Additional Note.—Chap. xvi. 12, ‘“‘which is a city of Macedonia, the first of the district,” R.V. This might mean, so far as πρώτη is concerned, that Philippi was the city nearest in the dis- trict, and the city which they first reached. Neapolis, which actually came first on the route, was not generally regarded as Macedonian but Thracian; so Lightfoot, Rendall, Ο. Holtzmann. Or it might also mean that it was ‘‘ the chief” (A.V.), the leading city of its division of Macedonia (Ramsay). Here again Ramsay sees a proof of St. Luke’s intimate acquaintance with the rivalries of the Greek cities, and of his special interest in Philippi. In B.C. 167 the province Macedonia had been divided by the Romans into four districts, µερίς, and even if this division were obsolete at the time, another would be
’
356
XVII. 1. ΔΙΟΔΕΥΣΑΝΤΕΣ δὲ τὴν ᾽Αμϕίπολιν καὶ 1 ᾽Απολλωνίαν, ἦλθον εἰς Θεσσαλονίκην, ὅπου ἦν ἡ συναγωγὴ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων.
1 την before Απολ. SABE 13, 40, 61, 180, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss. η before συν. om. SABD 13, 40, 61, 180, Sah., Boh., Arm., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Zéckler,
Blass, Hilg.
likely to succeed to it (so Ramsay, Church in the Roman Empire, p. 158, aS against Lightfoot, Phil., p. 50, who takes πρώτη as denoting not the political but the geographical position of Philippi.) At this time Amphipolis was the chief (πρώτη) city of the district to which both it and Philippi belonged, but though Amphi- polis held the rank, Philippi claimed the same title, a case of rivalry between two or even three cities which often occurred. This single passage Ramsay regards as conclusive of the claims of Philippi, see St. Paul, p. 207, and Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, ii., 429. As to whether µερίς can be used in the sense of a division of a province, cf. Ramsay, Church in the Roman Empire, p. 158, and the instances quoted from Egypt, and also Expositor, October, 1897, p. 320, as against Hort’s limitation of the term. Hort, W.H., App. 96 (to whose view Rendall inclines, cf. also Zahn, Einlei- tung, i., p. 375), thinks that µερίδος must be a corruption, and proposes Πιερίδος, Pieria being an ancient name of that part of Macedonia; but he declines to draw any positive conclusion in its favour. Wendt, following Meyer, regards πρώτη as signifying rank, and so far he is in agreement with Ramsay. But as Απι- phipolis was really the chief town of the district, he contends that πόλις κολωνία might be taken as one phrase (see also Hackett, Overbeck, Weiss, Holtzmann), and so he regards the whole expression as signifying that Philippi is spoken of as the most considerable colony-town in that district of Macedonia, whilst he agrees with Hort and Lightfoot in main- taining that πρώτη is only classical as an absolute title of towns in Asia Minor. This Ramsay allows, but the title was frequent in Asia and Cilicia, and might easily have been used elsewhere, Church in the Roman Empire, p. 156; Holtzmann quite admits that the term may have been applied as in Asian towns to signify the enjoyment of certain privileges. For Ramsay’s criticism of Codex D, which substitutes κεφαλὴ τῆς M. and omits µερίδος altogether, see Church in the Roman Empire, pp. 156, 157, and Εκ- positor, u. s., κεφαλή being evidently
substituted because the term πρώτη is ambiguous, and so liable to be misun- derstood. Blass himself finds fault with D, and also considers πρώτη wrong, not only because Amphipolis was superior in rank, but because Thessalonica was called πρώτη Μακεδόνων, C. T. Gr., 1967. But this would not prevent the rivalry amongst other towns in the various sub- divisions of the province. Blass reads in β πρώτης µερίδος (a reading which Lightfoot thinks might deserve some consideration, though unsupported, if the original Roman fourfold division of the provinces were still maintained, see above, Pp. 355), and takes it as referring to Philippi as a city of the first of the four regiones.