The word
ἅëõóéò
is used of the coupling-chain or manacle by which the prisoner was attached to his guard, as distinguished from
ðÝäç
, the foot-fetters. It differs apparently from
äåóìïß
in conveying the idea of attachment rather than confinement. Among the Romans, it was customary to attach the prisoner by a light chain to the soldier responsible for his safe custody. One end of the chain was fastened to the right wrist of the captive, and the other to the left wrist of his custodian, whose right hand was thus free. It is to this method of confinement that St. Paul alludes, when speaking of his ‘chain’ (Act_28:20, Eph_6:20 m, 2Ti_1:16). Sometimes, for greater security, the prisoner was bound to two soldiers, one on each side of him, in which case, of course, the use of two chains would be necessary. This more rigorous method of confinement is the sort to which St. Peter was subjected during his imprisonment (Act_12:6), and also St. Paul during the early days of his captivity at Jerusalem (Act_21:33), Later on, at Caesarea and Rome, the latter Apostle, although still kept in strict military custody, was permitted to enjoy a considerable measure of freedom (Act_24:23; Act_28:30 f.). More frequently, the less precise and graphic terms
äåóìïß
and
äåóìÜ
, ‘bonds’ or ‘imprisonment’ are used to describe the condition of persons in captivity. St. Paul, speaking of himself as a prisoner, makes repeated allusions to his ‘bonds’ (Php_1:7; Php_1:13-14; Php_1:16, Col_4:3, 2Ti_2:9, Phm_1:10; Phm_1:13). The neuter and masculine forms are used with distinct shades of meaning,
äåóìÜ
referring to the fetters by which the person was bound (Act_16:26 [‘bands’] Act_20:23, Act_26:29),
äåóìïß
to the state of captivity into which the person had been thrown.