511 . See Rapske, Custody , 377.

511 . See Rapske, Custody , 377.

511. See Rapske, Custody, 377.

512. Conzelmann, Acts, 216.

513. Aside from the question of advice, a κυβερνήτης might be happy to talk with nonsailors about his ship (Lucian Ship 7).

514. The soldier in Apul. Metam. 9.39 may be simply an ordinary soldier, but the “vine-rod” he carries was normally carried by centurions; see Lindsay, Golden Ass, 209n1.

515. Horsley, Documents, 2:74, §25.

516. Llewelyn, Documents, 6:82–83, §12.

517. Including the centurion, who would rather not requisition homes in which to quarter his soldiers and prisoners for more of the winter than necessary. A larger city with a greater Roman presence and appreciation for Rome would be more useful in every respect.

518. White, “Meteorological Appraisal,” 405–6.

519. Ibid., 406 (noting, “This allowed the heat from the Sahara Desert to slide northward and fuel the storms, while keeping them on track as they slid eastward”).

520. Ibid.

521. Concern for safety precautions appears both in sages (perhaps Prov 14:16; 22:3; 27:12) and in laws concerning negligence (e.g., Exod 21:29, 32–34, 36; Deut 22:8; Eshn. 5, 53–58; Hamm. 229–37, 244–52).

522. Bruce, Commentary, 507 (following Smith, Voyage, 85n), though also noting the site’s weaknesses.

523. Cf. Luke 21:21, where it is better to abandon the city than to lose life (though the point is clearer in Mark and Matthew).

524. Conzelmann, Acts, 217, citing Arrian Peripl. 4.

525. Conzelmann, Acts, 217 (noting Pliny E. N.H. 2.119 for west-northwest). Seamen hybridized Latin and Greek weather terms, including corus (IGRR 1.177 = IG 14.1308 in Hemer, Acts in History, 140–41; cf. also BDAG).

526. Gen 13:14; 20:1; 24:62; 28:14; Exod 27:9; 37:7; 38:9; Num 2:10; 3:29; 10:6; 34:3–4; 35:5; Deut 1:7; 3:27; 33:23; Josh 15:1–4, 7–8, 10; 17:9–10; 18:5, 13–16, 19; 19:9; 2 Chr 28:18; Ps 77:26; Isa 43:6; Ezek 47:19; 48:28.

527. 2 Chr 32:30; 33:14.

528. Conzelmann, Acts, 217. Even unprotected, the winds would not push them seaward, and Crete itself still protected them from the worst northern winds.

529. Sanders, Crete, 29.

530. Ibid.

531. Ibid., 165.

532. Ibid., 29. Limited remains at Anopolis (Hellenistic) and Aradena (a later basilica, 165) leave some uncertainty about the level of habitation in this period.

533. There were coastal cities with Roman habitation before Phoenix in present-day Ayios Savvas, Ayios Photia, Cape Melissa, and Ayia Galini (Sanders, Crete, 164), though a wrecked ship not far from Ayia Galini (165) might testify to the difficulty of the harbor. Closer is probably Matala, though Roman evidence is incomplete and the harbor may have been difficult, as illustrated by a wreck north of the bay (161).

534. Bruce, Commentary, 508; Witherington, Acts, 765.

535. Barrett, Acts, 1192. Ramsay, “Roads and Travel,” 379, 381, surmises that Phoenix was probably a common winter harbor.

536. See Sanders, Crete, fig. 64.

537. For significant evidence supporting uplift in western Crete and the rise in water level around the island during the medieval and modern periods, see Sanders, Crete, “Appendix III: Sea Level Functions,” 181–82. For earthquake destruction levels from fourth-century Crete, see pp. 30, 172. On the city of Phoenix, see further Sonnabend, “Phoenix.”

538. The description of the location for Phoenix in Ptolemy Geog. 3.15.3 places it near Cape Mouros (Finegan, Apostles, 196).

539. Located with Phoenix in Sanders, Crete, fig. 64; not to be confused with Loutra on the interior (fig. 64).

540. Barrett, Acts, 1192. Because Ptolemy’s list moves from west to east, the Phoinikos Harbor (Phoenix Harbor) was west of Phoenix proper, on the western bay; further, sailors view Loutro as unsafe during winter (Finegan, Apostles, 197).

541. Smith, Voyage, 87–92.

542. Bruce, Commentary, 508; Haenchen, Acts, 700n7; Arrington, Acts, 254; Hemer, Acts in History, 139; Witherington, Acts, 764; Barrett, Acts, 1192 (viewing this site as “virtually certain”). On the changes of topography due to earthquakes, Finegan, Apostles, 197.

543. Finegan, Apostles, 196 (noting also the bay’s two inlets, one mostly filled up).

544. Ibid.

545. Kistemaker, Acts, 923, following Ogilvie, “Phoenix,” and noting other results of seismic activity in southern Crete.

546. Conzelmann, Acts, 217.

547. With Johnson, Acts, 447.

548. E.g., Ovid Metam. 15.391–407 (claiming that this is its Assyrian name, 15.393); Am. 2.6.54 (on its longevity); Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 42.2; Pliny E. N.H. 10.2.4 (540 years); 13.9.42; Philost. Vit. Apoll. 3.49 (living in India but visiting Egypt every 500 years); Ach. Tat. 3.25 (without resurrection); cf. one view in Tac. Ann. 6.28; a speaker in Lucian Peregr. 27; see further Van den Broek, Myth of Phoenix; idem, “Phoenix”; Käppel, “Phoenix.” On its rare appearance, see, e.g., Ael. Arist. Def. Or. 426, §144D; Philost. Letters 8 (46). The depiction of the Ethiopian and Indian phoenix in Pliny E. N.H. 10.2.3–5 resembles Asia’s golden pheasants (trans. H. Rackham, LCL, 3:292 n. a). In Jewish sources, see 3 Bar. 6:9–10; 7:5; Ezek. Trag. Exag. 254–69 (on which cf. Heath, “Visuality”); in the rabbis, see Gen. Rab. 19:5; Niehoff, “Phoenix.” In Tac. Ann. 6.28, Tacitus doubts that it has appeared (see discussion in Keitel, “Non-appearance”).

549. In early Christian literature, see 1 Clem. 25.2; in art, Latourette, First Five Centuries, 324.

550. E.g., John 12:13; Rev 7:9; Herm. 68.1; often in the LXX (e.g., 2 Macc 10:7; 14:4; Sir 24:14; 50:12); Josephus (e.g., Ant. 3.9, 102, 113, 124, 154, 183, 245); and Philo (e.g., Alleg. Interp. 3.74; Unchangeable 137; Agr. 112; Flight 183, 186–87).

551. On the name, cf. Tsirkin, “Canaan.”

552. Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 691 (citing Ap. Rhod. 4.1223–25; Arrian Peripl. 5; Ps.-Chion Ep. 4.1–2; Herpyllis 17; Quintus of Smyrna Posthomerica 14.403–18; Sen. Y. Ag. 431–55; Tac. Ann. 2.23.2).

553. Cic. Att. 16.4–5 (on the Etesian winds [etesiis]).

554. Dio Chrys. Or. 34.53 speaks of swimmers who swim out too far in fine weather, unaware that a storm will come.

555. This south wind resembled what one might expect during summer (Pliny E. N.H. 2.47.123). Odysseus’s ship was detained twelve days in Crete by a strong north wind (Hom. Od. 19.199–202, fictitious but perhaps nautically informed regarding Crete).

556. Cf. the advantage of a south wind for northward travel in Acts 28:13; the hot southern wind in Luke 13:29 reflects Palestinian conditions (though, in general, south winds brought hot air and north ones brought cold air; so Vitruv. Arch. 8.2.5–6; 1 En. 34:2; cold north wind in Plut. Bride 12, Mor. 139DE).

557. Hemer, Acts in History, 141.

558. Ibid. In Casson, Mariners, 211, this is an east-northeaster. More generally (not specifically on this region), Hünemörder, “Notos,” notes that the νότος proper “blew from various directions in winter (from November) and is described as rain-bringing, stormy and bringing obscured visibility.”

559. See Casson, Mariners, 73, 211; also Finegan, Apostles, 197 (noting the use of gregale on Malta and the “low” over Libya). In the story in Hdt. 4.152, this wind blew a Greek ship all the way to Spain; Paul’s ship happily reached Malta first (Casson, Mariners, 211).

560. White, “Meteorological Appraisal,” 405–6. For a readily accessible photograph of mountains along the southern Cretan coast, see Chance, Acts, 497.

561. White, “Meteorological Appraisal,” 406.

562. Ibid. Crete normally has a mild climate (Pliny E. N.H. 4.12.58).

563. White, “Meteorological Appraisal,” 406.

564. Ibid., 407.

565. See discussion on deities’ immorality at Acts 14:15; for deities granting “benefactions” that were harmful or that they later regretted, see Ovid Metam. 2.44–102; 3.287–98, 308–9; 11.100–105; 14.129–53; Apollod. Bib. 3.4.3.

566. See BDAG (citing, e.g., Philo Mos. 1.85; Jos. Ant. 7.97; 9.229; 13.86).

567. Conzelmann, Acts, 217. With favoring winds, ships could cover roughly 50 nautical mi. in an average daylight period, or 90 mi. in twenty-four hours; this was hardly surpassed until the eighteenth century (Cary and Haarhoff, Life, 136).

568. Bruce, Commentary, 508.

569. With, e.g., Finegan, Apostles, 197.

570. On Luke 12:54–56 (on the south and the west winds), see Bovon, Studies, 38–50. Biblical idiom (both in Hebrew and in the LXX) labels winds differently from their direction (e.g., hot “east” winds being from the south), but Luke’s perspective is not Palestinian (see Theissen, Gospels, 252–54). For ancient meteorology, addressing anything above the earth (including atmosphere and stars), see Fritscher, “Meteorology” (for Aristotle, 797–98; for Hellenistic and Roman sources, 798–99; for further sources, including books, see the bibliography, 800).

571. On litotes, see Rowe, “Style,” 128.

572. On these, see Sen. Y. Nat. Q. 5.16.1–5.17.2; cf. Hünemörder, “Winds,” 653–54. Williams, “Winds,” thinks that Seneca includes a moralizing perspective in discussing winds, but a verdict on this thesis will not affect the information applied here.

573. Johnson, Acts, 447 (citing Strabo 1.2.21). For wind titles, see, e.g., Pliny E. N.H. 2.46.119–2.48.127; see esp. the wider discussion of twelve- and eight-wind roses in Davis, “Navigation,” 92–106 (concluding on 106 that the twelve-wind pattern prevailed starting no later than the first century B.C.E.).

574. Sen. Y. Nat. Q. 5.16.6.

575. Pliny E. N.H. 2.46.119–20; 2.47.123. This was opposite the African wind from the southwest (cf. 18.77.336). The winter Aquilo, starting Nov. 11, is northeast (2.47.125).

576. Sen. Y. Nat. Q. 5.18.2; Lucan C.W. 9.422–23.

577. LSJ. OLD 628 gives the Latin as east or (parenthetically) southeast wind (with supporting references). Eurus and Aquilo appear together in Sen. Y. Nat. Q. 5.16.2.

578. The eurus is between aquilo (northeast) and volturnus (the southeast wind; OLD 2100) in Aul. Gel. 2.22.11 (but Pliny E. N.H. 2.46.119; 18.77.338 identifies volturnus with eurus). Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 691, views eurus as the east and aquilo as the north in other sources (Hom. Od. 5.295–96; Hor. Epodes 10.5–8; Lucan C.W. 5.597–612; Ovid Metam. 11.481; Petron. Sat. 114.3).

579. Smith, Voyage, 103, 161; Bruce, Commentary, 509.

580. Hemer, Acts in History, 141; Davis, “Navigation,” 104; Luke likely heard it from the sailors (Hemer, Acts in History, 142). It is a northeast wind (CIL 8.26652 [OLD 628]).

581. Witherington, Acts, 765.

582. Hemer, Acts in History, 141; Bruce, Commentary, 509 (following Smith, Voyage, 102).

583. Witherington, Acts, 765. For Roman-period habitation of this plain, see Sanders, Crete, 20–24. Philost. Hrk. 31.9 speaks of a wind that swept down from Mount Ida every morning, but he refers to the namesake mountain in the Troad.

584. Hemer, Acts in History, 141.

585. The four winds experienced in southern Crete included the Euraquilo, “a severe northeasterly wind associated with passage of a cold front or similar trough of low pressure usually associated with a storm centre to the north in the Aegean Sea” (White, “Meteorological Appraisal,” 403). Shipwrecks near Crete do appear in ancient sources (e.g., the myth in Vell. Paterc. 1.1.2).

586. White, “Meteorological Appraisal,” 406–7, arguing that the ship could have succeeded against a Euraquilo.

587. Witherington, Acts, 765; see also Bruce, Commentary, 509.

588. For some further comment on winds, see comment on Acts 2:2; on wind deities, see also Mussies, “Wind-Gods.”

589. The wind’s more positive narrative function in Acts 28:13 is to explain the group’s later, quicker progress, after the sufferings of the storm and shipwreck.

590. Especially if it is viewed as realized eschatology along with the eschatological fire of Acts 2:3 (cf. the possible eschatological cast of 6:48–49, though this is a flood more than Matthew’s storm; Matt 7:24–27).

591. One voyager to Italy was supposedly blown off course to the outer sea (Paus. 1.23.5); the peoples depicted in 1.23.6 are mythical, but this narrative illustrates that Aegean peoples knew about winds blowing people off course.

592. Johnson, Acts, 448, cites Hom. Od. 9.82–84; Heliod. Eth. 5.27.2; Ach. Tat. 3.1–2; Petron. Sat. 114; Lucian Tox. 19; A True Story 1.6; 2.46; Ship 7.

593. Cary and Haarhoff, Life, 135. These were the mainsail, usually also a foresail, and on larger ships also a topsail above the mainsail, and on some Hellenistic ships also a mizzen (Casson, Mariners, 190, 194). For more detail on the mainsail (probably with “two smaller triangular” sails above it), foresail (artemon), and mizzen (at the stern), see Fitzgerald, “Ship of Paul,” 31–32.

594. Cary and Haarhoff, Life, 135 (comparing [n. 3] Acts 27). Luke’s ἀντοφθαλμέω, for facing, appears a figurative adaptation of the term (BDAG), employed more literally in Acts 6:10 D; Wis 12:14; 1 Clem. 34:1; Barn. 5:10 (see other texts in Bruce, Acts1, 458–59), although some have suggested an allusion to the ancient practice of eyes sometimes painted on either side of the ship’s prow (Smith, Voyage, 98n2; Witherington, Acts, 765). In the 1440s ships better able to tack against wind than their predecessors facilitated Portuguese involvement in Africa (Irvin and Sunquist, History, 37).

595. Cf. Casson, Mariners. See Pliny E. N.H. 2.48.128, mentioning the method of “slacking sheets” (trans. Rackham, LCL, 1:269). For sailing into a wind, using maneuvers such as tacking, see also Wallinga, “Poseidonios” (noting FGH 87F46 and other passages).

596. Rapske, “Travel,” 33. Sails could be pulled down in view of an impending storm (Petron. Sat. 114).

597. Many MSS have Κλαῦδα or variations thereof, perhaps partly because it sounded more familiar (cf. “Claudius”); Cassiodorus and Ψ (eighth–ninth centuries) have Γαύδην, closer to the modern name. All these variants were already in use for the same island: Greek writers (such as Hierocles and Ptolemy) use Κλαῦδος whereas Latin writers omit the l (Pliny the Elder uses “Gaudos”; Mela uses “Caudos”; Bruce, Acts1, 459; Finegan, Apostles, 198). Pliny E. N.H. 4.12.61 places Gaudos not too far from the western cape of Crete. The Venetians called it Gozzo, not to be confused with a similarly named site near Malta.

598. Cauda is also said to be ca. 25 mi., or ca. 40 km., south of Phoenix (Conzelmann, Acts, 218, cites Pliny E. N.H. 4.61; Stad. 328; Ptolemy Geog. 3.17.11); online sources place Cauda slightly less distant than this from Loutro. Cauda is more than 35 mi. (more than 50 km.) west of Cape Matala. Sanders, Crete, 172, locates “Gavdhos” ca. 20 km. south of Crete.

