Dioscuri continued to sail the seas after their mortality because they had done so in life (Max. Tyre 9.7).

In any case, both Greeks and Romans in this period believed that the Twins were deified.1454 Like other deities, they had sanctuaries1455 and altars1456 and received votive offerings.1457 As constellations (Gemini), they affected fate;1458 their appearance in a storm was considered a favorable sign.1459 It was thought that they sometimes slew those who insulted them.1460 Although some ancients apparently doubted the beneficence of deified or heroized mortals (Babr. 63.7–12), most thought otherwise.1461 The cult of the Dioscuri was ancient among Greeks, who hailed them as “saviors.”1462

Castor and Pollux also were highly honored in Rome after their alleged intervention in 484 B.C.E.1463 Similarly, they were thought to watch over Rome,1464 and all Romans knew the temple of Castor in their forum,1465 with its statue of mounted Castor,1466 restored and rededicated several decades before Paul’s voyage.1467 Their importance for Rome may be gauged from their utility for imperial veneration: the mad emperor Caligula allegedly seated himself between Castor and Pollux in their temple,1468 and Augustus’s adopted sons were assimilated to these twins in statuary.1469 These associations may also be involved in Luke’s mention of them: Paul was now heading to the center of Roman paganism. Nevertheless, the associations with the sea are far more prominent and would require little specific knowledge of Rome itself to fathom.1470

Not only in Rome but closer to the region where Paul’s company encountered this vessel, the Dioscuri were well known.1471 The Dioscuri were popular on coins at Rhegium,1472 though this was not the ship’s home port, since it spent no time there (Acts 28:13) and is expressly Alexandrian (28:11). An island near southern Italy and Sicily—that is, in this region—was apparently dedicated to these deities as well.1473 Outside the region, they were widely known;1474 even in Judea, the hellenistically educated would know of them.1475 Luke’s audience understands from the preceding narrative, however, that it is not the Dioscuri but Paul’s God who stands watch over the voyage and protects his servant.

b. From Syracuse to Puteoli (28:12–13)

The voyage from Malta to Syracuse to Rhegium and Puteoli appears uneventful, summarizing the progress of Paul and his companions to Rome. Apparently there are not yet known believers there, since Luke likes to emphasize that local churches in diverse parts of the empire knew of and welcomed Paul (27:3; 28:14–15).

Educated romanized readers in Corinth or Philippi would appreciate Luke’s mention of Syracuse, Rhegium, and Puteoli in 28:12–13; not only were they important in current east-west trade, but two of these cities figured prominently in Greeks’ history. There can be little doubt historically that Paul was transported from Malta via these cities to Rome, where he remained in custody;1476 these cities belonged to the expected route (though Malta was not always one stop).1477 Following a frequent route, Alexandrian grain ships would work “south of Crete and then, tacking continuously, beat their way to Syracuse in Sicily, with perhaps a stop at Malta en route.”1478 Everyone recognized that Syracuse was a major port;1479 a ship sailing for Italy but blown off course to Sicily would disembark there (Xen. Eph. Anthia 5.1).1480

I. SYRACUSE (28:12)

The voyage to Syracuse, on Sicily’s1481 southeast, was close to one hundred miles. Luke does not explain the three days’ delay there; since the ship had left Malta early in the season, as if the voyage was urgent, there may have been a weather delay.1482 Unexpectedly good weather had presumably allowed sailing from Malta; but the season remained dangerous, and perhaps they needed to await good weather again. A ship with time to spare might wait at Syracuse for a southerly wind to help the voyage northward.1483 An Alexandrian ship bound for Rome but wintered on Malta would not need to stop in Sicily to unload grain; Sicily had enough of its own, but Rome depended on imports.

