' In gratitude for the recognition which his artistic contribu- tions had met with in the native land of the Muses . . . [he] declared the Greeks collectively to be rid of Roman govern- ment, free from tribute, and, like the Itahans, subject to no governor. At once there arose throughout Greece movements, which would have been civil wars, if these people could have achieved anything more than brawling ; and after a few months Vespasian re-established the provincial constitution, so far as it went, with the dry remark that the Greeks had unlearned the art of being free ' (Mommsen, Provinces, i. 26'2).
To the end of the empire Achaia remained a senatorial province. The administrative centre was Corinth [q.v.), where the governor had his official residence. During a prolonged mission in that city, St. Paul was brought into contact with the proconsul Gallio [q.v.], the brother of Seneca. The rapid progi'ess of the gospel in Achaia is partlj^ explained by the fact that Judaism had already for centuries been working as a leaven in many of the cities of Greece. Sjjarta and Sicj^on are named among the numerous free States to which the Romans sent letters on behalf of the Jews about 139 B.C. (1 Mac 15-^), and VhWo's Legatio ad Gaium (§ 36) testifies to the presence of Jews in Boeotia, yEtolia, Attica, Argos, and Corinth. Only three Achpean cities are mentioned in the NT — Athens, Corinth, and CenchrciC — but the address of 2 Cor. to ' all the saints who are in the whole of Achaia,' and the liberality of 'the regions of Achaia' (2 Co 9^ 11'°), prove that there must have beeo many other unnamed centres of Christian faith and life in the province. While 1 Co 16'^ refers to the house of Stephanas as 'the firstfruits of Achaia,' Ac 17^ rather indicates that the Apostle's brief visit to Athens had already borne some fruit, ' Dionysius, Damaris, and others with them ' being Achjean believers. Athens (q.v.) was either reckoned by itself or else entirely overlooked.
Literature. — The Histories of Polybius and Livy ; A. Holm, Hititory of Greece, Eng. tr. London, 1894-98, vol. iv. ; T. Momm- sen, The Provinces of the Roman Empire-, Eng. tr., Lmidiui, 19119, i. 260 ff. ; J. Marquardt, Rom. Stnatsverwaltmir), tievveil., Leipzig, 18S5, i. 321 f. ; C. v. Weizsacker, Apostolic A<je, Eug. tr. i.- [London, 1897] p. 303 If. ; A. C. McGiffert, Apostolic Age, Edinburgh, 1897, p. 2.'i6ff. JaMK.S STRAHAN.
ACHAICUS. — One of many worthies whose character adorned the early Church, and whose service edified it, but whom we know only by a casual reference in the NT. In I Co 16" St. Paul rejoices ' at the coming of Stephanas and Fortu- natus and Achaicus.' Probably they formed a
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
15
deputation from the Corinthian Church ; they may have been bearers of the letter of inquiry which St. Paul answers in ch. 7 tl'. His language suggests that their coming somewhat reassured him after the disquieting news brought by Chloe's household, and other ugly rumours (1 Co 5^). Perhaps they represented the parties in Corinth ; yet they must have been trusted by the Church and must also have shown themselves loyal to the Apostle. Achaicus is such a rare name that some authorities call it 'Greek,' others 'Roman.' The suggestion that Achaicus was a slave — either of Stephanas or of Chloe — does not comport either with his position as a delegate or with St. Paul's appeal to the Church to 'acknowledge such,' i.e. to recognize the quality of their service and to treat them with becoming deference.
Literature. — Artt. in HDB on 'Achaicus,' and 'I. Corinth- ians,' i. 487a ; Comm. on 1 Cor. by Findlay {EOT), 950, and by Godet, ii. 467 ; C. v. Weizsacker, Apostolic Age, i.2 [London, 1897] pp. 113, 305, 319, ii. [do. 1895] p. 320 ; Expositor, 8th ser. L [1911] 341 f. J. E. KOBEETS.
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.—
1. Text—
1. Greek MSS.
2. The Latin Versions.
3. The Syriao Versions.
4. The Eg3ptian Versiont.
5. Secondary Versions,
6. Early Quotations.
7. Textual theories : Westcott and Hort, Rendel Harris,
Chase, Blass, von Soden. IL Tradition as to authorship —
1. In favour of Luean authorship.
2. Against the tradition.
in. The date of Acts and reception in the Canon—
1. The date of the Lucan Gospel.
2. The abrupt termination of Acts.
3. Knowledge of Josephus in Acta.
4. Reception in the Canon. IV. The composition of Acts —
1. The obvious facts.
2. The purpose of the whole narrative.
8. The sources used in Acts.
(1) The we-clauses.
(2) The earlier chapters.
(a) The Antiochene tradition.
(b) The Jerusalem tradition.
V. Historical value of the various traditions—
1. The Gospel of Luke and Ac 1.
2. The Jerusalem and Galilaean traditions.
VI. Chronology of Acts —
1. The death of Herod Agrippa.
2. The famine in Judaea. 8. Gallio's proconsulate.
4. The expulsion of the Jevrs from Rome. 6. The arrival of Festus in Judaea. VII. The theology of Acts—
1. Christology.
2. Eschatology.
3. The OT and Jewish Law.
4. The Spirit. 6. Baptism.
I. Text. —The text of the Acts is preserved in Greek MSS, in Latin, Syriac, Sahidic, Bohairic, Armenian, and other secondary Versions, and quoted extensively, though not nearly so fully as the Gospels, by the early Fathers.