599. With Hemer, Acts in History, 142. That the variants in the textual tradition match contemporary variants of the island’s name, however, suggests that it was not unknown.

600. Bruce, Commentary, 509 (following Smith, Voyage, 113n). Various internet sources note that the island is triangular and fairly rocky but with beaches and many pines and cedars; fairly dry, it does not experience frequent rainstorms. Some modern writers (sometimes appealing to Callimachus) link it with Ortygia, Calypso’s island in Homer’s Odyssey.

601. For habitation attested in the Roman period, see Sanders, Crete, 10, fig. 2; p. 128. Christianity is also attested fairly early on the island, though obviously much later than our narrative (128). Today the island is said to have less than fifty (perhaps about forty) permanent inhabitants.

602. Larger, however, than other islands near Crete; see, e.g., Sanders, Crete, 11, fig. 3; 12, fig. 4.

603. One source lists it as 27 km. in area.

604. Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 332; see Casson, Travel, 157. The term σκάφη (Acts 27:16, 30, 32) is good Greek (BDAG cites, e.g., Polyb. 1.23.7; BGU 1157.8; 1179; though the only LXX use, Dan 14:33, means “bowl”; a related term applies to boats over twenty times in Josephus), though Hemer, Acts in History, 143, suggests here the Latin loanword scapha, which applied to the sort of boat that Luke mentions (Caesar Gall. W. 4.26.4). Bede Comm. Acts 27.16–17 thinks of a light skiff (scapha) covered with hide (following Isidore), but further reading later convinced him (Bede, Retractatio in Actus apostolorum 27) that it could refer to a boat hollowed from a single tree (Martin, Bede, 191n).

605. Johnson, Acts, 448, cites Heliod. Eth. 5.27.6 (so also Parsons, Acts, 356).

606. Casson, Mariners, 195; Davis, “Navigation,” 215n64 (citing Petron. Sat. 102.5). It is not clear from the narrative that anyone is inside, but if someone is, this would be another reason to bring the dinghy on board as quickly as possible.

607. Apart from being torn loose and swept away, it could be smashed against the ship’s hull (cf., e.g., Finegan, Apostles, 198; Larkin, Acts, 370).

608. Davis, “Navigation,” 215n64, quoting Cic. Inv. 2.154.

609. Luke’s proximity to one or more sailors by volunteering at times may have also helped him acquire his specific nautical information of parts of the narrative.

610. Bruce, Commentary, 509; idem, Acts1, 459; Hemer, Acts in History, 143. Luke has a greater predilection for this term than most early Christian writers and employs it especially regarding the storm (the NT uses are Acts 14:18; 27:7, 8, 16; Rom 5:7; 1 Pet 4:18; it is absent in the Apostolic Fathers and appears in the LXX only in the later parts, Prov 11:31; Wis 9:16; Sir 21:20; 26:29; 29:6; 32:7; 3 Macc 1:23; 5:15).

611. Conzelmann, Acts, 218.

612. For the Syrtis’s association with Libya, see, e.g., Hdt. 2.32; 2.150; 4.174; the myth of the Psylli in Hdt. 4.173; Aul. Gel. 16.11. Purcell, “Syrtes,” defines the area as “from Cyrenaica . . . through Tripolitania to Tunisia.”

613. Strabo 17.3.18 estimates more than 5,000 stadia from the start of the Greater Syrtis to Carthage. Pliny E. N.H. 5.4.26, following Polybius, estimates the distance from the Lesser Syrtis to Carthage as 300 mi.

614. See Fitzmyer, Acts, 776, citing Pliny E. N.H. 5.4.27.

615. Homer’s lotus-eaters supposedly continued to live on Meninx (Polyb. 1.39.2; 34.3.12; Strabo 3.4.3; 17.3.17), though they may be a past phenomenon in Pliny E. N.H. 5.4.28. On this island, see further Huss, “Meninx” (who also comments on Syrtis in idem, “Syrtis”).

616. Strabo 17.3.20, perhaps preferring the more conservative or another source, estimates it as 3,930 stadia around and 1,500 across. Pliny E. N.H. 5.4.26, following Polybius, estimates the width of the Lesser Syrtis as 100 mi. and its circumference as 300 mi. Pliny E. N.H. 5.4.27 estimates 250 mi. between the two Syrtes, and the circumference of the Greater Syrtis as 625 mi., with an entrance 312 mi. wide.

617. Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 333; Bruce, Commentary, 510.

618. Pliny E. N.H. 5.3.25 (on the Lesser Syrtis); Berenice (modern Benghazi), one of the five prominent cities of Cyrenaica, is “at the tip of the horn of the Syrtis” (5.5.31 [trans. Rackham, LCL, 2:241]).

619. Purcell, “Syrtes.”

620. E.g., Ps.-Tibullus 3.4.92 (horrendave Syrtis); Jos. War 2.381.

621. Commentators (Conzelmann, Acts, 218; Johnson, Acts, 448) cite Dio Chrys. Or. 5.8–11; Pliny E. N.H. 5.26. Cf. the early nineteenth-century explorations in Cella, Narrative; Beechey and Beechey, Proceedings.

622. Hemer, Acts in History, 144, describes it as “an extensive zone of shallows and quicksands.”

623. Polyb. 1.39.3–4. When they foolishly attempted the voyage again, however, their fleet was destroyed (1.39.5–6). Josephus flatters Roman valor as unstopped by the Syrtis (War 2.381). Speaking more technically from a modern perspective, the Mediterranean Sea has, for those familiar with oceans, relatively low tidal variation. In some locations this can be as little as 14 cm. (Genoa), though in other locations (such as Gibraltar) up to 1.2 m. or even more (Davis, “Navigation,” 27).

624. Dio Chrys. Or. 5.10 compares the “porous,” sandy bottom of the sea there with the sand dunes of the Libyan landscape.

625. Marshall, Acts, 409; Rapske, “Travel,” 39; Witherington, Acts, 766. To ancient mariners, it might well seem closer than it was; Pliny E. N.H. 4.12.60 estimates 80 mi. from Crete to Malea (Morea in southern Greece) and just 125 mi. from Crete’s Cape Crio to Cyrene (beyond which lay the Greater Syrtis). Elsewhere Pliny opines that the Cyrenian coast (well before the Syrtes) juts into Cretan Sea 224 mi. from Crete (N.H. 5.5.32). Libyans crossed the sea to visit a shrine in Crete (Philost. Vit. Apoll. 4.34).

626. Ramsay, “Roads and Travel,” 380.

627. Hemer, Acts in History, 144, cites, e.g., Virg. Aen. 1.111, 146; Ps.-Tibullus 3.4.91; Prop. Eleg. 2.9.33.

628. Strabo 17.3.20 (trans. H. L. Jones, LCL, 8:197).

629. Catull. Carm. 64.156; Ps.-Tibullus 3.4.90–92; Ovid Am. 2.16.21–26 (“the Libyan Syrtes,” 2.16.21–22; Scylla and Charybdis, 2.16.23–26). For the dangers of Scylla and Charybdis, see also Hom. Od. 12.85, 103–13, 125–26, 245, 426–46; Virg. Aen. 3; Ovid Her. 12.123–25; Metam. 13–14; Apul. De deo Socr. 178; Libanius Speech in Character 25.5; cf. Lucan C.W. 1.547–48; Lucian Critic 27. Cf. Harris, Scylla; more recently, the developmental interpretation of the myth in Hopman, Scylla.

630. Thucyd. 4.24.4; Polyb. 34.3.9–12, esp. 10; Cic. Verr. 2.5.55.146; Pliny E. N.H. 3.8.87 (in light of 3.5.73); cf. Cic. Sest. 8.18. See also Rose and Hornblower, “Charybdis”; cf. Griffiths, “Scylla”; Harder, “Scylla”; Ovid reconciling two traditions in Lowe, “Scylla.”

631. Dio notes here that they were not winged like sphinxes and made no sound except like a dragon.

632. Offering a more sober perspective, Pliny the Elder notes that the land swarmed with serpents (N.H. 5.4.26). Paul encounters one instead in Malta (Acts 28:3), but snakes of various sorts were widespread.

633. The twin dangers of Scylla and Charybdis were sometimes used for comparisons with supposedly greater dangers, such as debt (Cic. Sest. 8.18); squandering money on a harp-girl (Alciph. Fish. 21 [Euploüs to Thalasserôs], 1.18, ¶3); luxury and shamelessness (Heracl. Hom. Prob. 70.10–11; cf. the Sirens, 70.9); an opponent’s big and offensive mouth (Lucian Critic 27); Verres (Cic. Verr. 2.5.55.146); and someone else evil (Catull. Carm. 64.156). Likewise, the Syrtes could be a danger worth facing for love (Ovid Am. 2.16.21–22).

634. Sources (BDAG; Bruce, Acts1, 460) cite Polyb. 27.3.3; Athen. Deipn. 5.204A; IG 12.73.9. After an extensive examination, Cadbury, “ὑποζώματα,” also concludes (352) that Luke probably refers to the hogging truss. Ropes on ships were made from “flax, hemp, papyrus, or esparto grass” (Casson, Mariners, 193). Admittedly, our archaeological sources for understanding the process remain quite limited (Fitzgerald, “Ship of Paul,” 34).

635. Rapske, “Travel,” 35, though noting that extant parallels so far address only warships (but as Hirschfeld, “Ship of Paul,” 26–27, notes, so far we lack “records of gear for commercial vessels” though archaeological evidence for this gear is also lacking). Bruce, Acts1, 460, notes the noun in Plato Rep. 10.616C; Laws 12.945C; and elsewhere.

636. Frapping was normally attempted when a ship was beached (D. Williams, Acts, 433).

637. C. Williams, Acts, 271 (noting Cadbury, Acts in History, 10; the illustration in Cadbury, “ὑποζώματα,” 351n28).

638. Cf. similarly Abbott, Acts, 252: “around the middle of the ship, at right angles to its length.”

639. So Bruce, Commentary, 509; apparently R. Williams, Acts, 162 (though rightly noting our uncertainty); the fourth and likeliest option in Conzelmann, Acts, 218. The ferocity of the waves would make this procedure difficult until it had been accomplished. After its success, those hit by waves on deck might also find such additional ropes helpful.

640. For βοήθεια, sources (BDAG; Bruce, Commentary, 509) cite Arist. Rhet. 2.5.18, 1383a; Diod. Sic. 3.8.5; Philo Jos. 33.

641. Davis, “Navigation,” 228n107, commenting on Acts 27:17 and also noting the similar strategy (with different words) in Synesius Ep. 4.198. Davis suggests (229n109) that grain ships’ hulls may “have been double-planked,” like a first-century B.C.E. “large wine-carrier” found by marine archaeologists off the French coast (citing for that ship Parker, Shipwrecks, 249–50).

642. Luke’s other uses refer to “letting down,” usually (Luke 5:4–5, fishing nets; Acts 27:30, the dinghy) but not quite always (Acts 9:25; cf. 2 Cor 11:33) into water.

643. Johnson, Acts, 448. Hemer, Acts in History, 143, suggests that the sailors retained for the ship “only a minimal storm-sail,” for steadying the ship.

644. Hemer, Acts in History, 143.

645. Davis, “Navigation,” 227, citing Xen. Oec. 8.15–16.

646. Davis, “Navigation,” 228, citing here (228n105) Acts 27:17, pointing out that χαλάω refers to “slackening, loosening, or unstringing (e.g., a bow), and in Greek nautical contexts, σκεῦος typically means equipment, gear or naval stores and does not typically include anchors (see LSJ, s.v.).”

647. Davis, “Navigation,” 228 (citing Synesius Ep. 4.164–65).

648. Davis, “Navigation,” 228n105 (noting also James Smith’s earlier treatment).

649. One of the views in Conzelmann, Acts, 218 (citing Plut. Talkativeness, Mor. 507a; Lucian Tox. 19); the view in Bede Comm. Acts 27.15, comparing a similar activity in the “British sea.”

650. Wachsmann and Haldane, “Anchors,” 137–38. For stone anchors at Ugarit, usually 220–400 pounds (but up to half a ton, for 70 ft. ships of 200 tons or more), see Craigie, Ugarit, 39.

651. Wachsmann and Haldane, “Anchors,” 138; for some lead ones, cf. Casson, Mariners, 173; cf. Adkins and Adkins, Life, 189–90. A Herodian anchor found near the Dead Sea consists of wood and lead (Hadas, “Routes”).

652. Wachsmann and Haldane, “Anchors,” 138–39. For various smaller anchors, as found on the sort of fishing boat that Peter may have used, see Nun, “Fishing,” 317; see also sources on anchors in Rapske, “Travel,” 33n149.

653. Jacobson, “Anchor.” For other symbolic uses, see Heb 6:19; Montefiore, Hebrews, 116; Lane, Hebrews, 153; cf. perhaps Heb 2:1 (Lane, Hebrews, 35, 37).

654. Bruce, Commentary, 510.

655. Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 691 (citing Ach. Tat. 3.1.1–2; Herpyllis 25–30; Heliod. Eth. 5.27.3–4; Ovid Metam. 11.482–91; Tac. Ann. 2.23.4–5).

656. Casson, Mariners, 208.

657. Millett, “Maritime Loans”; Krampe, “Fenus nauticum,” 381; idem, “Naufragium,” 541 (citing Dig. 4.9.3.1); Toner, Culture, 45 (estimating 20 percent); cf. Schmitz, “Loan,” 759; Andreau, “Maritime Loans,” 362. The interest rate was not limited (cf. Paulus Sent. 2.14.3) until Justinian (Justin. Cod. 4.32.26.2; Krampe, “Fenus nauticum,” 381). Sometimes the arrangement may have invited entrepreneurs with unprofitable ventures to commit insurance fraud (Philost. Vit. Apoll. 4.32). Meanwhile, lenders who lent to sailors worried about winds and wrecks (so Gregory of Nyssa, as cited in Toner, Culture, 24).

658. Rathbone, “Navicularii.”

659. A large ship’s cargo could be quite lucrative (Lucian Ship 13–14); hence “this great loss” in Acts 27:21.

660. As Casson notes (Travel, 157), “The alternative to keeping the ship afloat was death.” For losing a cargo to escape alive, cf. also Jos. Ant. 14.377; War 1.280; for jettisoning some things to save others, Quint. Curt. 5.9.3.

661. Trans. Rackham, LCL, 19:119. Conzelmann, Acts, 220, compares 1 En. 101:4–5, where frightened sailors will hurl their goods into the sea. A shipwreck survivor who lost his possessions at sea could, with special skills, acquire his living afresh afterward (Phaedrus 4.23); cf. similarly a sage who was a refugee (Val. Max. 7.2.ext. 3). Galen praises Zeno for reportedly remaining content after losing all in a shipwreck (Grief 48).

662. Cf. C. Williams, Acts, 271–72; Bruce, Commentary, 511n42; idem, Acts1, 460; Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 691; cf. Jos. Ant. 9.211–12. Wall, “Acts,” 348, suggests that Luke may have chosen σκευή because of its similarity to Jonah’s σκεῦος (cf. BDAG), also thrown overboard.

663. Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 691 (citing Ach. Tat. 3.2.9; Juv. Sat. 12.30–53); Johnson, Acts, 448, adds other sources (including Heliod. Eth. 5.27.7).

664. E.g., Polyb. 1.39.3–4; Jos. War 1.280.

665. Davis, “Navigation,” 229, citing Nomos Rhodiōn Nautikos 9: the captain should consult passengers with goods and allow them to vote. Someone should record the items being thrown overboard for the sake of later compensation.

666. Conzelmann, Acts, 218 (citing Jonah 1:5 LXX; Lucian Posts 1; Ach. Tat. 3.2.9; Jos. War 1.279–80).

667. BDAG cites Pollux Onomasticon 1.99.

668. Souza, “Ships.” One first-century B.C.E. wreck was carrying between 225 and 390 tons of wine amphoras; another from this period carried 500 to 600 tons (Casson, Mariners, 172). Another, carrying blocks of stone, contained 350 tons (p. 173). Even as early as ancient Ugarit, scholars estimate some ships of 200 tons (Craigie, Ugarit, 39).

