What do you think?
Rate this book
St. Paul: The Traveller and the Roman Citizen
St Paul was one of the most influential figures in the early Church.
But who was he?
And why was he so important?
William Mitchell Ramsay, one of the twentieth century’s foremost scholars on the early church, here uncovers the real story of St Paul.
Ramsay charts his journey from Antioch to Galatia, Asia Minor to Macedonia, his shipwreck off Malta to his final years in Rome.
Using archaeological evidence to further understand the writings of the New Testament allows Ramsay to gain a new layer of meaning behind Paul’s work.
Although Paul was never one of the original Twelve Apostles he used his status as a Jew and a Roman to talk to wide audiences across the Mediterranean and brought Christianity to a larger number of people in the 1st century AD.
Paul’s influence over the early church was immense, and fourteen of the twenty-seven books in the New Testament have traditionally been attributed to Paul.
He continues to be a revered figure of the Christian faith as his continue to be vital roots of the theology, worship, and pastoral life in the Catholic and Protestant traditions of the West, and the Orthodox traditions of the East.
St Paul the traveller and Roman Citizen is a fascinating biography of one the most influential people the world has ever seen.
William Mitchell Ramsay (15 March 1851 – 20 April 1939) was a Scottish archaeologist and New Testament scholar. By his death in 1939 he had become the foremost authority of his day on the history of Asia Minor and a leading scholar in the study of the New Testament. His other works include The Church in the Roman Empire, The Letters to the Seven Churches and Was Christ born at Bethlehem?
Albion Press is an imprint of Endeavour Press, the UK's leading independent digital publisher. For more information on our titles please sign up to our newsletter at www.endeavourpress.com. Each week you will receive updates on free and discounted ebooks. Follow us on Twitter: @EndeavourPress and on Facebook via http://on.fb.me/1HweQV7. We are always interested in hearing from our readers. Endeavour Press believes that the future is now.
But who was he?
And why was he so important?
William Mitchell Ramsay, one of the twentieth century’s foremost scholars on the early church, here uncovers the real story of St Paul.
Ramsay charts his journey from Antioch to Galatia, Asia Minor to Macedonia, his shipwreck off Malta to his final years in Rome.
Using archaeological evidence to further understand the writings of the New Testament allows Ramsay to gain a new layer of meaning behind Paul’s work.
Although Paul was never one of the original Twelve Apostles he used his status as a Jew and a Roman to talk to wide audiences across the Mediterranean and brought Christianity to a larger number of people in the 1st century AD.
Paul’s influence over the early church was immense, and fourteen of the twenty-seven books in the New Testament have traditionally been attributed to Paul.
He continues to be a revered figure of the Christian faith as his continue to be vital roots of the theology, worship, and pastoral life in the Catholic and Protestant traditions of the West, and the Orthodox traditions of the East.
St Paul the traveller and Roman Citizen is a fascinating biography of one the most influential people the world has ever seen.
William Mitchell Ramsay (15 March 1851 – 20 April 1939) was a Scottish archaeologist and New Testament scholar. By his death in 1939 he had become the foremost authority of his day on the history of Asia Minor and a leading scholar in the study of the New Testament. His other works include The Church in the Roman Empire, The Letters to the Seven Churches and Was Christ born at Bethlehem?
Albion Press is an imprint of Endeavour Press, the UK's leading independent digital publisher. For more information on our titles please sign up to our newsletter at www.endeavourpress.com. Each week you will receive updates on free and discounted ebooks. Follow us on Twitter: @EndeavourPress and on Facebook via http://on.fb.me/1HweQV7. We are always interested in hearing from our readers. Endeavour Press believes that the future is now.
416 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1895
179 people are currently reading
183 people want to read
About the author
William M. Ramsay
70 books15 followersSir William Mitchell Ramsay, FBA was a Scottish archaeologist and New Testament scholar. By his death in 1939 he had become the foremost authority of his day on the history of Asia Minor and a leading scholar in the study of the New Testament. From the post of Professor of Classical Art and Architecture at Oxford, he was appointed Regius Professor of Humanity (the Latin Professorship) at Aberdeen. Knighted in 1906 to mark his distinguished service to the world of scholarship, Ramsay also gained three honourary fellowships from Oxford colleges, nine honourary doctorates from British, Continental and North American universities and became an honourary member of almost every association devoted to archaeology and historical research. He was one of the original members of the British Academy, was awarded the Gold Medal of Pope Leo XIII in 1893 and the Victorian Medal of the Royal Geographical Society in 1906.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
June 21, 2014
I hope to review this in a few days (going on a trip). In short, one of the best histories I've ever read. A remarkable book that totally transformed and enriched my view of the Book of Acts. If interested, you can get it cheap on Amazon. There are several editions available.