Syracuse was huge, about a quarter the size of Rome.1484 Its beauty was well known; Cicero calls it “the loveliest of all cities” and expects his audience to have heard this claim before.1485 He describes Syracuse in his day as the combination of four cities (Verr. 2.4.53.118).1486 The heart of Syracuse was an island partly sheltering a bay on the Sicilian mainland. The island city was well fortified, with strong walls, and it easily controlled the harbor (2.5.38.98). This island had two harbors and hosted the Roman governors, temples of Diana and Minerva, and a spring called Arethusa (2.4.53.118).1487

The second constituent town was Achradina, holding a marketplace, a senate house, a temple of Jupiter, and houses. The third town, Tycha, had athletic grounds and temples, and the fourth, Neapolis, was the newest part, with a theater and temples of Ceres and Libera (2.4.53.119). Syracuse was known for bronze work, ship construction, and fishing.1488 Syracuse also had gladiatorial games;1489 a small Roman theater remains, probably from the first century C.E., and many stone quarries are evident.1490

Greeks from Corinth, led by one Archias, colonized Syracuse in about 734 B.C.E., establishing great wealth but reducing indigenes of the area to serfdom.1491 Syracuse ruled an empire of its own for a time, allied itself with the Carthaginians, and under the Roman Republic became the governor’s seat for Sicily. Augustus established a colony of Roman veterans there (Strabo 6.2.4; as well as at five other Sicilian cities).1492 Greek settlers had long before brought many Greek cults to Greek colonies in Sicily,1493 including Syracuse.1494 Jews in Sicily not only maintained their distinctive identity and Jewish traditions but also interacted with Greco-Roman culture.1495

II. RHEGIUM (28:13)

Rhegium, on Italy’s southwest coast (at the tip of Italy’s boot), was about seventy miles beyond Syracuse. It was just six to seven miles across from Sicily,1496 but because the waters of two seas met in a strait between Messene in Sicily and Rhegium in mainland Italy, the narrow passage from Sicily to Italy had long been counted dangerous (Thucyd. 4.24.4), even closely linked with the legendary Charybdis (see comment on Acts 27:17).1497 Although late spring through autumn winds were calmer in this strait,1498 the current season was less predictable.1499 Ships could often ride a current northward through the strait, but if it slackened before they reached Italy’s Tyrrhenian Sea beyond the strait,1500 they could enter safe ports at Messina or Rhegium or wait near either the Sicilian or Italian coast for some slower northerly currents.1501 Rhegium remained an important stop between Rome and Sicily.1502

The geographically informed understood that both Rhegium and Puteoli lay on the route between Rome and the East, important points for the Alexandrian grain trade.1503 Those approaching Rome from the east could reach Rhegium and then Puteoli en route to Rome (Suet. Tib. 5.3). Roman ships traveling west could also spend time at Rhegium (Polyb. 5.110.3).

In earlier times Rhegium was a powerful city in its region (Strabo 6.1.6); it was founded in the late eighth century B.C.E. to guard the Strait of Messina from Italy’s side.1504 An ancient Greek colony, it retained much of its Greek character despite its loyalty to Rome, with some Greek institutions and religious cults surviving until the second century C.E.1505 Although Rome subdued it in 271 B.C.E., it remained a strategic, hence coveted, location, and the Carthaginians under Hannibal nearly captured it afterward (Polyb. 9.7.10; 9.9.4). Long before Paul, the citizens of Rhegium (Regini) were already Roman citizens (Cic. Verr. 2.4.60.135); nevertheless, it was one of the few areas near Sicily to retain their Greek roots (Strabo 6.1.2).

Although the sea route northward was faster (once the south wind began blowing again, Acts 28:13), Rhegium was also well connected with the rest of Italy by a road northward into Campania, where the road joined the Appian Way (Strabo 6.3.7). Since the voyage from Rhegium to Puteoli covers more than two hundred miles (ca. 350 km.), the travelers’ arrival on the second day with a favorable wind suggests “an average speed of five knots,” about right for ships of that era.1506

III. PUTEOLI (28:13)

Paul’s ship, the Twin Brothers, made extraordinarily good time to Puteoli, able to take advantage of winds from the south that blew early in the spring.1507 Puteoli was on the northern side of the Bay of Naples, only about twenty kilometers west of Naples (Neapolis) on the most sheltered part of its bay. A ship coming from the south into the Bay of Naples would pass the island of Capri;1508 4,000 feet (1,220 m.) high, Mount Vesuvius would be visible there.1509 Naples was founded in the mid-seventh century B.C.E. Puteoli, the commercial port, was not far from Cumae, a political center, and Misenum, a Roman naval base.1510 Puteoli’s exports included sulfur, pottery, iron utensils, and a mortar composed partly of volcanic ash.1511 Archaeologists have found the city’s market, about 125 by 118 feet (38 by 36 m.), with porches and shops around it,1512 and also a modest Augustan amphitheater, 427 by 312 feet (130 by 95 m.).1513