669. Casson, Mariners, 191 (noting one case ca. 40 C.E. with 1,300 tons).

670. Rapske, “Travel,” 31. Casson, Mariners, 209, estimates between 1,000 and 1,300 tons, noting that only eighty ships so massive would have been required to supply Egypt’s 135,000 tons for Rome each year. This ship was probably unusual, however; Lucian Ship 5 notes the report that the huge ship Isis, bound for Rome, carried sufficient grain “to feed all Attica for a year” (LCL, 6:437). One third-century B.C.E. ship later mentioned in Athenaeus has been estimated as holding nearly 2,000 tons (Hirschfeld, “Ship of Paul,” 27).

671. Rapske, “Travel,” 31.

672. Ibid., 32. The Isis had virtually an army’s worth of sailors according to Lucian Ship 6.

673. Cf. Rapske, “Travel,” 32–33. Any grain accessible to water because of leakage would be ruined and swelling by this point, in any case.

674. Ibid., 32. Hirschfeld, “Ship of Paul,” 28–29, presents partitions and sacks as separate ways of compartmentalizing the cargo.

675. Rapske, “Travel,” 35.

676. In Acts 27:38, it is possible that the crew also has help, if the subject of the verbs remains the same throughout that sentence. Here, however, Luke does distinguish “we” from “they.” Aside from sacks, large clay vessels would also be difficult to move (on their size, see, e.g., Casson, Mariners, 170; Docter, “Pithos,” 306).

677. E.g., Acts 21:1; 27:19, 27, 33; Philost. Hrk. 6.3.

678. Bruce, Acts1, 461. The term is not a Lukan coinage; see Jos. War 7.393; Ant. 13.363; and other sources in BDAG.

679. Some suggest anything left on deck (D. Williams, Acts, 434, but exempting the passengers’ luggage if it remained secured, in view of the third- rather than first-person pronoun). This could include the yard (noted below) without being limited to it (Bock, Acts, 736).

680. Casson, Travel, 157 (who thinks that the passengers were drafted to help here, as may have happened in other storms). Cf. also Bruce, Commentary, 510 (following Smith, Voyage, 111–12); for rigging, see Finegan, Apostles, 199. Johnson, Acts, 448, who notes the extremity of cutting down the mast in Juv. Sat. 12.52–60, rightly points out that it is satire. Even in severe twentieth-century storms, sailors would jettison expensive equipment to try to preserve the ship (Braun, Here, 95–96; Braun, Way, 13).

681. Davis, “Navigation,” 229, citing Hom. Od. 12.409–13.

682. Davis, “Navigation,” 230.

683. Ibid., citing Juv. Sat. 12.30–69.

684. Davis, “Navigation,” 230, citing Papinianus Dig. 14.2.3; Hermogenianus Dig. 14.2.5 pr. 1; Nomos Rhodiōn Nautikos 35.

685. This may include Luke himself, although the first-person-plural pronoun is directly connected here with deliverance rather than with the loss of hope (pace the NIV, trying to circumvent a passive construction).

686. Storms could lengthen voyages (cf. the Isis’s seventy days from Alexandria to the Piraeus; Lucian Ship 9).

687. On litotes, see, e.g., Rowe, “Style,” 128; comment on Acts 1:5. The term χειμών can imply a winter storm (cf. the season in Acts 27:9), but the sense had extended to storms in general (see BDAG). That this “tempest” “pressed” (ἐπικειμένου) on them reflects its force due to the low-pressure zone, but the analogous sound links it rhetorically with χειμῶνος.

688. Some also considered breezes on “sunny days” healthier, with winter chills increasing pain (Symm. Ep. 1.100); winter also decreased the hours of sunlight, of course (1.20.3).

689. Such storms could be held to affect only the lower heavens; the stars themselves, being in the upper heavens, were unaffected (so Sen. Y. Dial. 5.6.1). For some, the nonappearance of heavenly bodies could indicate that they were astrologically impotent at this time (cf. Gen. Rab. 25:2), but the navigational meaning is far more dominant in sea voyage passages.

690. White, “Meteorological Appraisal,” 407.

691. Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 692, notes Virg. Aen. 3.203–4 (where sun and stars were obscured for three days in a storm near Crete). Even trees’ shrouding stars in the forest could terrify soldiers (Quint. Curt. 5.4.25; the snow in 5.4.18 renders deciduous tree leaves unlikely, but perhaps he thinks of tall conifers). For common ancient veneration of the sun as a deity, see note on Acts 2:20 (Keener, Acts, 1:918–19n630); for later dedications to Sol Invictus, see discussion in Carbó García, “Sol Invictus.”

692. It may appear tempting to parallel Paul’s testing toward the end of Acts with Jesus’s passion on this point (Luke 23:44), or to envision it as a sort of proleptic eschatological fulfillment (Acts 2:20). Had this been Luke’s intention, however, he could have worded the parallel much more clearly (mentioning either the moon here, as in 2:20, or darkness, as in both other texts; Luke 23:44 does not mention the sun, and neither other text mentions stars). But the other texts share some of the associations mentioned below.

693. With Hanson, Acts, 248; Conzelmann, Acts, 218. Phoenicians (best known for sailing) were held to be skilled in this (Lucian Icar. 1). For the use of nautical astronomy, see esp. discussion in Davis, “Navigation,” 120–57; for wind roses, see 90–119. For the ancient use of astronomy to calculate dates, see Robinson, “Ardua.”

694. Souza, “Navigation”; Casson, Mariners, 195. For the constellations and named stars in Greek sources, see Toomer, “Constellations” (note also the “barbarian” tradition, 383).

695. Theissen, Miracle Stories, 52 (citing, e.g., Lucian Lover of Lies 11).

696. Theissen, Miracle Stories, 52 (citing, e.g., Mark 4:37; Hom. Hymns 33.11–12 [to the Dioscuri]).

697. Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 692 (noting Ach. Tat. 5.9.2; Arrian Ind. 35.7; Eurip. Iph. Taur. 1413; Lucan C.W. 5.636–37; Ovid Tristia 1.2.23; a related image in Lucan C.W. 5.453–55). Johnson, Acts, 449, adds other sources (Hom. Od. 5.297–304; 12.277–79; Ael. Arist. Or. 2.12; Ach. Tat. 3.2.4; Lucian Tox. 20; Thucyd. 1.2.65).

698. Cf. also Johnson, Acts, 448–49.

699. E.g., Sil. It. 12.623–26; 1 Sam 7:10. When such omens were not to their advantage, generals sometimes explained them away (Sil. It. 12.627–29; Plut. Alex. 60.2).

700. Hemer, Acts in History, 145. Cf. Acts 27:17.

701. In some apparently special Lukan material, though the material is closely related to Matt 24:29 rather than possibly simply composed from whole cloth.

702. E.g., Apul. Metam. 6.28; Char. Chaer. 2.7.6; 2.8.1; Pss. Sol. 16:5; Let. Aris. 18; 4 Macc 17:21–22; Jos. Ant. 11.282; War 5.415; 6.310; Test. Job 19:2/1; Ramsay, Teaching, 94–95; from demons in Incant. Text 17.1–2; 19.2; 34.1, 6; 47.1; probably eschatological, nationalistic deliverance in Jos. Ant. 20.189.

703. E.g., Aeschines Embassy 74; Plut. Statecraft 32, Mor. 824D; Jdt 11:3; Philo Decal. 53, 60, 155; 4 Macc 15:8; cf. Dio Chrys. Or. 40.36; civic security in Proclus Poet. 5, K49.1–2.

704. E.g., Terence Andr. 473; perhaps 1 Tim 2:15 (cf. Winter, Wives, 109–10; Keener, Paul, 118–20); for medical help more generally, e.g., Men. Rhet. 2.17, 443.27 (of Apollo).

705. Xen. Anab. 5.2.24; Lysias Or. 2.66, §196; Demosth. Cor. 324; Epitaph. 10, 23; Ep. 1.2; by the Lord in Sir 46:1; 1 Macc 4:25; Jdt 8:17; Jos. Ant. 2.339; 3.1; cf. Plut. Themist. 9.4.

706. Diod. Sic. 4.43.1; 11.24.2; Dion. Hal. Ant. rom. 11.9.1; Ach. Tat. 3.5; Libanius Comparison 4.4–5.

707. With Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 692–93.

708. Rom 8:24; 1 Thess 5:8; cf. 1 Tim 1:1; 4:10; Titus 2:13; also 2 Clem. 1.7; Ign. Phld. 5.2; Barn. 1.3; 12.3, 7. For abandoned hope, see, e.g., Herm. 75.4.

709. Repeatedly in LXX Psalms and Job; Bar 4:22; 1 Clem. 16.16; Barn. 17.1; esp. 2 Macc 3:29, mentioning loss of hope as here; Libanius Comparison 4.4 (marginal hope of safety at sea). Still, sometimes even such usage can lend itself to eschatological analogies (cf. 1 Clem. 11.1). But the allegorization by some to suggest a theology of universal spiritual salvation (based on the non-Christian passengers) inappropriately confuses distinguishable nuances of the term at the expense of Luke’s explicit theology elsewhere (e.g., Acts 4:12; see Schnabel, “Reading Acts,” 264).

710. Cf. the honors for Ajax, lost at sea in Philost. Hrk. 31.8–9. For fear of death at sea, see, e.g., Philodemus On Death 32.31–34; 33.34–36 (where such fear is rejected).

711. E.g., Ach. Tat. 23.3; Prop. Eleg. 3.7.7–26; Libanius Comparison 4.14 (eaten by fish instead); Eccl. Rab. 3:2, §2; cf. Hermog. Issues 39.15–16; on a lake in Sil. It. 6.12–13; in a river in Val. Max. 1.4.2; Philost. Hrk. 19.7. Even if a ship was safe, it would not retain a corpse on board (Apoll. K. Tyre 25), but tombs could be erected for those lost at sea, even if their bodies were not recovered (Gr. Anth. 7.397) or only half-recovered (7.506; corpses washed up from the sea could be unrecognizable, Quint. Decl. 388.17). Despite the possible attempt to evade final judgment by being scattered over the seas (b. Giṭ. 56b), God would restore even those lost at sea for that day (1 En. 61:5; Sib. Or. 2.233).

712. Hom. Il. 23.70–74; Virg. Aen. 6.365–66; Heliod. Eth. 6.15; for this belief also in the ancient Near East, Monson, “Kings,” 62, cites Abusch, “Ghost”; van der Toorn, Religion, 55, 60–61; cf. also Provan, “Kings,” 150. Those who died beforehand in Crete would have easily been inhumed (for the local custom, see Sanders, Crete, 40–43).

713. Lucan C.W. 1.11; Pliny Ep. 7.27.5–11; Plut. Cim. 1.6; 6.5–6; Johnston, “Dead, Cult of,” 114; cf. similarly, in some other traditional religion, Mbiti, Religions, 109.

714. Lucian Lover of Lies 31. The only other traditional complication would be the one obol needed for entry (Dial. D. 423 [2/22, Charon and Menippus 1]).

715. Garland and Scheid, “Death”; cf. Rüpke, Religion, 130.

716. Test. Ab. 17:16; 19:11–12 A. Romans employed it as one of the most terrible punishments; see Val. Max. 1.1.13; Livy 1.51.9 (drowned with a crate full of stones); 27.37.5–7 (newborn hermaphrodite); Suet. Aug. 67.2; Modestinus Dig. 48.9.9; cf. weasels in Babr. 27. See also Luke 17:2; Mark 9:42; Matt 18:6; Rev 18:21. This method also prevented burial (cf. Derrett, “Mylos onikos”; Cic. Phil. 11.2.5).

717. Visions are a critical element in Luke’s theological epistemology; see, e.g., Acts 2:17; 11:5 (on the latter, see, e.g., Nguyen, Peter, 137–38, 163).

718. Why Luke omits the first person here is unclear, since he has not gone temporarily overboard. Perhaps historically (given the layout of the ship, especially if they are below deck) Paul addressed only a group of those aboard; the third person plural in the preceding context seems to refer to the ship’s crew (27:17–19), although Luke casually mentions his participation where it occurs in the same scenes (27:16, 18). Certainly Paul’s message is directed toward those who made a wrong decision, not his companions (27:21), though his prediction extends beyond the crew (27:22, 24).

719. Haenchen, Acts, 704; Conzelmann, Acts, 218; Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 696.

720. Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 696, helpfully cites Hom. Od. 5.299–312; Lucan C.W. 5.653–71; Sen. Y. Ag. 510–27; Sil. It. 17.260–67; Val. Flacc. 1.626–33; Virg. Aen. 1.92–101. Chance, Acts, 500, rightly points out that some of these “speeches” are prayers and hence do not reveal a convention of people aboard a ship listening to speeches.

721. Cf. the similar concern of Witherington, Acts, 767. He suggests (767–68) that there were surely times when ancients tried to “rally crew and passengers,” as in modern times.

722. See Hall, “Delivery,” 220; cf. voice training (and sometimes a herald) on 230 (Quint. Inst. 11.3.19; Suet. Aug. 84).

723. As Soards points out (Speeches, 128), Luke has Paul stand “in their midst,” like a Greek orator and in keeping with Luke’s depiction of some other speeches (Acts 1:15; 17:22, 33; cf. 4:7; 23:10).

724. Some people even in normal circumstances slept below deck (Libanius Maxim 1.13). Perhaps in special circumstances using torches, but probably more often smaller lamps, for some light; in any case, the lighting would be weak, but the voyagers would by now be accustomed to this problem. A low ceiling would not provide good acoustics for a large crowd, although, in much of the Majority World today, pastors do manage to address hundreds of people in relatively small spaces without a sound system.

725. See, e.g., Hirschfeld, “Ship of Paul,” 28.

726. Witherington, Acts, 768. For the phrase “stand” (or “be stood,” “placed”) “in the midst,” see also 4:7; 17:22; Luke 24:36 (similarly Acts 1:15); four other times in the NT; for speeches, Jos. Ant. 7.278; 9.169; 10.63; 11.168.

727. Personal correspondence, Justin Leidwanger, Oct. 7, 2014.

728. 3 Macc 4:9–10, apparently envisioning quite a large number of prisoners. Although novels normally played on social reality, it is possible that the author of this one lacked genuine knowledge of ships; his contemporary knowledge, however, seems likelier than our modern guesses. See also the below-deck torment in Mart. Felix appendix (in Rapske, Custody, 205).

729. Mark Wilson, personal correspondence, Oct. 13, 2014. During a storm, Davis, “Navigation,” 227, notes, the crew would “shut and secure cabin doors and cargo hatches to prevent swamping” (while warning in n. 103 that archaeological remains provide no information regarding “decks, hatches and cabins,” since only the lower parts of ships have survived). Given the danger of wet grain swelling, grain ships’ hatches must have been watertight, and Nomos Rhodiōn Nautikos 38 shows that sailors must bail water; if the cargo gets wet, the sailors are liable (Davis, “Navigation,” 228n108). Citing the Nomos Rhodiōn Nautikos, Wilson (correspondence, Oct. 13, 2014) notes that because the pilot, owner, and sailors all received shares in the profit, they would be reluctant to risk the grain’s security.

730. With Rapske, Custody, 205.

731. Justin Leidwanger, personal correspondence, Oct. 7, 2014. Cf. a sailor guarding the hold in Paulinus of Nola Ep. 49.1–3 (cited in Davis, “Navigation,” 226–27).

732. Brian Rapske, personal correspondence, Oct. 13, 2014, allows for the possibility that this was on-deck cargo. For the sorts of reasons provided, both Rapske and Mark Wilson (personal correspondence, Oct. 13, 2014) think the scene more likely on deck than below it.

733. Personal correspondence, Oct. 7, 2014; Prof. Leidwanger also consulted with Prof. Elizabeth Greene.

734. Rapske, Oct. 13, 2014, citing Casson. Leidwanger, personal correspondence, Oct. 7, 2014, suggests that such accommodations were normally for voyagers who could pay more.

735. Mentioned in Justin Leidwanger, personal correspondence, Oct. 7, 2014.

736. Triremes remained the choice warships through the fourth century C.E. (Souza, “Triremes”), but this is not a warship. Though “merchant galleys” with rowers did exist in this period (Casson, Mariners, 192; plate 44), most merchant ships of the period did not employ them (Schneider, “Rigging”), and the dependence on winds and failure to mention rowers during the storm count against this likelihood here. George Bass (founder of the Institute of Nautical Archaeology) and Frederick van Doorninck Jr., both emeritus professors of the Nautical Archaeology Program at Texas A&M University, kindly confirmed for me the unlikelihood that Paul’s vessel included rowers; Dr. van Doorninck added, “The use of a galley to transport grain would only occur for some special, unusual reason, where speed and certainty of delivery were important considerations. It is quite safe to assume that St. Paul was not on a galley” (Bass and van Doorninck, personal correspondence, Feb. 27, 2007).

