Stephan Witetschek, «Artemis and Asiarchs. Some Remarks on Ephesian Local Colour in Acts 19», Vol. 90 (2009) 334-355
Luke’s account about Paul’s stay in Ephesos (Acts 19) is well known for its strong local colour, two elements of which are studied in this contribution: the asiarchs (19,31) and the title newko/roj (temple-warden) for Ephesos (19,35). The appearance of asiarchs in Acts questions the view that the asiarchs were the highpriests of the provincial imperial cult. Acts 19,35 contributes to the discussion about city-titles in the 1st-3rd centuries CE. In both instances, Acts is a source not so much for the narrated time of Paul, but rather for Luke’s own time, and as such of interest for both exegetes and historians.
Artemis and Asiarchs 345
becomes even more relevant if Luke-Acts is indeed a text from
Ephesos (35): To be sure, the local colour is quite ambiguous (see above)
and can hardly serve as a clear indication for the place of composition
of Luke-Acts (36). But Luke devotes very much space to Paul’s stay in
Ephesos (Acts 18,19–20,1.18-35), and he makes remarkable narrative
efforts to present Paul as the first “proper†Christian missionary in
Ephesos (Acts 18,19-28) and especially to have Paul deliver his
farewell speech (Acts 20,18-35) — his only speech in Acts that is
directed to a Christian audience and that clearly addresses the concerns
of a Christian community in the time after Paul — to Ephesians. So it
seems to be quite a plausible option that the two-volume work of Luke-
Acts comes from Ephesos.
As we have seen above, the office of asiarchs did exist before
89/90, but it was apparently only with the inauguration of the temple of
the provincial imperial cult in Ephesos that it gained new prominence
— to judge by the epigraphic record — and possibly some new quality.
Now it could certainly be that in Acts 19,31 Luke refers to “old-styleâ€
asiarchs as already Strabon used to know them. In this case it would
even be possible to consider this verse as a piece of historical
reminiscence. This seems to be what C.J. Hemer meant when he wrote:
“The Asiarchs are naturally situated in Ephesus, and the friendship of
some of them with Paul is interesting, and not merely to be dismissed
as ‘highly unlikely’†(37).
Yet the occurrence of asiarchs in Acts 19,31 takes a peculiar and
quite deliberate position in the narrative that points to an authorial
intervention. The remarks in Acts 19,30-31 form an aside that
interrupts the story of the riot of the silversmiths; the narrative would
flow very well — maybe even better — without these two verses (38).
(35) Cf. WITETSCHEK, Ephesische Enthüllungen 1, 255-262. For this locali-
sation cf. also CONZELMANN – LINDEMANN, Arbeitsbuch14, 360; PERVO, Acts, 5-6.
(36) Cf. also W. WEREN, “The Riot of the Ephesian Silversmiths (Acts 19,23-
40). Luke’s Advice to his Readersâ€, Luke and his Readers (FS A. DENAUX) (eds.
R. BIERINGER – G. VAN BELLE – J. VERHEYDEN) (BETL 182; Leuven 2005) 441-
456, esp. 453-454.
(37) HEMER, Book of Acts, 121; the last remark refers to E. HAENCHEN, Die
Apostelgeschichte (KEK 3; Göttingen 1956) 514, n. 4. HEMER (Book of Acts)
included the reference to asiarchs in Acts 19,31 among the instances of Luke’s
“specific local knowledge†(104: “Specifics of local routes, boundaries, titles of
city magistrates, and the like, which may not be closely controllable in date, but
are unlikely to have been known except to a writer who has visited the districtsâ€).
(38) Cf. A. LOISY, Les Actes des Apôtres (Paris 1920) 750-751; W. ECKEY, Die
Apostelgeschichte. Der Weg des Evangeliums von Jerusalem nach Rom II.