Puteoli was a strategic location for Italy’s trade; rumors about Egypt would normally reach there before Rome (Cic. Att. 4.10), and its location near Rome and on the sea was well known (e.g., Philo Embassy 185, employing the earlier Greek name). Commentators often note the importance of Puteoli to the Alexandrian grain traffic (see Acts 28:11).1514 Before Claudius improved Rome’s harbor in Ostia at the mouth of the Tiber (Suet. Claud. 20), Puteoli was the Alexandrian grain fleet’s primary maritime destination.1515 Paul arrives during the reign of Nero, Claudius’s successor, but even then Puteoli remained the most important western Italian port for trade outside Italy during this season; it took time for Ostia to surpass it (Titus later used it, Suet. Tit. 5.3).1516 Even when cargoes continued on to Ostia, passengers might disembark at Puteoli.1517 In Paul’s day, Puteoli’s crowds would stand along the docks watching for the sails of the first Alexandrian ships (Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 77.1).

Puteoli, built on a hill, was earlier a port or naval base for the Cumeans, but Rome controlled it from about 338 B.C.E., and when battling Hannibal, Rome established a colony there (Strabo 5.4.6). Because of the wells (putei) there (or possibly the sulfurous odor of the waters; puteo means “stink”), Rome also changed its name to Puteoli (5.4.6).1518 Nero apparently granted Puteoli greater colony status (Tac. Ann. 14.27). The port city could be extremely hot at noon (Fronto Ad M. Caes. 2.6.3) but would normally be much cooler during this season. Inscriptions show “a flourishing civic life” there; it was also a prominent resort area, and many wealthy Romans “owned villas there.”1519

Although the maritime voyage was complete, the journey to Rome was not; even directly as the crow flies, Puteoli remained more than 120 miles (ca. 200 km.) from Rome, and by road farther still. Normally those traveling on to Rome would follow “the Via Campana to Capua, and from there the Via Appia.”1520 Shortly before Puteoli the group would reach the Appian Way, so named because it was planned when Appius Claudius was censor (312 B.C.E.).1521 The Via Appia, or Appian Way, was the major thoroughfare from Rome toward the south of Italy.1522 It crossed the Pontine (or Pomptine) Marshes.1523 The land route to Rhegium (Acts 28:13), which Paul’s company had not taken, was not technically the Via Appia but also often went by that name.1524

c. Believers’ Hospitality (28:14–15)

The group’s hearty reception in Italy merited Luke’s attention and reveals several points of interest: the Christian movement was already noticeable in Italy, even outside Rome; the movement was loving and hospitable (positive virtues that would commend it in Luke’s Greco-Roman setting); and Paul was loved and welcomed (supporting Luke’s characterization of his ēthos).1525

I. CHRISTIANS IN PUTEOLI (28:14)

Given Puteoli’s importance as an Italian port, the appearance of Christians there (28:14) is hardly surprising if Christians were in Rome (as Paul’s letter to the Romans makes clear they were; cf. earlier Luke’s report in 18:2).1526 Other groups from the East settled there and often propagated their cults. An influential Tyrian colony there (IG 14.830) spread its cult of Baal of Sarepta;1527 Puteoli had a temple of the Egyptian god Serapis by 105 B.C.E.1528 It also had one of Italy’s oldest synagogues outside Rome and apparently a sizable Jewish community (Jos. Ant. 17.328; War 2.104).1529

Some scholars have suggested pre-79 C.E. evidence of Christians in nearby Herculaneum (ca. 25 km.) because of cross marks on a wall there;1530 this evidence is not very compelling (was the cross necessarily used as a Christian symbol here?), but with attestation of a sizable Christian community in Rome (e.g., Tac. Ann. 15.44; Rom 1:7; cf. Suet. Nero 16.2), it is intrinsically likely that some Christians had settled near a major conduit to Rome.

