RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Paul the Apostle
Josephus says that Agrippa died three years after he became king of all Judea (War, II., xi. 6; Ant., XIX., viii. 2); consequently at the earliest in Feb., 44 a.d., since he received " his whole paternal kingdom " from Claudius immediately after the latter's accession (Jan. 24, 41 a.d.; War, II., xi. 5; Ant., XIX., v. 1). Furthermore, he died at a time of special festivities because of the emperor's " safety " {Ant., XIX., viii. 2), which must refer to Claudius' safe return from Britain at the beginning of 44 a.d. Two or three months were required for the news of the emperor's return to reach Palestine and for the preparations for the festivities. Hence the year 44 a.d. is well attested as that of the death of Agrippa, and the time of year indicated by Acts is quite consistent with Josephus. The events recorded in Acts xii. 1-19, can hardly have occurred while Paul and Barnabas were in Jerusalem, since the two apostles do not seem to have been involved in them; and if these events and the death of Agrippa (Acts xii. 20-24) occurred after the journey, the natural place to relate them would be after Acts xii. 25 (or before xv. 1). The date of the famine in Palestine was probably 46-48 a.d. But the determination of the Antiochians to send relief to Judea was formed because of a prophecy foretelling " great dearth throughout all the world " before the event (Acts xi. 27-29). In 41- 43 a.d. there were harvest failures in different parts of the empire, which may well have been regarded as the beginning of the fulfilment of the prophecy (cf. T, Zahn, Einleitung, ii. 417, 633 sqq., Leipsic, 1900).
Sergius Paulus, proconsul of Cyprus when Paul and Barnabas visited the island as recorded in Acts xiii. 4-13, is undoubtedly the proconsul Paulus of a Greek inscription of Soloi (D. G. Hogarth, Devia Cypria, p. 114, Oxford, 1889; cf. NKZ, 1904, pp.
192 sqq.) and the Lucius Sergius Paulus
3. First of CIL, vi. 31, 545. He governed
Missionary Cyprus before 53 a.d., the date of the
Journey, inscription of Soloi, but was not the
proconsul of 52 or 51. If he was the proconsul of 50, he would have been in office in the spring of 51 a.d., and this date is the terminus ad quem of the beginning of Paul's first missionary journey. The inscription CIL, vi. 31, 545, is probably earlier than the proconsulship of Sergius Paulus, since his name appears there in a subordinate position which would not be likely if he had filled so important an office before the inscription was written; but since the date of this second inscription is uncertain, no satisfactory terminus a quo is furnished herein.
In 52 a.d. Lucius Anniua Bassus was proconsul of Cyprus (CIG, 2632). His predecessor was Quintus Julius Cordus (CIG, 2631). Gatti, the first editor of CIL, vi. 31, 545, with impropriety assumed that it was later than the censorship of Claudius (Apr., 47-Oct., 48 a.d.; of. Prosopographia, iii. 221, Berlin, 1898; Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyklopadie, iv. 1793).
Paul's first visit to Corinth was made at a time when Aquila had lately come thither in consequence of an edict of Claudius expelling all Jews from Rome (Acts xviii. 1-2). The time of this edict can not be
4 First exactly determined, but it was not Visit issued during the first years of Claudius. to Corinth. ^n ^1 and 42 a.d. Claudius granted to the Jews in Alexandria, in Rome, and in the empire the free exercise of their religion, with admonitions not to abuse the privilege (Josephus, Ant, XIX., v. 2-3; Dio Cassius, LX., vi. 6). Failure to heed this advice and tumultuous disturbances of the peace ultimately brought about their expulsion from Rome (Suetonius, Claudius, xxv.). Dio Cassius doubtless had this later edict in mind when he adds to the year 41 " he did not drive them out,"
and had he known that it was issued immediately he would have mentioned it. The conclusion is that Paul first went to Corinth between 45 and 54 a.d. He stayed there eighteen months, during which time (or part of it) Gallio was proconsul of Achaia (Acts xviii. 11-12). Attempts to determine the date of Gallio's proconsulship have failed (cf. Ramsay in the Expositor, Mar., 1897, pp. 201 sqq.; Schiirer in ZWT, 1898, p. 41 ; Honnicke, pp 26 sqq.). When Paul was arrested in Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 7 sqq.) Felix was procurator of Judea (Acts xxiii, 24); after two years he was succeeded by Porcius Festus (Acts xxiv. 27). Holtzmann, Blass, Harnack, and others have argued lately in favor of 54, 55, or 56 a.d. as the date of this change 5. Arrest in of officials. But so early a date is Jerusalem, inconsistent with clear and unquestioned statements of the historians, especially Josephus, who is the classic authority for the history of Palestine from 50 to 70 a.d., and the older opinion is to be preferred, placing the recall of Felix and the assumption of office by Festus probably in 60, possibly in 59 or 61 a.d. The arrest occurred in 57, 58, or 59, probably in 58 a.d.
