13. ποταμόν] a (or, the) river; viz. the small stream Gangites, or Gangas: Leake, p. 217, cited by C. and H. i. 341; not, as Meyer and De Wette, the Strymon, the nearest point of which was many miles distant. The name Krenides, formerly borne by the city, was derived from the fountains of this stream.
From many sources we learn, that it was the practice of the Jews to hold their assemblies for prayer near water, whether of the sea, or of rivers: probably on account of the frequent washings customary among them. Thus a decree of the Halicarnasseans in Joseph. Antt. xiv. 10. 23, allows the Jews τὰς προσευχὰς ποιεῖσθαι πρὸς τῇ θαλάσσῃ κατὰ τὸ πάτριον ἔθος. Thus Juvenal, speaking of the ‘madida Capena’ at Rome, adds, ‘Nunc sacri fontis nemus, et delubra locantur Judæis,’ iii. 13. And Tertullian, de Jejuniis, ch. 16, vol. ii. p. 976, ‘Judaicum certe jejunium ubique celebratur, quum omissis templis per omne litus quocumque in aperto aliquando jam precem ad cœlum mittunt.’ And ad Nationes, i. 13, vol. i. p. 579, he speaks of the ‘orationes litorales’ of the Jews. See also Philo in Flacc. § 14, vol. ii. p. 535.
οὗ ἐνομ. προς. εἶναι] Where a meeting for prayer was accustomed to be: i.e. ‘where prayer was wont to be made,’ as E. V. That this is the meaning here, is plain from the use of ἐνομίζετο εἶναι, which could certainly not be said if the προσευχή were in this case a building dedicated to prayer. Were there no such qualification, we should understand the word of a προσευκτήριον or synagogue, as frequently used: τινὰς δὲ οἴκους ἑαυτοῖς κατασκευάσαντες ἢ τόπους πλατεῖς φόρων δίκην, προσευχὰς ταύτας ἐκάλουν· καὶ ἦσαν μὲν τὸ παλαιὸν προσευχῶν τόποι ἔν τε τοῖς ἰουδαίοις ἔξω πόλεως, καὶ ἐν τοῖς σαμαρείταις. Epiphanius, Hær. 80, § 1, p. 1067: and again, soon after, ἀλλὰ καὶ προσευχῆς τόπος ἐν σικίμοις, ἐν τῇ νυνὶ καλουμένῃ νεαπόλει, ἔξω τῆς πόλεως, ἐν τῇ πεδιάδι, ὡς ἀπὸ σημείων δύο, θεατροειδής, οὕτως ἐν ἀέρι κ. αἰθρίῳ τόπῳ ἐστὶ κατασκευασθείς, ὑπὸ τῶν σαμαρειτῶν πάντα τὰ τῶν ἰουδαίων μιμουμένων. Josephus, Vita p. 54, says, συνάγονται πάντες εἰς τὴν προσευχήν, μέγιστον οἴκημα πολὺν ὄχλον ἐπιδέξασθαι δυνάμενον.
The προσευχή here was probably one of the open places spoken of in the above extracts from Epiph(79) The close of the verse also agrees best with an open place of resort. There seem to have been few, if any, Jews in Philippi: this assembly consisting merely of women attached to the Jewish faith. We hear of no opposition arising from Jews. There appears (ch. Acts 17:1) to have been no synagogue.
Verse 14
14. πορφυρόπωλις] The guild of dyers ( οἱ βαφεῖς) at Thyatira have left inscriptions, still existing, shewing the accuracy of our narrative. The celebrity of the purple dyeing of the neighbourhood is as old as Homer: ὡς δʼ ὅτε τίς τʼ ἐλέφαντα γυνὴ φοίνικι μιήνῃ ΄ῃονὶς ἠὲ κάειρα, παρήϊον ἔμμεναι ἵππων, Il. δ. 141. So also Claudian, de Raptu Proserp. i. 270: ‘non sic decus ardet eburnum Lydia Sidonio quod fœmina tinxerit ostro’ (Lewin, i. 242). Thyatira was a city of the province of Asia. Thus, although forbidden to preach the word in Asia, their first convert at Philippi is an Asiatic. Lydia is a proper name, not ‘ita dicta a solo natali,’ as Grot.: though its origin may have been that. It was a common female name. See Hor. Od. i. 8; iii. 9.