Some suggest that Luke contrasts the heroes of Acts 28:11 (whose brotherhood was well known) with the real and more genuinely helpful “brothers” of 28:14.1531 This is possible, but if Luke intends such a contrast, he certainly does not go out of his way to emphasize it; although the brotherhood of the Dioscuri was well known, Luke does not explicitly call the Dioscuri “brothers” in 28:11 (despite some translations).

How did they “find” the brothers? (The language contrasts with 28:15, where other brothers, having heard advance news from Puteoli, come to meet them.) Presumably they looked for them in Puteoli, perhaps using some logic to find them (cf. 16:13) or simply inquiring about them, possibly at a synagogue (cf. Matt 10:11).1532 Paul may have also heard about Christians in Puteoli from travelers (e.g., Phoebe, Rom 16:1) or correspondents in Rome (Rom 16). It is also not unlikely historically that many Christians in Italy knew of Paul; even aside from his friends in Rome, he had written his extraordinarily long letter (by ancient standards) to the Roman believers a few years before. A letter of that length was an expensive undertaking intended for wide readership, and its preservation suggests that it had circulated widely. Although Paul may have intended only a friendly visit,1533 the hospitable Christians1534 strongly “urged” or “exhorted” (παρεκλήθημεν, Acts 28:14) the group to stay, presumably revealing their appreciation of Paul (of which Luke approves).

II. PERMITTED A WEEK’S STAY (28:14)

Seven days is a fairly lengthy stay (20:6; 21:4; contrast 21:7; 27:3–4), which allows Luke to emphasize (as in 28:15) that his protagonist was loved throughout the Diaspora and by partly Gentile churches (despite some antipathy in Jerusalem). This is all the clearer when we consider that Paul was a prisoner; although chains were generally a matter of shame (see comments on Acts 21:33–34; 26:29), Paul’s hosts welcomed both him and his official (but well-disposed) captors.1535 (In view of their lack of embarrassment in front of Julius, it is clear that they were not at this point expecting imperial persecution.) The sorts of scruples that Jerusalem Christians once had regarding Cornelius are obviously not in effect among such Diaspora believers.

Given struggles, evident in Paul’s letters, against Paul’s interpretation of Christianity, Luke’s report of his positive reception in various places may serve a partly apologetic function for Pauline Christianity.1536 Luke also emphasizes, for the sake of any outsiders, that the Christian movement was like an extended family (see Luke 18:29–30; Mark 10:29–30): one could expect to find hospitality wherever one traveled (also the ideal for Jews and some other minorities; see comment on Acts 16:15).

Given what potentially awaited him in Rome, Paul himself may have been happy to visit and pray with Christians before proceeding; Acts 28:15 hints that he still needed to be encouraged. But why would the centurion allow it? One suggestion is that he left a guard with Paul but Julius himself and his other prisoners, whose arrival in Rome he would wish to expedite, traveled on to Rome.1537 Yet leaving few guards with Paul, when he was surrounded by so many friends, was an act of great trust—one that could risk his own life if he was charged with negligence for Paul’s escape.1538 Although he may have trusted Paul this much by this point (cf. already 27:3), another complication existed. Arriving without one of the prisoners (who would come later) would leave Julius with questions to answer. Although Julius may trust Paul enough by this point, it is unlikely that Luke would have let such an extraordinary evidence of trust pass unmentioned. Given the delays so far, a few more days would hardly matter, and Julius and the others had undoubtedly remained dependent on hospitality in Malta until their very recent voyage.

Although Julius previously approved Paul’s receiving hospitality (27:3), he likely did so without any expense of unnecessary delay. That he now grants a delay of an entire week allows Luke to demonstrate the transformation of Paul’s status on the journey to Rome. We can speculate on the reasons, but paramount among those that the narrative itself implies is the respect that Julius now has for his prisoner.1539 Paul was not only a Roman citizen but also a prominent person with friends in various parts of the empire (27:3; 28:14–15). More important, Julius has seen the miracles (28:8–9) and gifts or honors (28:10), and he was already heeding Paul as a prophet by the end of the voyage (27:31–32); he is in no hurry to see his prisoner, already vindicated in his eyes, brought to detention in Rome.1540 Far from the narrative being implausible as it stands, it is unlikely that Julius would refuse Paul’s request (or perhaps be eager to deliver him to further custody) after what Luke narrates he has observed (27:10, 26, 31–32, 34, 41, 44; 28:5, 8–9); it may be that some modern readers who object to Julius’s delay may do so largely because they are skeptical of these prior elements in the narrative.

