The Official’s Communication with Philip
5
A Novel Official in Acts 8:27?
Comparing Acts and Ancient Novels
How historical is Luke’s narrative concerning the African official? Although we lack external sources that confirm or disconfirm Philip’s meeting with the official, we do have evidence by which we can evaluate the claim that the account fits ancient novels rather than history.
The Debate
Some scholars claim that the account reflects the style of legend,⁴²⁴ but this judgment appears subjective, since ancient historians used many of the same narrative techniques employed by storytellers and novelists.⁴²⁵ As Barrett points out, “There is no means of checking the historicity of the narrative unless it can be assumed that angels do not exist or that they do not order missionaries about or provide transport for them.”⁴²⁶ Whether or not it pleases modern readers, most of Luke’s contemporaries assumed such events not only in novels but in their own real world. Others have suggested that the story is “completely mythical” because so many details have symbolic value;⁴²⁷ but parallels between different accounts in Plutarch show that stories laden with narrative connections and allusions could have historical bases.⁴²⁸
Other scholars have countered with various arguments in favor of the historical accuracy of this narrative (not least of which is the overall historical genre of Acts).⁴²⁹ If Philip did meet a pilgrim from Nubia, such a pilgrim might well have been a person of means to make such a journey.⁴³⁰ If Philip was Luke’s oral source, as 21:8–10 might well suggest,⁴³¹ Luke may have known and wished to reveal to his audience an event that prefigured the church’s official story in Acts 10. Other scholars argue forcefully from the apparent narrative tension with Luke’s account of Cornelius that Luke would not likely have invented this account, though he certainly enlists it to good effect once he has it.⁴³²
Here, however, I focus on a particular literary question. Richard Pervo has argued that Luke includes the story of the African official because the latter was “exotic,” being from a distant and fabled land.⁴³³ By contrast to this approach, Luke’s narrative lacks the fictitious elaborations about a distant land characteristic of reports in novels and novelistic sources. Luke’s details, sparse as they are, display a higher proportion of accuracy than in even many historians’ speculations; they certainly lack the colorful but inaccurate depictions common in fiction.
The Official’s Nation (8:27)
Although writers often engaged in fanciful tales about distant lands beyond the realm of corroboration (cf., e.g., the later “Wonders beyond Thule”), Luke’s account takes place in the Roman province of Syria, not a distant land impossible to verify. Often people confused material about distant lands (e.g., the “Ethiopian” Trogodytae with northern Troglodytae, or cave-dwellers),⁴³⁴ but others reported data accurately, and Luke’s report tends to match these more accurate reports.
For example, the Kandake is clearly a historical personage (or series of persons), in contrast to mythical Memnons or exotic novelistic details such as appear in Heliodorus’s Ethiopica. My focus here will be to compare the treatment of “Ethiopia” in myth and in history and to show that Luke’s brief data about “Ethiopia” fit history rather than myth. While myth and fiction could draw on valid historical information, they usually included historically impossible material as well. Were Luke composing novelistically (in contrast to the historical genre in which he writes), we should not expect him to know, any better than other fictitious storytellers did, which sort of source was which.
At a minimum, Luke’s sparse portrayal of the official’s nation fits historical fact at most of the few points it offers. The Greek title “Ethiopia” technically included all of Africa south of Egypt,⁴³⁵ but the Kandake’s title has convinced nearly all scholars that the Nubian kingdom of Meroë is specifically in view here.⁴³⁶ James Bruce discovered Meroë in 1722, and John Garstang’s work (1909–1914) identified the site archaeologically.⁴³⁷
That the treasurer is journeying southward toward Gaza would surprise no one and probably cannot be counted either way in the argument. Meroë’s Nubia was what was then a centuries-old black African kingdom between Aswan and Khartoum, the two leading cities of which were Meroë and Napata.⁴³⁸ People in the Mediterranean world depicted “Ethiopia” as near⁴³⁹ or directly south⁴⁴⁰ of Egypt, likewise describing Meroë as south of Egypt.⁴⁴¹ Such basic information was, of course, widely available; even a later novelist who fictionalized freely about Ethiopia recognized its capital as Meroë.⁴⁴²
Information and Myths
As we have noted, Richard Pervo has argued that Luke includes the story of the African official because the latter was “exotic,” being from a distant land;⁴⁴³ but whatever appeal a remote land might have for the story, Meroë was a real place, and Luke does not elaborate at any length on the location. Whereas many indulged in wild speculations about exotic distant lands, both fictitious and real, Luke avoids adding speculations; while he is interested in the symbolic spread of the gospel to the ends of the earth, his interest is not in fact “exotic.”