σεβ. τ. θ.] A proselyte; see reff. N. T.
ἤκουεν, was listening,—when διήνοιξεν, the act of God, took place.
διήνοιξεν] ‘cor clausum per se: sed Dei est id aperire.’ Bengel.
τ. λαλουμένοις] It appears rather to have been a conversation ( ἐλαλοῦμεν, we spoke—and not τὸν λόγον) than a set discourse: the things which Paul was saying.
Verse 15
15. ἐβαπτ., κ. ὁ οἶκος αὐτ.] It may be (as Meyer maintains) that no inference for infant-baptism is hence deducible. The practice, however, does not rest on inference, but on the continuity and identity of the covenant of grace to Jew and Christian, the sign only of admission being altered. The Apostles, as Jews, would have proposed to administer baptism to the children, and Jewish or proselyte converts would, as matter of course, have acceded to the proposal; and that the practice thus by universal consent, tacitly (because at first unquestioned) pervaded the universal church, can hardly with any reason be doubted. See note on 1 Corinthians 7:14.
εἰ κεκρίκατε] If ye have judged me; modestly alluding to the decision respecting her faithfulness implied by their baptizing her, and assuming that such a judgment had been passed. Similarly εἰ ἡμεῖς ἀνακρινόμεθα, ch. Acts 4:9.
Verse 16
16.] This happened on other occasions; not on the same day, as Heinrichs and Kuinoel fancy. In that case (besides other objections), if they had gone back from the house of Lydia to the place of prayer, the word would certainly have been ἐξελθόντων, and not πορευομένων. In Acts 16:15 is implied their taking up their abode with Lydia:—in this verse that they habitually resorted to this place of prayer to teach, and that what follows happened on such occasions.
It may be remarked that the E. V. of πορευομένων εἰς ( τὴν) προσευχήν, ‘as we went to prayer,’ has given rise to a curious abuse of the expression ‘going to prayer,’ in the sense of ‘beginning to pray,’ among the lower classes in England.
ἔχουσαν πνεῦμα πύθωνα] On the whole subject of dæmoniacal possession, see note on Matthew 8:32. This was a case in which the presence of the spirit was a patent fact, recognized by the heathen possessors and consulters of this female slave, and by them turned to account; and recognized also by the Christian teachers, as an instance of one of those works of the devil which their Lord came, and commissioned them, to destroy. All attempt to explain away such a narrative as this by the subterfuges of rationalism (as e.g. in Meyer, and even Lewin, i. 243, and apparently Hackett, p. 222), is more than ever futile. The fact of the spirit leaving the girl, and the masters finding the hope of their gains gone, is fatal: and we may see, notwithstanding all his attempts to account for it psychologically, that Meyer feels it to be so.
πύθωνα] Plut. de Defectu Oracul. p. 414, says ὥσπερ τοὺς ἐγγαστριμύθους εὐρυκλέας (from a prophet, Eurycles), πάλαι, νυνὶ πύθωνας προσαγορευομένους. It is difficult to decide internally between the probabilities of πύθωνα and πύθωνος: I have retained the ancient reading, both from its external authority, and because I find so many Commentators explaining πύθων to be a name of Apollo, or the serpent Python, that the alteration into the gen. may thus be easily accounted for. Bp. Wordsworth has an interesting note on the probable reason for this new term appearing in the narrative, now that St. Paul is brought directly into contact with Greek and Roman divination.
Verse 17
17.] ἔκραζεν, used to cry out: several occasions are referred to. The recognition of Paul and his company here by the spirit is strictly analogous to that of our Lord by the dæmons, Matthew 8:29; Luke 4:34; and the same account to be given of both: viz. that the evil spirit knew and confessed the power of God and His Christ, whether in His own Person or that of His servants.
