Paul and Roman Law in Acts

MARK BLACK Lawrenceville, New Jersey

The student of the NT is constantly made aware that he is moving in a Roman world. Frequently mentioned are the names and titles of Roman officials, such as the provincial governors Quirinius, Pilate, Felix, and Festus; the proconsuls Sergius Paulus and Gallio; the centurions Cornelius and others; the tribune Lysias; various ranks of Roman soldiers; and, of course, the emperors Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius. The reader is often reminded thatfirst-centuryPalestine as well as the entire Mediterranean world was a part of the great Roman Empire and its pax Romana. Nowhere is this background more evident than in the book of Acts. Henry Cadbury states:
Of all the environments which encircle the book of Acts, the most universal though in some ways, the most superficial is the Roman. It provides the outline, setting and condition of the contemporary civilization. . . .'

It does not overstate the case to assert that the rapid spread of Chris tianity was made possible by the unprecedented facility of travel and communication effected by the consolidation of the world by the Romans. Especially in the activities of Paul one recognizes the significance of the Roman environment. Paul continually found himself in Roman prowinces, in Roman colonies, being questioned by Roman officials, being protected or condemned by Roman laws, and being detained or released by Roman soldiers. In fact, chapters 21 through 28 revolve around Paul's arrest by the Romans in Jerusalem and his defense which leads him ultimately to Rome itself.

The Book of Acts in History, 1955, p. 58.

209

210

Restoration Quarterly

These proceedings of the final eight chapters of Acts are based on Paul's legal rights as a Roman citizen. It is, therefore, necessary to understand as much as possible about these rights and the legal system of the Empire. Paul appealed to his Roman citizenship on two occasions in Acts. The first occurs at Philippi, recorded in 16:37,38:
Paul said to them, 'They have beaten us publicly, uncondemned, men who are Roman citizens, and have thrown us into prison; and do they now cast us out secretly? No! let them come themselves and take us out.' The police reported these words to the magistrates, and they were afraid when they heard that they were Roman citizens.

The second occasion on which Paul appealed to his. citizenship is at Jerusalem, in 22:25-29:
But when they had tied him with with the thongs, Paul said to the centurion who was standing by, 'Is is lawful for you to scourge a man who is a Roman citizen, and uncondemned?' When the centurion heard that, he went to the tribune and said to him, 'What are you about to do? For this man is a Roman citizen.' So the tribune came and said to him, 'Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?' And he said, 'Yes.' The tribune answered, bought this citizenship for a large sum.' Paul said, 'But I was born a citizen.' So those who were about to examine him withdrew from him instantly; and the tribune also was afraid, for he realized that Paul was a Roman citizen and that he had bound him.

These texts suggest many questions. How did one acquire Roman citizenship? How widespread was the citizenship? What were the rights of the citizen? How were these rights enforced? How did one prove his citizenship? The answers to these and other questions shed much light on Paul's situation and are helpful in understanding the book of Acts prop erly. Perhaps the best starting point for such an inquiry is an examination of the role of thefirst-centuryprovincial governor in criminal jurisdic tion. Judea was, of course, one of many Roman provinces, having been granted this status in A.D. 6.2 Normally, Roman provinces were gov erned either by imperial legates (generals of senatorial rank) or procon suls (former consuls or praetors).3 For example, Syria was governed by the legate Quirinius from A.D. 6-11 (cf. Luke 2:2), and Achaia was ruled by the pronconsul Gallio ca. A.D. SI (Acts 18:12). Judea, however, was one of several relatively small provinces governed by a procurator

Bo Reicke, The New Testament Era, p. 226. The Oxford Classical Dictionary, 2nd ed., 1970, pp. 881, 882.