In addition, the group is ahead of schedule for travelers in the spring, leaving early in spring from Malta instead of from Judea, Asia, or Crete. Another factor or reason for Julius’s approving the delay could be the discomfort of the sea voyage, which might invite a rest stop before continuation of the journey to Rome (the road they would need to take was reportedly “rough and flinty”).1541 The journey of about 120 to 130 miles could take up to a week; some of the journey ran through hill country and, as mentioned, the Pontine Marshes,1542 although travelers could avoid the latter.1543

Further, the hospitality of Paul’s friends would help Julius. Whereas prisoners might need to supply their own food while awaiting trial in Rome (Jos. Life 14), Julius can requisition what he needs for them (see comment on Acts 27:3). But especially because of its abuses, requisitioning caused much tension, and hospitality would prove much more convenient.1544 Although Ignatius’s guards (unlike Paul’s) were not impressed with him, they accepted hospitality while journeying to Rome (Ign. Rom. 5.1); he spent enough time in Smyrna to receive delegations and send four long letters.1545 Likewise, private hospitality was generally preferable to boardinghouses and inns available along the way,1546 and the closer one came to Rome, the heavier the competing demands would be for billeting.1547

Another possibility is that someone in the company had fallen too sick to travel; if anyone’s sickness provided reason for the delay, Luke may have felt it incongruous to mention this after the dramatic healings of Acts 28:8–9 if this one was not accompanied by an instant recovery. But no evidence directly points to this solution, and there are reasons enough for Julius to have accommodated Paul’s friends.

“Thus we came to Rome” does not imply that the seven-day “sojourn” with these Christians means that they walked with Paul to Rome (though it could be a seven-day journey). Luke would hardly write that they “implore” Paul to “sojourn” with them if what he meant was that they wanted to travel with him. Rather, Luke is saying, “This is the manner in which we came to Rome,” a manner continued in 28:15 (with its honorary delegation meeting him) and completed with arrival at Rome in 28:16. Paul travels to Rome not like a prisoner but like an honored official.

Undoubtedly the party proceeded to Capua, 20 miles (32 km.) beyond Puteoli, to connect with the Via Appia, the primary land conduit to Rome.1548 The journey from Capua to Rome would take 131 miles (211 km.); the Via Appia went to Sinuessa on the coast, then inland to Minturnae, back to the coast at Formiae, then down to the coast again at Tarracina, where the Via Appia became Tarracina’s decumanus, or “main longitudinal street.” Tarracina was roughly halfway to Rome from Capua, leaving 64 more miles (103 km.) to travel.1549

III. ROMAN CHRISTIANS WELCOME PAUL (28:15)

“Brothers” (as in Puteoli, 28:14) from Rome came to meet Paul on his way to the city. Among Luke’s theological reasons for emphasizing this “sibling” support is the notion of spiritual family as a reward for faithful sacrifice: one who leaves behind family and possessions for God’s kingdom has many more of both in God’s kingdom (Luke 18:29–30). Some scholars think that Luke wants even to emphasize Paul as the Roman church’s founder here,1550 but the fact that the “siblings” are already Christians and Luke mentions the church as early as Acts 18:2 counters this suggestion.1551

What Luke does show is that the Christians of the empire’s prestigious capital honor and receive Paul—much more than the Jerusalem church had. In Acts, the gospel (which for Luke includes the Pauline gospel of the Gentile mission) has moved from Jerusalem to Rome, the heart of the empire. If Luke were addressing the more global situation today, he would likely insist that no one region maintains an eternal privilege in the gospel; as one region is turning from it, it is spreading to others. For Luke’s audience, however, how the gospel reached even to the imperial household (cf. Phil 4:22) in the prestigious heart of the empire serves an analogous function.1552

Luke does not explain how the Christians in Rome knew of Paul’s approach or how they recognized each other. To call him a “storyteller” for this reason,1553 however, is to infer too much from silence and not enough from the facts that he and Paul provide us. Paul spent seven days in Puteoli (28:14); even had Christians there not deliberately sent word ahead to Rome, travelers would be passing from one place toward the other daily and would carry both messages and news.

