The Acts of the Apostles

CHRONOLOGICAL DATA 5
the youthful Church. Neither in the one case nor in
the other can we therefore trace any real chrono-
logical interest on the part of the author.
As concerns the history in the Diaspora, here again
Claudius is the only emperor mentioned by name,
and his name forms the sole directly chronological
notice. When St. Paul came to Corinth he found
there one Aquila with Priscilla his wife, who had
lately come from Italy ; they had been compelled to
leave their place of abode Sia to ^larerayevaL }^\av^iov
^copi^ecrOai TrdvTag rov^ 'lovSaiovg airo t?? ^Vcojurjg
(xviii. 2).^ Here again this information is not given
for the sake of chronology, but quite casually. That
St. Luke knows of the edict of Claudius, and records
it, shows that he interested himself in the fortunes
and doings of the Jews in the Diaspora. Besides this
piece of information mention is made of a few
notable persons, such as the pro-consul Sergius Paulus
in Cyprus (xiii. 7), and the pro-consul Gallio in
Corinth (xviii. 12 /*.). Here again the names are
mentioned in the natural course of the narrative
there is nothing that is intentionally chronological.^
1 In both cases (here and xi. 28) St. Luke has omitted all titles,
and gives only the name of the emperor. Even in this point the
consistency of his style is remarkable. Orosius gives the date of
the edict of Claudius. We do not know where he got his informa-
tion ; there is, however, no reason for doubting its accuracy.
* For further references to general history and matters connected
with heathen cultus, cf. the Chiliarch Claudius Lysias (xxiii. 26),
the centurion Julius (xxvii. 1) ; the a-TreXpa 'ItoXikti (x. 1), and the
ffveTpa T^e^aa-T-n (xxvii. 1)—note the coincidence ; the Epicureans
and Stoics (xvii. 18 ; we are surprised that no mention is made of
the Academicians ; did the author intend to represent them as not
opposed to St. Paul 7) ; the Areopagus (xvii. 19) ; Dionysius the
;