August 14, 2021
This book is incredibly good for having been written in 1895. The author is thorough and his interpretations are well balanced by an informed historical and cultural logic. Good to read with an atlas of Paul's three journeys, as Ramsay takes you step-by-step through Paul's itinerary. For the most part it is a straight forward narration of Paul's travels and encounters, not giving a lot of extra insight or illumination, but does indeed familiarize you with the missionary journeys.
April 22, 2008
The copy I have is a 1902 sixth edition. To better understand his epistles, it best to better know Paul.
March 19, 2025
RAMSAY’S ARGUMENTS ABOUT ACTS, AND PAUL’S LETTERS
Sir William Mitchell Ramsay (1851-1939) was a Scottish archaeologist and New Testament scholar, as well as Professor of Classical Archaeology at Oxford University. He is now probably most remembered for his studies (in what is now Turkey and Asia Minor) of St. Paul's missionary journeys and of Christianity in the early Roman Empire, and for his endorsement of the historical accuracy of Luke and the Book of Acts.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1895 book, “I can feel no doubt about the facts themselves, which seem to stand out so clear and distinct, that one has only to look and write. Hence I have not withdrawn from any of the positions maintained in my ‘Church in the Roman Empire’… The present work is founded on the results for which evidence is there accumulated; but, in place of its neutral tone, a definite theory about the composition of Acts is here maintained…. My aim has been to state the facts of Paul’s life simply, avoiding argument and controversy so far as was possible in a subject where every point is controverted.” (Pg. xxi-xxii)
He states in the first chapter, “The aim of our work is to treat its subject as a department of history and of literature. Christianity was not merely a religion, but also a system of life and action; and its introduction by Paul amid the society of the Roman Empire produced changes of momentous consequences, which the historian must study. What does the student of Roman history find in the subject of our investigation? How would an observant, educated, and unprejudiced citizen of the Roman Empire have regarded the new social force, that new philosophical system, if he had studied it with the eyes and the temper of a 19th century investigator?... If the main position if this book is admitted, it will furnish a secure basis for the epistles to rest on.” (Pg. 1-2)
He states, “I may fairly claim to have entered on this investigation without any prejudice in favor of the conclusion which I shall now attempt to justify to the reader. On the contrary, I began with a mind unfavorable to it, for the ingenuity and apparent completeness of the Tübingen theory had at one time convinced me. It did not then lie in my line of life to investigate the subject minutely; but more recently I found myself often brought in contact with the book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne in upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth. In fact, beginning with the fixed idea that the work was essentially a second-century composition, and never relying on its evidence as trustworthy for first-century conditions, I gradually came to find it a useful ally in some obscure and difficult investigations…” (Pg. 7-8)
He continues, “It is probable that I have … not grasped the full meaning in some cases. I am well aware that I leave some difficulties unexplained, sometimes from inability, sometimes from mere omission. But I am sustained by the firm belief that I am on the right path, and by the hope that enough of difficulties have been cleared away to justify a dispassionate historical criticism in placing this great writer on the high pedestal that belongs to him.” (Pg. 9-10)
He acknowledges, “The marvels described in Acts concern my present purpose only insofar as they bear upon the historical effect of the narrative. In themselves they do not add to, but detract from its verisimilitude as history. They are difficulties; but my hope is to show first that the narrative apart from them is stamped as authentic, second that they are an integral part of it. To study and explain them does not belong to me… That Paul believed himself to be the recipient of direct revelations from God, to be guided and controlled in his plans by direct interposition of the Holy Spirit, to be enabled by the divine power to move the forces of nature in a way that ordinary men cannot, is involved in this narrative. You must make up your own minds to accept or to reject it; but you cannot cut out the marvelous from the rest, nor can you believe that Paul or this writer was a mere victim of hallucinations.