Black: Paul and Roman Law in Acts

211

(formerly called a perfect).4 In the NT, the procurator is called simply 'governor" (Gk. egemori), and examples are Pontius Pilate (Matt. 27), Felix (Acts 23f.), and Festus (Acts 25f.). In general, the authority of the procurator in Judea was equal to that of the proconsul or legate in his province.9 Each held the Imperium (authority, power) in his district. This authority was final by virtue of the fact that it was given him directly by the emperor. Therefore, each pro vincial governor, whether proconsul, legate, or procurator, had the total power of administration, jurisdiction, defense, and maintenance of public order in his province. Subsequently, any matter which fell outside the jurisdiction of the local magistrates of a town became subject to the judgment of the governor himself.6 In dealing with criminal cases (normally cases involving public order), the governor had several options. He could look to the precedent of the Roman ordo, a "list" of certain crimes and their punishments as prac ticed in Rome. On the other hand, he had the authority to ignore the or do and make his judgment as he wished, that is, extra ordinem^ Outside the list"). Thus, in all matters for which there was no established statute law and even in those matters covered by the ordo which he wished to ig nore, the final judgment was that of the governor.7 The governor, then, ruled with a free hand in all matters dealing with provincial subjects.8 He held the Imperium. However, a problem arises in considering the role of the governor in dealing with those who were not provincial subjects. What of the Roman citizen who lived or traveled in the provinces? It is clear that the governor had some power over at least some Roman citizens. For instance, he had the ius gladii, the power of execution over Roman citizens who were soldiers under his command.'

4 In a recently discovered inscription Pontius Pilate is called Praefectus Iudaeae. See L'Anne Epigraphique, 1963, p. 104. s See Ulpian, Digest 1.17.1, in which the Prefect of Egypt is said to have been given powers "similar to those of a proconsul by law." A. H. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero's Time, 1901, p. 410. 7 . . Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament, 1963, pp. 14,15. 'This is all too clear in the case of Jesus. Pilate had authority to do as he wished, with no fear of being challenged. See the wealth of material on the trial of Jesus, most recently R. Larry Overstreet, "Roman Law and the Trial of Christ," Bibtiotheca Sacra, 135 (1978):323-332. 'Sherwin-White, Roman Society, pp. 8-10.

212

Restoration Quarterly

This power was necessary for proper military discipline. But what was the extent of his authority over the civilian Roman citizen? What were the rights of Paul? Before dealing directly with this question, it is instructive to note the significance of Roman citizenship at the time of Paul. As suggested by the statement of Lysias in Acts 22, the citizenship was still at this time, a valued possession, unlike the period 150 years later when all provincials were citizens. The history of the development of the Roman citizenship is an interesting one. At its beginning only patricians who lived in Rome could be citizens, but this was soon to be changed. During the Republic, soldiers were given citizenship in exchange for their service. Later Julius Caesar planted colonies outside Rome and declared their inhabitants citizens (for example, Corinth and Philippi). During the Principate, subjects of provincial municipalities and districts were given citizenship in increasing numbers.10 During the time of Paul, then, the number of citizens was significant. However, it was by no means what it was to become in A.D. 212 when the Constitutio Antoniniana made virtually all provincials citizens. At that time the citizenship had lost almost all of its political importance.11 During Paul's day citizenship could be conferred in a number of ways. For example, manumission from slavery or the holding of certain offices automatically conferred citizenship.12 Important in the book of Acts are the claims of Paul and the tribune Lysias. The most obvious means of becoming a citizen was by birth, and this is Paul's claim.13 Thus Paul's parents had to have been citizens. Many have offered suggestions as to how Paul's family, being Jews, acquired citizenship;14 however, 'such speculation is a fruitless task.13

See the brief discussion of Eugene Brewer, "Roman Citizenship and Its Bearing on the Book of Acts," Restoration Quarterly, 3 (1961):205-219. For the full discussion, see Sherwin-White, The Roman Citizenship, 2nd ed., 1973; also see Sherwin-White's "The Roman Citizenship: A Survey of Its Development into a World Franchise," Aufstieg und Neidergang der Romischen Welt 1.2, 1972. "The Oxford Classical Dictionary, p. 244. "See W. W. Buckland, A Textbook of Roman Law, 1966, pp. 94-100, for complete discussion. "Acts 22:28. 14 See, for example, Ramsay, Paul, the Traveler and Roman Citizen, 1897, pp. 31,32; also Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free, 1977, p. 37. l5 Sherwin-White, Roman Society, p. 151.

