531
. From Craig S. Keener, “Acts
10
: Were Troops Stationed in Caesarea During Agrippa’s Rule?” Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism
7
(
2010
):
164–76
. Reprinted by permission from Sheffield Phoenix.
. Haenchen, Acts,
360
; cf. Conzelmann, Acts,
81
. Perhaps Haenchen excludes only legionaries rather than auxiliaries, hence cohorts of Roman citizens rather than noncitizens; but it is difficult to see how such a claim would call Luke’s narrative into question. They were likely auxiliaries even before and after Agrippa’s rule.
. Conzelmann, Acts,
81
, notes that the dating is not certain and that Luke could have transferred it from a different time.
. Smallwood, Jews,
147
n
13
.
. With e.g., Levinskaya, “Cohort,”
106
; Bruce, Acts
¹
,
215
; Munck, Acts,
92
; Le Cornu, Acts,
820
.
. In general, see Rhet. Her.
1
.
9
.
15
. An author, if following other than a chronological outline of material, may need to justify why he has arranged it as he has (Vitruvius Arch.
2
.
1
.
8
).
. E.g., Thucydides
2
.
1
.
1
;
5
.
26
.
1
. For one’s personal notes or diaries in the Roman tradition of the commentarius, see Rebenich, “Historical Prose,”
313–14
; Pelling, “Commentarii.” Commentarii were originally minutes of civic authorities or councils, normally in a series, but by the late Republic included lecture notes, speech drafts, etc. (Rüpke, “Commentarii,”
628
), and personal or business diaries (Rüpke, “Ephemeris”). Others filled notebooks with their thoughts (Pliny Ep.
1
.
6
.
1
,
3
).
. Even in oral performance of standard stories, performers often can rearrange the sequence (Eddy and Boyd, Legend,
433–35
). For weaknesses in chronology, see e.g., Sallust’s historical monographs (Laistner, Historians,
58–59
); different reckoning methods in Livy’s sources confused his chronology (Laistner, Historians,
94–95
).
. Seneca the Elder Controv.
1
.pref.
4
.
. Eusebius Hist. eccl.
3
.
39
(although it is possible that he means simply rhetorical order). Early Judaism also recognized the need to rechronologize some Old Testament accounts; see
4
Q
158
; Wise, “Introduction to
4
Q
158
.”
. Ancient biographies were not expected to be in chronological order (Görgemanns, “Biography”; Stanton, Jesus of Nazareth, 119–21
).
. Aug.
9
(LCL
1
:
133
). For Suetonius’s thematic approach, see also Matthews, “Emperor and Historians,”
292
.
. Hemer, Acts in History,
74
.
. For example, he narrates an event from
33–34
CE in Ant.
18
.
106
; yet he has noted Pilate’s later recall (
36
CE) already in
18
.
89
.
. Dionysius of Halicarnassus Pomp.
3
. Thucydides went so far as to divide his narrative by summers and winters, distorting continuity so inappropriately that later historians avoided this method (Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thuc.
9
; LCL
1
:
485
n
8
mentions one partial exception).
. See Suetonius’s criticism of Pliny in Cal.
8
.
3
. Later rabbis doubted that the Torah was chronologically arranged (originally to resolve potential contradictions; see Kaunfer and Kaunfer, “Time and Torah”).
. E.g., Bruce, Peter,
26–27
; Witherington, Acts,
368
. Many attribute the specific arrangement of the accounts to distinct sources, which is plausible though not certain. The objection to a source that Luke fails to display sufficient concrete material (Conzelmann, Acts,
87
) is not compelling in view of his limited space, but oral tradition does seem most likely here (Barrett, Acts,
52–53
).
. If it preceded Antioch’s gentile mission historically, this would help explain the lack of reported resistance to the latter (Gaventa, Acts,
177
); but Antioch’s great distance might also help account for this.
. For Roman-style artwork in the Herodian period, see Ovadiah, “Pavements”; cf. a Roman villa even in the countryside (though in the late second century; Edelstein, “Villa”).
. Josephus estimated that Syrians in Caesarea massacred
20
,
000
Jews in a single hour in
66
CE (War
2
.
457
), provoking Jewish slaughter of Syrians elsewhere (
2
.
458
). Although there is some evidence for some Jewish auxiliaries under Rome (cf. Josephus Ant.
