The

i. Date and Circumstances. ii. Analvsis. iii. Literarj- Dependence, iv. Authorship. V. Integrity. vi. Value. Literature. i. Date and Circumstances. -The genuine- ness of this Epistle is more contested than that of any other attributed to St. Paul, except the Pas- torals. If it is not genuine, the exact date and circumstances are merely a hterarj' setting, of little historical value. Yet, even so, a dehnite situation was in the ^vriter's mmd and must be examined. , .^ ..

a„«o» The following points fix that situation. Appar- ently the temple is still standing {i^i.e. the date is before A.D^O. Further, P^"!;, ^''^^i^""^.', "^"j Timothy, after having founded the Church at Thessalonica (2^ 3'-") and written a letter probably IT^ss^to it (2» and nerh. 2» 3-), are stUl working to-ethe; (1') in some place where they are thwarted b/perve.se and malicious men (3'^), and where the..e a?

e other churches in the neighbourhood ( ) 1 h 3 will suit exactly the time ot Ac IS'" ' (cf. 2 Co 1 w th 1^) : late in the stay at Coiinth, but probabl.v before the appeal to Gallio had stopped he Jewis^i persecution. At this time news about the T •essa- onian Church reached them at Corinth (3» caoi.- ou.e.) ; perhaps brought by the messenger implied in I Th 3^ perhaps by the bearer of 1 pess. on his return, perhaps by some chance pa-^^f "^y • J'}?

^ were stUl exposed to persecution, and were std^ bravely enduring it; but there w^re tendencies o disorder and insubordination , idlers ^vere presu .^ in-' on the charity of their neighbours; and there was a tendency to excitement catiscd by an expc.

> tation of the sneedy setting-in of ' the 'laj °/ the Lord'; spiritual utterances, not duly tested (1 Hi S^-s") increased the expectation ; sayings of 1 aul, Silvanus, and Timothy were exaggerated to coun- tenance it ; possibly a for-ed letter m their name wasdrcilated, or Iniore likely) the language of 1 Th 4 5 was distorted in the same interest (- ).

The three teachers feel that their converts must be praised and comforted, yet stimulated and stead led 'riiey write a common letter-always '" the p mal, except that once one of them, probably Paul in- tervenes with a spe.!ial appeal to hU own teaching n. TUESSALOXIANS n. THESSALONIAJSrS 747 (2°), and Paul confirms the whole with his auto- graph at tlie end (3"). ii. Analysis. — 11- S Greeting. ▲.

Gratitude jot their gpiritual state, especially lor their loyal endurance under persecution (3- ). 8trenj,'theninj; of them bv the thought of (1) the justice of Go<i {&) ; (2) theepecial manifestation of that justice, which will accompany the Appearance of the Lord Jesus (H-10). Prayer to God to complete their Christian life, that Ciirisl may be gloriUed in them on that day ' (ii- 1^). B. F\UUr tt-acliiiuj about that day. Warning au'ainst beint; milled into thinking it immcdi.

ately at band (21- -), and a reminder of Paul's past teaching (), which implied (a) a mystery of lawk-ss- ness and of error already at work ; {b) a, restraining power or person ; (c) a removal of that restraint at some future date ; (d) a great apostafjy ; {>•) the appearance of the man of sin ; {/) the appearance of the Lord destroying the man of sin and all who have been deceived by him (3- ■ **-l2). Thanksgiving to God that He saved them from this doom ('3. li). E.

xhortution to abide lovally by their past teaching Prayer to God to comfort and to steady them (I6- 17). 0. liequent for their intercession (31- 2). A.ssurance of God's faithfulness (^), and of their teacher's faith in them (■"). Prayer to God to pive them love and patience (5). IX lt'''jutation o/ their covninvnft!i-l\fe. They are to shun all disorderly brethren (^) ; for such disorder is contrary to tlie example which tlieir teachers had set (7-^), and tlieir repeated command O**).