Verse 18
18. διαπονηθείς] Not mere annoyance is expressed by this word, but rather holy indignation and sorrow at what he saw and heard; the Christian soldier was goaded to the attack, but the mere satisfaction of anger was not the object, any more than the result, of the stroke. It is doubtful here, in mere grammar, whether the dat. τῷ πνεύματι is to be constructed with ἐπιστρέψας or with εἶπεν. But considering 1) that the spirit could hardly be the object of a bodily movement on the part of the Apostle, except as represented by the possessed damsel, and 2) that ἐπιστρέφω is never elsewhere found with a dative, but always with a preposition, εἰς or πρός or ἐπί, it is much the best to take τῷ πνεύματι with εἶπεν, and believe it to be thrown forward before its verb for the sake of emphasis.
Verse 19
19.] Her masters (a partnership of persons, not plur. for sing.
They may have been the hæredes of some one to whom she had belonged) perceived that the hope of their gain had gone out (with the dœmon).
ἐπιλ.… εἵλκ. gives the idea of force having been used. So we have ‘obtorto collo ad prætorem trahor,’ Plaut. Pœn. iii. 5. 45.
Paul and Silas only are apprehended as having been the principal persons in the company. When De Wette says that, if Luke here were the narrator, he must say something of Timotheus, as he mentions him ch. Acts 17:14, Acts 18:5,—and yet holds (on Acts 16:10) that Timotheus himself is the narrator, he forgets that the same reasoning will apply to him also, if it applies at all, which I much doubt. When two persons of a company are described as being apprehended, we do not need an express assertion to assure us that the rest were not.
ἐπὶ τ. ἄρχοντας said generally: they dragged them to the forum to the authorities,—afterwards specified as στρατηγοί.
Verse 20
20. στρατηγοῖς] The Duumviri of the colony, of whom at Capua Cicero says, ‘cum in cæteris coloniis Duumviri appellentur, hi se Prætores ( στρατηγούς) appellari volebant.’ De Leg. Agr. c. 34. ‘Messinenses,’ says Wetstein, ‘etiam nunc (cir. 1750) Prætorem sive Præfectum urbis Stradigo appellant.’ The name, as a rendering of Prætor, had come from the Greek title of similar magistrates: so Aristotle, Politic. vii. 3, ἐν ταῖς μικραῖς πόλεσι μία περὶ πάντων ( ἀρχή)· καλοῦσι δὲ στρατηγοὺς καὶ πολεμάρχους.
ἰουδ. ὑπάρχοντες.… ῥωμ. οὖσιν] The distinction between ὑπάρχων and ὤν seems to be, that the former is used of something which the speaker or narrator wishes to put forward into notice, either as unknown to his reader or hearer, or in some way to be marked by him for praise or blame: whereas the latter refers to facts known and recognized, and taken for granted by both. Thus, we may notice that, when the fact of Paul and Silas being Romans is announced to the jailor, it is not ἀνθ. ῥωμαίους ὄντας, but ὑπάρχοντας; whereas here, both parties, the speakers and the addressed, being indisputably Romans, we have ῥωμαίοις οὖσιν. The account of this may be, that ὑπάρχω is predicated of something of which the speaker informs the hearer, some prior knowledge which he possessed and now imparts,— εἰμί being predicated of the bare matter of fact. See ch. Acts 17:27; Acts 17:29; Acts 21:20 (for both); Acts 22:3; Galatians 2:14 al., for ὑπάρχων: and for ὤν, John 3:4; John 4:9 bis; Romans 5:10 al.
‘Versute composita fait hæc criminatio ad gravandos Christi servos: nam ab una parte obtendunt Romanum nomen, quo nihil erat magis favorabile; rursum ex nomine Judaico, quod tunc infame erat (especially if the decree of Claudius, expelling them from Rome, ch. Acts 18:2, had at this time been enacted) conflant illis invidiam: nam, quantum ad religionem, plus habebant Romani affinitatis cum aliis quibuslibet, quam cum gente Judaica.’ Calvin.
