The strong mounted detachment, numbering four hundred and seventy
full-armed Roman warriors, accordingly set out that night at nine
o’clock, and moving silently off from the castle, which stood near one
of the western gates of the city, passed out of Jerusalem unnoticed in
the darkness, and galloped away to the north-west. After forty miles
of hard riding, they reached Antipatris before day, and as all danger
of pursuit from the Jerusalem assassins was out of the question there,
the mounted infantry and the lancers returned to Jerusalem, leaving
Paul however, the very respectable military attendance of the seventy
horse-guards. With these, he journeyed to Caesarea, only about
twenty-five miles off, where he was presented by the commander of the
detachment to Felix, the Roman governor, who always resided in Caesarea,
the capital of his province. The governor, on reading the letter and
learning that Paul was of Cilicia, deferred giving his case a full
hearing, until his accusers had also come; and committed him for safe
keeping in the interval, to an apartment in the great palace, built by
Herod the Great, the royal founder of Caesarea.
After a delay of five days, the high priest and the elders came down to
Caesarea, to prosecute their charges against Paul before the governor.
They brought with them, as their advocate, a speech-maker named
Tertullus, whose name shows him to have been of Roman connections or
education, and who, on account of his acquaintance with the Latin forms
of oratory and law, was no doubt selected by Ananias and his coadjutors,
as a person better qualified than themselves to maintain their cause
with effect, before the governor. Tertullus accordingly opened the case,
and when Paul had been confronted with his accusers, began with a very
tedious string of formal compliments to Felix, and then set forth a
complaint against Paul in very bitter and abusive terms, stating his
offense to be, the attempt to profane the temple, for which the Jews
would have convicted and punished him, if Lysias had not violently
hindered, and put them to the trouble of bringing the whole business
before the governor, though a matter exclusively concerning their
religious law. To all his assertions the Jews testified.
This presentation of the accusation being made, Paul was then called
on for his defense, which he thereupon delivered in a tone highly
respectful to the governor, and maintained that he had been guilty of
none of the troublesome and riotous conduct of which he was accused:
but quietly, without any effort to make a commotion among the people
anywhere, had come into the city on a visit, after many years absence,
to bring alms and offerings; and that when he was seized by the Asian
Jews in the temple, he was going blamelessly through the established
ceremonies of purification. He complained also, that his original
accusers, the Asian Jews, were not confronted with him, and challenged
his present prosecutors to bring any evidence against him. Felix,
after this hearing of the case, on the pretence of needing Lysias as
a witness on the facts, deferred his decision, and left both accusers
and accused to the enjoyment of the delays and “glorious uncertainties
of the law.” Meanwhile he committed Paul to the charge of a centurion,
with directions that he should be allowed all reasonable liberty, and
should not be in any particular restricted from the freest intercourse
with his friends. The imprisonment of Paul at Caesarea was merely
nominal; and he must have passed his time both pleasantly and
profitably, with the members of the church at Caesarea, with whom he
had formerly been acquainted, especially with Philip and his family.
Besides these, he was also favored with the company of several of his
assistants, who had been the companions of his toils in Europe and Asia;
and through them he could hold the freest correspondence with any of
the numerous churches of his apostolic charge throughout the world. He
resided here for two whole years at least, of Felix’s administration;
and during that time, was more than once sent for by the governor, to
hold conversations with him on the great objects of his life, in some
of which he expressed himself so forcibly on righteousness, temperance
and judgment to come, that the wicked governor,――at that moment sitting
in the presence of the apostle with an adulterous paramour,――trembled
at the view presented by Paul of the consequences of those sins for
which Felix was so infamous. But his repentant tremors soon passed
off, and he merely dismissed the apostle with the vague promise, that
at some more convenient season he would send for him. He did indeed,
often send for him after this; but the motive of these renewals of
intercourse seems to have been of the basest order, for it is stated
by the sacred historian, that his real object was to induce Paul to
offer him a bribe, which he supposed could be easily raised by the
contributions of his devoted friends. But the hope was vain. It was no
part of Paul’s plan of action to hasten the decision of his movements
by such means, and the consequence was, that Felix found so little
occasion to befriend him, that when he went out of the office which he
had uniformly disgraced by tyranny, rapine, and murder, he thought it,
on the whole, worth while to gratify the late subjects of his hateful
sway, by leaving Paul still a prisoner.
“This Drusilla was the youngest daughter of Herod Agrippa.