15
.
317
;
18
.
84
; CPJ
2
, §
229
), other sources seem to support their more common exemption; see evidence in Kraft, “Judaism on Scene,”
86–87. Syrian recruits were sometimes considered the least disciplined and most discontent and prone to mutiny (Fronto Pr. Hist.
12
).
. Speidel, “Army,” argues for Roman soldiers in Judea even in
41–44
(so Levinskaya, “Cohort,”
106–7
).
. Given the dates, it is unlikely that many of these soldiers would remain active during the Judean war just over two decades later, the years of service normally being twenty (Friedländer, Life,
1
:
192
; Stevenson, “Army,”
227
). But the same sentiments would have been passed down to newer recruits.
. Campbell, Army,
212
.
. Campbell, Army,
120–21
(noting that they had to built their own fortresses, water supplies, and so forth).
. Campbell, Army,
121
. They could also sell their products locally.
. Campbell, Army,
121
.
. Campbell, Army,
140
.
. Campbell, Army,
141
(noting that the camp commander decided the location of the canabae, whether a mile distant or directly beside the camp).
. Josephus Ant.
19
.
357
employs strateuomenoi, a verb that BDAG defines as “do military service, serve in the army” (or “to engage in a conflict”). Josephus employs the verb
143
times, normally in military contexts. More clearly still, it is the military cohorts (speiras, to be replaced by legionary stratiôtas,
364
) stationed in these cities who are nearly moved (
19
.
364–65
).
. The proposal would be unlikely in any case. The emperor forced Agrippa to desist from expanding Jerusalem’s city wall, out of concern for preventing accumulation of independent power (Josephus Ant.
19
.
326–27
; War
5
.
152
). The emperor surely would have allowed Agrippa his own elite guards, but to deactivate Rome’s auxiliaries (as opposed to allowing Rome to transfer them elsewhere) would be meddling in the affairs of the Syrian legate.
. Nor can we easily attribute Josephus’s portrayal of gentile soldiers in Caesarea as due to his apologetic bias; why would he invent gentile soldiers who hated a Jewish king? If he was prone to inventing all such opposition, we could then explain away the entire local history of conflict by which he explains the subsequent war, an approach that is not plausible.
. Stevenson, “Army,”
227–28
; Gardner, Women,
58
; O’Rourke, “Law,”
181–82
; Campbell, Army,
151
; for popular knowledge that marriage was not for soldiers, see e.g., Quintilian Decl.
306
.
17
. Over four thousand offspring of Roman soldiers with Spanish concubines in
171
BCE were counted illegitimate (Livy
43
.
3
.
2
). Thus even a high officer, at least in the more rigid past, might count it below his dignity to take for himself a female captive (Scipio the Elder
2
in Plutarch S. Rom., Mor.
196
B).
. Jones, Empire,
155–56
.
. Campbell, Army,
152
.
. Friedländer, Life,
1
:
192
; Stevenson, “Army,”
227
(though noting that some complained they had been kept
30–40
years under Tiberius). In earlier times only
16
years were demanded (Polybius
6
.
19
.
2
), except in times of special danger (
6
.
19
.
4
); the early first-century figure was
16
years plus four “as reservists” (Thompson, “Military,”
993–94
; cf. gratuities in
6
CE for those with at least
20
years’ service in Res Gestae
3
.
17
). Mortality was high, probably most often from natural causes (on the latter, cf. Hope, “Trophies”); but it seems that the majority did survive (see Res Gestae
1
.
3
with the LCL note).
. One had been in the army over
36
years in Caesar [or Hirtius] African War
45
.
. Jones, “Army,”
203
. So also Stevenson, “Army,”
226
(but noting exceptions).
. That soldiers had prostitutes and other women was public knowledge (see e.g., Höcker, “Prostitution,”
60
), requiring toll fees at customs stations (IGRR
1
.
1183
in Sherk, Empire,
149
, §
106
B).
. Jones, Empire,
156
(the form often being “interest-free loans”).
. Campbell, Army,
152
, noting military families “in nearby canabae or other settlements.” This would presumably already be true in places like Caesarea, where Josephus indicates the soldiers’ local attachments.
. Lewis, Life,
141
(OGIS
674
= IGRR
1
.
1183
, from
90
CE).