“To the men of that age only what was guaranteed by marvelous accompaniments was true; to us unusual accompaniments tend to disprove truth. The contrast between the ages is himmelweit [huge]. The marvelous is indissolubly interwoven… with this narrative, and cannot be eliminated. Do the marvelous adjuncts discredit the rest of the narrative, or does the vividness and accuracy of the narrative require us to take the marvels with the rest and try to understand them? Every one must answer the question for himself.” (Pg. 87-88)
He notes, “there is evidently a marked difference between the looser way of talking about ‘the hand of God’ that is common in the present day, and the view entertained by Paul or Luke. Where a great advantage results from a serious illness, many of us would feel it right to recognize and acknowledge the ‘guiding hand of God’; but it is evident that, when Luke or Paul uses such language as ‘the Spirit suffered them not,’ they refer to a guidance which became apparent only through the results. The superhuman element is inextricably involved in Luke’s history and in Paul’s letters.” (Pg. 140-141)
Of Paul’s address to the Athenians, he comments, “It is remarkable that, alike at Lystra and Athens, there is nothing in the reported words of Paul that is overtly Christian, and nothing (with the possible exception of ‘the man whom he hath ordained’) that several Greek philosophers might not have said. That is certainly not accidental; the author of Acts must have been conscious of it; and it is a strong proof of their genuineness: no one would invent a speech for Paul, which was not markedly Christian.” (Pg. 150)
He observes, “In the mission of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem, it is noteworthy that the Divine action plays no part. The Church in Antioch resolved, and the Church sent them to Jerusalem, escorting them on their way. This is not accidental, but expressed the deliberate judgment of Paul and of Luke. The action that led up to the Council in Jerusalem and the ineffective Decree did not originate in Divine revelation.” (Pg. 154)
He asks, “One question remains: Why was Paul content with writing? Why did he not start [away] at once himself? Personal intervention is always more effective in such cases. But… a letter would certainly travel faster than Paul could get over the ground… In the second place, he could hardly sacrifice the opportunity of reviewing the churches in Syria and Cilicia that lay on his way: everywhere he would be besieged with entreaties to stay for a little… Finally there are frequently reasons which make it impossible to hurry away on a serious journey like that… Paul was only human.” (Pg. 191)
At the end of the book, he turns to the question of authorship and date of Acts. “Luke represents himself as having been an eye-witness of some of the events which he describes; and we have inferred… that he was not an eye-witness to the rest. In a former work I have tried to show that there lies behind the narrative of Paul’s journeys a document originating ‘from a person acquainted with the actual circumstances,’ and therefore ‘composed under St. Paul’s own influence.’”(Pg. 383)
“I purposely left the question untouched whether the ‘Travel Document’ was composed by the author of Acts or by a different person… we must now put the question in a more precise form. What is the relation between the ‘Travel Document’ and the completed text of Acts? To this the answer must be that the ‘Travel Document’ was Luke’s own written notes (supplemented by memory…) His diary, where he was an eye-witness, and notes of his conversation with Paul, and doubtless others also, were worked into the book of Acts suitably to the carefully arranged plan on which it is constructed…” (Pg. 383-384) “Luke added to these authorities an obvious acquaintance with Paul’s own letters. He rarely states anything that is recorded in them; he assumes them as known; and he makes it one of his objects to set them in a clearer light…” (Pg. 385)
“On our view the Crucifixion took place at the Passover of A.D. 30, the fourth Passover in the public career of Jesus… Now John was six months older than Jesus… we reach the conclusions that the synchronisms of Luke 3:1-2 are calculated for the summer … of A.D. 26; and he calls this the fifteenth of the reign of Tiberius… But such a way or method of reckoning the reign of Tiberius was unknown…” (Pg. 386)
“It has an important bearing on Luke’s attitude towards the Roman State that his work is addressed to a Roman officer, who had become a Christian. We may safely say that in the first century a Roman official would hardly bear the name Theophilus; and therefore it must be a name given to him at baptism…” (Pg. 388)
Most of Ramsay’s writings will be of keen interest to those studying Biblical Archaeology and Apologetics.