10

Black: Paul and Roman Law in Acts

213

In contrast to Paul, Lysias in 22:28 claims to have bought his citizenship "for a great price." That citizenship could be bought at this time is illustrated by Dio Cassius, when he speaks of the emperor Claudius in the following manner:
A great many other persons unworthy of the citzenship were deprived of it, whereas he granted it to others quite indiscriminately, sometimes to individuals and sometimes to whole groups. For inasmuch as Romans had the advantage over foreigners in practically all respects, many sought the franchise by personal application to the emperor, and many bought it from Messalina and the imperial freedmen. For this reason, though the privilege was at first only sold for large sums, it later became so cheapened by the facility by which it could be obtained that it came to be a common saying, that a man could become a citizen by giving the right person some bits of broken glass.16

Although this statement is an obvious exaggeration, it nonetheless confirms Lysias' statement. It should be noted, however, that the citizenship was not technically for sale; the money was a sort of bribe for the official who could arrange to have a man's name put on the list of prospective citizens for approval by the emperor.17 Students of Acts have been puzzled as to how Paul proved his citizenship, if indeed he offered any proof. While no conclusive answer can be given, several considerations are interesting. First, it has often been noted that a false claim to citizenship was punishable by death, as suggested by Suetonius:
Claudius forbade men of foreign birth to use the Roman names so far as those of the clans was concerned. Those who usurped the privileges of Roman citizenship he executed in the Esquiline Field.1'

Second, it is possible that Paul had with him a "certificate of citizenship" as certain soldiers are known to have been given at the time of their acquistion of the citizenship.19 However, it seems unlikely that Paul, a citizen by birth, would have been issued one of these certificates.20 Another possibility is that Paul had with him a copy of his birth registration, as traveling citizens are known to have carried.21 Yet it may

"Roman History 60.17.5. "See Tacitus, Annals 14.50.1, in which Nero was enraged to find out that one of his senators was selling "the right to official promotion." "Claudius 5.25; cf. Epictetus 2.24.41. "See the introduction to Corpus Inscriptionum Latinorum, vol. 16. "Bruce, Paul, p. 39. "F. Schulz, "Roman Registers of Births and Birth Certificates," Journal of Roman Studies, 32 (1942):78-91; 33 (1943):55ff.

214

Restoration Quarterly

be questioned whether Paul would necessarily have had one, since the laws demanding birth registration seem to have arisen only after A.D.4." The rights of the Roman citizen were guaranteed by several laws, of which three will be cited. The first of these was the Lex Valeria of 300 B.C. Livy states:
The Valerian Law, having forbidden that he who had appealed should be scourged with rods or beheaded, merely provided that if anyone should disregard these injunctions, it should be deemed a wicked act."

Similar to the Lex Valeria was the Lex Porcius of 195 B.C. Livy again states:
. . . the Porcian Law seems intended, solely, for the security of the persons of the citizens; as it visited with a severe penalty anyone for beating with stripes or putting to death a Roman citizen.24

Most important during the time of Paul and further guaranteeing the rights of citizens was the Lex Iulia de vi publica.2* Paulus writes of the Lex Iulia:
Anyone invested with authority who puts to death or orders to be put to death, tortures, scourges, condemns, or directs a Roman citizen who first appealed to the people, and now has appealed to the Emperor to be placed in chains, shall be condemned under the Lex Julia relating to public violence. The punishment of this crime is death, where the parties are of inferior station; deportation to an island, where they are of superior rank.26