737. The call of the κελευστής (boatswain) kept time for the rowers; Karanika, “Songs,” suggests that Orpheus may have held this role in Apollonius Rhodius’s Argonautica.

738. For the number, see Casson, Mariners, 85. Supergalleys with up to 4,000 rowers (Casson, Mariners, 130; it “never saw action”) would have been more problematic. The heyday of galleys was earlier (see the focus on classical Greek vessels in Tilley, “Trireme”).

739. Although the disjunction could result from Luke’s already knowing the revelation and hence not needing to be addressed. Some suggest that even if Paul offered such a speech, only a few of the passengers would have heard him (Chance, Acts, 500).

740. If he was chained to Julius, the latter would have to be very receptive to Paul to have accommodated this; but cf. 27:31–32.

741. With Anson, “Exhortation,” rightly. This is not to deny historians’ frequent creativity in composing the speeches, expanding according to appropriate expectations; see, e.g., Iglesias-Zoido, “Speeches.”

742. E.g., Thucyd. 2.86.6–2.88.1; 4.9.4–4.11.1; Polyb. 15.10; Dion. Hal. Ant. rom. 6.6.1–6.9.6 (esp. 6.8.1); Quint. Curt. 4.14.1–6, 9–26; 5.8.6–17; 6.3.1–18; Appian Hist. rom. 8.7.42; 8.17.116; Bell. civ. 4.16.126; Arrian Alex. 3.9.5–7; Tac. Hist. 2.32; Ann. 3.46; 14.36; Agric. 30–32, 33–34; Deut 20:2–8, esp. 20:3–4; 1QM X, 2–5; Jos. Ant. 3.44–45; in other genres, cf. Hom. Il. 13.95–124; Battle of Frogs and Mice 110–21, 132–59; Xen. Cyr. 2.1.14–18; Dion. Hal. Demosth. 32; Sil. It. 9.184–216; 17.292–337. Granted, even many of these speeches in histories are elaborated, but they reveal the standard expectation of prebattle speeches.

743. When there was much noise, armies could not hear (e.g., Quint. Curt. 4.9.20; 4.13.38; Tac. Ann. 6.35), except for leaders and those nearby (Quint. Curt. 4.14.7); thus those farther away might be thought to misunderstand gestures (Suet. Jul. 33). Some suggest that behind the historiographic convention generals simply rode in front of the army, delivering more concise exhortations (Marincola, “Speeches,” 128); if that is the case, however, we could postulate something similar for this scene.

744. Noll, History, 93; see further discussion at Acts 2:14–15. Modern sound systems, of course, are not comparable, allowing one to address even a million people; see Stanley, Diffusion, 71, following Martin, Prophet, 418.

745. Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 696.

746. Even status could adjust normal expectations regarding prisoners; even some people sent to execute speakers were restrained at least temporarily by their status and eloquence (Appian Bell. civ. 1.8.72; Val. Max. 8.9.2; cf. similarly 2.10.6).

747. See, e.g., the account of the Liberian boy Samuel Morris in the late nineteenth century, whose faith is said to have affected the crew on a long voyage (for popular versions, see, e.g., Baldwin, Samuel Morris, 40, 78; Whalin, Samuel Morris, 77–95, 169–70).

748. Leaders’ response was often that they could not foreknow the future; see Quint. Decl. 301.16; Hermog. Issues 68.10–69.21 (esp. 69.15–17); Libanius Declamation 36.42–43; 44.50–52, 61.

749. As was usual in storms at sea (Jonah 1:5–6; Ach. Tat. 3.5; Apoll. K. Tyre 39). Juvenal (Sat. 12) praises the gods for rescuing his friend from death during a shipwreck (joking that he is serious, since his friend already has heirs); a Jewish inscription likewise praises God for saving its writer at sea (Horsley, Documents, 4:113, §26). Deities could supposedly prevent mobility (Athen. Deipn. 15.672C) or grant instantaneous mobility (John 6:21); Pythagoras could provide speed in sailing (Iambl. V.P. 3.16; 28.135).

750. Witherington, Acts, 767.

751. Ibid.

752. E.g., Mark 2:5; 5:36; 6:50; 7:29; 9:23; 10:49; Luke 7:13; John 11:23.

753. Theissen, Miracle Stories, 59, cites Philost. Vit. Apoll. 3.38; 4.10, 45; 7.38; Lucian Lover of Lies 11; Hymn of Isyllus in IG 4.128.

754. 1 Cor 2:3 (interpreted literally by Chrys. Hom. 1 Cor. 6.2, who emphasizes Paul’s humanity); 2 Cor 7:5; cf. 2 Cor 11:3; 12:20.

755. Engberg-Pedersen, Paul and Stoics, 73, 311n32; also noted in Aug. City 14.8, first paragraph (about Stoics); cf. Winter, Left Corinth, 54; Attridge, “Stoic Tradition,” 89, on the Fourth Gospel’s portrayal of Jesus. Learning to be free from fear was treated as a basic matter of philosophy (e.g., Epict. Diatr. 2.1.21). In a distant culture, cf. the ideal of the calm, unafraid, and nonanxious wise person in Confuc. Anal. 11 (9.28); 59 (7.36); 61 (12.4); 71 (14.30) (though righteousness is more important than courage, 75 [17.23]); or the virtuous person, who fears only that which truly matters, in 70 (16.8).

756. Mus. Ruf. 8, p. 66.10; cf. Iambl. V.P. 32.224–25; Stowers, “Resemble Philosophy?,” 93. On philosophers against fear, see further Val. Max. 3.3.ext. 1; Sen. Y. Ben. 4.27.1; Ep. Lucil. 13; 98.6; Dio Chrys. Or. 1.13; 3.34; Crates Ep. 7; Arius Did. Epit. 2.7.5a, p. 10.11; 2.7.5b, pp. 12–13.6; 2.7.5b1, pp. 12–13.27–29; 2.7.5c, pp. 28–29.14–15; Philost. Vit. Apoll. 1.23. Stoics valued tranquility and peace of mind (Sen. Y. Dial. 4.12.6; 4.13.2; 5.6.1; 9 passim; Ep. Lucil. 75.18; Mus. Ruf. frg. 38, p. 136.1–3; Epict. Diatr. 1.4.1; Arius Did. Epit. 2.7.5b1, p. 12.31–33; 2.7.5k, p. 34.1–4; 2.7.11s, p. 100.7), as did Epicureans (Lucret. Nat. 5.1198–1206; Cic. Fin. 1.14.47; Lucian Alex. 47; Diog. Laert. 10.131; 10.144.17) and others (Iambl. V.P. 2.10; cf. Cic. Amic. 22.84; Hossenfelder, “Ataraxia”).

757. E.g., Cic. Leg. 1.23.60; Diogenes Ep. 28; Max. Tyre 11.11; 36.2; Iambl. V.P. 32.228. Cf. Val. Max. 9.13.praef.; 9.13.3; Plut. Poetry 14, Mor. 37A; Sir 40:2, 5; Heb 2:14–15; Mart. Pol. passim.

758. Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 80.6; 82 passim; 98.10; Nat. Q. 1.pref. 4; 2.58.3; 6.32.12; Dial. 9.11.4–5; Mus. Ruf. 1, p. 34.31–33; 3, pp. 40.35–42.1; p. 42.3; 4, p. 48.5–6; 17, p. 110.1, 12–13; Epict. Diatr. 1.17.25; 2.1.13; 2.18.30; Marc. Aur. 9.3; 12.35; cf. Marc. Aur. 8.58. But even philosophers could admit to struggling with this fear (Mus. Ruf. 6, pp. 54.35–56.7, esp. 56.2). Cf. Trelenberg, “Märtyrer,” for possible Stoic influence on ancient Christian martyr narrations.

759. Perhaps especially Epicureans; see, e.g., Lucret. Nat. passim (esp. 1.102–26; 3.1–30, 87–93; cf. O’Keefe, “Lucretius”; Warren, “Lucretius”); Cic. Fin. 1.18.60; 4.5.11; Nat. d. 1.20.56; Diog. Laert. 10.125.

760. E.g., Cic. Fin. 2.30.96–98; cf. tested bravery in Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 66.50.

761. Other philosophers, too, are praised for maintaining tranquility, avoiding emotional disturbances (e.g., Iambl. V.P. 2.10), and living by what they taught (Diod. Sic. 9.9.1).

762. Sen. Y. Nat. Q. 6.32.4 (on Seneca’s expectation of courage when facing death, see Nietmann, “Seneca”); cf. Lucian Dem. 35.

763. Mus. Ruf. 8, p. 66.10; Diog. Laert. 1.86; 2.71; 9.11.68; Aul. Gel. 1.2.11; 19.1.4–6, 11–21; cf. Brawley, Luke-Acts and Jews, 56.

764. Epict. Diatr. 2.19 (e.g., 2.19.19). Philost. Vit. Apoll. 1.23 denies that one who fears is yet a philosopher. Lucian writes that Socrates and most other philosophers feared when facing the underworld (Dial. D. 421 [4/21, Menippus and Cerberus 1–2]) but Cynics did not (422 [4/21, Menippus and Cerberus 1–2]); others, however, emphasized Socrates’s fearlessness concerning death (Max. Tyre 3.7).

765. Epict. Diatr. 2.5.12 (trans. Oldfather, LCL, 1:241).

766. Brawley, Luke-Acts and Jews, 56. “This wondrous person who was thought to be superior to death,” Lucian complains, “fell to wailing along with the women!” (Peregr. 43 [trans. Harmon, LCL, 5:49]).

767. E.g., Lucian Peregr. 42–44. One notes the same interest in Aul. Gel. 19.1.4–6, although the philosopher here fails the test.

768. Chance, Acts, 508, cites how the Moravians’ faith during a storm at sea impressed John Wesley.

769. Eunapius Lives 504; cf. Galen Grief 48.

770. Stowers, “Resemble Philosophy?,” 93.

771. Ibid. (citing Arist. N.E. 7.1153b19).

772. Mus. Ruf. 6, pp. 54.35–56.7, esp. 56.2. Cf. Galen’s limits in Grief 72a, 73–74, 78b.

773. Diog. Laert. 2.71 (LCL, 1:201).

774. Seneca viewed such initial fear as merely a bodily reaction, not counting it as true emotion until one has rationally considered and chosen it (Sen. Y. Ira 2.2.1–2.4.2 [on such initial fear, see esp. 2.3.3; cf. 2.2.1], in Sorabji, Emotion, 73–74). For an analogy from a different culture, cf. Confucius’s sudden “change of countenance” during thunder or strong winds, in Confuc. Anal. 334 (10.16), despite his teachings on calmness noted above.

775. On the challenge of faith versus fear in the passage about Jesus’s stilling the storm (Mark 4:35–41), cf., e.g., Wallace, Miracles, 59–62.

776. In contrast to etymological expectation, ἀσιτία and ἄσιτος (Acts 27:33) refer to only lack of appetite and eating (see BDAG).

777. With Conzelmann, Acts, 218; Fernando, Acts, 612; cf. Bruce, Commentary, 461. This is common “on a rough voyage, even when there is no thought of shipwreck” (Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 334); it is doubtful, however, that experienced sailors would have been as susceptible under normal circumstances. For the physical and emotional trauma, see, e.g., Ps 107:26–27.

778. Tannehill, Acts, 334 (noting their loss of hope in Acts 27:20); cf. Brenz 233 in Chung-Kim and Hains, Acts, 354. Grief or anger might keep people from eating (Philost. Hrk. 31.7; see fuller comment on Acts 9:9).

779. Rapske, Custody, 359. More speculatively, some (Hemer, Acts in History, 145; Bruce, Commentary, 461) suggest that seawater spoiled the food or that cooking was impossible (during normal voyages passengers remained on deck, and cooking facilities were extremely limited); Rapske, Custody, 359, is probably right to doubt this suggestion in view of Acts 27:33–36. (Seawater would not only spoil the grain but expand it; see idem, “Travel,” 35.) Some passengers may have also run low on food, or preserved what little they had, because of the unexpected length of time without the ship’s being able to make port.

780. With Tannehill, Acts, 334.

781. E.g., Epict. Diatr. 2.1.23; in Latin, Fronto Ad M. Caes. 2.3.1. It appears often in the LXX, but especially in the later parts, and pervasively in 4 Maccabees (4 Macc 5:6; 6:22; 7:6–7, 10, 15; 8:5, 17; 9:1, 17; 10:10; 11:4, 12, 20–21; 14:2–3, 7; 15:1, 4, 13, 16–17, 29–30; 16:6–10, 14, 16; 17:2, 4; 18:1, 20). For Luke’s uses, see comment on Acts 1:1.

782. As a pure interjection in Rom 11:33 (cf. also 1 Clem. 53.5; Diogn. 9.5); positively in 1 Tim 6:11, 20 (cf. also 1 Esd 3:24; 4:2, 12, 32; 4 Macc 6:22; 7:6–7, 10, 15; 14:2–3, 7; 15:13, 29–30; 16:14; 17:2, 4; 18:1).

783. Cf. also, e.g., 2 Macc 7:34; 4 Macc 9:1, 17; 10:10; 11:4, 12, 21; Jas 2:20; 1 Clem. 23.4.

784. Witherington, Acts, 767.

785. Luke also implies that Paul is their spiritual benefactor, a claim that would invite reciprocity (cf., e.g., Publ. Syr. 71).

786. Witherington, Acts, 767.

787. On oxymoron, see Rowe, “Style,” 143; Aune, Dictionary of Rhetoric, 327; Porter, “Paul and Letters,” 582. The specific term, however, is not yet extant prior to the fourth century C.E. (Anderson, Rhetorical Theory, 227).

788. E.g., Ach. Tat. 2.7. Heliod. Eth. 1, indeed, picks up partway through a story.

789. Fitzmyer, Acts, 777; Johnson, Acts, 449 (comparing Ael. Arist. Or. 2.12; Plut. Br. Wom. 8–9, Mor. 247E–248A; Petron. Sat. 105); on divine epiphanies rescuing at sea, see Theissen, Miracle Stories, 101. Luke’s placement of “angel” after the clause designating the genitive for “of God” underlines that Paul is God’s (not the angel’s) servant.

790. For ancients, epiphanies remained valid in either case (Proclus Poet. 6.1, K110.24).

791. Cf. Luke 12:20; Mark 14:30; Gen 19:33–34; 30:15; Exod 12:8, 12; Ruth 3:2; Jdt 8:33; 11:3, 5; 13:14; Tob 6:16; the expression appears emphatic (shared with me by Stanley Porter, personal correspondence, Dec. 9, 2012) and characterizes the Septuagint much more than, say, the more polished Greek of Josephus, Philo, or the Apostolic Fathers. When not referring to the current night, these references often refer to the impending night (cf. also BDAG: “this very night,” citing Test. Ab. 7A; Jos. Asen. 24:13; Apoc. Mos. 2), but Paul narrates a matter past rather than impending. Many commentators, however, envision Paul speaking the next day; he could be referring simply to “last night” (Bruce, Acts1, 461; cf. also Marshall, Acts, 410; Fitzmyer, Acts, 777; Peterson, Acts, 689; NRSV). This proposal makes sense especially if Paul reckons a day as beginning from sundown—less so if he expects his audience to think from sunrise. More consideration might be allowed the possibility that Paul speaks the same night, the “marker of close proximity” simply suggesting that the vision (perhaps while awake) had just happened (as noted by Cynthia Long Westfall, personal correspondence, Dec. 9–10, 2012). What the normal sleep routine was in such conditions (27:20) and whether Paul would address many others while it remained night are legitimate questions for which Luke’s sparse description offers few answers. The next scene occurs at night (27:27), but not the same one.