Sir William Mitchell Ramsay (1851-1939) was a Scottish archaeologist and New Testament scholar, as well as Professor of Classical Archaeology at Oxford University. He is now probably most remembered for his studies (in what is now Turkey and Asia Minor) of St. Paul's missionary journeys and of Christianity in the early Roman Empire, and for his endorsement of the historical accuracy of Luke and the Book of Acts.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1895 book, “I can feel no doubt about the facts themselves, which seem to stand out so clear and distinct, that one has only to look and write. Hence I have not withdrawn from any of the positions maintained in my ‘Church in the Roman Empire’… The present work is founded on the results for which evidence is there accumulated; but, in place of its neutral tone, a definite theory about the composition of Acts is here maintained…. My aim has been to state the facts of Paul’s life simply, avoiding argument and controversy so far as was possible in a subject where every point is controverted.” (Pg. xxi-xxii)
He states in the first chapter, “The aim of our work is to treat its subject as a department of history and of literature. Christianity was not merely a religion, but also a system of life and action; and its introduction by Paul amid the society of the Roman Empire produced changes of momentous consequences, which the historian must study. What does the student of Roman history find in the subject of our investigation? How would an observant, educated, and unprejudiced citizen of the Roman Empire have regarded the new social force, that new philosophical system, if he had studied it with the eyes and the temper of a 19th century investigator?... If the main position if this book is admitted, it will furnish a secure basis for the epistles to rest on.” (Pg. 1-2)
He states, “I may fairly claim to have entered on this investigation without any prejudice in favor of the conclusion which I shall now attempt to justify to the reader. On the contrary, I began with a mind unfavorable to it, for the ingenuity and apparent completeness of the Tübingen theory had at one time convinced me. It did not then lie in my line of life to investigate the subject minutely; but more recently I found myself often brought in contact with the book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne in upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth. In fact, beginning with the fixed idea that the work was essentially a second-century composition, and never relying on its evidence as trustworthy for first-century conditions, I gradually came to find it a useful ally in some obscure and difficult investigations…” (Pg. 7-8)
He continues, “It is probable that I have … not grasped the full meaning in some cases. I am well aware that I leave some difficulties unexplained, sometimes from inability, sometimes from mere omission. But I am sustained by the firm belief that I am on the right path, and by the hope that enough of difficulties have been cleared away to justify a dispassionate historical criticism in placing this great writer on the high pedestal that belongs to him.” (Pg. 9-10)
He acknowledges, “The marvels described in Acts concern my present purpose only insofar as they bear upon the historical effect of the narrative. In themselves they do not add to, but detract from its verisimilitude as history. They are difficulties; but my hope is to show first that the narrative apart from them is stamped as authentic, second that they are an integral part of it. To study and explain them does not belong to me… That Paul believed himself to be the recipient of direct revelations from God, to be guided and controlled in his plans by direct interposition of the Holy Spirit, to be enabled by the divine power to move the forces of nature in a way that ordinary men cannot, is involved in this narrative. You must make up your own minds to accept or to reject it; but you cannot cut out the marvelous from the rest, nor can you believe that Paul or this writer was a mere victim of hallucinations.
“To the men of that age only what was guaranteed by marvelous accompaniments was true; to us unusual accompaniments tend to disprove truth. The contrast between the ages is himmelweit [huge]. The marvelous is indissolubly interwoven… with this narrative, and cannot be eliminated. Do the marvelous adjuncts discredit the rest of the narrative, or does the vividness and accuracy of the narrative require us to take the marvels with the rest and try to understand them? Every one must answer the question for himself.” (Pg. 87-88)
He notes, “there is evidently a marked difference between the looser way of talking about ‘the hand of God’ that is common in the present day, and the view entertained by Paul or Luke. Where a great advantage results from a serious illness, many of us would feel it right to recognize and acknowledge the ‘guiding hand of God’; but it is evident that, when Luke or Paul uses such language as ‘the Spirit suffered them not,’ they refer to a guidance which became apparent only through the results. The superhuman element is inextricably involved in Luke’s history and in Paul’s letters.” (Pg. 140-141)
Of Paul’s address to the Athenians, he comments, “It is remarkable that, alike at Lystra and Athens, there is nothing in the reported words of Paul that is overtly Christian, and nothing (with the possible exception of ‘the man whom he hath ordained’) that several Greek philosophers might not have said. That is certainly not accidental; the author of Acts must have been conscious of it; and it is a strong proof of their genuineness: no one would invent a speech for Paul, which was not markedly Christian.” (Pg. 150)
He observes, “In the mission of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem, it is noteworthy that the Divine action plays no part. The Church in Antioch resolved, and the Church sent them to Jerusalem, escorting them on their way. This is not accidental, but expressed the deliberate judgment of Paul and of Luke. The action that led up to the Council in Jerusalem and the ineffective Decree did not originate in Divine revelation.” (Pg. 154)
