28. The argument for the year 61, as the date of St. Paul's arrival at Rome, is thus put by Wiese ler, Chrottologie des Apost. Zeitalters, p. 66, ff. The narrative of Josephus, Antiq. xx. 8, Bell.
13, from Nero's accession (t3th Oct. 54) to the de feat of the Egyptian' implies at least two years ; this impostor, claiming to be another Moses, would of course make his appearance at the Passover, i.e., at the earliest, that of 57 A. D. That this must have been at least a year before St. Paul's arrest is implied in the tribune's expression, arpb TOUTWL (Acts. xxi. 38) ; therefore the earliest pos sible date for this arrest is A.D. 5S, Pentecost ; the aterla of xxiv. 27, gives A. D. 6o as the earliest pos sible date for the arrival of Festus, and the spring of 61 for the Apostle's arrival at Rome. The latest possible is given by the cliccoXtircut of Acts xxviii. 31, implying that after these two years some great hindrance' did arise, which could be no other than the Neronian persecution, beginning July A. D. 64. The extreme date hence resulting is limited by these further considerations. Pallas and Burrus were living, and influential men at the time when Felix was recalled ; but Pallas died in the latter half, and Burrus in the first or second month of A. D. 62 ; consequently Felix arrived in 61 at latest. But Paul was delivered TO arparore5cipxco, the one prmfect of the praetorian guards, who must there fore be Burrus, before and after whom there were two. As Burros died Jan. or Feb., and Paul arrived May or June, the year could not be 62, and the latest possible date would be A.D. 61. Latest possible and earliest possible thus coinciding, the date, Wieseler thinks, is demonstrated.—To this it is objected, and justly, that o-rioaroweadpxy of necessity means no more than the prefect con cerned (Meyer, Kamm. izc Apostelgesch, p. 19 ; Lange, Apost. Zen'. ii. 9). And in favour of the later date (62 A.D.), it is urged that on the hearing before Nero of the complaints relative to Agrippa's building overlooking the Temple (Antig. xx. S. 10, 11;Be11.7ad.ii.14.1), the Jews obtained a favourable judgment through the influence of Poppma, .Nero's wife.' But Poppma was married May 62, and un doubtedly Festus's successor, Albinos, was at J erusa lem in the feast of Tabernacles of the same year (Bell. Ind. vi, 5. 3). Hence it is argued, that un less Kara. TbP KaLpOP TOOTOP xx. 8. t) is
taken with undue latitude, Festus cannot have entered upon the province earlier than 61 (Meyer zi. s.) Ewald (G'esch. vi. 44) also urges the ci,a4 Ail.rws. of Acts xxviii. fin. for this year 62, and calls attention to the circumstance that the imperial re script, rescinding the Jewish isopolity, obtained by the Greeks of Cmsarea through the influence of Burrus (Antiq. xx. 8-9), is spoken of as something recent in the beginning of the rebellion (spring of A.D. 66) ; indeed, in Bell. Ind. ii. 14. 4, it seems as if the rescript had but just then reached Cmsarea. Ewald surmises that the death of Festus and of Burrus may have retarded the process. But the fact may be (as was suggested above), that Josephus in that passage has confused some exercise of Burrus's influence in behalf of the Cmsarean Greeks in the time of Claudius, or early in the time of Nero, with the much later matter of the rescript, which would officially pass through Burrus's hands as secretary for the East ( Rxx _7rf6TONCVP re71.0-TEUI.kePOS), and the operation of which may have been delayed through the influence of Popprea (ob. Aug. 65). That Poppma is spoken of as Nero's ' wife,' on the occasion above mentioned, may be merely euphemistic anticipation : this woman, din pellex, et adielteri Neranis, mox mariti patens (Ann. xiv. 6o), may have befriended the Jews in the former capacity (at any time after 58, Ann. xiii. 45). In fact the marriage could not have taken place at the time when she is said to have aided them, unless it be possible to crowd the subsequent occurrences, Arab/. xx. 8. II and 9. t, into the space of three or four months (Ordo &rel. p. 122, ff.) Nor can any certain inference be drawn from the narrative in Joseph, Vit. 3, of certain priests whom Felix had sent to be tried at Rome, and for whom Josephus, ' after his 26th year,' which was complete A. D. 64, was enabled, through the good offices of Cresar's wife,' Poppma, to obtain their liberty. The men had been prisoners three years at least, and for aught that appears, may have been so seven or eight years or more. That they were obscure and insignificant persons is evident, from the fact that Ismael and Helkias, whom the devout' Poppma, two years before, had graciously detained at her court, appear to have made no intercession for their release.