792. Matthew has angelic instructions in dreams but does not recount the same incidents as reported in Luke.

793. For Jesus in the Gospels, see Mark 5:36; Luke 5:10; 8:50; 12:32; the risen Jesus in Rev 1:17; an oracle of Scripture in John 12:15. The exact expression appears thirty-five times in the LXX, often God (Gen 15:1; 26:24; 28:13; 46:3) or his angel (Gen 21:17; Dan 10:12, 19; cf. Judg 6:23) speaking; also in oracles (Isa 7:4; 10:24; 41:10, 13; 43:1, 5; 44:2; 54:4; Jer 26:28 [46:28 ET]).

794. E.g., 1 En. 1:2; 10:1; 19:1; 22:3; 23:4; 27:1; 33:3; 40:2, 8–9; 43:3–4; 46:2–3; 52:5; 74:2; 75:3–4; 78:10; 79:6; 82:7; 108:5–6; Jub. 2:1; 17:11; 32:21; 4 Ezra 5:20, 31; 7:1; 10:29; 2 Bar. 55:3; 3 Bar. 1:8; 2:5; 4:5, 7; 4 Bar. 6:15 (a message of encouragement, as here); Test. Reub. 3:15; 5:3; Test. Levi 2:9; 5:1, 3; 9:6; Test. Jud. 15:5; b. Ber. 51a; Ned. 20a; perhaps 4Q529; see also comment on Acts 8:26. On angels in apocalyptic literature, see also Morris, Apocalyptic, 35; in later sources, see Blau and Kohler, “Angelology,” 587. The first part of Daniel includes angels as deliverers (3:28; 6:22; as in Acts 5:19; 12:7–11), though only in characters’ comments rather than direct narration, but the later part also includes them as revealers (Dan 8:15–19; 9:21–23), as in apocalyptic and elsewhere (e.g., Gen 16:7–12; Judg 13:3–5; esp. Zech 1:9–19; 2:3; 4:5; 5:5; 6:5). Some later sources taught that an angel could perform only one errand per mission (Gen. Rab. 50:2, bar.; cf. b. B. Meṣiʿa 86b). Angels as messengers differs from the Promethean tradition of angels revealing divine secrets without authorization (cf. Gal 1:8; b. Šabb. 88a; Gen. Rab. 50:9; 68:12; 78:2; cf. even Elijah once, in b. B. Meṣiʿa 85b).

795. 4Q537 frg. 1, introductory line.

796. See Johnson, Prayer, 63–65.

797. See, e.g., Iris (Hom. Il. 2.786–87; 4.121–24; Virg. Aen. 5.618–20); Hermes (Cornutus Summ. 16 [Lang, 20, lines 18–19], in van der Horst, “Cornutus,” 169).

798. Cf. “someone who looked like an angel,” sent by Diana, in Apoll. K. Tyre 48 (CAGN 769; but the final version is from the fifth or sixth century C.E.). On apparitions in dreams, see comment on Acts 16:9–10.

799. E.g., Max. Tyre 8.8; 9.2; cf. Iambl. Myst. 2.10. Later Platonists allowed angels to appear as generic “humans” (Proclus Poet. 6.1, K114.9–10). Philosophers did not depend on such revelations, however; Socrates based his divine leading on internal intuition, not any direct external revelation (Rapske, Custody, 395).

800. Contrast Jonah 1:12. For God saving some on behalf of others’ merits, Jerome Against Jovinianus 2.24 (Martin, Acts, 304) cites Acts 27 (and God sparing Sodom for ten righteous or Zoar for Lot’s sake).

801. Aune, Prophecy, 268 (contrasting the relative scarcity in analogous Greco-Roman oracles).

802. Rapske, “Travel,” 46, even treats it as “the hermeneutical tool” for interpreting the rest of the narrative.

803. See Tannehill, Acts, 292. Schröter, “Modell,” 75, approaches Acts’ widely agreed open ending with consideration of 19:21 and 23:11.

804. In context, this seems to occur before Jerusalem’s conquest (Luke 21:20–24) and/or before Jesus’s return (21:25–28).

805. Only the elite might view Caesar as accessible personally as, for example, media-saturated U.S. residents sometimes view their president or celebrities today.

806. O’Rourke, “Law,” 177; see comment on Acts 25:10.

807. See Sherwin-White, Society, 110.

808. Luke may expect us to infer that Paul’s later arguments before Caesar’s tribunal reflect the sorts of arguments found in his defense speeches in Acts 24–26 (cf. Cazeaux, Actes, 338). The tradition of Paul’s testimony before rulers outlived him (see 1 Clem. 5.7).

809. Cf. Dan 10:12, different term; the aorist for “received” in Mark 10:24.

810. This is the only LXX use of the verb in precisely this form, but the verb does not by itself necessarily imply prayer (e.g., 3 Macc 5:11; 4 Macc 5:8). Nor is it a necessary inference from Luke’s theology (Acts 11:18, different term; nor even Paul’s, e.g., Phil 1:29).

811. BDAG cites, e.g., Diod. Sic. 13.59.3.

812. Johnson, Acts, 449 (citing Ps 106:28–29 LXX; Test. Naph. 6:8–9; Plut. Dinner 18, Mor. 161F; Lucian Ship 9; Posts 1; Ach. Tat. 3.5; cf. further discussion of Ps 107 [106 LXX] in Börstinghaus, Sturmfahrt, 209–24). Neptune also calmed the sea for the Argo in Val. Flacc. 1.651–52; Apollo helped sailors in a storm (Apollod. Bib. 1.9.26); see further comment at Acts 28:11.

813. Theissen, Miracle Stories, 102, citing Plut. Caes. 38; Dio Cass. 41.46.

814. See comment in Theissen, Miracle Stories, 102.

815. Pesiq. Rab Kah. 18:5; Pesiq. Rab. 32:3/4. Theissen, Miracle Stories, 102, cites y. Ber. 9:1. These examples are not the same as a miracle worker, but such workers do appear in Jewish sources as well (emphasized especially by Vermes, Jesus and Judaism; cf. summary in Keener, John, 270–72). On God’s sparing others for one’s sake, see Gen 18:26 (Bruce, Acts1, 462); 2 Macc 3:33. If 4Q541 7 3 refers to the eschatological priest (as Cook, “Words of Levi,” 259–60, argues), it notes the sea being quieted because of him (but is this figurative for eschatological peace? and does it imply his direct authority?).

816. Cf. the later portrait of Odysseus “alone and naked and shipwrecked” (Mus. Ruf. 9, p. 72.1).

817. Sometimes few survived (Dio Chrys. Or. 7.55; cf. Jos. Life 15).

818. Johnson, Acts, 449 (who also cites, for the view that a shipwreck was guided by divine purpose, Ael. Arist. Or. 2.12–13; for one’s fate at sea fulfilling prophecy, Hom. Od. 5.300–302).

819. Elsewhere in Luke-Acts only at Acts 12:7; 27:29. Although the term had a range of meaning, this is the likeliest sense here given the present context and nautical usage (see BDAG, citing Eurip. Hel. 409; Thucyd. 2.92.3; Diod. Sic. 1.31.5; 2.60.1).

820. Witherington, Acts, 770. Cf. sometimes similar complaints about Jesus’s hyperbole in Mark 13:2; Luke 21:6; cf. Danker, New Age, 198; Kaufman, “Eastern Wall,” 115.

821. One could discern the time of night from the moon on nights too cloudy for observing the zodiac (Polyb. 7.16.3; 9.15.12; Virg. Aen. 7.9; Ovid Fasti 2.697; Sil. It. 15.616; cf. Plut. Alc. 20.5; contrast Plut. Nat. Phen. 24, Mor. 917F).

822. Bruce, Commentary, 515; Fitzmyer, Acts, 778. Conzelmann, Acts, 219, allows either this or the sea anchors dragging; 30 m. is too deep for this, but he doubts Luke’s knowledge of the depth (see comment on Acts 27:28).

823. Hemer, Acts in History, 146.

824. Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 338.

825. Wallinga, “Poseidonios,” argues that διαφερομένων here refers not to being “driven” but to zigzagging, including tacking.

826. Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 335. The lack of sun (Acts 27:20) does not mean that days could not be calculated; day may have offered at least hazy light at times whereas night offered none. Chrys. Hom. Acts 53 opines that the storm’s long duration proved providential, so that Paul could teach them longer; certainly Paul has gained the centurion’s full respect (27:43; cf. 28:7).

827. By air (Conzelmann, Acts, 219). Bruce, Commentary, 514, following Smith, notes 476.6 mi. The figure may be higher if they traveled not straight but northward from a southward drift as the northern wind weakened, allowing them to reach Malta instead of the Syrtis.

828. Smith, Voyage, 126–28; followed by Bruce, Commentary, 514–15; Hemer, Acts in History, 145; Witherington, Acts, 771.

829. Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 335 (following the more extensive study of Treidler, “Ionische Meer,” esp. 86–91), noting that some ancients would have labeled this region Ionian, others Adriatic. For the entire sea east of Italy, see also Cary and Murray, “Adriatic Sea.”

830. Ptolemy Geog. 3.4.1 (the sea east of Sicily); 3.15.1 (west of Crete). These texts are often noted (e.g., Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 335; Conzelmann, Acts, 219; Schille, Apostelgeschichte, 466; Nunnally, “Acts,” 408).

831. Rapske, “Travel,” 41; Bruce, Acts1, 462. Ramsay, “Roads and Travel,” 380, attributes this title to influence from winds from the Adriatic (in its narrower original and modern senses).

832. Rapske, “Travel,” 40 (citing, e.g., Livy 5.33.7; Strabo 2.5.29; 7.5.9–10; Lucan C.W. 2.613–15). Strabo 7.5.9 notes the extension of the narrower, technical usage, though still linking it with the Illyrian seaboard; some referred to the northern Adriatic as simply the “upper sea” (Cic. Att. 16.8). In Pliny E. N.H. 3.26.150, only the northern Adriatic (the “upper sea”) is Adriatic, the southern waters being “Ionian.”

833. Rapske, “Travel,” 40–41; Ramsay, Pictures, 312–13; Bruce, Commentary, 515; Conzelmann, Acts, 219; Hemer, Acts in History, 145–46; Witherington, Acts, 770.

834. Josephus is soon after in Puteoli (Life 16); cf. Acts 28:13.

835. Hemer, Acts in History, 147 (followed by BDAG; Witherington, Acts, 771).

836. Pliny E. N.H. 2.105.224 (contrasting this unmeasured depth with opinions that the deepest sea is 2 mi. deep; but his claim of fresh water bubbling up there [2.105.225] does not suggest firsthand acquaintance).

837. Casson, Mariners, 173, 195; Hemer, Acts in History, 147 (following Casson, Ships, 246).

838. Conzelmann, Acts, 219. A Greek “fathom” was about 6.1 ft. or 1.85 m., so the figure here should be some 120 ft. or 37 m.

839. Bruce, Commentary, 516; idem, Acts1, 463 (following Smith); Hemer, Acts in History, 147; cf. similarly Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 339.

840. Casson, Mariners, 211.

841. Tannehill, Acts, 333, suggests that they doubt Paul’s words. On the portrayal of fear, contrast Paul’s confidence and the comment on philosophers’ ideal courage in the introduction, above, to Acts 27:21–26. But historically, even Paul did have fears (2 Cor 7:5).

842. Luke elsewhere uses τραχύς only figuratively (following Isa 40:4 LXX), for John preparing the road for the king’s coming (for rough roads, see also Bar 4:26; Pss. Sol. 8:17). On the expected Syrtis, see comment on Acts 27:17.

843. Conzelmann, Acts, 219, cites as an example Dio Chrys. Or. 7.2 (and for a smoother island surf, Lucian True Story 1.6).

844. With, e.g., Casson, Mariners, 211. For information on ancient anchors, see comment on Acts 27:17.

845. Wachsmann and Haldane, “Anchors,” 138. Anchors could, however, at least symbolize safety (Appian Hist. rom. 11.9.56). Paulinus of Nola Ep. 49.1–3 (cited in Davis, “Navigation,” 226) tells of a ship casting anchors in an island’s lee, but the winds soon sundered the anchors’ cables.

846. Bruce, Acts1, 463, cites a figure in Smith; also Appian Hist. rom. 8.18.123 (where Romans anchored by the stern) and (in the modern period) Lord Horatio Nelson (who followed the example of Acts 27; Abbott, Acts, 254).

847. Smith, Voyage, 135 (followed by Witherington, Acts, 771, who also notes that ancient ships were shaped similarly in the bow and the stern).

848. Hemer, Acts in History, 147; Bruce, Acts1, 463.

849. Bruce, Acts1, 463; Witherington, Acts, 764.

850. This may not be true in all cases. In some cases, it seems, they received as pay a portion of the profit (Wilson, personal correspondence Oct. 13, 2014, citing the Nomos Rhodiōn Nautikos).

851. Casson, Mariners, 195–96; cf. Davis, “Navigation,” 201. In at least hypothetical cases, one remaining aboard a ship that others have abandoned during a storm may become its owner (Hermog. Issues 40.20–41.13); but such an action is futile if the ship is doomed.

852. Often a single skillful person could be sufficient; see the hypothetical example in Cic. Inv. 2.154 in Davis, “Navigation,” 215. We might also allow for the possibility that Luke’s language is simply imprecise and not all the sailors belonged to the conspiracy; but their being needed to save the ship suggests that at least those who knew sailing adequately belonged to it.

853. A crew could be large, given the size of this ship (cf. Casson, Mariners, 209, citing Lucian, though concerning a much larger ship), but this objection against Luke’s interpretation is not very convincing. Davis, “Navigation,” 204, estimates “two dozen or more sailors” for one ship twice this size (noting four or five sailors for much smaller ships; cf. the limited number on 205n28, concerning Demosth. Or. 34.10), so the crew here includes perhaps a dozen hands (cf. thirteen for the midsize vessel on 205, noting Synesius Ep. 3.20–23). The dinghy’s size is harder to predict, but the fleeing sailors would not want to overload it. Perhaps Luke means skilled sailors as opposed to other hands (cf. Acts 27:27), speaking inexactly (as he often does). In an account in Paulinus of Nola Ep. 49.1–3, 12 (cited in Davis, “Navigation,” 226–27), however, a grain ship’s entire crew (save one, by accident) crowded into the skiff to escape. Presumably the “we” narrator knew the approximate number of hands, and he surely knew the size of the boat; but he does not supply sufficient details for us to resolve their relative sizes with any certainty.

854. Cf., e.g., the many fatalities when some tried to swim toward an unseen shore after dark (Livy 28.36.12).

855. E.g., Hanson, Acts, 249; Conzelmann, Acts, 219. Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 336, suggest that cutting off the boat “was the direct cause of the shipwreck,” since without it they could have ferried people to shore when the weather improved. But 276 people would also require much ferrying with much risk.

856. Davis, “Navigation,” 215 (also noting the use of tugboats at major ports).

857. So also Hemer, Acts in History, 148.

858. Davis, “Navigation,” 231, cites a fictitious account of survivors escaping in a boat swept terrifyingly through the night until it reached shore (Plaut. Rud. 2.3.36–41). Reading the text as depicting desperate measures for desperate circumstances, see, e.g., Marshall, Acts, 412; Bock, Acts, 739.

859. Smith, Voyage, 137, with examples; followed by Witherington, Acts, 771n85.

860. See Tannehill, Acts, 333. He complains (334) that Haenchen’s skepticism on this point creates “a new story more to” his liking.

861. The contingent of soldiers is probably fairly small (such assignments might include about ten; Pliny Ep. 10.27). But escape without conflict would be preferred to conflict, in any case.

862. Ach. Tat. 3.3.1–2 (trans. S. Gaselee, LCL, 141). Those in the boat began striking at those trying to enter, lest it be swamped by too many people (3.3.4).

863. Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 336, suggest that this was the best means of escape once the gale ended. But they may overestimate the strength of the anchors and may have estimated the duration of the gale more modestly than the sailors, who, after days being driven by it, had little hope of its swift diminution. The weather has been unpleasant for days (Acts 27:4, 7–8) and, now further into the dangerous sailing season, does not seem inclined to improve soon (28:2).

864. Modern readers may think of the failure to make optimal use of lifeboats on the Titanic: in emergency situations, many people rank personal survival or safety over that of others.

