Van Unnik interpreted the biographical term άνατροϕή in Acts 22.3 as confirmation of the view that Paul spent the major part of his youth in Jerusalem. A linguistic, rhetorical and narratological enquiry shows that this interpretation cannot be sustained. Acts and the undisputed Pauline letters make it more probable that Paul went to Jerusalem in his adolescent years. The Tarsus–Jerusalem dichotomy should be superseded by the recognition that Paul was the meeting and integrating point of a variety of influences.