Unlike Luke, even some nonfiction writers speculated, in some cases more plausibly than others. Based on their knowledge of the Sahara, some Romans thought that “Ethiopia” and the interior of Africa were mainly desert (Seneca Nat. Q. 3.6.2; Dial. 5.20.2), just as much sand lay between Ethiopia and Egypt (Seneca Nat. Q. 1.pref.9); all knew that it was hot (Arrian Ind. 6.7).⁴⁴⁴ Some thought that Ethiopia north of Meroë lacked trees (Pliny Nat. 12.8.19), except for those yielding cotton (13.28.90).⁴⁴⁵ For lack of more accurate data, many writers simply linked Ethiopia with India, comparing their rains and crocodiles (Arrian Ind. 6.8). But a real, first-century expedition sent in the time of Nero confirmed that desert began giving way to foliage around Meroë, with more forest and even elephant and rhinoceros tracks (Pliny Nat. 6.35.185).
In contrast to information and at least plausible surmises, some exotic “knowledge” was pure invention designed to “sell” effectively on a popular market.⁴⁴⁶ Polybius complained about the fables invented by various writers about Ethiopia (3.38.1, 3) and other distant locations (34.5.1–12; 3.57.1—59.9, especially 3.57.1–9; 3.58.2) in his day. Thus the Ethiopians were said to mine metal by pulling it up only by magnets (Silius Italicus 3.266–67).⁴⁴⁷ One swift monster considered native to Ethiopia supposedly had a lion’s body with a human face, and three rows of teeth useful for devouring humans.⁴⁴⁸ Ultimately writers often mixed genuine and fictitious information, lacking resources to distinguish them: thus Ethiopia produced not only hyenas and monkeys, but also “winged horses armed with horns.”⁴⁴⁹
Pliny the Elder offers some of the most thorough information about what the Roman world thought of Meroë in Luke’s era. In Nat. 6.35.178–80, he lists towns and peoples reported south along Nile to Meroe, but notes (181) that most no longer exist, as attested by Nero’s scouts who found there only desert. While researching his work on Ethiopia, one Greek writer allegedly lived in Meroë for five years (6.35.183). Nero’s scouts found few buildings in Meroë (6.35.185); its sizeable population was apparently spread out.
The Roman world claimed knowledge of some other African, “Ethiopian” regions in addition to Meroë, sometimes with the same sort of admixture of fact and fiction found in its reports about Meroë. Besides north African regions and Axum, these included explorations in west Africa in the second century BCE, likewise preserved for us in Pliny the Elder (Nat. 5.1.9–10). Discoveries included forests (5.1.9) and rivers with crocodiles (5.1.9–10). Elsewhere in Africa, after a desert and the Egyptian Libyans, came the “white Ethiopians”; and after them, “the Ethiopian clans of the Nigritae, named after the river . . . ”⁴⁵⁰
But the further Pliny moves from his known world, the less certain (and often more skeptical) we can be of his information. He speaks of mute, snake-eating cave-dwellers (5.8.45);⁴⁵¹ the naked Gamphasantes (5.8.45); the Blemmyae, whose mouth and eyes are on their chests (an unfortunate necessity because they lack heads; 5.8.46); and leather-footed people who crawl rather than walk, along with Satyrs and other creatures (5.8.46).
Even around Meroë, he assures us, strange peoples lived: on the east some flat-faced peoples lack noses; some had neither mouth nor nostrils, but one opening both for breathing and for sucking in fluids through “oat straws,” using gestures instead of speech (Pliny Nat. 6.35.187–88). Likewise (but now again more reliably), some also report a race of Pygmies closer to where the Nile originates (Pygmaeorum; 6.35.188).⁴⁵² All quadrupeds around “Nubian Ethiopia” (Nubaei Aethiopes), including elephants, lacked ears; a still more distant people “have a dog for a king and divine his commands from his movements” (6.35.192; LCL 2:481).⁴⁵³ Some plants around Meroë were useful medicinally, whereas others caused suicidal madness.⁴⁵⁴ A mineral category including diamonds was found in mines near Meroë (Pliny Nat. 37.15.55), though also in India and Arabia (Pliny Nat. 37.15.56).