That Roman Christians historically knew of Paul is certain.1554 His letter to “the consecrated ones” there (Rom 1:7) must have circulated widely in Rome through the approval of house church leaders named in Rom 16.1555 Some of Paul’s coworkers in Corinth visited Rome (most clearly, Phoebe in 16:1–2), and the contact between the congregations (Corinth being a Roman colony) was significant (as 1 Clement attests). When the winds were favorable, a person could reach Rome from Corinth in about a week, and so travelers (such as Phoebe) were probably frequent.1556 That Paul knew so much about the issues in the Roman churches when he wrote his letter to them suggests a solid source of information.

Moreover, many Roman Christians knew Paul by face.1557 In the early empire, heavy provincial immigration sustained the Roman population despite the high mortality rate,1558 and so it is not surprising that many of Paul’s mobile urban contacts would eventually find themselves there. From Paul’s own letter to the Romans1559 we learn that Prisca and Aquila now led a house church there (Rom 16:3–5), and we discover many of his former colaborers already at work there (16:3–15, esp. 16:7, 9). Prisca and Aquila were with Paul in Ephesus during the height of his ministry there (1 Cor 16:8–9, 19) but were in Rome by the time of Paul’s last visit to Corinth (Rom 16:3; cf. Acts 20:3). According to tradition, they finally left Rome only later, probably during the Neronian persecution (2 Tim 4:19).1560 They would have spoken much about Paul, although it is uncertain that they would be expecting his arrival (would word of his appeal have reached Rome before Paul himself did?).1561 There was reason to believe, however, that Paul hoped to visit eventually (Rom 1:10; 15:23–24).1562

Given those greeted in Rom 16, the majority of members in the Roman church by this time were probably Gentiles (1:5, 13; 11:13)1563 of originally non-Roman extraction,1564 and a large proportion were probably of slave or freed backgrounds1565 (like many Roman Jews in an earlier generation; see comment on Acts 28:17). Paul knew many of them already.1566 Some leaders were Jewish (Aquila and Priscilla; Andronicus and Junia; Herodion),1567 as were a minority of the members (possibly including Aristobulus’s household in Rom 16:10).1568 Indeed, if one may infer anything from the content of Paul’s letter to the Roman Christians, the Roman church’s originally Jewish background also remains heavily influential theologically. There may have even been some Christians of high status, especially if the “foreign superstition” with which Pomponia Graecina was charged (Tac. Ann. 13.32.3–5) was Christianity.1569 Women played a prominent role in the church (cf. Rom 16:3–7, 12, 15).1570

In view of later Christian housing in Rome, many of the believers were undoubtedly located in Transtiberinum (modern Trastevere),1571 where also a large number of Jewish people lived (see fuller treatment at Acts 28:17). That this area across the Tiber remained unscathed by the conflagration of 64 C.E. may help to partly explain Nero’s using Christians as scapegoats.1572 Their likely second most dominant location was a low-class area around Porta Capena, where much traffic entered the city and many immigrants lived.1573

Nor should we question whether the Roman church was already large enough to send such a delegation.1574 Paul addresses not the entire Roman church in Rom 16 but those he knew personally, many of whom were leaders.1575 Further, a few years before his arrival, the “whole world” knew of the faith of the Roman saints (Rom 1:8); while this universal claim is partly hyperbole (cf. Col 1:23; 1 Thess 1:8; perhaps Rom 10:18) and partly because Rome was the imperial capital, it would scarcely have made sense to apply such words to a small and struggling church. Finally, Nero found hundreds, possibly thousands (given the number of “torches” he would need), of Christians to persecute starting in 64 (Tac. Ann. 15.44), probably no more than half a decade after this narrative.1576 Further suggesting the Roman church’s numerical strength, it apparently remained strong after this persecution (cf. 1 Clement title).1577

IV. HONORARY DELEGATIONS

The nature of Paul’s entry is noteworthy. The disciples came from far away to “meet” him, offering the sort of welcome appropriate to a royal emissary or official1578 (cf., e.g., 1 Thess 4:17),1579 a practice that is widely attested. The Latin adventus was the Roman equivalent for the Greek παρουσία, applicable to the arrival of emperors, cult statues, generals, and others of importance.1580 People of rank were to even come out of retirement on their estates to Rome to hail a new emperor (Pliny Ep. 3.7.6–7).1581 The Judean king Agrippa I went out to meet Syria’s Roman governor to show the Romans the highest respect (Jos. Ant. 19.340).