865. See Paulinus of Nola Ep. 49.1–3, 12 (cited in Davis, “Navigation,” 226–27, 231).

866. Mariners derived especially from a “low social stratum” (Davis, “Navigation,” 200), and sailors and even captains could be tortured in the course of investigating shipwrecks (201). Unlike shipowners and shipbuilders, sailors and even navigators lacked their own guild, even in major commercial centers such as Ostia (202).

867. Johnson, Acts, 454.

868. Courtesans served rich shipowners, e.g., Lucian Dial. C. 7 (Musarium and Her Mother ¶2), 296; 12 (Joessa, Pythias, and Lysias ¶1), 311; also ship’s officers, Dial. C. 14 (Dorio and Myrtale 2), 320; and other sailors, Dial. C. 14 (Dorio and Myrtale 3), 320.

869. Davis, “Navigation,” 201, noting that the later Nomos Rhodiōn Nautikos stipulates “penalties against predatory sailors for robbing other ships or merchants and passengers on board, for fighting against other sailors (with fist, stone and ax!), for killing other crew members, and more.” Ancient religion often involved offerings and rituals more than morality, but many people in antiquity did expect the gods to punish the wicked.

870. Davis, “Navigation,” 201–2, following Rauh, Merchants, 161–62.

871. Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 701 (emphasizing the few references, against Conzelmann; cf. Pervo, Acts, 662).

872. With also Witherington, Acts, 772n85. Petronius wrote shortly before Luke and was probably unknown to him; Achilles Tatius may depend on Petronius. Whether it was a motif before Petronius is impossible to know.

873. Cf. Hemer, Acts in History, 148n138.

874. A dinghy often promised at best a narrow hope for survival, yet also the only one (Davis, “Navigation,” 231).

875. Cf. Tannehill, Acts, 333; Hemer, Acts in History, 148; Witherington, Acts, 772. The principle that one who remains aboard an abandoned ship during a storm becomes the new owner (Hermog. Issues 40.20; 41.1–13) suggests the value of someone knowledgeable remaining aboard. Alternatively, Soards, Speeches, 129, thinks that the prohibition concerns unbelief: because God had already promised safety to those aboard (Acts 27:22–25), leaving the ship demonstrated unbelief. But is their faith necessary to fulfill the promise of 27:22–25, and is such faith generated under compulsion?

876. That Luke, through time spent with sailors that is suggested as a possibility above, could have learned of the plot is not impossible, but inference would seem likelier in this case, since they would not likely confide in anyone for whom there would be no room in the boat.

877. Polyb. 1.32.1–9 reports that when a Spartan complained about Carthaginian strategy, the generals summoned him and, being convinced of his knowledge, put him in charge of the troops (who cheered). (They won this battle; 1.34.1–12.)

878. Lentz, Luke’s Portrait, 94 (regarding this portrait as fictitious). Thomas, “Upside-Down,” may have a point in viewing Paul’s being in charge as part of Luke’s use of irony to subvert the social order.

879. Vespasian gave Josephus expensive gifts even while the latter remained in custody, out of respect for his prophetic gift (Jos. War 3.408). Cf. fear of a prophet (a divine agent) in Gen 20:7–8, although this was not always the response.

880. Luke’s verb for “letting down” can be used for acts of faith (Luke 5:4–5; Mark 2:4) but does not bear such connotations exclusively (cf. Acts 9:25), including in this context (27:17).

881. For cutting off such a boat during a storm, Johnson, Acts, 454, cites also Heliod. Eth. 5.27.6.

882. Witherington, Acts, 772 (citing Diog. Laert. 2.71; Lucian Peregr. 43–44; and Keener, Background Commentary, 402). See further comment in the introduction, above, to Acts 27 and esp. at Acts 27:21–26.

883. Johnson, Acts, 455 (citing Epict. Diatr. 4.1.92; 4.1.174; Diog. Laert. 2.71, 77; 2.130; 4.50; 6.74; 7.2; 9.68; cf. Hom. Od. 12.270–300; Lucian Tox. 20). See further comment in the introduction, above, to Acts 27.

884. On which see esp. Fitzgerald, Cracks, passim.

885. Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 696–97.

886. More often, and plausibly, some think that Luke styles the meal to evoke (albeit not constitute) the Eucharist (cf., e.g., Tannehill, Acts, 335; idem, Shape, 231; Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 699; Heil, Meal Scenes, 293–305; Pervo, Acts, 664; Jipp, Visitations, 35; cf. my view below). F. Martin, in Martin, Acts, 306, doubts a Eucharist here but notes that the church fathers’ application to that agenda is not surprising, since (306–7) they were often preaching homilies; without viewing this meal as the Eucharist, John Chrysostom draws lessons for the church (307).

887. Witherington, Acts, 772–73. Cf. Barrett, Acts, 2:1208–10; Jervell, Apostelgeschichte, 609 (also listing some commentators on both sides).

888. See also Dunn, Acts, 341. For thanksgiving at meals, see, e.g., Jub. 22:6; Sib. Or. 4.25–26; Jos. War 2.131; m. Ber. 6:1–6; Safrai, “Religion,” 802–3; Slater, “Kiddush”; after meals, cf. also Pesiq. Rab Kah. 28:2; b. Ber. 34b; y. Ter. 1:6; Finkelstein, Making, 333–84; Troster, “Quest”; perhaps at Qumran, Weinfeld, “Grace.”

889. Cf. Heil, Meal Scenes, 293–305, 312; Hamm, Acts, 118. As Kurz, Acts, 370–71, notes regarding echoes of the Lord’s Supper, “Luke’s purpose is to hint at the salvific effect of Paul’s example, not to claim that Paul actually celebrated the Eucharist with hundreds of non-Christians on a ship while waiting out a storm.”

890. Those who think that the historical Paul cared only for believers may have a harder time explaining how he converted nonbelievers; his extant writings, though occasional letters to churches, also betray a concern for outsiders at points (e.g., 1 Cor 14:24; 1 Thess 4:12).

891. Incidentally, in terms of application, it may also offer a model for caring engagement with nonbelievers as fellow human beings, an insight that has sometimes been in unduly short supply in some religious circles with which some readers may be familiar.

892. Aelius Aristides also speaks of his ship “being adrift for fourteen days, with no one on board being able to eat during that time (2:68 [Sacr. 2.68])” (Johnson, Acts, 455; also in Parsons, Acts, 358). This is a true account, written in the second century, long after Luke (i.e., the accounts must be independent). Some argue that most poor people in antiquity normally ate only one or, at most, two meals daily (Schneider, “Nutrition,” 919). Hyperbole is not impossible (allowed for in Parsons, Acts, 358); Arrington, Acts, 261, suggests that Paul’s words are a forceful way of saying that they have “not eaten properly,” rather than that they were without food altogether.

893. Keeping count of days at sea (as also in Acts 21:1; 27:19, 27) was apparently a common practice (Philost. Hrk. 6.3).

894. On anxiety among the causes for lack of sleep that are noted in ancient sources, see, on Acts 2:15, Keener, Acts, 1:872n111.

895. On causes of sleeplessness in ancient literature, see Keener, John, 841; fuller comment at Acts 2:14–15.

896. As opposed to the more “sectarian” worldview of churches under persecution (see John 15:18–25; Keener, John, 149–52, 1017–18; cf. also apocalyptic sources protesting the oppression of God’s people), Luke (like, e.g., many Jews in Asia) is comfortable with much Greco-Roman culture (see comment on Acts 19:31).

897. This is also plausible for one who has cultivated pastoral skills in nurturing and leading people. As one example, when Emmanuel Itapson, a Nigerian pastor, came as a student to Eastern Seminary in Philadelphia in 1996, I regularly found seminarians in his room baring their hearts to him simply because relating to people in a pastoral way was second nature to him.

898. Seventy-five percent of all NT uses of this final verb are Lukan, and of these, two-thirds appear in this context. All uses in earliest Christianity are physical (Acts 23:24; Luke 7:3; Matt 14:36; 1 Pet 3:20; 1 Clem. 9.4, echoing 1 Pet 3:20; 1 Clem. 12.5–6; Mart. Pol. 8.2).

899. Let. Aris. 45.

900. E.g., Mus. Ruf. 20, p. 126.8; Aeschines Embassy 74 (the city); Lysias Or. 2.66, §196 (soldiers fought for their people’s deliverance); Hermog. Inv. 1.1.98–99.

901. Xen. Anab. 5.2.24.

902. Aeschylus Suppl. 26.

903. E.g., Diod. Sic. 4.43.1; Ach. Tat. 3.5; Lucian Dial. G. 287; cf. a Jewish inscription praising God for deliverance at sea in Horsley, Documents, 4:113. Isis was “Lord” of rainstorms (a second-century C.E. aretalogy in Grant, Religions, 133, employing the masculine form for “Lord”).

904. Noah and his family were also “saved” in relation to water (Wis 10:4; Jos. Ant. 1.77, 79; 1 Pet 3:20).

905. Jameson, “Soteria.”

906. Cf. deliverance from present spiritual oppressors in Luke 8:36; liberation from them in 13:16; Acts 10:38.

907. Cf. weakness for battle among those who had missed breakfast (Polyb. 3.71.11–3.72.6); eating could help a weakened person regain strength (y. Ber. 2:7, §3). Accustoming oneself to deprivation, however, was often considered healthful (Val. Max. 2.5.6; Mus. Ruf. 9, p. 70.13–22; 20, p. 126.6–7, helping courage; Dio Chrys. Or. 6.8; Lucian Tim. 33; Max. Tyre 36.5; on rigor, see further comment at Acts 2:44–45).

908. Cf. b. B. Qam. 50a: God judges those close to him “for matters as light as a single hair” (Soncino). Publ. Syr. 186: “Even one hair has a shadow of its own” (trans. J. W. Duff, LCL, 39).

909. 1 Sam 14:45; 2 Sam 14:11; 1 Kgs 1:52; cf. Matt 10:30; b. B. Bat. 16a. Allison, “Hairs,” thinks that the passage in Matthew alludes to the omniscient God counting hairs (Pss 40:12; 69:4), thus knowing rather than protecting; there is some tension with the context, but some measure of protection may be in view even in that text (see Keener, Matthew, 327).

910. See also Luke 12:7 (Q, also in Matt 10:30), which emphasizes the large number of hairs (cf. Pss 40:12; 69:4). It is not clear that Luke 21:18 is meant to be harmonized fully with 21:16.

911. Perhaps originally wrapped to prevent its getting moldy or stale, and hence now still edible.

912. Rapske, Custody, 223–24; Casson, Mariners, 193.

913. Wheat normally is processed (e.g., into bread) before being preserved and eaten, especially helpful for the digestive systems of persons who have not eaten for two weeks.

914. The historical Paul apparently knew the tradition of Jesus’s eating with sinners (see Dunn, Theology of Paul, 192, on Gal 2:12, 14–15). On the motif in the Gospels, see, e.g., Keener, Historical Jesus, 211–12; and esp. Powell, “Table Fellowship,” 928–30, and sources discussed there.

915. So Jipp, Visitations, 255–56.

916. See Harland, Associations, 77; Boring, Berger, and Colpe, Commentary, 147; cf., e.g., Iambl. V.P. 21.98–99.

917. Apparently it was customary to “offer sacrifices in thanks for a safe return”—upon arrival (Casson, Mariners, 194). Here Paul expresses faith; his thanksgiving is for food, but it calls attention to faith in the God who will help them.

918. As also noted by others, including Haenchen, Acts, 707; Peterson, Acts, 694; Gilbert, “Acts,” 250–51; Schnabel, Acts, 1046.

919. Cf. Apost. Const. 7.26.4; Ambrosiaster Commentary on Paul’s Epistles (Vogels, 118; Bray, Corinthians, 102); Jub. 22:6; Sib. Or. 4.25–26; Jos. War 2.131; m. Ber. 3:3; 6:1–8:8.

920. Safrai, “Home,” 747; Neusner, Beginning, 23; cf. Pliny E. N.H. 22.68.138; in more detail, Lewis, Life, 68. Ancients typically regarded wheat as the most important kind of food besides wine (e.g., Diod. Sic. 4.3.5). Likewise, most of the ancient Near Eastern diet was cereals (Hopkins, “Cereals,” 479).

921. With Johnson, Acts, 455. That they were “encouraged” or “fortified” fits Paul’s earlier exhortation in 27:22, 25 (using the cognate verb; cognates appear elsewhere in the NT only at 24:10; Jas 5:13; in the LXX only at 2 Macc 11:26, but thirteen times in Josephus and thirty times in Philo).

922. Schnabel, Acts, 1046, suggests this or possibly an early morning roll call (27:33, 39). Normally passengers were responsible for their own food, but the circumstances of bread distribution may have dictated otherwise in this case.

923. Colson, “Triangular Numbers,” 72 (who Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 699n48, suggests may be the sole advocate of this position; though cf. C. Williams, Acts, 272–73); now also Pervo, Acts, 665; Twelftree, Paul, 267.

924. See Laroche, “Numbers”; on ancient theories about symbolic numbers, see Menken, Techniques, 27–29. Lucian Phil. Sale 4 parodies the Pythagorean emphasis on triangular numbers.

925. The occurrence in John 21:11 might be coincidental (see discussion in Keener, John, 1231–33); on the possibly more significant occurrence in Rev 13:18, see Rissi, Time, 76; Caird, Revelation, 176; esp. Bauckham, Climax, 390–94, 403–4.

926. Metzger, Textual Commentary, 499.

927. Dunn, Acts, 341, suggests a morning (Acts 27:33) roll call, in case some had been lost during the rough voyage and fasting.

928. Twenty-three is a prime number, but no more significant than seventeen or nineteen. There are sixteen square and more than twenty triangular numbers up to 276; given the various figures offered in Acts, the odds are fairly high of one randomly being triangular or having some other distinctive feature. Luke shows no discernible pattern of such numbers—that is, such explanations do not account for the rougher estimates in 2:41; 4:4; 19:19; or 21:38 or for the closer figures in 23:23; 27:28; or 27:33. The case is not like that of the doubly triangular number in Rev 13, which belongs to a work full of symbols.

929. As most concur (e.g., Conzelmann, Acts, 220; cf. C. Williams, Acts, 272–73).

930. Packer, Acts, 214, preferring the manuscripts saying “76.” This variant is improbable (see Metzger, Textual Commentary, 499–500).

931. Even Foakes-Jackson, Acts, 232, who prefers the unlikely variant “76,” concedes that the larger number is credible (citing Josephus).

932. Cf. Cary and Haarhoff, Life, 135; see comment on Acts 27:6, 18.

933. Casson, Mariners, 211, thinks that Paul’s ship sailed below capacity in passenger numbers (which might make the proportion of crew higher); given the lateness of sailing season, this is possible (though not certain).

934. Schnabel, Acts, 1046, has four years.

935. Casson, Mariners, 209. On the massive tonnage of Roman cargo ships, see further pp. 172–73, 191.

936. Cf. Hemer, Acts in History, 149, following Casson here. Hundreds could be aboard (Casson, Travel, 156).

937. With Tannehill, Acts, 335. The specific verb differs, here being rare in the NT (1 Cor 4:8; cf. Deut 31:20 LXX).

938. Bruce, Commentary, 517; Johnson, Acts, 455 (comparing Luke 12:42, which uses a NT hapax legomenon; but cf. instead Luke 3:17; 12:18; 16:7).

939. With Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 337.

940. See Rapske, “Travel,” 31–32; fuller comment on Acts 27:18.

941. See Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 337; Rapske, “Travel,” 32–33.

942. Casson, Mariners, 193.

943. Rapske, personal correspondence, Oct. 13, 2014.

944. Even assuming passengers helping the crew in passing up the sacks in “bucket-brigade” style, if one were to guess eight minutes from hold to sea for each bag nearest the deck, the process would require fifteen or sixteen hours; carriers working at multiple hatches would reduce this figure accordingly, but sacks stored deeper in the hold would also take longer to transport. As noted earlier, unloading a vessel in more orderly fashion sometimes took twelve days (Rapske, “Travel,” 31).

945. Rapske, “Travel,” 35, following esp. Rickman, “Grain Trade,” 261, 265; cf. Hirschfeld, “Ship of Paul,” 28 (also citing Rickman). On methods for keeping grain dry on ancient ships, see Fitzgerald, “Ship of Paul,” 37–38.