Although all educated people knew of Africa south of Egypt, some of the most widely circulated stories about particular Africans south of Egypt belonged to myth and legend. One of the most popular characters was Memnon, though many located his Ethiopia in the “east,” the land of the dawn.⁴⁵⁵ (Some later writers, however, also associate him with Egypt.)⁴⁵⁶ Dawn, a goddess who lived in the east, consorted with the mortal Tithonus and bore him two sons, including Memnon, in Ethiopia (Hesiod Theog. 984–85; Apollodorus Bib. 3.12.4).⁴⁵⁷ Memnon was black (nigri, Virgil Aen. 1.489),⁴⁵⁸ and Odysseus claimed that Memnon was the handsomest man he had ever seen (Homer Od. 11.522). By all accounts, he was a mighty warrior, though he finally succumbed to Achilles (Apollodorus Epit. 5.3).⁴⁵⁹ In some versions, after Achilles slew Memnon, Zeus made the latter immortal (Aethiopis 1–2).⁴⁶⁰ Pliny reports the view of some that birds fly annually from Ethiopia to fight over Memnon’s grave at Troy, and that another source claims that the birds do the same around his palace in Ethiopia (Pliny Nat. 10.37.74).⁴⁶¹ For centuries his death remained a subject for Greek art and of rhetorical descriptions thereof (Philostratus the Elder Imagines 1.7).
Some suggested that the Ethiopians originated astrology.⁴⁶² Others claimed that they stole their wisdom from India (Philostratus Vit. Apoll. 6.11), from which they were expelled for murdering many Indians, including King Ganges, the river’s son (3.20). Ethiopian sages could make the trees salute Apollonius (6.10); after Apollonius argues that the Indian sages are superior to them (6.5–11), the youngest of the Ethiopian sages follows him as a disciple (6.16). Ethiopians were as wise due to their warm climate as Scythians were fierce due to their harsh climate.⁴⁶³
The Roman public proved infatuated with any stories about Ethiopia after the return of Nero’s expedition (61–62 CE).⁴⁶⁴ By contrast, Luke (versus, say, the later novelist Heliodorus) does not even describe Ethiopia; we know that Nubians were a real people (unlike Amazons), and Kandake was a real queen. Comparison with ancient fictions show us that Nubia would be of interest to Luke’s audience; but unlike some other locations that fictitious reports claim, Nubia was not fictitious. Far from indulging speculations about distant lands, Luke stays close to the more sober model of historiography. Though he could not have known which reports of his contemporaries were reliable and which were not, what he reports (in contrast to what many others report) does not contradict what we know.
Exotic Analogies
Against the claim that Luke would invent the African official because he hails from an unverifiable, “exotic” land, Luke’s brief report is barely comparable to sources genuinely interested in exotic matters. Many Greeks had long enjoyed speculating about distant, exotic lands, where life differed from what was known as far as their imaginations could allow. Comparison with some other peoples helps set their speculations about Ethiopia in context. In the far north lived the Hyperboreans,⁴⁶⁵ who enjoyed such longevity that finally, when they tired of living, they would banquet and then hurl themselves into the sea.⁴⁶⁶
Likewise, some claimed that India had rivers of milk, honey, wine, and olive oil,⁴⁶⁷ and people ate the lotus that grew without need for cultivation;⁴⁶⁸ their Brahmin sages drank from the “fountain of truth,” making them incapable of lying.⁴⁶⁹ Ants larger than foxes dig gold, and at midday, when the ants retreat underground due to the heat, Indians steal their gold, often leading to ensuing battles with the ants.⁴⁷⁰ Arrian had such fantasies in mind when he complained about unverified tales of water monsters, griffins, and gold-mining ants in India (Alex. 5.4.3).