Such brethren must earn Ineir own bread (11. 12). The rest must be forbearing, but yet break off mtercourse with any one who persists in disobeying this written command t'^1^). Praver to the Cod of peace to give peace to them all ('■«). Autograph salutation in Paul'i own handwriting (17). Benediction ("*). iii. Literary Dependence. — (1) The Epistle presupposes the existence of 1 Thessalonians.

For II 2" explains itself readily by reference to I 4'"' 5'-'"; II :)» to I 4" ; 11 3", perhaps, liut less prob- ably, to I 4"'"''- ; and II 2- may imply a misunder- standing of I 4" 5"^ Further, there is a remark- able similarity of structure, e.g., in the form of tTeeting (I 1', II !••=), of thank.s<,'ivinK (I l\ II P), of [irayers (I 3'i 5==, II 2'« 3i'), of transition (I 4', II 3').

And this extends to many verbal points, as will be seen by a comparison of the following places : — 1 1^ with II IS. I IJ irilb II 2". I 1'! wilb II H. I ISOwith II 1. I 211 with II 39. I -i'^ with II 1». I v;^ with II 2>7. HI 10 ,',11 with tit. I .19 witli II •». I 6H li with H 313. The writer of 2 Thess. must have latel.v written 1 Thess., or have known it as a piece of literature. (2) Prcvions apocalyptic teaching is also pre- supposed. No one pas.

sage of the OT is appealed to, but the ajiocalyjitic descriptions I""'" 2^"'- weave together phrases from Is 2i''''"-'' 11 [found in a similar context in Ps-SoI 17"- "] 49" GG"- ', Jer 10=, F,zk 28'-, and Dn ll". There are also striking re- somljlaiices between the language here and that of our Lord's escliatological discourse ; cf.

1" with Mt 25»'-'"i ; 2' with iMt 24»' {fmavi'diouati') ; 2^ with Mt 24« (BpouaOai, here and Mk 13' only in NT) ; 2-' with Mt 24" ; 2* witli Mt 24" (^» t6wv iylv), Mk 13i< {4(TTriK6Ta Srou oi Su) ; 2' with Mt 24'" (di-o^ifo) ; 2" with Mt 24".

Such similarities may be due to the fact that each draws independently from the common stock of ajiocalyptic imagery, and they do not prove a literary dependence on anj' written (Gospel, but they make probable a knowledge of some oral tradition of that dis- course. (3) A knowledge of other Gospel sayings may lie behind l»=Mt 5'», 3» = Mt G". Tlie command in 31" is a quotation of a Rabbinical saying, but possibly it had been already used by our Lord Himself, and may have been taken by St.

Paul from Him (ef. Kcsch, Agraplia, pp. 128 and 240). iv. AuTlIoiisHlP. — Church tradition universally ascribed the Epistle to St. Paul. It is directly attributed to him by Polycarp (c. xi.), who quotes 1*, though by mistake he quotes it as addressed to the Phillppians. Keminiscences of the apocalyptic language may underlie Justin Martyr, Dial, xxxii. ex. ; Didache, c. IG ; and more prob. E/>. Vicnne and Lyons, ap. Eiis. v. I (iv{(!

Kr}\j/ev 6 avTiKet)ievo;, irpoot- fita^b^ivo^ ij^Tj TT)v fi^Wovaav ^treadat irapovo-iav ai>roO . . XpKTrbi . . KarapYwv rby avriK^iaevov . . oi v\o\ Tt)? airuXcias), but in no case can the reference be called undoubted. Marcion included the Epistle in his Canon as Pauline, and so did the Latin and Sj'riac translators. The internal evidence on the whole supports this view.

The general structure of the Epistle, the style and pliraseology, the afi'ectionate tone, the frequent intercession tor the readers, the request for their prayers, the appeal to his own teaching and examjile, the sharp insistence on his own authority in a matter of discipline, are all characteristic of St. Paul. Cut two main objections are raised. (a) The relation of the style to that of 1 Thessa- lonians.

In spite of the pointsof likeness (see above), there is a dillerence ; the tone is more orticial {eux- 6(pti\ofiev), the feeling less vivid, the sentences more involved, the .same things are being said, but said with less point and directness ; they suggest a second person adapting Pauline thought (Spitta, pp. 116-119). But the variety seems equally ex- plicable as that of one writer writing after a short lapse of time, and in a dillerent mood.