946. Davis, “Navigation,” 229.

947. When ships were destroyed, the creditors who underwrote the loans had to assume responsibility (Millett, “Maritime Loans”; Krampe, “Fenus nauticum,” 381). Some even willfully sabotaged unprofitable ships to escape the debt (Philost. Vit. Apoll. 4.32). In some sources, however, the pilot and owner received shares of the profit (Wilson, personal correspondence, Oct. 13, 2014).

948. Finegan, Apostles, 200.

949. Ibid., 202.

950. Conzelmann, Acts, 220. Topographic changes may account for this, but we do not know much about the condition of the beach even in the narrative.

951. Finegan, Apostles, 202 (noting that possible approaches to the bay nevertheless cohere fairly well with the soundings of Acts 27:28).

952. E.g., Packer, Acts, 214; Schnabel, Acts, 1044; note the summary of opinion in R. Williams, Acts, 164; this is the case, apparently, even with Haenchen (Acts, 707). An underwater survey for wrecks along the Maltese coast might provide more objective data, but this ship’s remains could have been swept out to sea (with much of its cargo having been discarded), especially over the centuries; and if a first-century ship were found, we could not be certain that it was Paul’s.

953. Heutger, “Paulus auf Malta,” argues for Mellieha Bay (the bay just north of the traditional Saint Paul’s Bay and not far south of the South Comino Channel separating Malta from the island of Comino) especially from διθάλασσον in Acts 27:41, but the sense of the term remains disputed; see comment on Acts 27:41.

954. Finegan, Apostles, 202.

955. See Friedländer, Life, 1:352; Casson, Mariners, 208. This is true even if it was not part of “the normal shipping route” (Haenchen, Acts, 707). Malta and Sicily were major targets for Alexandrian ships sailing from Crete, but reaching either by accident or mere coincidence would be difficult; together they comprised only roughly 5 percent “of the horizon as viewed from the western end of Crete” (Davis, “Navigation,” 224).

956. With Larkin, Acts, 376.

957. Cf. Hemer, Acts in History, 150–51; Conzelmann, Acts, 220; Johnson, Acts, 455–56.

958. Barrett, Acts, 1212, suggests that the anchors were released from the ropes, but simply releasing the ropes would be the simpler maneuver.

959. Throckmorton, “Shipwrecks, Anchors, and Paul,” 80.

960. If there would be confused and forgotten details in his eyewitness account, this could be the place to look for them: Luke might well have stowed any notes in a waterproof container by this point (though this action could also come after it is clear the ship is sinking in Acts 27:41).

961. See Rapske, “Travel,” 34n150.

962. BDAG, s.v. πηδάλιον (following Casson, Ships [1971 ed.], 224n2). On control by the κυβερνήτης, see, e.g., Lucian Indictment 2; on more than one rudder, see, e.g., Dio Chrys. Or. 75.10; Lucian Ship 6; on two rudders per ship controlled by the κυβερνήτης, see, e.g., Dio Chrys. Or. 77/78.7.

963. Casson, Mariners, 194; for the steering oars as early as the sixth century B.C.E., see p. 77. The irony of one person keeping the ship safe through a single tiller was not lost on ancients (e.g., Lucian Ship 6; Indictment 2; cf. Jas 3:4); on failure to use the rudder to steer the ship, leading to shipwreck, see, e.g., Apul. Flor. 23.2 (for the danger of an oversize rudder, see Apul. Apol. 19). One improvement in the Middle Ages was the replacement of the steering oars with a “handier stern rudder” (Casson, Mariners, 218).

964. Rapske, “Travel,” 33; the ropes used on ships were made of “flax, hemp, papyrus, or esparto grass” (Casson, Mariners, 193). Ships that lost their rudders might still survive except in a storm (Dio Chrys. Or. 75.10), but merchant ships probably had additional oars for emergencies (Casson, Mariners, 192).

965. Cf. Barrett, Acts, 1212.

966. Cf. Johnson, Acts, 455–56.

967. Casson, Mariners, 193, notes, “Sails were chiefly of linen, usually of oblong blocks of cloth sewn together . . . ; the edges were secured by a boltrope . . . and the corners reinforced by leather patches.” In earlier times, too, the sails were made of linen (40).

968. The artemon, which projected over the ship’s bows, was the foresail (Casson, Mariners, 194); although first explicitly attested in Roman times, it undoubtedly goes back to Hellenistic times (p. 190; cf. 79, 158). Most sails were square, but the foresail was triangular (195) and slightly smaller than the mainsail (79).

969. Rapske, “Travel,” 33. Large grain vessels could include two square sails (the large mainsail and a smaller sail); the foremast was slanted at an angle (Jeffers, World, 38). Bruce, Commentary, 467, compares Juv. Sat. 12.68–69.

970. Casson, Mariners, 194.

971. Aune, Environment, 129, calls it “obsolete,” but it recurs in contemporary texts (BDAG cites Philo Eternity 138; Jos. Life 165; Sib. Or. 8.348). Padilla, “Παιδεία,” 430, cites its usage in papyri.

972. Aune, Environment, 129; Conzelmann, Acts, 221; Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 701; Witherington, Acts, 764. Padilla, “Παιδεία,” 430, questions whether it is a deliberate imitation of Homer or simply reflects familiarity with the term used there. For the verb, BDAG adds Ap. Rhod. 1.1362; 2.352.

973. Some prows were rounded whereas others projected forward (Casson, Mariners, 192, 195), but most were rounded and, like sterns, “curved upward in graceful arcs” (192; for earlier versions of prows and sterns, see 76–77).

974. Conzelmann, Acts, 221 (comparing also the Latin phrase in Virg. Aen. 5.206, where a prow stuck fast). BDAG provides many references; perhaps most relevant is Pindar Pyth. 10.51–52.

975. Johnson, Acts, 449–50, cites Dio Chrys. Or. 7.2; Lucian Posts 2; True Story 1.6; Ach. Tat. 3.4. In Lucian Posts 1–2, sailors spin yarns of ships breaking up and survivors swimming ashore.

976. Ach. Tat. 3.4.3 (LCL, 143).

977. Fitzmyer, Acts, 782, notes that there are five proposals, though he favors “the northwest side of the strait near St. Paul’s Islands.”

978. See BDAG (viewing it as a point of land jutting out with the sea on either side; BDAG notes that it occurs in, e.g., Strabo 1.1.8; 2.5.22; Dio Chrys. Or. 5.9; Sib. Or. 5.334). The context in Dio Chrys. Or. 5.9, where the LCL translates διθάλαττα as “cross-currents” (LCL, 1:239), refers to shoals (Or. 5.8–10, esp. 5.9), as probably here.

979. Smith, Voyage, 143–47; followed by Bruce, Commentary, 518.

980. Smith, Voyage, 144; followed by Bruce, Commentary, 518; Hemer, Acts in History, 151. The beach did not quite fit, but Smith could explain this as due to erosion (Hemer, Acts in History, 150).

981. Witherington, Acts, 774.

982. Munck, Acts, 251; Conzelmann, Acts, 220; Johnson, Acts, 456; Larkin, Acts, 376–77; Witherington, Acts, 774; earlier, cf. Bede Comm. Acts 27:41a.

983. Witherington, Acts, 774; cf. Conzelmann, Acts, 220. Fitzmyer, Acts, 780, suggests that instead the term means “a place subject to crosswinds, rather than a geographical spot.”

984. That this portrayal has apologetic value need not be doubted; reliable characters in Luke’s narrative portray as immoral their arraignments for benefactions (Acts 4:9; 24:17; cf. 26:6–7).

985. See the objection of Haenchen, Acts, 708.

986. Soldiers could be beaten if a captive committed suicide; if the death was by accident, as could happen when one was swimming to shore, this must be proved by witnesses (Rapske, Custody, 32). Given the public and potentially deadly circumstances, they would need only prove that the prisoners died; but death by sword was counted more merciful than death by drowning (on the horror of capital punishment by drowning, see, e.g., Val. Max. 1.1.13; Livy 1.51.9; further discussion at Acts 27:20).

987. Ambrosiaster Commentary on Paul’s Epistles (Vogels, 294–95; Bray, Corinthians, 298) reads this danger into Paul’s earlier ministry (2 Cor 11:26).

988. Like the centurion (though not as close to Paul), the soldiers apparently respected Paul as a divine agent (Acts 27:31–32); on the religious interests of many soldiers, see comment on Acts 10:2. But even if they appreciated the hope that he provided, his prophecy of survival remained to be tested, and even if they were grateful, they might value their own lives more than his. Or they might have excepted Paul, but the centurion recognized that, once in Rome, they might not be able to readily explain the inconsistency.

989. As also he is the agent of preserving all those aboard in Acts 27:24, 31–32 (Abbott, Acts, 257).

990. E.g., Munck, Acts, 114; Ramsay, “Roads and Travel,” 386; Bruce, Commentary, 519; Dunn, Acts, 342. When an entire unit was blamed for a military failure, the majority might be required to club to death a small percentage of the unit, selected by lot (Le Bohec, “Decimatio”).

991. Fitzmyer, Acts, 780. Cf. an analogous idea in 1 Kgs 20:39–40.

992. People were not criminally liable for accidents (Robinson, Criminal Law, 16); intention was necessary for a crime (16–17, 49).

993. Rapske, Custody, 30. A guard lacked custodial liability if an object was destroyed by an “act of god” (“Custodia,” 1029, though addressing the law of obligations, not prisoners).

994. Rapske, Custody, 271.

995. Ibid.

996. Ibid.

997. A centurion who befriended a prisoner might rejoice at his survival (Jos. Ant. 18.231) so long as this did not risk the centurion’s own life (18.232–33). Luke contrasts the centurion’s “purpose” (27:43) with that of the soldiers by employing a noun and participle that are both cognate to the noun in 27:42.

998. Agreeing with Lang, “Self,” 171.

999. Le Bohec, “Disciplina,” 538 (citing Tac. Ann. 1.17.4; 1.18.1; 1.23.3–4; 1.32.1); for wanting to kill their leaders, e.g., Tac. Hist. 4.36; for killing the strictest centurions, Tac. Hist. 1.80. For mutinies and near mutinies, see, e.g., Vell. Paterc. 2.125.2; Quint. Curt. 4.10.4; 6.2.4; 7.2.31 (averted in 6.6.12; 7.1.4); Appian Bell. civ. 5.13.127–29; Tac. Hist. 1.80; 2.30, 44, 68; 3.21; 4.46, 56; Agr. 16; see also Campbell, “Mutiny.” Syrian auxiliaries, some of whom may be present in this mission from Caesarea, may have been particularly prone to mutiny (Fronto Pr. Hist. 12). For complaints, see, e.g., Sherk, §67, pp. 107–8 (P.Fouad 1.21; P.Yale 1528; from 63 C.E.). But money could help secure soldiers’ loyalty (Polyb. 11.25.8–10; Hdn. 4.7.4; 6.8.8; Jos. Ant. 19.129; cf. Appian Hist. rom. 7.1.2; Pliny Ep. 7.31.2; Suet. Jul. 67–69; Jos. Life 78); their own financial need sometimes generated their unrest (Xen. Anab. 7.6.11–22; 7.7.48; Polyb. 5.50.1; Diod. Sic. 33.22.1; Appian Hist. rom. 3.1.2; Bell. civ. 5.3.18; Tac. Hist. 4.19). On soldiers’ pay, see discussion at Acts 10:2. Centurions and tribunes also made special targets for enemies (e.g., Tac. Ann. 12.17). Suetonius may depict the current emperor, Nero, as indulging the military more than did his successor (Suet. Nero 8; 10; 43; Vesp. 8; cf. Luke, “Ideology”).

1000. Soldiers could also prove loyal to their centurions (see, e.g., Tac. Hist. 2.60).

1001. E.g., Hanson, Acts, 251; Barrett, Acts, 1215 (the μέν . . . δέ construction he cites does not affect the question of whether the “others” from the ship are human); cf. Haenchen, Acts, 708n8; Witherington, Acts, 774n103 (who regards this view as “less likely”).

1002. Modern forms of lifesaving do not appear to have been widely known. Stories of boys or others riding dolphins’ backs (e.g., Hdt. 1.24) are not relevant to human lifesaving; one could definitely not go on another’s back (Ael. Arist. Def. Or. 376, §125D); a lover might be able to rescue only his beloved’s body (Xen. Eph. Anthia 3.2).

1003. In Lucian True Story 2.47, the survivors of shipwreck managed to swim out with their weapons, but as a parody, this description may not pretend realism on this matter. Preparing to swim or fight, Caesar stripped but “bound a dagger to his thigh” (Vell. Paterc. 2.43.2, LCL).

1004. Vulnerable shipwreck survivors would not be inclined to trust potential criminals (cf. Phaedrus 4.23.16, depicting robbers looting what shipwreck survivors had salvaged).

1005. E.g., Jos. Life 15; Hom. Od. 5.388–89, 399, 438–41; 7.276–77, 280–81; 23.23–38; Keener, John, 1230; idem, “Vigor,” 564 (and cf. 567–68). Le Cornu, Acts, 1473, notes that the rabbis required fathers to teach their sons swimming (b. Qidd. 29a; 30b; Eccl. Rab. 9:9, §1). Given Paul’s age, he may have floated on something instead, but he did have some water survival experience (2 Cor 11:25). Swimming was rarely done as a sport, but it was a skill for fishing and other activities and, apparently, often done like the modern crawl, with alternating strokes (Decker, “Swimming”).

1006. For a later escape from battle by diving (here into a river) and swimming, see Val. Max. 3.2.11; the British auxiliaries, living near the sea, had notable facility in swimming (Tac. Agr. 18). Swimmers were sometimes preserved in the sea (Dio Chrys. Or. 64.10); sometimes those who fell overboard have made it safely to land (e.g., Dio Chrys. [if genuine] Or. 63.4).

1007. In Lucian True Story 2.47, the shipwrecked people carried whatever they could while swimming, but it is not clear that this is intended to be realistic.

1008. Lucian Tox. 21 claims that the swimmers remained alive in Athens when he wrote. In another likely true account, Agrippina, though injured, swam to the safety of some small boats in Tac. Ann. 14.5.

1009. Lucian Tox. 20–21. Cf. Paul’s night in the sea in 2 Cor 11:25.

1010. E.g., Hom. Od. 23.233–38 (most died); Livy 28.36.12; Prop. Eleg. 2.26.1–2; Longus 1.30; Xen. Eph. Anthia 3.2. For the dangers of swimmers’ drowning, see the story of Hero and Leander (e.g., in Musaeus Hero; alluded to, e.g., in Fronto Ad M. Caes. 3.13.3).

1011. My wife, who fled war as a refugee, informs me that she saw weakened people muster a final burst of strength if they were fleeing death.

1012. In today’s language, we would expect them all to be suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome for some time afterward.

1013. Certainly, ancients envisioned shipwrecks in which only some could have access to planks (note the philosophic debate regarding which of two swimmers should retain the one plank in Berthelot, “Problem,” 171–83).

1014. In a false story of Odysseus, he survived ten days in the sea by clinging to his destroyed ship’s mast (Hom. Od. 14.310–15).

1015. See the cognates in LXX Exod 27:8; 2 Kgs 12:9; 3 Macc 4:10; Song 8:9; Ezek 27:5. One relevant sense is a ship’s deck (as in 3 Macc 4:10), though tearing boards loose may have been difficult unless some had already been battered; wooden writing tablets would be too small for help.

1016. BDAG (citing Breusing, Nautik, 203).

1017. E.g., Hom. Od. 5.371; Ovid Metam. 11.559–61; Xen. Eph. Anthia 2.11; Lucian Tox. 20 (an apparently true story); Apoll. K. Tyre 12 (though most who grasped timbers nevertheless perished). Praeder, “Acts 27:1–28:16,” 701, cites some of the same texts and also Ach. Tat. 3.4.6–5.3 (Conzelmann, Acts, 221, also cites Xen. Eph. Anthia 2.11.10; to this, Johnson, Acts, 456, adds Test. Naph. 6:6).

1018. Stealing during the confusion of shipwreck was a more severe crime than looting things washed up on shore (Robinson, Criminal Law, 35; this differs from robbing shipwreck survivors, as in Phaedrus 4.23.16). In severe shipwrecks, however, even the wood might prove unsalvageable (Dio Chrys. Or. 7.51–52).