Ulpian echoes this statement concerning the Lex Iulia, adding the following:
This also applies to deputies and orators, and their attendants, where anyone is proved to have beaten them, or caused them any injury.27

"Bruce, Paul, p. 40. "History of Rome, 10.9.4. **Ibid. Cf. Cicero, Pro Rab. Perd. 4.12. That this prohibition against beating a citizen extended even into the provinces is implied in Cicero, Against Verres 2.5.58ff. "The exact date of this law is unknown and disputed. However, most would agree with A. H. M. Jones that it probably originated between 23 and 19 B.C. See Studies in Roman Government and Law, 1961, pp. 97,98. Sentence 5.26.1. Digest 48.6.7.

Black: Paul and Roman Law in Acts

215

The bearing of these texts upon the case of Paul is obvious. Paul, being a Roman citizen, could not be beaten, scourged, or put to death by the provincial officials. For this reason, the tribune Lysias became afraid upon learning that Paul was a Roman citizen, "because he had him chained" (Acts 22:29). As suggested above, this protection against the scourge was based upon the further right of the Roman to appeal his case to the emporor." Again, Paul's case is a clear example, as he says:
I am standing before Caesar's tribunal where I ought to be tried; to the Jews I have done no wrong, as you know very well. If then I am a wrongdoer, and have done anything for which I deserve to die, I do not seek to escape death; but if there is nothing in their charges against me, no one can give me up to them. I appeal to Caesar. (Acts 25:10,11)

These laws guaranteeing the citizen's rights seems to have been enforced, as a general rule. Cicero, therefore, spoke as follows in regard to the matter:
To bind a Roman citizen is a crime, to flog him is an adomination, to slay him is almost an act of murder: to crucify him iswhat? There is no fitting word that can possibly describe so horrible a deed.29

While the laws were normally enforced, there were times at which the laws seem to have been ignored, as is shown by the following incident from Cicero:

"There is no consensus of opinion among scholars as to the details of the appeals procedure. Peter Garnsey, "The Lex Iulia and Appeal under the Empire," Journal of Roman Studies, 56 (1966): 167-189, has argued that there was only one basic appeals process during the Empire and that it was called provocatio and appellatio interchangeably. He goes so far as to state that Paul's case was not an example of an appeal at all, but that it was rather an example of reiectio iudicii, that is, the rejection of a court biased against him. However, Lintott, "Provocatio: From the Struggle of the Orders to the Principate," Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt 1.2,1973, pp. 226,227, rightly has pointed out that Paul's case, although prompted by the problem of the biased court, was clearly an example of the appeals process. On the other hand, Jones and Sherwin-White have seen a distinction between provocatio and appellatio. Provocatio was the earlier system and the one utilized by Paul in Acts. Under provocatio the appeal was made before the trial, as in Paul's case. Appellatio was the system of the later Empire in which appeal was made after the trial and sentence. This second system arose as a necessity as the number of Roman citizens grew. For the full discussion, see Jones, Studies, pp. 53ff. 29 Against Verres 5.66.

216

Restoration Quarterly

The unhappy man cried out that he was a Roman citizen... To this Verres replied that he had discovered that he had been sent as a spy. . . . He then ordered the man to be flogged severely all over his body. There in the open marketplace of Messana a Roman citizen, gentlemen, was beaten with rods . . . and all the while, amid the crack of the falling blows, no groan was heard from the unhappy man . . . except am a Roman citizen.*"

Cicero goes on to state that the man was crucified after being beaten. He then calls for the death by crucifixion of the man who was guilty of such a deed.31 In addition to suchflagrantviolations of the law there appear to be recorded examples in which Romans were beaten and even executed within legal bounds; that is, no charge is made of violating the citizen's rights. For example, Galba judged a man guilty of poisoning another:
And when the man invoked the law and declared that he was a Roman citizen, Galba, pretending to lighten his punishment by some consolation and honor, ordered that a cross much higher than the rest and painted white be set up, and the man transferred to it."