A compari- son of the style of 2 Timothy with I Timothy, of Colossians with Ephesians, of 2 Co 11 with 1 Co 9, will show very similar variety. (b) The escliatology is said to be un-Pauline. It is true tliat no such detailed anticip.-itions are to be found elsewhere in St. Paul (but 2 Co 0" rh ffv^tpujvTjffts XptaTou irpot lieXiap may refer to the Anti- christ tradition), liut .such teacliing was naturally esoteric ; and, even here, the writer .

seems inten- tionally to avoid being explicit, through fear, jierhaps, of giving the Roman authorities a handle against himself or his converts (cf. the reticence of Jos. Ant. X. X. 4, about the interpretation of Daniel's prophecies). Further, some such teacliin^j was common among the Jews, so that St. Paul wouhl have inherited it ; and, lastly, it is almost universal in Christian writers (Synoptists, John [5'''], James, I. 2 John, Apoc. ), so that the proba- bility is in favour of St.

Paul having shared the expectation in some form. But is the form iniidicd here Pauline? This again is dillicult to answer, because of the diliiculty of deciding what the writer was pointing to. There lay behind him in the history of the doctrine the following stages. (1) A common Oriental mytli of a struggle between the ])ower of evil, represented by a dragon (I'.ab. Tiaiii.

it) and the Creator of the world (Marduk), in which the dragon had been bound, but would revive for another conllict with God before the end of the world (see articles Rahaii, Sea Monstkr, and Rkvki.ai'ion). The connexion of this with the following is only a conjecture, but a very possible conjecture.

(2) A Jewish expectation, springing up during the Exile, of an attack upon Israel by foes led by some liuiiian leader or (later) by Satan or Heliar, which would bo frustrated either by J" or the Messiah. Such a victory is described in Ezk 38. Something similar recurs in the prophecies of Daniel (7. 8 and 1 1 ) about the conllict with Antioclius Epiplianes.

The ex- pectation did not ccasewitli the deathof Antioclius; it was applie<l to the thouglit of deliverance from the Roman empire in 2 Es 5', Ps-Sol 17, Urac. Sib. iii. 60, Apoc. ISaruch, c. 40, Ase. Is. c. 4 (cf. Man T48 II. THESSALOXIANS IL THESSALOXIA^v^S OF Six). (3) This anticipation had become Chris- tian.

Our Lord had contemplated a leader ' coming in his own name ' (Jn 5'^) and demanding allegiance ; some person, ' the abomination of desolation, stand- ing in the holy place (itrTriKdra) ' ; many false pro- 5 bets, a growth of lawlessness, a destruction of erusalem, and a coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24, Mk 13, Lk 21). Similar teaching bad been given at Thessaionica by the writer frequently {IXcyof, 2'), but it was shared by his fellow-teacbers {{puruiixcv ...

lis iC Tit>-C»', 2'- -), and the phrases t) iiroaraaia, 6 &v$piairo$, 6 dvTtKeifiivoSf 6 Karix^' s-re quoted without explanation as from a well-known body of teaching. (4) A new point had probably been given to the expectation among the Jews in A.D. 39 or 40, by the attempt of Caligula, frustrated only by his death, to erect his own statue in the temple of Jerusalem (Jos. Ant. XVIII. viii. ; Tac. Hist. v. 9). This would help to explain the language of 2, and Spitta suggests that St.

Paul and his colleagues had adapted a Jewisli form of the apocalyptic teacliing written in view of Caligula's attempt ; but there is no necessity for such a suggestion, interest- ing and possible as it is. This history of the doctrine helps us to define the probable application which is implied in this teaching. It is not indeed necessary to suppose in St.

Paul's mind any clear identification with a definite person or a definite time ; yet the language is more natural on such a supposition, and the in- terpretation will come in one of two directions. (a) Probably the opposition comes from Jewish soil, t6 ^vaTijptov TTjs di'Ofj.ias is the opposition of the Jews to the spread of Cliristianity (cf. 3'-^, 1 Th 2", Ac 18* and passim) ; the ipepyca ir\dfn!

is the blinding of the eyes of the Jews to the gosjiel (Ac 13"-'^ 1 Co 2«, 2 Co 3», Ro U^^) ; t6 Karexof is the Roman empire controlling the Jews ' assidue tumultuantes ' (cf.

