With the example of Aceldama, this paper shows that reception history must not be confined to ideas or stories, but may take an interest in places. It should not simply explore art or literature, but also envisage geography. The site purchased by Judas with the blood of Jesus in Acts 1.19–20 has suffered, once identified (or at least defined), from this terrible acquisition. At the same time, a legend has grown around the land, which is supposed to devour corpses while a sinister reputation was established making ‘Aceldama’ the paradigm of a scary place. This Wirkungsgeschichte should lead us to revise an initial preconception according to which historical work should stop at the writing of the text, and a second mistaken notion according to which the work of the exegete ends with ‘defining’ the ‘meaning’ of the text. There are potentialities in texts that only the study of their effects can perceive.