(Josephus lib. xix. c. 9. in.) Josephus gives the following
account of her marriage with Felix:――‘Agrippa, having received
this present from Caesar, (viz. Claudius,) gave his sister
Drusilla in marriage to the Azizus, king of the Emesenes, when
he had consented to be circumcised. For Epiphanes, the son of
king Antiochus, had broken the contract with her, by refusing
to embrace the Jewish customs, although he had promised her
father he would. But this marriage of Drusilla with Azizus was
dissolved in a short time, after this manner. When Felix was
procurator of Judaea, having had a sight of her, he was mightily
taken with her; and indeed she was the most beautiful of her
sex. He therefore sent to her Simon, a Jew of Cyprus, who was
one of his friends, and pretended to magic, by whom he persuaded
her to leave her husband, and marry him; promising to make her
perfectly happy, if she did not disdain him. It was far from
being a sufficient reason; but to avoid the envy of her sister
Bernice, who was continually doing her ill offices, because
of her beauty, she was induced to transgress the laws of her
country, and marry Felix.’” (Lardner’s Credibility, 4to. Vol. I.
p. 16, 17, edition, London, 1815.) [Williams on Pearson, p. 78.]
Illustration: SYRACUSE. Acts xxviii. 12.
The successor of Felix in the government of Palestine, was Porcius
Festus, a man whose administration is by no means characterized in
the history of those times by a reputation for justice or prudence;
yet in the case of Paul, his conduct seems to have been much more
accordant with right and reason, than was that of the truly infamous
Felix. Visiting the religious capital of the Jews soon after his first
entrance into the province, he was there earnestly petitioned by the
ever-spiteful foes of Paul, to cause this prisoner to be brought up
to Jerusalem for trial, intending when Paul should enter the city,
to execute their old plan of assassination, which had been formerly
frustrated by the benevolent prudence and energy of Claudius Lysias.
But Festus, perhaps having received some notification of this plot,
from the friends of Paul, utterly refused to bring the prisoner to
Jerusalem, but required the presence of the accusers in the proper seat
of the supreme provincial administration of justice at Caesarea. After
a ten days’ stay in Jerusalem, he returned to the civil capital, and
with a commendable activity in his judicial proceedings, on the very
next day after his arrival in Caesarea, summoned Paul and his accusers
before him. The Jews of course, told their old story, and brought out
against Paul many grievous complaints, which they could not prove.
His only reply to all this accusation without testimony was――“Neither
against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor yet against
Caesar, have I offended in any particular.” But Festus having been in
some way influenced to favor the designs of the Jews, urged Paul to go
up to Jerusalem, there to be tried by the supreme religious court of
his own nation. Paul replied by a bold and distinct assertion of his
rights, as a Roman citizen, before the tribunal of his liege lord and
sovran: “I stand before Caesar’s judgment-seat, where I ought to be
judged. To the Jews I have done no wrong, as thou very well knowest.
If I am guilty of anything that deserves death, I refuse not to die;
but if I have done none of these things of which they accuse me, no
man can deliver me into their hands. I APPEAL TO CAESAR.” This solemn
concluding formula put him at once far beyond the reach of all inferior
tyranny; henceforth no governor in the world could direct the fate of
the appellant Roman citizen, throwing before himself the adamantine
aegis of Roman law. Festus himself, though evidently displeased at
this turn of events, could not resist the course of law; but after a
conference with this council, replied to Paul――“Dost thou appeal to
Caesar? To Caesar shalt thou go.”
While Paul was still detained at Caesarea, after this final reference
of his case to the highest judicial authority in the world, Festus was
visited at Caesarea, by Herod Agrippa II. king of Iturea, Trachonitis,
Abilene, and other northern regions of Palestine, the son of that
Herod Agrippa whose character and actions were connected with the
incidents of Peter’s life. He, passing through Judea with his sister
Bernice, stopped at Caesarea, to pay their compliments to the new
Roman governor. During their stay there, Festus, with a view to find
rational entertainment for his royal guests, bethought himself of
Paul’s case, as one that would be likely to interest them, connected as
the prisoner’s fate seemed to be, with the religious and legal matters
of that peculiar people to whom Agrippa himself belonged, and in the
minutiae of whose law and theology he had been so well instructed, that
his opinion on the case would be well worth having, to one as little
acquainted with these matters as the heathen governor himself was.
Festus therefore gave a very full account of the whole case to Agrippa,
in terms that sufficiently well exhibited the perplexities in which
he was involved, and in expressions which are strikingly and almost
amusingly characteristic,――complaining as he does of the very abstruse
and perplexing nature of the accusations brought by the Jews, as being
“certain questions of their own religion, and of one Jesus, whom Paul
affirmed to be alive.” Agrippa was so much interested in the case that
he expressed a wish to hear the man in person; and Festus accordingly
arranged that he should the next day be gratified with the hearing.
“‘_King Agrippa and Bernice._’ Acts. xxv. 13. This Agrippa
was the son of Herod Agrippa; St. Luke calls him king, which
Josephus also does very often. (Antiquities lib. xx. c. viii.
§ 6, et passim.) But St. Luke does not suppose him to be king
of Judaea, for all the judicial proceedings of that country
relating to St. Paul, are transacted before Felix, and Festus
his successor; besides, he says, that ‘Agrippa came to Caesarea
to salute Festus,’ to compliment him on his arrival, &c. verse 1.
When his father died, Claudius would have immediately put him in
possession of his father’s dominions, but he was advised not to
do so, on account of the son’s youth, then only seventeen; the
emperor, therefore, ‘appointed Cuspius Fadus praefect of Judea
and the whole kingdom, (Josephus Antiquities lib. xix. c. 9, ad
fin.) who was succeeded by Tiberius, Alexander, Cumanus, Felix,
and Festus, though these did not possess the province in the
same extent that Fadus did.’ (Antiquities xx. Jewish War lib.
ii.)
“Agrippa had, notwithstanding, at this time, considerable
territories. ‘Herod, brother of king Agrippa the Great, died
in the eighth year of the reign of Claudius. Claudius then gave
his government to the young Agrippa.’ (Josephus Antiquities
xx. p. 887.) This is the Agrippa mentioned in this twenty-fifth
chapter. ‘The twelfth year of his reign being completed,
Claudius gave to Agrippa the tetrarchy of Philip and Batanea,
adding also Trachonitis with Abila. This had been the tetrarchy
of Lysanias. But he took away from him Chalcis, after he had
governed it four years.’ (Josephus Antiquities xx. p. 890,
v. 25, &c.) ‘After this, he sent Felix, the brother of Pallas,
to be procurator of Judea, Galilee, Samaria, and Peraea; and
promoted Agrippa from Chalcis to a greater kingdom, giving
him the tetrarchy which had been Philip’s. (This is Batanea,
and Trachonitis, and Gaulonitis;) and he added, moreover, the
kingdom of Lysanias, and the province that had been Varus’s.’
(Josephus War of the Jews lib. ii. c. 12. fin.) ‘Nero, in the
first year of his reign, gave Agrippa a certain part of Galilee,
ordering Tiberias and Tarichaea to be subject to him. He gave
him also Julias, a city of Peraea, and fourteen towns in the
neighborhood of it.’ (Antiquities xx. c. 7. § 4.) St. Luke
is therefore fully justified in styling this Agrippa king at
this time.” (Lardner’s Credibility, 4to. Vol. I. pp. 17, 18.)
[Williams’s Pearson, p. 81, 82.]
On the next day, preparations were made for this audience, with a
solemnity of display most honorable to the subject of it. The great
hall of the palace was arrayed in grand order for the occasion, and, in
due time, king Agrippa, with his royal sister, and the Roman governor,
entered it with great pomp, followed by a train composed of all the
great military and civil dignitaries of the vice-imperial court of
Palestine. Before all this stately array, the apostolic prisoner
was now set, and a solemn annunciation was made by Festus, of the
circumstances of the prisoner’s previous accusation, trial, and appeal;
all which were now summarily recapitulated in public, for the sake of
form, although they had before been communicated in private, to Agrippa.
The king, as the highest authority present, having graciously invited
Paul to speak for himself, the apostle stretched forth his hand and
began, in that respectful style of elaborately elegant compliment,
which characterizes the exordiums of so many of his addresses to
the great. After having, with most admirable skill, conciliated the
attention and kind regard of the king, by expressing his happiness
in being called to speak in his own defense before one so learned in
Hebrew law, he went on; and in a speech which is well known for its
noble eloquence, so resplendent, even through the disguise of a quaint
translation, presented not merely his own case, but the claims of that
revelation, for proclaiming which he was now a prisoner. So admirably
did he conduct his whole plea, both for himself and the cause of Christ,
that in spite of the sneer of Festus, Agrippa paid him the very highest
compliment in his power, and pronounced him to be utterly guiltless
of the charges. No part of this plea and its attendant discussions,
needs to be recapitulated; but a single characteristic of Paul, which
is most strikingly evinced, deserves especial notice. This is his
profound regard for all the established forms of polite address. He is
not satisfied with a mere respectful behavior towards his judges, but
even distinguishes himself by a minute observance of all the customary
phrases of politeness; nor does he suffer his courtly manner to be
disturbed, even by the abrupt remark of Festus, accusing him of frenzy.
In his reply, he styles his accuser “Most noble;” and yet every reader
of Jewish history knows, and Paul knew, that this Festus, to whom he
gave this honorable title, was one of the very wicked men of those
wicked times. The instance shows then, that those who, from religious
scruples, refuse to give the titles of established respect to those who
are elevated in station, and reject all forms of genteel address, on
the same ground, have certainly constructed their system of practical
religion on a model wholly different from that by which the apostle’s
demeanor was guided; and the whole impression made on a common reader,
by Luke’s clear statement of Paul’s behavior before the most dignified
and splendid audience that he ever addressed, must be, that he was
complete in all the forms and observances of polite intercourse; and
he must be considered, both according to the high standard of his
refined and dignified hearers, and also by the universal standard of
the refined of all ages,――not only a finished, eloquent orator, but
a person of polished manners, delicate tact, ready compliment, and
graceful, courtly address:――in short, A PERFECT GENTLEMAN.