Ac 18-) and preventing their illegal attacks on the Christians ; 6 Karixuv, the Roman emperor, or perhaps on the analogy of Dn lu'^- -" some archangel who presides over the order of the empire (so Goebel, ad loc); ^ diro- uraaia is the final rejection by the Jews of their Messiah, or possibly some Christian apo>tasy such as is contemplated in He 10^*- ; 6 di'dpuiiros rijt dpuipTlas is some false Messiah, expected to lead the Jews in a final rising against tlie Roman emj>ire ; and his destruction lies in the overthrow of the Jewish polity and the salvation and estab- lishment of the Christian Church.

This interpreta- tion is most in accord with the Synoptists and with the subsequent Church tradition, as well as with St. Paul's own circumstances at the moment. (i3) The opposite view has been frequently main- tained of late, which sees the explanation in heathen oiiposition and especially in the worsliip of tlie Cfajsars.

The lawlessness and deceit will then be that of heathen wickedness and error ; the restrain- injj power, tlie antagonism of the Jewish State (Warfield), or the imperial authority (Jljlicher) ; the man of sin, the emperor or some heathen per- sonification of evil proclaiming himself as God ; the apostasy, that of the Jews, or, as on the former theory, of some Christians ; and the coming of the Son of Man will be tlie ultimate annihilation of C^sarism and the est.

iblishment of Christianity as the religion of the world. This view would be more in accordance with the past history of the appli- cation to Antiochus Epiphanes, with the attempt of Caligula, and with the reference to Nero in the Apocalypse; but it seems less in accord with St. Paul's own circumstances at the time. Either of these views gives a setting possibly Pauline ; the language, no doubt, is indefinite ; it is capable of being applied to the theory of a Nero reclivivu,i (c. 69 A.D.

), or to some Gnostic oppo-sition to Christianity in the 2nd cent. ; but none of the lan^age rcfjuires such an interpretation. Noi again, is this view fatally inconsistent with St. Paul's expectation elsewhere. 1 Th 5'"' certainly foretells a sudden surprising appearance of the day of the Lord ; but that is consistent with a previous preparation of events, the length of which 13 left, as here, wholly indefinite.

Ro U^ also implies a hope that ' all Israel will be saved,' which seems scarcely consistent with a great Jewish antagonism ; out the language cannot be rigidly pressed ; the failure of a Jewish false Messiah might be a stage in the conversion of the Jewish nation ; and it is possible that St. Paul's expectation on this point may have changed.

Again, 1 Ti 4', 2 Ti 3' point to an expectation of an apostasy within the Christian Church ; but that would not be inconsistent with the view main- tained here. Recent investigations have emphasized the strength of the tradition both Jewish and Chris- tian ; but they have also shown the versatility of its application ; it is applied to the danger which threatens the truth at any moment.

Baniel gives it a heathen application to Antiochus Epi- phanes ; the writer of the Psalms of Solomon to Pompey ; St. Paul, thwarted by Jews, applies it to them ; St. John sees many Antichrists in teachers untrue to Christianity ; the writer of the Apocalj'pse, when the Roman empire had become a persecuting power, applies it to the Roman emperor ; the writers of the Ep.

of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons see in the persecu- tion there an anticipation of the final conflict : ' he that opposeth ' swoops down upon the Christians ; Christ m the martyrs ' brings to naught ' him who opposeth ; the apostate Christians are ' the sons of perdition.' This application is all the more inter- esting that it is mcidental, and the passage is not quoted.