The earlier date rests upon the chronicle of Eusebius — a secondary authority. Eusebius, however, appears to have thought that Felix held office from 51 or 52 to 56, Festus from 56 to 61, and Albinus (the successor of Festus) from 61 to 64 a.d. Josephus (War, II., xii. 8; Ant., XX., vii. 1) makes it plain that Felix was sent to Palestine toward the end of the reign of Claudius — in his twelfth or thirteenth year (53 a.d.), if an inference may be made from the connection of the latter passage. The inference is supported by the fact that Josephus places his account of Felix's procuratorship (War, II., xiii. 2-7; Ant., XX., viii. 5-8) after the accession of Nero (War, II., xii. 8; Ant., XX., viii. 2). Furthermore, Josephus says the emperor sent Felix after Quadratus had removed Cumanus just before a Passover (War, II., xii. 6, 8). From Tacitus (Annates, xii. 52-54) the year when Cumanus was removed appears to have been 52 a.d. (see Felix and Festus). The interval from the Passover of 52 a.d. to the close of navigation in the autumn of the same year seems very short for all that is related by Josephus (War, II., xii. 6-8; Ant., XX., vi. 2-vii. 1, ix. 5) between the removal of Cumanus and the arrival of Felix in Palestine; for this reason also the spring of 53 a.d. is the more probable date for the latter event. When Paul first appeared before Felix the latter had been in office "many years " and he continued two years longer (Acts xxiv. 10, 27; cf. " already for a long time [jam pridem] governor of Judea," Tacitus, Annates, xii. 54). It is hard to reconcile this with the term of only four or five years assigned by the chronicle. The statement of Josephus (Ant., XX., vm. 9) that Felix, after he had been replaced by Festus, escaped punishment through the influence of his powerful brother, Pallas, can be made to support the new chronology only by assuming that Josephus believed the recall of Felix, the despatch of Festus, and the accusation of the Jews in Rome all to have occurred before the downfall of Pallas (Feb., 55 a.d.). But this means that Josephus believed that Felix ruled only about three and one-half months under Nero (from Oct. 13, 54, to Feb., 55 a.d.), and yet he places the greater part of Felix's procuratorship under Nero. It means: also that the voyages of Felix, Festus, and the Jewish embassy were all made in the winter months. It is inconsistent. with the account in Acts, which shows clearly that ielix was replaced by Festus, not in the winter, but in the summer (between Pentecost and September; Acts xx 6, lb, xxiv. 11, 27, xxv. 1, 6, 13, 14, 23, xxvii. 1, 9). And, lastly, it makes Felix's term of office too short. The statement about Pallas in Ant., XX., viii. 9, may be an error (so Bacon in the Expositor, Feb., 1898, p. 135; Zahn, Emleitung, ii 640); or, possibly, Pallas regained influence after *eb., &o a.d. (cf. Schiirer, i. 578). There is independent ev»dence that Felix ruled during the first years of Nero. (1) me " Egyptian " of Acts xxi. 38 belongs to the reign ot JNero and the procuratorship of Felix (Josephus, War, II., xui.
Paul the Apostle