. Schiemann, “Concubinatus,”
682
. An officer praises Tiberius’s moderation in usually pretending not to see infractions (Velleius Paterculus
2
.
114
.
3
).
. Epitaphs from Roman Algeria indicate that although soldiers (and other Romanized men) nearly always married Romanized local women in some areas, in other areas intermarriage with non-Romanized women was higher (
13
.
2
percent in the sample; Cherry, “Marriage”).
. In the second century CE, soldiers could bequeath property, but only to those of their own nation (BGU
5
.
34
), and their children could inherit if they died intestate only if of the same nation (BGU
5
.
35
). Cf. Thompson, “Military,”
994
.
. See B.G.U.
140
.
10–33
; ILS
1986
; CIL
16
.
1
,
42
; FIRA
1
.
78
; Sherk, Empire,
154
, §
111
; Gardner, Women,
143
; O’Rourke, “Law,”
182
. An auxiliary in
131
CE is happy with his daughter’s birth (B.G.U.
1690
); and Rome might grant an auxiliary centurion’s request for his daughter’s citizenship (Pliny Ep.
10
.
107
).
. See Llewelyn, Documents,
6
, §
19
, p.
148
.
. Fabius Maximus
4
in Plutarch S. Rom., Mor.
195
EF.
. Herodian
3
.
8
.
5
(LCL
1
:
309
).
. Buckland, Roman Law,
128
.
. Gardner, Women,
57
.
. Gardner, Women,
58
(also noting that the men were more often the partners with higher status).
. Buckland, Roman Law,
128
. Concubinage was prohibited during marriage (Paulus Sent.
2
, in Lefkowitz and Fant, Life,
193
, §
196
; cf. Gardner, Women,
56–57
); a married man’s concubine was considered dishonorable, at least traditionally (Aulus Gellius
4
.
3
.
3
).
. Buckland, Roman Law,
128
. By contrast, royal houses of the east, especially Persian (Athenaeus Deipn.
13
.
556
b-
557e) but occasionally Judean (Josephus Ant.
13
.
380
; War
1
.
97
; cf. War
1
.
511
; Jeremias, Jerusalem,
90
; but these were not positive examples), were known to have multiple concubines. Multiple concubines appear to be presupposed in Ps.-Phoc.
181
; the rabbis refer to concubinage, but in biblical times (Safrai, “Home,”
748
).
. Buckland, Roman Law,
129
. Eventually sons in such unions, by entering the military, could receive “rights of succession” (
129
).
. Harrell, Divorce,
30–31
.
. C. R. Whittaker in Herodian LCL
1
:
309
n
5
.
. Older debates about infant baptism in the passage are thus a moot point; we cannot know whether Cornelius’s household included infants.
. C. Williams, Acts,
134
; Barrett, Acts,
499
; Dunn, Acts,
135
; on land grants for veterans, see Keener, Acts,
3
:
2484–86
(where I argue that the jailer is not likely a veteran).
. Campbell, “Veterans.”
. Thompson, “Military,”
994
(though noting on
993
that centurions often remained in the army for their entire lives); Campbell, Army,
212
. They do not seem to have been especially involved with local politics, and it is not clear to what extent they contributed to stimulating local economies or to Romanization (Campbell, Army,
222–23
).
. Ferguson, Backgrounds,
38
; Stambaugh and Balch, Environment,
34
. This claim might refer particularly to legionary centurions.
. Campbell, “Vexillum.” For calling up veterans in times of earlier, severe military crises, see Velleius Paterculus
2
.
111
.
1
;
2
.
113
.
1
; in the most severe emergency like Hannibal’s invasion fewer soldiers were mustered out or settled abroad (Velleius Paterculus
1
.
15
.
1
). Neither sort of situation would prove relevant to Cornelius in Caesarea at this date.
. Witherington, Acts, 347
(though allowing that the account may refer to
39–40
CE).
. Jewish soldiers were rare in Roman armies (see Kraft, “Judaism on Scene,”
86–87
; Applebaum, “Legal Status,”
458–60
).
. Various factors could explain Cornelius’s Roman name; perhaps the simplest is that legionary centurions were sometimes assigned to auxiliaries. In this period, even most legionaries in Syria were recruited from the region. See discussion in Keener, Acts,
2
:
1739–42
.