Consequently there may be many applications and many fulfilments yet in the future, as long as the cleavage between faith and unfaith, error and truth, remain. [Cf. Man OF SiN, vol. iii. p. 226 ; PAUL, vol. iii. p. 709 ; Bousset, Der Antichrist (Gottingen, 1895, Eng. tr. 1896) ; in Encyc. Bill. s.v. ; Thackeray, The Relation of St. Paul to Contemporary Jeu-ish Thought, pp. 136- 141 ; Stanton, Jeu-ish and Christian Messiah, iii. e. 2 ; R. H. Charles, Eschatvlogy, p. 380 tt'., and art.

'Apocalyptic Literature' in Encyc. Bibl. ; Schurer, EJPu.'n. 154 f. ; B. B. Warfield in Expositor, 1886, ii. pp. 30-44 ; G. G. Findlay, ti. 1900, ii pp. 251- 261]. There is, then, no reason for denying the author- ship to St. Pall. Spitta in a valuable examination of the Ep. {Zur Gesch. und Litt. dcs Urchristentunis, i. pp. 111-154) suggests Timothy as the real author, supposing that St.

Paul, instead of dictating as usual, left Timothy to compose it, and that Timothy is referring in 2* to his own separate teaching at his last visit to them ; St. Paul then adds a general authentication in 3". In this way he attempts to explain the ditlerence of style be- tween 1 Thess. and this Ep., and the difference of the eschatological view. But these differences are not so great as to call for such an explanation ; further, St.

Paul would not authenticate a letter which contained any substantial ditference from his own teaching ; the Thessalonians would natur- ally refer fKeyov of 2° to the leading apostle whose name stands first (!') and who is named in 3", the only other use of the singular; and 2'-' imply that the teaching of the one teacher (2°) was shared by all.

If anotlier author were needed, Silvanus seems a more natural suggestion, for he, as a prophet, miglit be the source of the projihetic passage ; but the theory creates more difficulties than it solves. ■Those who reject the Pauline authorship alto gether suppose tnat at some later date an expects. n.

THESSALONIAXS THliSSALONICA 749 tion of the immediate coming of Christ arose and produced excitement and neglect of daily duties ; that some one in authority tried to meet the peril implied in the excitement uy writing a letter which described the stages that would precede that com- ing, and in order to gain w eight for it com|)osed it in the name of Paul, deliberately modelling it upon 1 Thess., the Pauline Epistle which was most cognate in subject.

Of the many suggested situations, that of Schmiedel seems the best, who would connect it with the expectation of a return 01 Xero, and so place it after Nero's death (June OS), and before the destruction of the teiiijile (August 70). It would then deal with the s:une circumstances a-s the Apocalypse (ch. 13). But there is no detail here, wliich connects 'him that opposeth ' clearly with Nero redioieus, and the verj' elaborateness of the theory is against its truth. V. IXTEGRITY.

— The difficulties of 2'-'= have natur- allj' led to suggestions of interpolation. Pierson and Nalieri r(;n'.ri»ii7K«, pp. 21-25) treat l'''"2'"'- 3 (except 7-13. 16-18) .^g parts of a pre-Christian Jewish apo- calviise, worked up into a Christian form by .some unknown bishop of the name of Paul (cf. preceding art.) Schmidt, S.

Davidson, and others treat the main body as Pauline, with 2'''- as a late insertion of about 6'J ; Hausrath treats 2'"'- as the only Pauline fragment worked up into an Epistle at a later date. But there is no MS support for any of these theories, and 2'"'^ cannot be separated from 1'"'°, which latter section shows striking similarities with the Jewish expectations ; cf. esp. 1* and 2" with Sib. Orac. iii. 67 i. of the coming of Beliar — (cf. Clemen, Die EinhcitUchkcit der Paul. Bric/e, pp.

17, 18 ; Moflatt, Historical NT, p. 626). vi. Value. — Short as the Epistle is, it b of great value, both doctrinal and historical. It marks the high position attributed from the first tu Christ, the language of the OT about Jehovah li'-iiig applied to llim (1'), and He being ranked "ilh tlie Father as the one source of comfort and strength (2" TrapokoX^crai . . oTupiJai, each in the singular).

It shows us the strength of the expectation of the Second Advent in the Early Chuich ; the deep sense of the struggle between good and evil, between truth and falsehood, its consummation in delinite persons, and the final triumph of the good and true; the faith in the ultimate justice of God to right the injustice of this world.

