348 Stephan Witetschek Roman culture, where he says “Non possumus”: when the distinction between human and divine gets blurred and humans are awarded divine honours (Acts 10,25-27; 12,21-23; 14,13-15; 16,29-31) (48). In view of this observation one may at least wonder whether Luke would have deliberately introduced high priests of the imperial cult into his narrative (49). In fact the context of Acts 19 does not suggest any specific function of the asiarchs, cultic or otherwise; they are simply introduced as people who are fivloi towards Paul (in the dative case!). This makes it less likely that any official function is in view (50). It seems that Luke is mainly interested in them as supporters of Paul (and Christianity) who belong to the highest levels of society (51). This is not the only passage in Acts where Paul has excellent connections to the very top of society (see especially Acts 28,7-8, also 13,6-12). So the appearance of asiarchs seems to fit into Luke’s concern to present Christianity as something decent and respectable. 3. Newkoro" of Artemis v In Acts 19,35 the city secretary appeals to the chaotic assembly’s civic pride by calling the city of Ephesos “temple-warden of the great Artemis and of the (image) fallen down from Zeus” (newkovro" th'" (48) Cf. H.-J. KLAUCK, Magie und Heidentum in der Apostelgeschichte des Lukas (SBS 167; Stuttgart 1996) 46, 56-57, 71-75; ID., “Des Kaisers schöne Stimme. Herrscherkritik in Apg 12,20-23”, Macht – Religion – Liebe (Mem. H. MERKLEIN) (eds. M. GIELEN – J. KÜGLER) (Stuttgart 2003) 199-215 = Religion und Gesellschaft im frühen Christentum. Neutestamentliche Studien (WUNT 152; Tübingen 2003) 251-267; C.K. ROWE, “Luke-Acts and the Imperial Cult. A Way Through the Conundrum?”, JSNT 27 (2005) 279-300; WITETSCHEK, “Paulus und die Asiarchen”, esp. 68-71; ID., “Christus und Caesar bei Lukas und Johannes. Der Kaiserkult in Ephesos und das Neue Testament”, MTZ 60 (2009) 51-61, 58-60. See also A. BRENT, “Luke-Acts and the Imperial Cult in Asia Minor”, JTS 48 (1997) 411-438. (49) It is basically this line of reasoning that CAMPANILE, “Asiarchi”, 74 suspects as (partly) the agenda behind the argument for a distinction between high priests and asiarchs. However, what she seems to criticise is an apologetic reasoning on the level of the events narrated in Acts 19, i.e. the attempt to dissociate the “historical Paul” from the imperial cult. On the contrary, the argument presented above concerns not so much the historical plausibility of the events in Paul’s time, but the tendency of Acts as a historical source for Luke’s time. (50) Pace SELINGER, “Demetriosunruhen”, 251 who understands them as an authority (“Behörde”). (51) Cf. LAMPE, “Acta 19”, 63; SHAUF, Theology as History, 249-250; O. PADILLA, The Speeches of Outsiders in Acts. Poetics, Theology and Historio- graphy (SNTSMS 144; Cambridge 2008) 173; PERVO, Acts, 496.