Greeks might receive a victorious general with applause, then conduct him to his house in triumph (Dion. Hal. Ant. rom. 7.7.2);1582 Romans likewise would go out to “meet” a returning general (even a defeated one, Sil. It. 10.634). To come to congratulate a leader or other person who had won success was an expected social convention.1583 When Cicero returned from exile, cities came out to meet (ἀπάντησιν) him (Plut. Cic. 33.5); he claimed that no town failed to “send official deputations to congratulate [him]” (Cic. Pis. 22.51).1584

Orators from delegations sent to meet a new governor would laud him with lavish praise: “We have come out to meet [προαπηντήκαμεν] you, all of us, in whole families, children, old men, adults, priestly clans,”1585 hailing “you our saviour and fortress, our bright star.”1586 The governor’s arrival was the most pleasurable of days, and now the people’s sun shines brighter!1587 When a town viewed some prominent person as its patron, they would celebrate his arrivals (adventus, Pliny Ep. 4.1.4).

Failure to display this honor could offend a prominent person. Claudius was angry with the people of Ostia for not sending a delegation to meet him, though he forgave them (Suet. Claud. 38.1). One of the reasons Cicero gave for divorcing his wife was that when he was returning from a long absence, she failed to come out to meet him (Plut. Cic. 41.2). Those whose friends did not meet them in person to congratulate or welcome them could, however, offer excuses that their friends might accept (Pliny Ep. 6.28.1). A generous friend might even request that someone who was physically weak not come out to meet him or his agent (7.23.1).

The term ἀπάντησις was not at all limited to this technical usage (see, e.g., Matt 25:6),1588 but given the city that Paul was entering, readers in Roman colonies in the East might1589 well think of the custom in which triumphant Roman generals (in this period, the emperor) would enter the city in triumph, leading humiliated captives.1590 Ironically, Paul, in chains, in this case would enter Rome with a different kind of triumph;1591 early Christians evoked the Roman triumph to illustrate victory in sufferings (2 Cor 2:14–16).1592 In the larger context of Luke-Acts, Paul’s entrance would thus parallel Jesus’s “triumphal entry” into Jerusalem (Luke 19:37–38),1593 though both presage suffering at the hands of the local establishment. The connection with Jesus’s entry is probably the point most in favor of this suggestion; Jews, like other peoples, understood the principle of celebrating victory or of hailing returning victors (1 Sam 18:6–7; 1 Macc 13:51).

Whereas a connection with triumphal entries is uncertain, it is clear that the magnificent reception depicted here portrays Paul as a highly respected figure. The popularity of an Eastern teacher in Italy immediately on his arrival could be viewed as a sign of the teacher’s greatness.1594 Romans were gravely concerned about new Eastern cults1595 and hence could have viewed Paul’s popularity less favorably. (This would be especially the case if they viewed his παρουσία as competition with the emperor’s; but the practice of greeting an honorable person was widespread, and no one concerned with the emperor’s honor would view a prisoner as much competition, particularly in this period, when the Christian movement was not a serious concern.)1596 But that the greetings were in the open1597 (and in the presence of a Roman officer) should have defused such concerns. Luke’s portrayal here is apologetic only by way of being epideictic: he defends the Pauline mission by showing how widely respected Paul was and how Christian love united most of the early Christian movement across geographic lines.

Because this is a delegation, it probably included some of the prominent leaders of the Roman church,1598 including some of those Paul names in Rom 16:3–15 (though probably many, presumably belonging to the working class, could not have left their work for so long).

