352 Stephan Witetschek a new “ancient” coin or rather imitated an existing coin as closely as possible. Moreover, the falsification must have happened before 1840, at a time when the Ephesian inscriptions referring to the imperial cult and to Ephesos as newkovro" of the provincial imperial cult under Domitian were not yet known. At that time there would have been hardly any motivation, apologetic or otherwise, to provide “evidence” for Ephesos as newkovro" of Artemis in the time of Domitian (the case would have to be judged differently if there were Claudius or Nero on the obverse). However, it seems that the numismatic discussion must remain inconclusive. It is at this impasse that Acts 19,35 ought to be taken seriously as a historical source for how Ephesians in the late 1st century could understand themselves and their city. Usually, however, when Acts 19,35 is taken into consideration with regard to the title newkovro", this text tends to be used as a report of what was actually said while Paul was in Ephesos in the early/mid-50s. A characteristic example is the assessment by B. Burrell who needs this approach to Acts in order to maintain the impossibility of addressing Ephesos as newkovro" of Artemis between Nero and Caracalla: “… yet the grammateus’ use of the term ‘neokoros of Artemis’ as if it were well known would not have been permitted in the early second century, as by that time Ephesos was officially neokoros of the Augusti, and only of the Augusti. Indeed, the title would not have been appropriate again until Ephesos did become neokoros of Artemis, at the beginning of the third, not the second century …” (67). Given Luke’s general use of speeches as vehicles of his own views and concerns (68) as well as the deliberate literary elaboration (69) and, in particular, the slightly “updated” language in Acts 19 (e.g. the asiarchs, see above), this is hardly a viable approach to this text. It seems that Acts 19,23-40 addresses the concerns of Luke’s readers in the late 1st century, when Christianity in Asia Minor would already have become a factor that made some impact on the economy. It may not be by chance that Paul’s farewell speech to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20,18-35 is very preoccupied with the use of money. Demetrios’ complaint in Acts 19,25-27 can then be paralleled to what Pliny the Younger writes in Ep. 10,96,10 (70). (67) BURRELL, Neokoroi, 60, n. 11. (68) Cf. most recently PADILLA, Speeches of Outsiders, 178-188 and passim. (69) Cf. e.g. SELINGER, “Demetriosunruhen”, 259. (70) Cf. H. KOESTER, “Ephesos und Paulus in der frühchristlichen Literatur”,