To us, the first and second centuries mark different epochs. Whether in relation to the Christian or Roman worlds, this periodization is problematic. Even on a “rational” modern dating of c.85 CE, Acts in some areas may resonate as much with the second century as with the first. One such area is the burgeoning “Second Sophistic” This paper discerns strong classical elements as co-existing with Jewish and Christian, with the corollary that our author envisages pagan readers and listeners, as well as Jewish, Christian, and “God-fearing” Early Christian writings, including Luke-Acts, did make some impact upon second-century pagan writers, including the philosopher Celsus and the satirist Lucian (Cook 1993; König 2006: 230), hence upon their readers. But in the case of “political” texts, the modern periodization finds an ancient analogue: contemporaries contrasted Nerva's and Trajan's “new age” with Domitian's “tyranny” Thus in 100 Rome could be said to be at a cross-roads (Tacitus, Agr. 3.1; Pliny, Pan. 2.2–3; Dio Chrysostom, Or. 1.61). If, then, Acts actually belongs to the second century (specifically, I believe, to the first decade), this contextualization should be eloquent, alike in the contexts of the Second Sophistic, of Roman persecution, especially under Domitian (Lane Fox 2006: 433), and of Christianity's growth.