Frederick E. Brenk - S.J Filippo Canali De Rossi, «The ‘Notorious’ Felix, Procurator of Judaea, and His Many Wives (Acts 23–24)», Vol. 82 (2001) 410-417

Confusion exists over both the gentilicium and the wives of Felix. As for the name, possibly both Antonius and Claudius are correct. In any case, the attempt to assign only the name Claudius to Felix rests on rather shaky ground. As for his wives, possibly none was a descendant of Kleopatra VII. But if she were, she would be a great-granddaughter rather than a granddaughter of the famous queen. An inscription adduced to fix Felix’ name and career is beset with many problems. Finally, we should take his reputation as ‘notorious’ with a grain of salt. But whether notorious or not, his rise was remarkable, deserving of awe if not admiration.

        By Felix, Drusilla had a son, (‘Tiberius Claudius’, according to Kokkinos) Agrippa III, who along with his wife disappeared in 79 A.D. during the eruption of Vesuvius (Josephus, Ant. 20.143-144). Kokkinos conjectures that Agrippa III owned a villa in Campania, possibly at Pompeii, and was around 25 years old when he died¹⁰. If we take this age as reasonable, his mother, Drusilla, would have married Felix sometime around 54 A.D. She was supposedly 14 years old when Felix assumed office in 52 (based on Josephus, Ant. 19.354) (She was six years old when her father, Agrippa I, died.)

        But this leaves us with another problem, the supposed notoriety of Felix. For some reason, many modern scholars feel compelled to introduce Felix as ‘notorious’ and Tiberius Alexander as ‘the renegade Jew’. In fact both probably belong to one of the Roman strategies in dealing with Judaea in the difficult times before the Jewish Revolt of 70. On occasion, it seems, the Romans entrusted command to persons with expertise in Jewish affairs or with good Jewish connections. Recently Emilio Gabba, though introducing Tiberius Alexander as ‘the renegade Jew’ (but without calling Felix ‘notorious’) actually treats the former quite well¹¹. As for Felix, the Imperial court seems to have regarded him as effective or competent. He remained in his post as procurator quite some time, outlasting his brother Pallas, who had been Claudius’ financial secretary (a rationibus) before moving into the government of Nero. Moreover, before becoming procurator, Felix may have been active in Judaea in some sort of commanding position (Tacitus, Annals 12.54, in contrast to Josephus). Judging by Acts, Felix was procurator from 52 A.D. to around 60, a period of almost eight years. His successors did much worse: Porcius Festus 60-62; Lucceius (?) Albinus 62-64; Gessius Florus 64-66 (followed by the Revolt).

        It can hardly be certain, as Rajak implies, that Felix was recalled because of the riots at Kaisareia. He had already been in office a long time. His role in suppressing the riot, as reported in Josephus, Ant. 20.173-178, could be interpreted as either pro- or anti-Jewish. According to Josephus, 20.182, the Jewish community at Kaisareia brought charges against him before Nero, but he escaped because of Nero’s esteem for his brother Pallas. But Pallas’ peak was in 52 A.D. under Claudius (Suetonius, Claudius 28), and only a little later, in 62, Nero ordered his death¹². Nero might have considered Felix too sympathetic or well connected to Jews, to be above suspicion of partiality. Could it have been because of growing anti-Jewish sentiment in Rome? However, Josephus at this point treats Felix as committing crimes against the Jews. He also mentions a Jewish delegation from Kaisareia, which after Felix’ recall, brought charges against him before Nero¹³.