The interpretation of Ac 16° affects that of 18%; and on that account Luke expresses his meaning more briefly in the second pence. In that pas- sage, as Dr. Hort says (Lectures on Colossians and Ephesians, p. 82), ‘he followed his old course (i.e. as in ch. 16) through southern Asia Minor, and this time was allowed to follow it right on to Ephesus,’ instead of being stopped and turned away north, as in 16°. He passed now through ‘ the region of Galatia and Phrygia,’ as it is rendered in RV (τὴν Γαλατικὴν χώραν καὶ Φρυγίαν). These words are applied to a more extended journe than those of 16%, for in 18% the journey throug Derbe and Lystra is included, whereas 16° begins from Lystra, and includes only the subsequent journey. The difference of order of the words is important: in 16° two epithets are attached to one noun which follows them, whereas in 18“ an epithet with its noun is connected by καί with a following + ae (or noun),§ and the second epithet (with the preceding noun repeated in thoweht) indicates a second region (this order in enumerating a list is common in Greek). || Two interpretations of the words have been suggested—
1. Φρυγίαν is to be interpreted as a noun, and
* An instructive example is mentioned by Mommsen (Res Geste Ὁ. προς 88), ρταυούρμαι — ducens rt een anim quam apertissime mere nec itans gratia aliquid detrahere ut vitaret obscuritatem (Sueton. Aug. 86), ut Bt, Sps0 nimio ambiguitatis vitand» studio incidit in ambiguitatem!
i ΤΣ P. = τὸς ΤΣ ii. p. 87.
Φ idiomatic Englis! ‘the Phrygian or Galatic R: τ see ii. p. 90, and Classical Review, 1808, p. 337. ea
§ Epithet or noun, according as we take Φρυγίαν as adjective at noun i see mar see "
k Examples are given in vol. il. p. 90, τὴς Ναβατινῆς χώρας παὶ Ἱπουραίρς καὶ Μναβίσιδος καὶ ᾿Αρηλέτιδοί, eto. Fe a
indicates the country Phrygia, both Asian and Galatic ; Luke may be supposed to use Φρυγία χώρα in 16° to indicate Phrygia as a region of the Galatic province, and Φρυγία the noun in 18% to indicate the country Phrygia as a single concep- tion independent of Roman provincial divisions. Then τὴν Γαλατικὴν χώραν would indicate ‘the Galatic region’ in the sense of the province like Γαλατικὴ ἐπάρχεια in the Iconian inscription of A.D. 54-55, CIG 3991. Luke would, on this theory, say that Paul traversed the Galatie province and Phrygia (the country). There is a certain staplicnty, in this view which recommends it; yet for many reasons we are obliged to reject it. The following arrangement seems conclusive. St. Paul, as he traversed the region of Galatia and Phrygia in order, stablished all the disciples: there were disciples in both the region of Galatia and in Phrygia, so that throughout both regions he passed from Church to Church. Now we know positively that he had as yet no Churches in any part of Phrygia except Galatic Phrygia. More- over, the remarkable reading of the Bezan text Ac 19! shows clearly that its originator (whether Luke himself, as Prof. Blass and his supporters hold, or a 2nd cent. reviser, as seems more prob- able) considered Paul to have arrived at the borders of Asia in 18%, and then, after completing his survey of his Churches, to have begun to return to Jerusalem, when the Spirit bade him turn back again into Asia (i.e. the province Asia), the higher parts of which he traversed, and so, finally, came to Ephesus.
e must therefore adopt the following inter- pretation :—
2. Φρυγίαν is an adjective, being the briefer de- scription of the same region which in 16° is called with pragmatical minuteness τὴν Φρυγίαν καὶ Τ'αλα- τικὴν χώραν. Luke would on this theory say, ‘ Paul traversed the Galatic region and the Phrygian.’ Now, in truth, Paul did traverse two regions of the vast Galatian province, one Lycaonia con- taining the cities Derbe and Lystra, the other Phrygia with the cities Iconium and Antioch.* The one real difficulty is this: could Roman Lycaonia be called simply ‘the Galatic region’? The phrase can be eeplamed and defended only on the supposition that the speaker conceives himself standing or travelling in Lycaonia: Lycaonia consisted of two parts, Roman or Galatic and non-Roman or ἈΠΕ ΘΘΕΙΒΗ (under king Anti- ochus): Ptolemy tells us that the latter was called ᾿Αντιοχιανὴ (χώρα), and the corresponding term for the other part necessarily would be ΤΓαλατικὴ χώρα: the inhabitants of Lycaonia would describe the two divisions of his country by those terms. This explanation may seem rather complicated, but the complexity is due to the real complexity of the divisions at the time. As we see, it is the expression of one who feels himself standing in the country, ἴ.6. it must be regarded as the expression used by St. Paul the actual traveller, and caught from his mouth by the listener Luke.
The system of dividing Phrygia into High and Low is probably referred to in Ac 191, though the name of the country is not actually mentioned. The journey described in 18%, as we have just seen, carried St. Paul over ground which he had previously traversed and cities where there were already disciples ; but there still remained a long stretch of country between him and his goal in Ephesus, viz. the whole breadth of the large province Asia. The journey is resumed in 19}, where St. Paul is said to have traversed the higher parts (τὰ ἀνωτερικὰ μέρη. The term ἄνω is often used in Greek to indicate simply the