Verse 21
21. ἔθη …] “Dio Cassius tells us that Mæcenas gave the following advice to Augustus:— τὸ μὲν θεῖον πάντη πάντως αὐτός τε σέβου κατὰ τὰ πάτρια, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους τιμᾷν ἀνάγκαζε· τοὺς δὲ ξενίζοντάς τι περὶ αὐτὸ καὶ μίσει καὶ κόλαζε· and the reason is alleged, viz. that such innovations lead to secret associations, conspiracies, and cabals, ἅπερ ἥκιστα μοναρχίᾳ συμφέρει.” (C. and H. i. p. 356.) So Julius Paulus, Sentent. v. 21. 2, cited by Wetst., ‘Qui novas et usu vel ratione incognitas religiones inducunt, ex quibus animi hominum moveantur, honestiores deportantur, humiliores capite premuntur.’
Verse 22
22. The multitude probably cried out tumultuously, as on other occasions (see Luke 23:18; ch. Acts 19:28; Acts 19:34; Acts 21:30; Acts 22:22-23),—and the duumviri, without giving them a trial ( ἀκατακρίτους, Acts 16:37), rent off their clothes, scil. by the lictors ( τοῖς ῥαβδούχοις ἐκέλευσαν τὴν ἐσθῆτά τε περικαταῤῥῆξαι καὶ ταῖς ῥάβδοις τὸ σῶμα ξαίνειν, Dion(80). Hal. ix. 39). The form was, ‘Summove, lictor, despolia, verbera,’ Seneca (C. and H. i. 357). See also Livy, ii. 8; Valer. Max(81) ii. 28, in Wetst. Erasmus fancied that the duumviri rent their own clothes from indignation: but, to say nothing of the improbability of such a proceeding on the part of a Roman magistrate, a man could not very well περι ῤῥῆξαι his own garments
Verse 24
24. τὸ ξύλον] Also called κᾶλον, ποδοκάκη, and ποδοστράβη, and in Latin, nervus: so ‘noctu nervo vinctus custodibitur,’ Plaut. Cap. iii. 5. 71. Eusebius (Acts 16:1, vol. ii. p. 16, ed. Heinichen) mentions, speaking of the martyrs in Gaul, τὰς ἐν τῷ ξύλῳ διατάσεις τῶν ποδῶν ἐπὶ πέμπτον διατεινομένων τρύπημα.
Verse 25
25. προσευχ. ὕμν.] Not as E. V., ‘prayed and sang praises,’—but, praying, sang praises, or in their prayers, were singing praises. The distinction of modern times between prayer and praise, arising from our attention being directed to the shape rather than to the essence of devotion, was unknown in these days: see Colossians 4:2.
‘Nihil crus sentit in nervo, quum animus in cœlo est.’ Tertullian ad Martyres, c. 2, vol. i. p. 623.
The imperfects shew that they were singing, and the prisoners (in the outer prison) listening, when the earthquake happened.
Verse 26
26. πάντων τὰ δεσμὰ ἀνέθη] i.e. of all the prisoners in the prison: see below (Acts 16:28), ἅπαντες γάρ ἐσμεν ἐνθάδε. Doubtless there were gracious purposes in this for those prisoners, who before were listening to the praises of Paul and Silas; and the very form of the narrative, mentioning this listening, shews subsequent communication between some one of these and the narrator.
Their chains were loosed, not by the earthquake, but by miraculous interference over and above it. It is some satisfaction to find, that neither Meyer, De Wette, nor Kuinoel have attempted to rationalize this wonderful example of the triumph of prayer. See some excellent remarks on Baur’s attempt to do so, in Neander, Pfl. u. L. p. 302, note 3.
