Please forgive the intrusion here.
I'm not one to push the relation between Luke and Acts but the LE appears to reference a few items found in Suetonius, Acts and the LE. The LE contains this:
Mark 28: 17 - 18 (RSV):
 And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues;
 they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover."
Consider the following:
Suetonius, 12 Caesars, "Titus":
"He [Titus} was brought up at court in company with Britannicus and taught the same subjects by the same masters. At that time, so they say, a physiognomist was brought in by Narcissus, the freedman of Claudius, to examine Britannicus and declared most positively that he would never become emperor; but that Titus, who was standing near by at the time, would surely rule. The boys were so intimate too, that it is believed that when Britannicus drained the fatal draught, Titus, who was reclining at his side, also tasted of the potion and for a long time suffered from an obstinate disorder...
This will be more than a Laundry List of Match-'em-'Ups, at least with me since I can place all of the Events mentioned in Sequence. YMMV.
The Roman Thesis writes of the coming of the Flavians. The Vanguard of this Movement is Mucianus, Procurator of Syria. The Template of "Paul" is Mucianus.
Acts 28: 3 - 5 (RSV):
 Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks and put them on the fire, when a viper came out because of the heat and fastened on his hand.
 When the natives saw the creature hanging from his hand, they said to one another, "No doubt this man is a murderer. Though he has escaped from the sea, justice has not allowed him to live."
 He, however, shook off the creature into the fire and suffered no harm.
"They will pick up serpents...it will not harm them...": Who would be the Serpent to Mucianus?
Tacitus, Histories, Book 3:
"While with this world-wide convulsion the Imperial power was changing hands, the conduct of Primus Antonius, after the fall of Cremona, was by no means as blameless as before. Either he believed that the necessities of the war had been satisfied, and that all else would follow easily, or, perhaps, success, working on such a temperament, developed his latent pride, rapacity and other vices. He swept through Italy as if it were a conquered country and caressed the legions as if they were his own; by all his words and acts he sought to pave for himself the way to power. To imbue the army with a spirit of licence, he offered to the legions the commissions of the centurions killed in the war. By their vote the most turbulent men were elected. The soldiers in fact were not under the control of the generals, but the generals were themselves constrained to follow the furious impulses of the soldiers. These mutinous proceedings, so ruinous to discipline, Antonius soon turned to his own profit, regardless of the near approach of Mucianus, a neglect more fatal than any contempt for Vespasian...
"Antonius and the other generals of the party judged it expedient to send forward the cavalry and explore the whole of Umbria for some point where the Apennines presented a more gentle ascent, and also to bring up the eagles and standards and all the troops at Verona, while they were to cover the Padus and the sea with convoys. Some there were among the generals who were contriving delays, for Antonius in fact was now becoming too great a man, and their hopes from Mucianus were more definite. That commander, troubled at so speedy a success, and imagining that unless he occupied Rome in person he should lose all share in the glory of the war, continued to write in ambiguous terms to Varus and Antonius, enlarging at one time on the necessity of following up their operations, at another on the advantage of delay, and with expressions so worded that he could, according to the event, repudiate a disastrous, or claim a successful policy. To Plotius Griphus, who had lately been raised by Vespasian to the senatorial rank and appointed to command a legion, as well as to all others on whom he could fully rely, he gave plainer instructions. All these men sent replies reflecting unfavourably on the precipitancy of Varus and Antonius, and suiting the wishes of Mucianus. By forwarding these letters to Vespasian he had accomplished this much, that the measures and achievements of Antonius were not valued according to his hopes.
"Antonius was indignant, and blamed Mucianus, whose calumnies had depreciated his own hazardous achievements. Nor was he temperate in his expressions, for he was habitually violent in language, and was unaccustomed to obey. He wrote a letter to Vespasian in terms more arrogant than should be addressed to an Emperor, and not without implied reproach against Mucianus. "It was I," he said, "who brought into the field the legions of Pannonia; my instigations roused the generals in Moesia; my courageous resolution forced a passage through the Alps, seized on Italy, and cut off the succours from Germany and Rhaetia. The discomfiture of the disunited and scattered legions of Vitellius by a fierce charge of cavalry, and afterwards by the steady strength of the infantry in a conflict that lasted for a day and a night, was indeed a most glorious achievement, and it was my work...
"The meaning of all this did not escape Mucianus, and there arose a deadly feud, cherished by Antonius with frankness, by Mucianus with reserve, and therefore with the greater bitterness..."
As I have stated before, assignments of meaning in the assertions of Symbolism are many and varied. There is no guarantee of Veridical Propositions. Nonetheless, there are Clues that this is correct.
Paul picks up a bundle of sticks, echoing the Fasces. He throws them on the fire. The Senate is on notice and see also what happened to various Members, as found in Tacitus, Book 4 and 1 Corinthians 1: 14 - 17.
The serpent attaches to "Paul's" hand, Mucianus did approach Rome from the sea by way of The Pontus, and Antonius Primus was successfully eliminated. The "Hand Symbolism" has been seen before, in "The Man with the Withered Hand" in Mark - "Jesus" heals the Man and he is free to write about what he has seen 12 years earlier at the Death of the 3000.
The rest is Flavian material mostly found in Acts. There are many people much more intelligent than I who could find the Match-Ups that are Correlates to Acts in Luke, if that Relationship truly holds.
Thus, I find that the LE has Historical Markers and may be identified with the Flavian Camp after the Ascension. YMMV - Big Time.