1019. Jennifer A. Miskov, personal correspondence, May 22–23, 2014 (Miskov’s PhD is in history, but she has extensive earlier experience as a surfer). Googling “surfing” + “Malta” yields information about sites (e.g., http://www.yourcarhiremalta.com/water-sports/surfing-malta/). Miskov adds (May 22, 2014), “Unless there is an undertow in a certain part, which is unlikely, the high surf will push people to shore and build momentum for them to get there. Also, sandbar means shallow water which also means bigger and more powerful waves breaking in that spot.”

1020. Cf. Porter, Paul in Acts, 38 (though this would also undermine Porter’s own thesis of the source).

1021. Though it is durable. Papyrus in book collections lasted, on average, for “a useful life of between one hundred and two hundred years” (Houston, “Evidence,” 251), and some were used for more than five centuries (250).

1022. Porter, Paul in Acts, 38–39n95. Casson, Mariners, 170, writes of amphoras used for transporting liquids, sometimes sealed by a cork stopper but more frequently one of “fired clay, set in mortar” (see also Docter, “Transport Amphorae,” 860–61, noting airtight containers much earlier than this period; for vast numbers of amphoras of oil imported to Rome, see also Lobell, “Talk”). In the ancient Near East (Wartke, “Pitch,” 304, from the fifth or fourth millennium B.C.E.) and widely in the Greco-Roman world (Burford-Cooper, “Pitch,” 305, including on “ship-timber”), pitch was used to seal substances against water. Even those stopped with cork, however, could not be used by Luke (even if they were dry inside): most were more than 3 ft. (1 m.) high; made of clay, the most common size weighed 50 or more pounds (23–24 kg.) even empty (Casson, Mariners, 170; Greeks’ “largest clay storage vessel” could exceed a man’s height, Docter, “Pithos,” 306). These were too big, too heavy, too wet on the inside, and too hard to reseal. Luke’s container would thus have to be smaller (see discussion below), but these amphoras do illustrate that watertight containers existed.

1023. Porter, Paul in Acts, 38–39n95. For the danger of dampness to papyrus, see, e.g., Galen Grief 19. Papyrus was available mainly from Egypt (Pliny E. N.H. 13.22.71; Ps.-Callisth. Alex. 1.8; for some elsewhere, see Pliny E. N.H. 13.22.72); on its manufacture, see Pliny E. N.H. 13.23.74–13.24.82 (esp. 13.23.74–77); Dimarogonas, “Pliny on Papyrus”; Aune, Dictionary of Rhetoric, 328. For writing on it with a reed pen, see, e.g., Milligan, Thessalonians, 121–24; Cary and Haarhoff, Life, 168; Bruce, Books, 13; Richards, Letter Writing, 29. Papyrus was also thought to have medicinal use (Pliny E. N.H. 24.51.88).

1024. See Pliny E. N.H. 13.24.79 (noting that the inferior kind dominant in Augustus’s reign was still used for ordinary correspondence, 13.24.80; most surviving papyri from Egypt would be the latter). Luke might have used the superior material for a book draft (though regular papyrus for mere notes).

1025. Dampness caused a wealthy second-century writer’s papyri to decompose and stick together; see Galen Grief 19.

1026. Sometimes, if one needed to swim, one would entrust one’s short tunic to a servant (Theophr. Char. 25.2), and so the idea of pulling a heavier cloak in water (especially if it was wool) is startling.

1027. Plutarch, recounting the same story, allows that “it is said” that Caesar protected the papers, claiming that arrows were falling around him (Caes. 49.4).

1028. E.g., Porter, Paul in Acts, 38n95.

1029. Nevertheless, Jennifer A. Miskov, who has considerable experience as a swimmer and surfer, informs me that holding one hand high in deep water is easily possible for a person who knows how to swim or even dog-paddle. At my request, she even carried out the maneuver to demonstrate that it was not difficult (personal correspondence, Oct. 19, 2014). How dry one could keep papers, between waves and splashing, is a different question (Oct. 20, 2014).

1030. See Keener, Acts, 3:2350–74.

1031. Smaller ones were probably available on board. Justin Leidwanger (personal correspondence, Oct. 9, 2014) notes the existence of “small bottles in the Roman world that could have been plugged the same way” one would “plug an amphora with a cork or ceramic stopper fitted with clay” or the like; “the common wares we traditionally find in galleys could have been stoppered with organic materials that did not survive”; unlike “the larger stoppered amphoras,” smaller containers with less density might not sink. Finding materials to seal the container would be a second issue if one did not come prepared. Certainly some materials (such as lead and resin) within the ship itself were used to keep out water (see Fitzgerald, “Ship of Paul,” 37–38), but these would be less accessible than the “planks” (Acts 27:44).

1032. Cf. Rapske, “Travel,” 34n151 (against Pervo and others); followed by, e.g., Le Cornu, Acts, 1471.

1033. Wilson, personal correspondence, Oct. 13, 2014.

1034. A parchment (μεμβράνας in 2 Tim 4:13, where they could be notebooks or Christian writings; cf. Ferguson, Backgrounds, 93; Skeat, “Parchments”; Lee, “Parchments”; Donfried, Thessalonica, 294, 298–99) could consist of papyrus or animal skins (BDAG; the latter usage more closely suits the term’s Latin origin). The latter were, however, more expensive (Kelly, Pastoral Epistles, 215; Watson, “Education,” 311), complicating matters if Luke had many notes beyond details of travels and basic notes supporting Paul’s legal innocence. Animal skins finally supplanted papyrus only in the fourth century (Aune, Dictionary of Rhetoric, 336), but they existed earlier. Galen had both some papyri (Grief 19) and parchment codices (31–36, esp. 33–35). On leather parchments, see Forbes, Technology, 5:61–64.

1035. Justin Leidwanger (personal correspondence, Oct. 9, 2014), notes that “most records we have . . . of writing on ships involve things like wax tablets or lead letters, obviously meant to be durable against water in that tough environment.” Also, there is evidence that not only the author of Luke’s “we” narratives but a number of others wrote at sea, at least compiling itineraries (see esp. Davis, “Navigation,” 189–97); list literacy was one of the most basic forms of literacy (Thomas, “Writing,” 28–30).

1036. Mark Wilson, personal correspondence, Oct. 13, 2014, suggests that Paul, given prior shipwreck experiences (2 Cor 11:25), could have advised Luke accordingly even had Luke not been aware of this himself. The voyages in the “we” material suggest that Luke would have known of Paul’s travel experiences as well as had some of his own.

1037. On notebooks, see, e.g., Richards, Letter Writing, 55–57. See comments on notes in Keener, Acts, 1:287–90 (for notebooks, see 1:198n235, 288n256, 289n258; 3:2541n2439).

1038. Even for letters; see Cic. Ad Brut. 3.1 (2.2.1); Fam. 3.3.2; Att. 13.29; Sen. Y. Ep. Lucil. 99; esp. Cic. Fam. 7.25.1. In rare emergencies, two copies of a letter might be sent by different means to make sure that at least one reached its destination; Brutus notes that he received both (Cic. Fam. 11.11.1). Cf. duplicate copies in Galen Grief 22–23a (though those in 21–22 were specifically requested).

1039. Cic. Att. 6.7 (though these are official records, because he was governor).

1040. See Bauckham, Eyewitnesses, 331–32; Elliott, Feelings, 44–45 (citing, e.g., Izard, “Relationships,” 22); Redman, “Eyewitnesses,” 184; note limitations in Allison, Jesus, 7n40; and the exception cited in Woodman, Rhetoric, 18–22.

1041. Johnson, Acts, 456, compares Ael. Arist. Or. 2.12 (a later work). That Luke omits “we” here is curious, unless he emphasizes the safety of the prisoners (Acts 27:42). That all (out of 276) should have survived seems remarkable (cf. Num 31:49), but some incidents in modern times render it plausible (e.g., Harriet Tubman’s never losing a slave or any of the eight hundred Union troops whom she guided on later raids, Sterling, Sisters, 259). Some of my wife’s refugee escape accounts also astonish me, though with fewer persons involved; for accounts of protection miracles, cf., e.g., Balcombe, Door, 68–69; see further Keener, Miracles, 274–75n68; even (not noted there) reports of assailants suddenly becoming unable to see their prospective victims, from Pastor Massamba of Madouma parish, interviewed by Dr. Médine Moussounga, June 26, 1999; a different (larger-scale but secondhand) incident reported to Médine Moussounga on Sept. 14, 1999; and Józef Bałuczyński, provided for me by Dr. Rob Starner, Sept. 1 and 14, 2014.

1042. Cf. Miles and Trompf, “Luke and Antiphon”; pace Rapske, “Travel,” 43–44; see comment on Acts 28:4–6. Even today, many regard the survival of nearly all people in a major accident as “miraculous” (see Vivian Sequera, “‘Miracle’ in Colombia Crash: Woman Dies, 130 Live,” Associated Press, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100816/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_colombia_plane_crash; cf. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11187166).

1043. See Witherington, Acts, 769; and others (see comment below, on Acts 28:4–5).

1044. See also, e.g., Puskas, “Conclusion: Investigation,” 151–52. Thus some compare the entire storm sequence with Jesus’s passion; Clabeaux, “Viper,” argues that Paul’s snakebite offers even closer parallels. For Luke’s apologetic for Paul, see Keener, “Apologetic”; such apologetic was important as early as 2 Cor 2:14–7:4, where (in ch. 3) Paul uses synkrisis to compare apostolic ministry with Moses (treated in Keener, Corinthians, 168–69, and many other sources).

1045. Bruce, Commentary, 470 (citing Galen Si quis optimus medicus est 13; following Hobart, Medical Language, 288–89).

1046. Cf. πρήθω in Num 5:21, 22, 27 LXX; Jos. Ant. 3.271.

1047. Hobart, Medical Language, 50; see, e.g., SIG 1179.15; BDAG.

1048. For “burn,” see also, e.g., Jos. Ant. 17.274, 291; the single Euripides fragment (from his Syleus) cited in Philo Alleg. Interp. 3.202; Jos. 78; Good Person 99 (though Philo employs the term elsewhere for swelling in Spec. Laws 3.62, with reference to Num 5, as in Jos. Ant. 3.271).

1049. Hobart, Medical Language, 50.

1050. In the LXX, Neh 8:11; 3 Macc 2:20; 4 Macc 4:11; Ps 144:14; Wis 7:3; 13:16; 17:15; cf. also Test. Job 30:1; Jos. War 6.64; Ant. 5.27 (BDAG). The term θηρίον is pervasive (thirty-eight NT uses, esp. in Revelation; 131 times in the LXX; though Hobart, Medical Language, 51, who emphasizes its medical application to serpents).

1051. See Witherington, Acts, 779n129 (noting Horsley, Documents, 2:20ff., §2); see discussion of authorship in Keener, Acts, 1:402–22, esp. 414–16. Today, see esp. discussion in Weissenrieder, Images.

1052. Today’s medical terminology is probably more apt to be technical than in antiquity.

1053. Spencer, “Odyssey in Acts,” emphasizes Paul’s development and challenges on islands; but of course, a seafarer would necessarily visit islands.

1054. BDAG cites Diod. Sic. 15.12.2; Strabo 6.2.11; 17.3.16; Ps.-Scylax Periplum maris interni 94 (Fabricius, 34); and inscriptions.

1055. Fitzmyer, Acts, 782.

1056. Contrast the islands that Greeks report in the Adriatic (in mari Hadriatico) that are called the Electrides—which do not exist (Pliny E. N.H. 37.11.32); on the island of lotus-eaters, see comment on Acts 27:17; for real versus novelistic geography, cf. again Keener, “Official.”

1057. E.g., Acworth, “Where Was Paul Shipwrecked?”; Meinardus, “Shipwrecked in Dalmatia.” Cf. the argument against this site already in Abbott, Acts, 257.

1058. With, e.g., Barrett, Acts, 1219–20.

1059. Witherington, Acts, 775, also notes that Malta, unlike Mljet, was on the grain route for Alexandrian ships. Although this observation fits the vessel’s trajectory, we should remember that the ship did not end up in Malta voluntarily!

1060. E.g., Hemer, “Euraquilo and Melita”; Pesch, Apostelgeschichte, 2:297; Rapske, “Travel,” 37–43; Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 340; Bruce, Commentary, 520–21; idem, Acts1, 469; Fitzmyer, Acts, 782; Peterson, Acts, 698.

1061. Pliny E. N.H. 3.26.152 (see LCL, 2:115 n. b). For the other Malta (Melita), see 3.8.92 (in the section on Sicily, 3.8.86–3.9.94, fitting Luke’s location, Acts 28:12).

1062. Pliny E. N.H. 3.26.151.

1063. Strabo 7, frg. 50a; 10.3.19.

1064. Pliny E. N.H. 4.9.32.

1065. Not as far north as Mljet but still far north of Crete. This position is favored (and extensively and carefully argued) by Warnecke, Romfahrt des Paulus; Suhl, “Seeweg” (on the normal sea route for Alexandrian ships, but as noted, this is not completely relevant here).

1066. E.g., Schwank, “Nacht”; idem, “Spurensuche auf Kefalonia”; Sant and Sammut, “Doch auf Malta”; Wehnert, “Gestrandet”; idem, “Insel Kephallenia.”

1067. Pliny E. N.H. 4.12.54.

1068. Rapske, “Travel,” 42.

1069. They allegedly drink by facing the windy sea with their mouths open (Val. Max. 1.8.ext. 18; Wardle, Valerius Maximus, 286, compares Arist. Mir. ausc. 9 and notes the claim in Aelian Nat. An. 3.32 that they do not “drink for six months”).

1070. The proximity of the modern island of Kefallinía, in the Ionian Sea, to the Greek coast would make nonsense of the narrative, and its proximity to Ithaca would make lack of more explicit identification (which could be helpful for Homeric allusions) at least unusual.

1071. The standard encyclopedia distance, presumably referring to the shortest distance from Malta’s northernmost point to Sicily. Strabo 17.3.16 places Malta (Μελίτη) 500 stadia from Cossurus, which is the island opposite the Selinus River in Sicily. For Pliny the Elder’s coordinates, see N.H. 3.8.92.

1072. Supposed relics of St. Paul in Malta drew seventeenth-century travelers’ attention (Freller, “Evasissemus,” unfortunately rooting this approach in Luke’s narrative), but the traditions about Paul on Malta are much older than this.

1073. Excavations have likely confirmed the site (Wardle, Valerius Maximus, 128; Trump, “Malta,” 403). Cicero stayed in Malta but had to leave there during his banishment (Att. 3.4), and he went to Malta during part of the civil war (10.9). Cicero claims that the Phoenicians had never bothered the site; Phoenicians had their own goddesses, however (e.g., Hdn. 5.6.4), and so Juno is probably simply the Roman identification. On ancient Malta, see also Sagona, Gregory, and Bugeja, Antiquities; Sagona, Archaeology; Sammut, Monuments; Lewis, Ancient Malta; idem, Paths; Goulder, Pavements; Mahoney, History; earlier, Boisgelin de Kerdu, Malta (focused on a later period); Caruana, Pottery. With respect to medical practices on Malta, with possible relevance to the illnesses described below, see Savona-Ventura, Medicine in Malta.

1074. Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 340, compare the island’s dogs in the modern era.

1075. Salmon, Boardman, and Potter, “Melita.”

1076. Goodenough, Symbols, 2:57. Apparently, the Jewish presence was not large, but the Jewish people there spoke Greek (see CIJ 1:471, §655).

1077. Bruce, Commentary, 521, entertaining a suggestion by J. R. Harris from 1909–10 (rightly rejected by Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 340).

1078. See esp. Jipp, Visitations, 257–60 (for the stereotype, see 40–42). Greeks held both positive and negative views of barbarian character; although Luke’s view of their religious perspective may be open to more debate (Acts 28:4, 6, though such sentiments appear among other peoples in his writings, e.g., 14:11; Luke 13:2, 4), he certainly provides a favorable view of their kindness here, using the same language as for that of Julius. Luke thus seems to lie toward the positive side of the Greek spectrum on the question.

1079. Readings from many Asian and other cultures today grasp the importance of hospitality more quickly than do many Western readings; see, e.g., Nguyen, “Asian View.”

1080. Pindar Ol. 13.3; in the ancient Near East, see Gordon, Near East, 200.

↑ Back to top