Verse 27
27. ἤμελ. ἑαυτ. ἀναιρ.] The law de Custodia Reorum (Wetst.) says, ‘Ad commentariensem receptarum personarum custodia observatioque pertineat, nec putet, hominem abjectum atque vilem objiciendum esse judici, si reus modo aliquo fuerit elapsus. Nam ipsum volumus hujusmodi pœnæ consumi, cui obnoxius docebitur fuisse, qui fugerit.’ Dean Howson notices, by the examples of Cassius, Brutus, Titinius, and many of the proscribed, after the battle,—that Philippi is famous in the annals of suicide (p. 361).
Verse 29
29. φῶτα] Not as E.V., ‘a light,’ but lights, neut. plur.
Verse 30
30. προαγ. αὐτ. ἔξω] Into the outer prison: not perhaps yet outside the prison, which (from ἀναγαγών, Acts 16:34, when he takes them to his own house) seems to have been underground, or at all events on a lower level in the same building. In this same space they seem to have been joined by the jailor’s family,—to have converted and baptized them, and to have been taken (to the well?) and washed from their stripes; and afterwards to have been led up (by stairs? see ref.) to his house, and hospitably entertained. The circumstantiality of the account shews that some eye-witness related it.
His question, connected with the ὁδὸν σωτηρίας of the dæmoniac in Acts 16:17, makes it necessary to infer, as De Wette well observes, that he had previously become acquainted with the subject of their preaching. He wanted no means of escape from any danger but that which was spiritual: the earthquake was past, and his prisoners were all safe. Bengel admirably remarks: ‘Non audierat hymnos Pauli, nam dormierat, sed tamen vel antea vel postea senserat, quis esset Paulus.’
Verse 31
31. ἐπὶ τ. κύριον] Not without allusion to the κύριοι, by which name he had just addressed them. So Bengel: ‘non agnoscunt se dominos.’
Considering who the person was that asked the question,—a heathen in the depths of ignorance and sin,—and how indisputably therefore the answer embraces all sinners whatever,—there perhaps does not stand on record in the whole book a more important answer than this of Paul:—or, I may add, one more strikingly characteristic of the Apostle himself and his teaching. We may remark also, in the face of all attempts to establish a development of St. Paul’s doctrine according to mere external circumstances,—that this reply was given before any one of his extant epistles was written.
καὶ ὁ οἶκός σου does not mean that his faith would save his household,—but that the same way was open to them as to him: ‘Believe, and thou shalt be saved: and the same of thy household.’
Verse 33
33. ἔλουσεν ἀπό] A pregnant construction: ‘washed them, so that they were purified from the blood occasioned by their stripes:’ see reff. This is much more natural than to take ἀπό (as in ἀπὸ τῆς χαρᾶς (ch. Acts 12:14) and the like) as signifying ‘on account of’ (see Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 225).
Verse 34
34.] ἀνα γ., see reff. and note on Acts 16:30.
πεπιστευκώς] Winer renders ‘as one who has placed his trust in God:’ but, as De W. observes, πεπιστευκώς must give the ground of his rejoicing (see 1 Corinthians 14:18 (rec.), εὐχαριστῶ … λαλῶν, ‘I give thanks … that I speak’). Thus the meaning will be, rejoiced that he with all his house had been led to believe (and thus as a necessary consequence to believe in) God.
The expression πεπιστ. τῷ θεῷ could only be used of a converted heathen, not of a Jew: in ch. Acts 18:8, of a Jew, we have ἐπίστευσεν τῷ κυρίῳ.
Verse 35
35.] What had influenced the magistrates is not recorded. We can hardly suppose that the earthquake alone (as suggested by the addition in D: see digest) would have done so, as they would not have connected it with their prisoners; they may have heard what had taken place: but that, again, is hardly probable. I should rather set it down to calmer thought, repudiating the tumultuary proceeding of the evening before.
ῥαβδούχους] The lictors,—‘bearers of the rods,’ bacilli; which, and not fasces, were carried before the colonial duumviri: see Cicero, de Leg. Agr. ubi supra, on Acts 16:20.
