Did Luke Travel?
Did Luke Travel?
Was Luke more like a typical Greek historian or a typical Roman one on the matter of travel? Given Luke’s Greek style and his focus on events in the Greek East, those who contend that Luke was primarily a “Hellenistic historian” rather than a Roman one easily have the stronger case. This observation need not mean that Luke traveled to all locations in his narrative, but it appears that he traveled sometimes. If, as apparently at least a slight majority of Acts scholars contend, the author of Acts also authored the “we” source,68 Acts clearly stands much closer to the Hellenistic mold. Luke would not have traveled as widely as, say, Polybius,69 but on this majority interpretation he would be acquainted firsthand with material and locations in his more detailed “we” material, including Jerusalem and especially Caesarea. He could have spent up to two years in Judea (Acts 24:27 with 21:15; 27:1). Probably most of it would have been in Caesarea on the coast rather than in Galilee, but he would have had access to believers there who had been part of the early Jerusalem church and were familiar with the earliest traditions (Acts 21:8, 10, 16). He may have had some contact with James the Lord’s brother (Acts 21:18), though we cannot say how much.
Opinions do vary regarding his “we” sections, and one’s approach to Luke’s historical methodology does not rise or fall on this point alone. Nevertheless, I believe that evidence for his genuine participation in some later events in his second volume, Acts, is very strong.70 “We” appears only sporadically, whereas a fictitious “we” in a novel normally appeared throughout the work. Without comment (as if the audience knows the identity of the narrator), the “we” appears incidentally in Troas, leaves off in Philippi (Acts 16:10-16), and resumes years later, again in Philippi (20:6-21:18; 27:1-28:16). It does not appear at more theologically pregnant points where it would be most useful (say in Acts 2, 10, or 15).71 As one might expect for eyewitness material, the “we” sections tend to be among Luke’s most detailed material.72 (Detractors often cite differences from Paul; at least some of the more significant of these, however, may reflect a traditional Protestant misunderstanding of Paul.)73
Scholars offer various interpretations of this material. While the “we” material could reflect a travel itinerary, it would presumably be the narrator’s own; why else would he preserve its first person narration only here, when he has other sources also reporting eyewitness material (Lk 1:2)?74 Most current scholars believe that the proposal of a literary device for sea-voyages75 misreads the evidence;76 the proposal of a fictitious literary device more generally is also questionable. Although entire works could be pseudonymous,77 Luke does not name himself, and his first audience seems (and Theophilus surely is) aware of his identity.78 First-person narrators normally remain central to the action throughout the narrative in novels,79 but (as we noted in ch. 5 and here) Luke-Acts is not a novel. More relevant is first-person narration in histories; like third-person narration naming the narrator, this narration nearly always indicated the actual presence of the author on the occasions noted.80 Classicist Arthur Darby Nock noted that a fictitious “we” is extremely rare outside obvious fiction; he thus evaluated Luke’s “we” narratives as authentic eyewitness memoirs. 81 For such reasons a majority of Lukan scholars concur that Luke here uses his own notes; that he indicates his presence on the occasions marked by “we”; and/or that this section includes the narrator’s genuine personal reminiscences. 82 We would grant the accuracy of this claim to almost any other ancient historian who made it; that some NT scholars are skeptical in Luke’s particular case may say more about the assumptions of NT criticism than about Luke himself.
What is the relevance of this connection to Luke’s “research” for the gospel story? The “we” departs for Judea with Paul in 20:5-21:18 and departs from Judea up to two years later (see 24:17) in 27:1-28:16. The narrator probably spent most of the interim in Caesarea, but even this location would have afforded Luke the opportunity to become more “fully acquainted” with reports about the Judean events (if not geography) that he depicts.