It shows the method in which the apostle met the feverish impatience that would antedate the end : (a) laying stress on those elements in the traditional expectation which innilied lapse of time and an overruling Providence wlucli fixed the right moment for the coming ((u T(f aiiroO xaipv, cf.

I's- Sol n-" its tJk Kaipof in oUat au, 6 Otit) ; (6) insist- ing on the duty of each man earnin" his own livelihood an<l discouraging all cringing dependence on Church charity ; (i:) strengthening the bonds of discipline, iire.s.sing the authority of hia own com- mands, and calling upon the Church to rise to the iluty of keei>iiig its ranks free of unworthy mem- bers ; 3" marks the commencement of Church discipline. It .

sanctions the tendency to read the ^-igns of the times an<l to see the great struggle between good and evil working itself out in con- temporary events ; and even if we cannot for certain identify St. I'aul's application, or even if it was not fullilled exactly as he expected, yet as the great expectation had grown with centuries and was rooted in principles, so it remains still, claim- ing a more adequate fulfilment. For applications made in subsequent Christian times see Smith's DB, s.v.

'Anti-Christ.' Historically, the section 2'"" was of great im- portance ; for the identification of the Roman empire with 6 (car^x"" led to its being treated as the great protecting power, and so gave special point to the prayers tor it and for the emperor (cf. Tertullian, A/wl. 32: ' est et alia major ueces- sitas nobis orandi pro imperatorilms, eliam pro omni statu imperii rebusque Itoniani.s, qui vim ma.

vimam nniverso orbi imminentem ipsanique clausulam sa'culi accrbitates borrendas commin- antem Romani imperii coniiiicatu scimus retar- dari '). The language of 3" is also valuable, as indicating that St. Paul had a larger correspond ence than we now possess, and probably hints at a danger of forged letters even at this early date. LiTKttATiniE. — See at end of preceding article, and add Goebel, IHe Thessalonuchen Brif/e, a crisp, terse, sensible com- mentary.

The authurship is best discussed, as against St. Paul, bv Spitta (see above), Schmiedel, lldcom. pp. 7-11 : as fur St. Paul, by Julicher, Kinl* pp. 45-.''il ; Zahn, pp. 160-182 ; Sloffatt, tiistorical ST, pp. 142-14S ; Hornemann in Meyer's Comnunfar ziiin ST. Interesting suggesti»»ns for the emendation ul the text (in l^'^ irirratlh;, 2- mi Ok roa/^) will be found in Westcott- Hort, it App. p. 128 ; Field, NoUt <m Tram. V ST. p. 2n2. W. Lock.

THESSALONICA [QeaaaKovlK-ri), a city of Mace- donia, still known by that name under the but slightly altered form of i>alo>ii/ci, b.-is lun'' held a prominent place in history, and still ranks, after Constantinople, as the most imiiortant town in European Turkey. It is situated on the inner- most bay, or north-eastern recess, of the larger gulf, which now takes its name from the modern town, but was known to the ancients as the Thcrmaic Gulf, after an earlier town on the .

same site, called Thcrme. It is built in the form of an amphitheatre on the slopes at the head of the bay ; and it is seen from .a great distance, crowned by its citadel above, and conspicuous by white- washed walls several miles in circuit. ' The situa- tion,' says Tozer, ' recalls the appearance of Genoa from the way in which the hou.-ics rise from the water edge, and gradually a.sccnd the hillsides to- wards the north.

It is admirably plac-ed for pur- poses of communication and trade, as it lies in the innermost bay of the winding gulf, and forms the natural point of transit for exports and imports; besides which it commands the resources of the immense plain, wliich reaches in a vast arc as far as the foot of Olympus, and receives the waters of three important rivers, the Axins, the Lydias, and the Haliacraon ' (G'eoj'. o/" Greece, 1873, p. 2U4).