Verse 36
36.] Paul and Silas had returned to the prison: whither the jailor goes, accompanied by the lictors ( ὁ δὲ π. ἔφη πρ. αὐτούς, Acts 16:37), to announce the order.
Verse 37
37.] δημοσίᾳ and λάθρα are opposed: the injury had been public: the reparation, not to Paul and Silas merely, but to the Gospel of which they were the heralds, must be public also.
ἀνθρ. ῥωμ. ὑπάρχ.] By the Lex Valeria, passed A.U.C. 254, and the Lex Porcia, A.U.C. 506, Roman citizens were exempted from stripes and torture: by the former, till an appeal to the people was decided,—by the latter, absolutely. The following passages of Cicero illustrate our text: ‘Porcia lex virgas ab omnium civium Romanorum corpore amovit.’ Pro Rabirio, c. 3. ‘Cædebatur virgis in medio foro Messanæ civis Romanus, judices: cum interea nullus gemitus, nulla vox alia istius miseri, inter dolorem crepitumque virgarum audiebatur, nisi hæc: Civis Romanus sum.’ In Verrem, lib. v. 62, 63. ‘Facinus est vinciri civem Romanum; scelus verberari; prope parricidium, necari.’ Ibid. 66. Many others are given by Kuinoel, Biscoe, &c.
On the question, how Paul came to be born a Roman citizen, see note on ch. Acts 22:28; and on ὑπάρχ., note, Acts 16:20.
Another irregularity had been committed by the duumviri, in scourging them uncondemned: ‘causa cognita multi possunt absolvi: incognita quidem condemnari nemo potest.’ Cic. in Verr. i. 9. ‘Inauditi et indefensi tanquam innocenter perierant.’ Tac. Hist. ii. 10.
ἑκβάλλ.] are they thrusting us out? It does not follow, because ἐκβάλλω has no such sense in ch. Acts 9:40, &c., that therefore it has not here. The circumstances must determine; which here seem to require this sense: the ἐκβάλλειν λάθρα having a tinge of degradation in it, as if said of casting out that of which one is ashamed.
οὐ γάρ] An elliptical answer to a question or position, the negative of which is self-evident: see Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. p. 48: Kühner, Gramm. § 741. 6: Hermann on Viger, p. 462. When it occurs with ἀλλά, it is best written without a stop between: cf. Aristoph. Ran. 58: μὴ σκῶπτέ μʼ, ὦ ʼ δέλφʼ· οὐ γὰρ ἀλλʼ ἔχω κακῶς:—ib. 193: μὰ τὸν δίʼ οὐ γὰρ (scil. νεναυμάχηκα) ἀλλʼ ἔτυχον ὀφθαλμιῶν, and 499, φέρε δὴ ταχέως αὔτʼ· οὐ γὰρ ἀλλὰ πειστέον.
Mr. Humphry remarks, ‘St. Paul submitted to be scourged by his own countrymen (five times, 2 Corinthians 11:24): for, though he might have pleaded his privilege as a Roman, to the Jews he “became as a Jew,” observing their ceremonies, and submitting to their law.’
Verse 38
38. ἐφοβ.] For the account which they might have to give at Rome, as in Verres’ case, or even for their popularity with the very mob of Roman citizens who had demanded the punishment.
Verse 39
39. παρεκάλεσαν] Not ‘comforted:’ but, as E. V., besought them: viz. not to make their treatment matter of legal complaint. In the request to depart from the city, the prætors seem to shew fear of a change in the temper of the mob. See the curious addition in the var. readd.
Verse 40
40.] They do not depart hastily, or as though forced, but wait to reassure the brethren. πρός has probably been altered to εἰς, on account of the verb, not because λυδίαν was mistaken (Meyer) for the country of that name.
παρεκ.] exhorted, is better than ‘comforted,’ E. V. The one in this case would imply the other.