Speculation (mixed with more accurate knowledge)⁴⁷¹ had also been rife about the Scythians, because they were remote enough⁴⁷² that knowledge about them was limited. Thus some felt that Scythia was too cold for thunderbolts, just as Egypt was too hot for them.⁴⁷³ One plant there reportedly preserved one from hunger and thirst, so long as one kept it in one’s mouth.⁴⁷⁴ In their land, a wild country,⁴⁷⁵ one hairy animal changed its color to blend in with its surroundings.⁴⁷⁶
Another major area of exotic geographic speculation involved the renowned Amazons, though by this period they are more often mentioned with regard to the past. Amazons were essentially the opposite of what Greeks thought of ordinary women, hence a fertile ground for imagination. It was thought that Amazons had once subdued much of Asia and Europe (Diodorus Siculus 2.44.2–3);⁴⁷⁷ it was more difficult for more recent people to believe such reports, one historian opined, because their strength had died out (Diodorus Siculus 2.46.6).
Most ancient historians and other writers took for granted the historical authenticity of the Amazons.⁴⁷⁸ Herodotus assumes the existence of Amazons.⁴⁷⁹ Xenophon did not see any Amazons in the east, but notes that they captured a man with weapons like those attributed to the Amazons.⁴⁸⁰ Pompey’s Asian captives included women thought to be Amazons; but it was uncertain whether they belonged to a separate kingdom or these captive “barbarians” simply called any warrior women “Amazons.”⁴⁸¹ Later, Strabo still apparently believes in Amazons, but thinks that, despite various claims, no historian in his day really knows their location.⁴⁸² Arrian reports that some in Alexander’s day claimed the existence of Amazons,⁴⁸³ but suspects that they must have died out by Alexander’s day, since he did not run into them.⁴⁸⁴
In the second century CE, Pausanias still treats them as real figures, citing earlier historians.⁴⁸⁵ Some philosophers offered arguments that depended on their authentic existence.⁴⁸⁶ Others proved more skeptical about their existence, though sometimes simply because such warlike women seemed to them unthinkable.⁴⁸⁷ Against their existence, although Greek art contains many Amazons, they do not appear in the art of other peoples, for whom Amazons would also have been a matter of interest.⁴⁸⁸ By contrast, Luke offers no mythical speculation about “exotic” peoples.
Luke’s Plausible Details
The few features Luke reports about the official relevant to his culture appear both in historical and novelistic works, but what is significant is that, in contrast to novelistic works, Luke offers no essential claims about the official that are inherently improbable.
A Meroitic Treasurer
Luke’s claim that the African was an official is not implausible. The journey was a significant one; any of Luke’s contemporaries who derived information from sources such as Herodotus might expect Meroë to be nearly a two months’ journey south of Elephantine, and more exotic expanses yet two months further south (Herodotus 2.29–32).⁴⁸⁹ As noted above, if Philip did meet a pilgrim from Nubia, such a pilgrim might well have been a person of means to make such a journey.
To supervise the queen’s wealth was no small matter, given the famous wealth of Meroë.⁴⁹⁰ Meroë was known for its wealth (Diodorus Siculus 1.33.1–4),⁴⁹¹ hence a novelist could claim that Ethiopians cared little for gold or jewels, heaps of which the royal palace had in storage (Heliodorus Eth. 9.24).⁴⁹² Its wealth was not, however, purely novelistic. At about one square mile (2.59 square kilometers or 640 acres), it is, apart from Egyptian cities, “the earliest large-scale city” we know of in Africa.⁴⁹³ Although plunderers ravaged much of Meroë’s wealth over the centuries, excavators have found many expensive imports, as well as hoards of gold jewelry.⁴⁹⁴
Even those writing fictitious geography recognized the strategic location for trade (cf. Xenophon Eph. 4.1), but again, this connection was not itself fictitious. As the link between the Mediterranean world and Egypt on the one hand and the wealth of Africa’s interior on the other, Meroë was strategically positioned for trade.⁴⁹⁵ Not far from Meroë was the strategic horn of East Africa, from which the Axumite empire would eventually rise to challenge Meroë’s dominance.
Greeks apparently had widespread contacts with Africa south of Egypt as far back as the Minoan period;⁴⁹⁶ Nubia’s contacts with the northern Mediterranean world were even more prominent in the Roman imperial period.⁴⁹⁷ “Ethiopia” was considered a source for ebony (Paus. 1.42.5) and ivory,⁴⁹⁸ though at this time some elephants also existed in North Africa.⁴⁹⁹ Ships trading in Roman Egypt would make “a two year round trip” voyage along the east African coast “as far south as Zanzibar,” purchasing “ivory, tortoise shell, myrrh and incense” en route.⁵⁰⁰
Naturally the nation’s prosperity also affected that of the queen, whose treasurer this official is. Meroë’s art typically depicts their queens as laden with jewels and many-fringed robes, and notably corpulent; their wide girth, probably intended as a display of prosperity, persisted in representations from the third century BCE to the fourth century CE.⁵⁰¹
Queen Candace
Presumably the queen whom the official served worshiped traditional deities of Meroë; nevertheless, she (and perhaps her society) must have known and tolerated Jewish faith. The treasurer could hardly have taken an excursion for months, along with his presumed entourage, without the queen’s approval (cf. Neh 2:5–8).