That Paul took “courage” does not mean that he was “depressed” before (pace some interpreters), but it could easily suggest anxiety or fear (cf. Acts 23:11).1599 Although approaching Rome as a prisoner could be a matter of concern by itself, Paul also may have had some reason to be concerned about his reception in the Roman church,1600 over which he had taken such care a few years earlier in his letter to the Romans; indeed, not all local believers proved supportive during his detention (Phil 1:15–17). The delegation’s coming to meet him relieved any concerns of Paul’s that Christians might avoid him because of his chains, a mark of shame.1601 Ancient sources reveal that the presence and visits of friends often encouraged prisoners.1602 Whereas Paul earlier thanked God (Acts 27:35) after encouraging others to take courage (27:22, 25), here he is encouraged himself and thanks God again.1603 Once shunned by believers in Jerusalem (9:26), Paul is now an honored dignitary of the growing Diaspora church movement (cf. also 27:3).

V. THE JOURNEY (28:15)

The Roman Christians had come a long way, more than a day’s journey along the Appian Way, to meet him. The Forum of Appius (Forum Appii)1604 was 43 Roman miles (39.5 mi.; 63.5 km.) southeast of Rome (for the forty-third milestone, see CIL 10.6825), and the Three Taverns was 33 Roman miles (30 mi.; 49 km.) southeast of Rome.1605 Both sites were ancient stations along the Appian Way by the time of Paul’s arrival, lined with both “monuments above ground and columbaria for graves below ground.”1606 That believers met him at both sites may be a special indication of honor for Paul (as Luke may intend it) or simply reflect disconnected house churches (or, less likely, different work schedules, with individuals coming as they were able). Other scholars have plausibly even suggested that it reflects the Roman church’s Jewish-Gentile division that many believe is addressed in Paul’s earlier letter to the Romans,1607 perhaps with both sides contending for the apostle’s support. In any case, both groups (if we should think of different groups here) respected and valued Paul.

A canal ran from the Forum of Appius1608 to near Tarracina (62 Roman mi. from Rome); mules normally pulled the canal boats at night through the Pontine Marshes.1609 The forum lay at the northern part of the marshes, near the termination of the most recent failed attempt to construct a canal for draining the marsh.1610 Not surprisingly, the site’s discomforts included gnats, frogs, and poor drinking water.1611 Horace (Sat. 1.5.3) also complained that the Forum of Appius was “crammed with boatmen and stingy tavern-keepers.”1612 Unpleasant as it may have seemed, anything would seem anticlimactic after the traumatic voyage to Malta, and Luke mentions the site only in passing and only because of the encounter there. The group may have traveled by barge, or they may have continued their trek on foot, as they usually did.1613

“Three Taverns” (Tres Tabernae) was a more favored stopping place and may have originated because it stood “at the crossroads of the road from Antium to Norba and the Appian Way.”1614 Settlements often grew up around solitary inns, often bearing the names of these inns, which explains such Roman settlements as Three Taverns, Rufini Taberna (“Rufinus’s Inn,” a North African hamlet), and Ad Stabulam (“By the Country Inn,” in southern France).1615 Sturdy travelers could make the trip from Three Taverns to Rome in a single day.1616

Both sites mentioned in Acts 28:15 were regular stopping places along the Via Appia,1617 and so it is likely that the delegates spent either the coming night or (awaiting him) the preceding one there. Regular stopping places along the way made a journey feel much shorter than did deserted roads (Demet. Style 2.47). The more-than-120-mile journey from Puteoli to Rome would require as many as five overnight rest stops, at which points Julius could requisition food and beds in inns or government hostels, where available.1618 (Military travelers carried diplomata, papers providing them with access to lodging on the way.1619 Local communities maintained stopping locations available to any travelers but offering priority to the imperial post.)1620 Given Luke’s emphasis here, it seems more likely than not that he would have mentioned it had further Christian hospitality been available at stops along the way. Probably few Christians had yet settled in smaller Italian communities; Eastern Christians would tend to settle first in urban areas with Greek-speaking immigrant communities.

The journey from Puteoli would be full of sights for a Roman citizen aware of much of Rome’s history; on the Via Domitiana from Puteoli to Neapolis, for example, Paul would have passed Virgil’s tomb.1621 These sites are not, however, of direct importance to Luke, may have been unknown to his Eastern audience, and possibly may not have mattered much to Paul, given his circumstances.

↑ Back to top