17 Chapter 17
Verse 1
1.] Here (or rather perhaps at ἐξῆλθον, in the preceding verse) we have the first person again dropped,—implying apparently that the narrator did not accompany Paul and Silas. I should be inclined to think that Timotheus went with them from Philippi,—not, as is usually supposed, joined them at Berœa: see below on Acts 17:10.
διοδεύσαντες] The ὁδός, on which they travelled from Philippi to Thessalonica, was the Via Egnatia, the Macedoman continuation of the Via Appia, and so named from Egnatia (‘Gnatia lymphis iratis exstructa,’ Hor. Sat. i. 5), in the neighbourhood of which the latter meets the Adriatic. It extended from Dyrrha chium in Epirus to the Hebrus in Thrace, a distance of 500 miles. The stages here mentioned are thus particularized in the itineraries: Philippi to Amphipolis, 33 miles: Amphipolis to Apollonia, 30 miles: Apollonia to Thessalonica, 37 miles. See more particulars in C. and H., i. pp. 368 ff.
ἀμφίπολιν] Anciently called ἐννέα ὁδοί, Thucyd. i. 100. Herod. vii. 114, lying in a most important position, at the end of the lake Cercinitis, formed by the Strymon, commanding the only easy pass from the coast of the Strymonic gulf into Macedonia. (‘Amphipoleos, quæ objecta claudit omnes ab oriente sole in Macedoniam aditus,’ Liv. xlv. 30.) In consequence of this, the Athenians colonized the place, calling it Amphipolis, ἐπʼ ἀμφότερα περιῤῥέοντος τοῦ στρυμόνος, Thuc. iv. 102. It was the spot where Brasidas was killed, and for previously failing to succour which Thucydides was exiled: see Thucyd. iv. and v., and Grote’s Hist. of Greece, vol. vi. p. 625 ff., where there is a plan of Amphipolis. After this it was a point of contention between the Athenians and Philip, and subsequently became the capital of Macedonia Prima,—see Livy, xlv. 30, where Paulus Æmilius proclaims, at Amphipolis, the freedom and territorial arrangements of Macedonia. It is now called Emboli.
ἀπολλωνίαν] Its situation is unknown, but was evidently (see the distances above given) inland, not quite half-way from Amphipolis to Thessalonica, where the road crosses from the Strymonic to the Thermaic gulf. Leake saw some ruins at about the right spot, but did not visit them: and Cousinéry mentions seeing, on an opposite hill, the village of Polina. Pliny mentions it (N. H. iv. 10), ‘regio Mygdoniæ subjacens, in qua recedentes a mare Apollonia, Arethusa.’ It must not be confounded with a better known Apollonia near Dyrrhachium, on the western coast, also on the Via Egnatia. See C. and H. i. pp. 376 f.
θεσσαλονίκην] At this time the capital of the province Macedonia, and the residence of the proconsul (Macedonia had been an imperial, but was now a senatorial province). Its former names were Emathia, Halia, and Therma: it received its name of Thessalonica from Cassander, on his rebuilding and embellishing it, in honour of his wife Thessalonica, sister of Alexander the Great. So Strabo, lib. vii. excerpt. 10: who, ib. excerpt. 3, calls it θεσσαλονικεία. It was made a free city after the battle of Philippi: and every thing in this narrative is consistent with the privileges and state of an urbs libera. We read of its δῆμος, Acts 17:5, and its πολιτάρχαι, Acts 17:6; not, as at the Roman colony of Philippi, of ῥαβδοῦχοι (lictors), and στρατηγοί (duumviri), ch. Acts 16:20; Acts 16:35. It has ever been an important and populous city, and still continues such (pop. 70,000), being the second city in European Turkey, under the slightly corrupted name of Saloniki. For a notice of the church there, see Prolegg. to first Ep. to the Thessalonians, § ii.
[ ἡ] συναγ.] The article is in all probability genuine: implying that there was no other synagogue for the towns lately traversed: and shewing the same minute acquaintance with the peculiarities of this district as our narrative has shewn since the arrival at Neapolis.
Verse 2
Share with your friends: |