Most scholars, including nearly all commentators on Acts,⁵⁰² hold that “Candace” (pronounced kan-dak’e) was not the queen’s name but her dynastic title, presumably comparable to Egypt’s Pharaoh or Ptolemy;⁵⁰³ Pliny claims that this name was passed on to each queen (“through a succession of queens for many years,” Nat. 6.186).⁵⁰⁴ Although Greek and Roman authors thought it a proper name, it is a Meroitic construction, kdke or ktke, from “woman” (kd) and the titular suffix –ke.⁵⁰⁵ Historically, we know of several Candaces from the late first century BCE to the mid-first century CE; the title seems to stop in the mid-first century CE.⁵⁰⁶ This observation could suggest that Luke’s source predates that time and the time of Luke’s own writing, though we dare not infer too much from it (since Greco-Roman writers later than he continued to employ the title).
Because the kings were considered sons of the sun god (similar to ancient Egypt’s pharaohs), Bion of Soli claims that they did not specify their fathers, but only their mothers, the mother of each king being called the Candace (Aethiopica 1).⁵⁰⁷ Because of the king’s holiness, it was thought, the queen was then left with tasks of secular administration.⁵⁰⁸ Nero’s scouting expedition claimed that a queen ruled Meroë.⁵⁰⁹ As late as Eusebius, the Roman Empire believed that queens ruled in Meroë (Euseb. H.E. 2.1.13).⁵¹⁰
Though not entirely accurate, Greco-Roman conceptions of this queen were close enough for ordinary purposes.⁵¹¹ Nubian society was not matriarchal, but its queens were wealthy and did exercise significant power, sometimes as regents for sons.⁵¹² One scholar argues that “Candace” appears to have been “a corruption of a Meroitic title (kdke) which was borne by all the royal consorts or queen-mothers of Kush; it does not specify a queen regnant.”⁵¹³ From a minimalist perspective (that is, based on only the extant evidence and not inferences from it), though “at least five queens” reigned directly “during the latter centuries of the Kushite dynasty,” no two of these known queens are known to have “reigned in succession, and it is not certain that they bore the title kdke . . . ”⁵¹⁴
Did Luke’s informant (again, possibly Philip) know the details of the Candace, or did he fill in this information relevant to the official’s position based on the popular Greco-Roman view of his era? “Candace” was the title by which she was known to the Greco-Roman world, and Adams concurs that it was apparently related to the indigenous Nubian title for all queens. Further, this eunuch could work for her without implying that no king held power at the same time.⁵¹⁵ Whether the queen would have her own wealth and her own treasurer is a subject meriting further exploration, but we need not rule it out a priori; there can be no question that the queen mothers in this period held significant political power.⁵¹⁶ Even at this point, where we could most readily forgive Luke if he (like some other historians) were slightly confused, his sparse report does not clearly conflict with certainly known facts.