Another instance is that involving Marius Priscus, who executed a Roman knight. When Pliny objected, his charge was not that a citizen's rights has been abused, but rather that Priscus had been bribed.33 A third case is that of Flavious Archippus, who was condemned for forgery. He objected, not on the grounds that he was a Roman citizen, but rather on the grounds that he had received a pardon from Domitian.34 More examples could be given, but these suffice to suggest that something more was involved than a simple abuse of power. Thus there is strong evidence that at times a Roman citizen could be executed without any breach of law. What, then, is the difference between these cases and the case of Paul, who was granted his appeal? While this discussion is technical and impractical to pursue here, the theory of . H. M. Jones seems to be the most reasonable. He suggests that the answer to this question lies in an examination of the types of crime involved. He concludes that the citizen who is guilty of an established statute (crime of the ordo) may be tried and sentenced despite his appeal. This would explain why the case of Paul (and later Christians

"Ibid., 5.62. "Ibid., 5.67. "Suetonius, Galba 9.1. "Pliny, Letters 2.11. "Ibid., 10.58.

Black: Paul and Roman Law in Acts

217

accused of the same type of crime) ended at Rome. Paul's was clearly a charge extra ordinem.*5 In the cases of the others, however, no appeal was granted because of the fact that their crimes were in the ordo.36 While Jones' theory cannot be proved, it seems to account for all the evidence. The question of the outcome of Paul's trial will remain unanswered, although several have offered guesses. It is likely that he was not heard by the emperor himself, for by the time of Nero most cases were delegated to others.37 However, any theories as to the later trial proceedings are simply conjecture. In light of the classical texts cited above, the book of Acts is seen to reflect accurately matters of provincial Roman law in the first century A.D. As well, these texts provide further insight into the proceedings and therefore place the student one step closer to the understanding of Acts that it had among its original readers. Paul, the Roman citizen traveling in the provinces, enjoyed rights and privileges unavailable to the majority of provincials. Local officials and even the governor himself were forbidden by the Julian Law and other laws to execute or even beat Paul. The punishment for violation of these laws was death, or, at best, exile. Paul was able to claim his rights by uttering the simple statements, "lama Roman citizen" and "I appeal to Caesar." Felix, the governor, had no alternative but to send him, protected, to Rome to appear before the emperor. The importance of the Roman background of the NT is by no means limited to the book of Acts. The Gospels, the epistles, and the book of Revelation also come from the first-century Roman world. For example, the Roman concept of citizenship is also important in Paul's own writings. Paul writes in Ephesians 2:19:
So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God. . . .

Again, in Philippians 3:20 he writes that "our citizenship is in heaven . . . ."An understanding of Paul's idea of citizenship adds further significance to these words. Being a Roman, he enjoyed many privileges unavailable to the noncitizen. He traveled in the provinces, but he was not subject to their laws. His citizenship was in Rome. In the same way, then, the Christian is in the world, but he is not subject to the
"Sherwin-White, Roman Society, p. 48, outlines three essential elements of the extra ordinem procedure in the trial of Paul: The charge brought by private prosecutors; the formal prosecution; and the appearance before the holder of Imperium. "Jones, Studies, pp. 59ff. "Tacitus, Annals 13.4.2.

218

Restoration Quarterly

jurisdiction of the world ("earthly things" of Phil.3:19). His citizenship is with the saints in heaven; therefore, he enjoys special privileges. It is especially significant that he wrote these words to the Christians at Ephesus, the capital of the Roman province of Asia, and Philippi, the Roman colony. The Christians of these cities could be expected to understand the privileges and duties involved in being citizens.39 The idea of citizenship is only one of many evidences of the Roman background of the NT. Let us not neglect this important area of NT study.

"Francis Lyall, "Roman Law in the Writings of PaulAliens and Citizens," Evangelical Quarterly, 48 (1976):3-14.

^ s
Copyright and Use: As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law. This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s). About ATLAS: The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.