It is said to have borne earlier the names of Emathia and Ilalia: certainly it bore that of Tlierme, by wliich it is known to Herod, (as a halting-place of Xerxes on bis way to Greece, vii. 121, 123, 124, 127, 128, 183) and Thucyd. (i. 61, ii. 20), and which it probably owed to hot mineral springs (thenna;), still existing in its vicinity. The name Thessa- lonica (as to the origin of which various conjectures are brought together by Tzetzes, Chil. xiii. 30511'.)

, which is first einploj'ed by Polybius (xxiii. 4, 4 ; 11, 2; xxix. 3, 7), would appear to commemorate a victory over the Thessafiaiis, of wliich nothing di Unite is known as to time, place, or victor (Philip?) It was most probalily given to the city by Ca.ssander (who rebuilt it about B.C. 315, ancl transferred to it the inhabitants of several small townships in the vicinity; Strabo, vii. fr. 21) in honour of his wife of that name, who was daughter of Philip, and step-sister of Alexander.

The place soon gained imjiortance, becoming, on tbecomiuest of Macedonia by the Romans, tiie cajiital of the second of its four divisions (Liv. xlv. 2!)), and, on the conversion of the country a few years lafer into a province, jiractically the capital of the whole, and residence of the Roman governor • called 750 THEUDAS THIGH 'the mother of all Macedonia' {Anthol. Gr. ed. Jacobs, ii. p. 98, Epig. 14), although the name ' metropolis,' occurring on coins of the city, is ot later date.

The Romans had docks (navalui) tliere (Liv. xliv. 10) ; the great Egnatian higlnvay tra- versed tlie city from west to east, the remains of arches at either end of a Ion" street still markin'' the site of its gates ; Cicero during Ins exile found friendly shelter there for seven montlis with Plancius the qu.Testor (Oral, pro Plane. 41 ; Ep. ad AH. iii. 8tl'.) In the first Civil war it supplied a basis of operations for Pompeius and the Senate (Die Cass. xli.

20) ; in the second it espoused the cause of Antonins and Octavianus (Pint. Brut. 4G ; Appian, Bell. Civ. iv. 118), which brouglit to it apparently tlie privilege of becoming a free city aUera! conditionls, Pliny, EN iv. 36), for there are several coins inscribed with the words eE— A- AONIKEfiN • EAEXeEPIAS, probably to be associ- ated with the victory at Philippi, from the reverse bearing the joint names of Antonius and Augustus.

This privilege implied autonomy (hence the men- tion of Tiv dijfiov in Ac 17=), and the appointment of their own magistrates, who were m this instance desi'Tiated 7ro\iT(£px<". as is apparent from Ac \i ■ , where the term is rendered RULERS OF THE CiTY (whicli see). Tafel, in his comprehensive monograph IDe Tliessal.

ein^que agro dissartatio gcugraphica, Berol 1839), follows out the fortunes of the city as under the later Empire a main bulwark against the Gothic and Slavonic invasions (of which lie enumer- ates six); and, during the Middle Ages, thrice captured,— by the Saracens in 904, by the Normans under Tancred in 1185, and by the Turks m 1430 It has still a population of about 70,000, whereof 20,000 are Jews. ,,,„■ When St.

Paul, along with Silas, visited Thessa- lonica on his mission to Macedonia and Greece, the Jews there, who were numerous and influential enough to have founded a synagogue, were his most active opponents. The discussions w^th them on three Sabbaths persuaded few Jewsh hearers, but a much larger number ('a great multitude ) of 'the devout Greeks'— i.e. proselytes— 'and of the chief women not a few' (Ac 17*).

But the Jews, who were not won over, called to their aid some worthless idlers of the market-place (d7oparoi), excited a tumult, beset the house of Jason, and, not finding there those whom they sought, dragged Ja.son and others before the politarchs, accusing tliera of having received disturbers of the world s peace, and of contravening the imperial decrees by owning another king in Jesus.

Upon this alarm, the politarchs took securities from the accused and dismissed them; but tlie brethren at once sent away Paul and SUas by night toBercea. The i subsequent fortunes of the Church which their brief ministry had formed called forth from the apostle (courteously associating with himself Timothy as well as Silvanus= Silas) the two Epistles to the Thessalonians. See preceding two articles. William P. Dickson.