But even with the visit fixed during the distress of the famine, which is in general associated with the time of Herod's death, it still remains doubtful whether this famine took place in 44. Since both Josephus and the author of Acts introduce the whole transaction (Ant. XX. ii. 1 ; Ac 12') with the general formula 'about that time,' the famine may very well have occurred as late as 45 or 46.
2. The expulsion of the Jews from Rome (Ac 18^ ; also Suet. Claud. 25). — This cannot be the action alluded to by Dio Cassius (Ix. 6), who expressly says that the Emperor, deeming it unwise to ex- clude the Jews from the city, commanded them not to hold meetings together, although he per- mitted them to retain their ancestral customs (iroLTpios /3tos). The decree, therefore, must be a later one unmentioned by the secular historians (except Suetonius, Avho assigns no date to it). It is possible, in spite of the generally favourable attitude of Claudius towards Agrippa II. in the years be- tween 51 and 54, that he saw the necessity of checking the growing power of the JeAvish com- munity in the capital, and decreed their exclusion from the city.
3. Sergius Paulus (Ac IS^-^^). -The data for the fixing of Sergius Paulus in a scheme of NT chron- ology are as follows : (1) The name occurs in in- scriptions. Of these one was first published by L. Palma di Cesnola [Salaminia, 1887, p. 256) and afterwards carefully edited by D. G. Hogarth in Devia Cypria, 1889, p. 114. It ends with the words riiiriT€V<Tas rrju ^ovXtju [5t]d i^aarCov (ttI liavkov [avd'\v- irdrov. Palfeographically the inscription is judged to belong to the 1st century. The second inscrip- tion is one found in the city of Rome naming L. Sergius Paulus as one of the curatores riparum et alvei Tiberis during the reign of Claudius ( CIL vi. 31545). — (2) The government of Cyprus was by proconsuls. The island came under Roman control before the establishment of the Empire, but was defined as a 'senatorial' province in 22 B.C. under Augustus (Dio Cass. liii. 12. 7; liv. 4. 1). Upon these data, however, while it is very clear that about A.D. 50 L. Sergius Paulus (who had already been a high officer in Rome) was holding the pro- consulship of Cyprus, no nearer approach to the precise date either of the beginning or the end of his rule can be made. See also art. Sergius Paulus.
4. Agrippa ii. and Drusilla. — Agrippa n., the son of Agrippa I., was bom in A.D. 28. According to Photius (Bihl. 33) he died in 100. At the time of his father's death he was considered too young for the responsibilities of the large kingdom, which was therefore again put under the care of procu- rators. But on the death of his uncle in the eighth year of Claudius (48) he was given the government ('kingdom') of Chalcis (Ant. XX. v. 2, Bill. xii. 1). Within four years, however, Claudius, 'Avhen he had already completed the twelfth year of his reign' (Ant. XX. vii. 1), transferred him from the
kingdom of Chalcis to the rule of a greater realm consisting of the tetrarchy of his great-uncle Philip, of the tetrarchy of Lysanias, and of that portion of Abilene which had been governed by Varus (BJ II. xii. 8). "When Nero succeeded Claudius, he enlarged this kingdom by the addition of considerable tracts of Galilee and Pereea, but the dates of these larger additions are not clearly given. More important than the growth of Agrippa's power is his giving of his sister in mar- riage to Azizus, whom not long after (/ier ov iroXvv Xpovov) she left in order to marry the Roman procu- rator Felix. These events cannot be fixed earlier than 54 or 55. The_ incidents of Ac 20''' 24'- -» are therefore posterior to this time. Cf. art. Drusilla.
5. Death of St. Peter and St. Paul in Rome.— The belief that the martyrdom of the two apostles took place in Rome in one of the last years of Nero's reign is based on tradition. Epiphanius places it in the 12th year of Nero, Euthalius in the 13th, Jerome in the 14th. Dionysius of Corinth associates the death of St. Peter and St. Paul in the phrase /carci t6v airrbv Kaipov ( ' about the same time'). No positive result for precise chronology is gained by these data. The general conclusion, however, that St. Paul's death took place after 64 is borne out by the necessity for finding a place in his life later than the Roman imprisonment for the composition of the Pastoral Epistles ; and, although this necessity is not admitted on all sides, the pre- dominance of view among critics seems to recognize it. The death of the two apostles may thus be approximately placed between the years 65 and 68. See artt. PAUL, PETER.
6. The Passover at Philippi (Ac 20^-').— W. M. Rams<ay, upon the basis of some very precarious data (see his St. Pavl, p. 289 ff ; also Turner's discussion, HDB i. 419 f.), claims the fixed date 57 for St. Paul's fifth and last recorded visit to Jeru- salem, which was also the occasion of his arrest. The argument is briefly as follows. The Apostle celebrated the Lord's Supper at Troas on Sunday night (v.''). If so, he must have left Philippi on Friday. Friday was the day after the Passover, which was therefore observed on Thursday that year. But the 14th Nisan (Passover Day) fell on Thursday in the year 57, not in 56 or 58. The un- certain factors in the computation are : (1) the ex- act day of the week for the Passover ; concerning this there is always room for dispute, owing to the well-known but unscientific method of the Jews in determining the beginning of the month Nisan ; (2) the interval between the Passover and St. Paul's departure from Philippi, which, on Ramsay's assumption, is a single night (but the text does not exclude a longer interval) ; (3) the time when the Lord's Supper was observed at Troas, which is stated to have been ' the first of the week' (ry jj.ia rCbv (ra/SfSdrwc) (but this may be construed as Saturday evening tOAvards Sunday). Any one of these uncertainties vitiates the con- clusion arrived at. Yet on the whole the conclu- sion corroborates the date 59, and is not necessarily inconsistent with 60 for the removal of St. Paul to Rome.