Still, it is not impossible that this Candace was also a queen regnant. Although some have suggested that a Candace named Amanitare (25–41 CE) ruled in this period, the newer chronology identifies a different queen for this period, for whom the particular title Candace is not yet attested. She may well have born this title (alongside a name, like other Candaces), or Luke may simply employ the title familiar to a Greco-Roman audience (or to his source); as noted above, the wife or mother of any king could bear the title. We know of four queen mothers who actually ruled (holding the title qore, “ruler”) in this period, the last being Queen Nawidemak, ruling in the first half of the first century CE. The Candace here could thus possibly be Queen Nawidemak, who is attested as qore, hence ruled Nubia.⁵¹⁷
Mediterranean Perspectives on Candace
For Luke’s audience, this queen unquestionably held high status. Although Roman sources claimed that Augustus defeated the Candace’s troops, the concessions he granted her suggest that this is one of the empty claims to victory so common among losers’ boasts in antiquity. Likewise, as Snowden observes, Meroë’s own reliefs and other evidence could suggest a Meroitic victory.⁵¹⁸ Rome continued diplomatic relations with Meroë, working together in the time of Nero⁵¹⁹ and even in later times after the kingdom’s strength vis-à-vis Axum was waning.⁵²⁰
Even novelists knew of the Candace, and seem to have preferred alliances with Ethiopian queens to battling them.⁵²¹ In a work praising Alexander, a novelist portrays the Candace as extremely tall, looking like “a demigod”; she proves smarter than Alexander and freely tells him so (Ps.-Callisth. Alex. 3.22).⁵²² Greek and Latin sources tend not to describe the Candace’s color, since it may be assumed from her being Ethiopian;⁵²³ but it is certainly only some of the later European romances that portray her as European.⁵²⁴ Another Greek novel, set in the Persian period, makes Ethiopia’s queen, Persinna, the priestess of the Moon (Heliodorus Eth. 10.4) and attributes to her a revelatory dream (10.3), though like all women, she was barred from attending special sacrifices lest she accidentally defile them (10.4). The story’s heroine, her daughter, is nearest to the throne for succession (10.12, 15). Luke shows little interest in such novelistic expansions, but his more modest assumption of a wealthy and powerful queen is accurate.
The Official’s Communication with Philip
That the official is reading (or perhaps has another reading to him, especially given likely bumps in the road) an Isaiah scroll, or can converse with Philip, is not implausible. Meroë had its own language, with (by this period) an alphabetic script,⁵²⁵ but we cannot expect Philip to have acquaintance with that language. If Philip was primarily Greek-speaking (cf. Acts 6:1–5), how could he talk with the Ethiopian or understand that he was reading from Isaiah? It is possible that Philip could have known enough Hebrew to recognize a Scripture text, but we need not suppose that this Nubian God-fearer reads Hebrew poetry as well as converses with Philip in (presumably) Greek.⁵²⁶ There is no question that the Septuagint was widely available in Alexandria (and probably in Jerusalem as well), and that is the version Luke quotes (though the version we might expect Luke to quote in any case).
Luke’s Greek audience would know that Ethiopians were not normally among Greek-speaking peoples (cf. Acts 2:10; Sib. Or. 3.516). Yet no person of means would come from Ethiopia to Jerusalem without either a translator or some knowledge of language; in this case, the latter situation is far more probable. As a presumably educated member of the Nubian elite and one perhaps involved in discussing trade, this treasurer would likely speak several languages, including those relevant for trade ties with places like Greek-speaking Alexandria in Egypt to Meroë’s north. Greek appears in Nubian inscriptions, including one mentioning the queen in 13 BCE.⁵²⁷ Coins from nearby Axum, dated before Ezana’s conversion (in the early fourth century), use Greek inscriptions as well as a Roman design and gold standard.⁵²⁸ An earlier king of Meroë appearing in Greek sources is said to have had a Greek education, which suggests one or more teachers of Greek there.⁵²⁹ Certainly knowledge of Greek would have been essential in relations with Ptolemaic Egypt;⁵³⁰ likewise in this period, the ruling elite in Egypt, as in much of the eastern empire, continued to speak Greek.
Conclusion
Various factors support Luke’s dependence on prior tradition. One is that whereas Luke’s brief information about Nubia comports with known historical data, he lacks the fictitious elaboration characteristic of most fictitious and speculative sources. This difference also suggests that Luke’s source, however limited, may reflect a genuine historical encounter between Jewish and Nubian culture. Correspondences with genuine information also appear in novels, but they (and sometimes historical works citing misinformation) also include fictitious elements (usually abundantly). While the present state of research does not prove that some of Luke’s details (such as a current “Kandake” having her own treasurer) will never be open to question, even those details do not differ substantially from what we find in basically accurate portrayals in contemporary historical works. Luke lacks interest in fictitious elaboration about the official’s homeland (on account of which he lacks even the inadvertent fictitious elements often found in histories).
While such correspondences and lack of elaboration do not prove that Luke has a source, they do show that his interest is more in recounting prior information than in adding the “exotic” developments characteristic of novels. That is to say, at the least, Pervo’s suggestion of Luke’s novelistic interest in the account is at this point misplaced.