He asks, “One question remains: Why was Paul content with writing? Why did he not start [away] at once himself? Personal intervention is always more effective in such cases. But… a letter would certainly travel faster than Paul could get over the ground… In the second place, he could hardly sacrifice the opportunity of reviewing the churches in Syria and Cilicia that lay on his way: everywhere he would be besieged with entreaties to stay for a little… Finally there are frequently reasons which make it impossible to hurry away on a serious journey like that… Paul was only human.” (Pg. 191)
At the end of the book, he turns to the question of authorship and date of Acts. “Luke represents himself as having been an eye-witness of some of the events which he describes; and we have inferred… that he was not an eye-witness to the rest. In a former work I have tried to show that there lies behind the narrative of Paul’s journeys a document originating ‘from a person acquainted with the actual circumstances,’ and therefore ‘composed under St. Paul’s own influence.’”(Pg. 383)
“I purposely left the question untouched whether the ‘Travel Document’ was composed by the author of Acts or by a different person… we must now put the question in a more precise form. What is the relation between the ‘Travel Document’ and the completed text of Acts? To this the answer must be that the ‘Travel Document’ was Luke’s own written notes (supplemented by memory…) His diary, where he was an eye-witness, and notes of his conversation with Paul, and doubtless others also, were worked into the book of Acts suitably to the carefully arranged plan on which it is constructed…” (Pg. 383-384) “Luke added to these authorities an obvious acquaintance with Paul’s own letters. He rarely states anything that is recorded in them; he assumes them as known; and he makes it one of his objects to set them in a clearer light…” (Pg. 385)
“On our view the Crucifixion took place at the Passover of A.D. 30, the fourth Passover in the public career of Jesus… Now John was six months older than Jesus… we reach the conclusions that the synchronisms of Luke 3:1-2 are calculated for the summer … of A.D. 26; and he calls this the fifteenth of the reign of Tiberius… But such a way or method of reckoning the reign of Tiberius was unknown…” (Pg. 386)
“It has an important bearing on Luke’s attitude towards the Roman State that his work is addressed to a Roman officer, who had become a Christian. We may safely say that in the first century a Roman official would hardly bear the name Theophilus; and therefore it must be a name given to him at baptism…” (Pg. 388)
Most of Ramsay’s writings will be of keen interest to those studying Biblical Archaeology and Apologetics.
February 6, 2020
While the general themes were illuminating, this book was a bit technical for me. The author was quite the expert historian and archeologist, and his familiarity with Paul scholarship was unparalleled for his time. However the Greek language, discussions of dates and other technical matters were beyond my interest as a general reader. I enjoyed books about Paul by NT Wright and Peter Walker far more.
April 3, 2024
A Good Study Resource On The Book Of Acts of the Apostles
William Mitchell Ramsay was an archeologist who spent much time in Asia Minor. This work about Paul is more or less Ramsay's commentary on the book of Acts. It contains a number of archeological data. But it also contains a considerable amount of conjecture. It is a good work and helpful in stimulating thought about the book of Acts.
William Mitchell Ramsay was an archeologist who spent much time in Asia Minor. This work about Paul is more or less Ramsay's commentary on the book of Acts. It contains a number of archeological data. But it also contains a considerable amount of conjecture. It is a good work and helpful in stimulating thought about the book of Acts.
November 1, 2024
Remarkable
William Ramsey was a respected historian who set out to prove that the writings of the New Testament were historically inaccurate. Instead, he discovered the history to be exact. He thought, “If the history is true, could the faith it teaches also be true.” The answer changed his life. This book details his examination of the biblical history and his remarkable conclusion. I highly recommend.
William Ramsey was a respected historian who set out to prove that the writings of the New Testament were historically inaccurate. Instead, he discovered the history to be exact. He thought, “If the history is true, could the faith it teaches also be true.” The answer changed his life. This book details his examination of the biblical history and his remarkable conclusion. I highly recommend.
May 9, 2016
J. Gresham Machen references Ramsay a lot in his New Testament studies or studies on the life of Paul. I found many of the cultural explanations enlightening and enjoyed seeing the "skeptic" who was convinced by the evidence that not only is this a historical account, but a first-rate one too.
However, the heavy-handed textual criticism was a bit much for me and tended to undermine the value of the first portion (as claiming the account was reliable, or at least the author was telling what he thought was the strict truth). Ramsey took portions from the Bezan text, the "great" manuscripts, and the "lesser" manuscripts to piece together what he thought was original.
However, the heavy-handed textual criticism was a bit much for me and tended to undermine the value of the first portion (as claiming the account was reliable, or at least the author was telling what he thought was the strict truth). Ramsey took portions from the Bezan text, the "great" manuscripts, and the "lesser" manuscripts to piece together what he thought was original.
June 7, 2009
Excellent.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews