Annas actually functioned as High Priest from A.D. 6-14, though he can be called the High Priest since it was customary for a man who had once held that position to maintain that title throughout life. Actually at this time Caiaphas, the son-in-law of Annas, was the High Priest, and held this office from A.D. 18-36. Nothing is known of John and Alexander, but it is possible that John was one of the sons of Annas who later became High Priest. Some manuscripts read “Jonathan” in place of John, and this text is followed by the New English Bible and the Jerusalem Bible. The manuscript evidence is in favor of the reading John, and since the Jewish historian Josephus states that Jonathan, son of Annas, was appointed high priest in A.D. 36 in succession to Caiaphas, it appears likely that the reading “Jonathan” is an attempt by some scribe to make Luke conform.

One may render this passage as “they met with Annas, the High Priest” or “with Annas who was the High Priest,” and show the relationship of the other persons to this event by repeating the verb “they also met with Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and others who belonged to the clan of the High Priest.”

In very few languages can one use an attributive such as “high” to indicate superior rank. One must more often be spoken of as “the big priests” or “the great priest.” In other instances he is “the boss of the priests” or “the one who controls the priests.” In still other languages one can simply employ “the chief of the priests.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .