ii. Time and Place of Writing. — The ministry of St. Paul as recorded in Acts falls into three periods : (a) The Antiochene (Ac 13-18^), when Antioch was his headquarters. Towards the end of this period (Ac 16-18) he founds the great Churches of the Mgean region. (6) The yEgean or Ephesian period (Ac 18-''-21'°), when he transfers his residence to Ephesus ; at the end come his second visit to Corinth and his last voyage to Jerusalem, (c) The period of captivity (Ac '21"-28) at CiEsarea and Rome. To the first period belong the Epistles to the Thessalonians, written from Corinth ; to the second, the four Epistles to the Galatians, Corinthians, and Romans. The third period is that of the ' captivity group,' Philipjiians, Colossians, Ephesians, Philemon. Our Epistle was in all probability the last of its group, — cer- tainly it is later than 1 and 2 Corinthians. It B-as wjitten from Corinth, where (assuming that 16^ belongs to our Epistle, see below, § viii.) St. Paul was the guest of the Gains of 1 Co 1".
Phoebe, possibly the bearer of the letter, was a •deaconess' of Cenchreae, the eastern port of Corinth. Moreover, St. Paul was on the eve of departure from Corintli with the alms collected by him in Macedonia and Achaia (15^- -*) for the ' poor saints' of Jerusalem. From the latter place he was hoping to visit Rome, and afterwards Spain (15=» ; cf. 2 Co 8'- », Ac 24" 20" 19-'). It was after the winter, which St. Paul had probably spent in Corinth (1 Co 16'), for he proposed to sail to Syria (Ac 20*) and to reach Jerusalem before Pentecost (Ac 20"). But Ro 15 contains no allusion to the
{dot of the Jews which at the last moment forced lim to change his route (Ac 20'). The exact year in which the Epistle was written depends upon the dates to be assigned to I and 2 Cor. (see 1 COR- INTHIANS, § 6 and reff., and Chronology of NT). If, as the present writer inclines to believe, the clironology of Lightfoot, etc., is not definitely superseded, the Epistle dates from just before the Passover of the year 58. If the whole scheme has to be shifted back two years, then the correspond- ing date in 56 must be adopted. The point may, for the purpose of this article, be left in suspense. The relative date, i.e. with reference to the other Ejiistles, is the point of real importance for the his- tori<-.al explanation of our Epistle. On this point the limits of doubt are narrow. There is no ques- tion but that Romans belongs, with 1 and 2 Cor., to the .'Ivgean period (see above), in contrast to 1 and 2 Thess., which belong to the Antiochene period, and to Philippians, Colossians, Ephesians, Phile- mon, which come after St. Paul's captivities had begun. There is, moreover, no doubt that Romans was written on the eve of St. Paul's departure from the .^"gean re^on, and therefore was preceded in time by both Epistles to the Corinthians. The point which is less absolutely certain is the relation of Romans to Galatians. It is not so very im-
portant to subdivide the alternative hypothesoi which agree in supposing Romans to follow Galatians. If Lightfoot's view of the close psycho- logical relation between 2 Corinthians and Gala- tians remains unshaken in itself, and is not outweiglied by general chronological considera- tions, we have a very intelligible historical situa- tion for the origin of llomans (see below, §§ iii. v.). Even if Galatians has to be placed at the beginning of the Ephesian period (Weiss, etc.) or at tlie close of the Antiochene period (Ramsay, Rendall, etc.), we lose, no doubt, something of the dramatic unity of situation, but we may still regard Romans as the mature expression and expansion of the thoughts struck out at white-heat in Galatians. But the relation is wholly reversed if (with Clemen, Chronol. der Paul. Brie/e) we regard Galatians a." presupposing Romans. This view is part of a general rearrangement of Pauline chronology dis- cussed in the art. 1 Corinthian.?, vol. i. p. 485. Its direct proof is drawn from the relation of the treatment of circumcision, the law, etc., in our Epistle to that in Galatians, which is supposed to represent an exacerbation of the apostle's attitude. The view to be maintained below (§§ iii.-vi.) seems quite as legitimate an inference from the facts, and in itself more in accord with our general know- ledge of St. Paul's thought and temper. If the reader finds it unsatisfactory, he may remember tliat he has the hypothesis of Clemen to fall back upon.
iii. Occasion and Pitrpose.— In order to esti- mate the occasion and purpose of our Epistle, we must first ask. For what readers was it meant! and, secondly. What was the apostle probably de- sirous to say to such readers at this particular time? This necessitates a glance at the ante- cedents of Roman Christianity.
Tlie Christian body to which our Epistle is ad- dressed was clearly not, like that of Thess. or even of Gal., of recent origin (l*-'' 15^ 16'). In view of features of the Epistle, to whicli attention will presently be drawn, its origin is to be sought in connexion with the existence of a Jewish com- munity in Rome.