Page images
PDF
EPUB

ought, by the syntactic order, expressly to exclude that interpretation; as it could be intended only to prevent a wrong reference to μúpov. The ovvrpiyaoa, therefore, whatever it denotes, must regularly refer to the box. This, say they, is not the usual method of taking out the liquor; but it may be sometimes a necessary method. Nor does it follow, as a consequence of breaking the box, that the liquor must be lost. The effect would depend entirely on the form of the vessel, and the manner of breaking it. We may strike off the neck of a bottle or flagon, without spilling the liquor. I have, however, chosen the words broke open, as sufficiently denoting that it required an uncommon effort to bring out the contents, which is all that the word here necessarily implies. And it is a circumstance that ought not to be altogether overlooked, being an additional evidence of the woman's zeal for doing honor to her Lord. That the term ought not to be rendered shook, is to me evident. I know no example of it in this meaning in any author, sacred or profane. Verbs denoting to shake, frequently occur in Scripture. But the word is never συντρίβω, but τινάσσω, σείω, σαλεύω,

14. "The guest-chamber," zo zarakuμa. L. 2.7. 3 N.

15. "Furnished," ¿orowμivov. I have followed the E. T. in rendering the Gr. word by a general term. To make a stricter interpretation intelligible to ordinary readers, would require more circumlocution than it would be proper to introduce into so simple a narrative. The Eng. word which comes nearest the import of the Gr. is 'carpeted.' But when this term is used, as here, of a diningroom, it is not meant (as without an explanation would occur to us) only of the floor, but of the couches on which the guests reclined at meals. On these they were wont, for the sake both of neatness and of conveniency, to spread a coverlet or carpet. As this was commonly the last thing they did in dressing the room, it may not improperly be employed to denote the whole.

22. “ Take, eat, this is my body,” λάβετε, φάγετε, τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σώμα μου. Vul. "Sumite, hoc est corpus meum." The same defect is in both the Sy. the Cop. the Ara. the Sax. and the Eth. versions. The Al. and some other noted MSS. omit qayers.

30. "Even thou." Though in the common Gr. we have not the pronoun ou after ör, it is found in so great a number of MSS. many of them of principal note, in so many ancient versions, fathers and early editions, that it has been generally received by critics. That ou is emphatical in this place there can be no doubt. Peter's solemn declaration ended with these words, álλ' ovx ¿yw. Our Lord's words or où stand directly opposed to them. It may be added, that the pronoun, in the learned languages, being in such cases unnecessary for expressing the sense, because its power is included in the verb, is hardly ever mentioned but with an em

phasis, which can rarely be transfused into modern tongues without the aid of some particle, as here of the adverb even.

41. "All is over," anézet. E. T. "It is enough." This expression is here both indefinite and obscure. L. Cl.'s version is nearer the point, "C'est une affaire faite," or An. "Tis done." The intention was manifestly to signify, that the time wherein they might have been of use to him by their counsel and comfort was now lost; and that he was in a manner already in the hands o fhis enemies.

43. "Clubs." L. 22: 52. N.

51. "Who had only a linen cloth wrapt about his body," пεQiβεβλημένος σινδόνα ἐπὶ γυμνοῦ. Ε. Τ. “Having a linen cloth cast about his naked body." Bp. Pearce supposes this to have been a tunic, or vestcoat, the garment worn next the skin, (for shirts, as necessary as we imagine them, appear to be of a later date, unless we give that name to a linen tunic): but the words in connexion, περιβεβλημένος ἐπὶ γυμνοῦ, lead us to think that this was a loose cloth cast carelessly about him. The historian would never have added ini yvuvou, speaking of the tunic, or, as we commonly render it, coat, which was always ini yuuvov, close to the body. By this, on the contrary, he signifies that the man had on no tunic, and was consequently obliged to make his escape naked, when they pulled off his wrapper. Besides, a man's appearing only in his tunic was nothing extraordinary, and would never have excited the attention of the soldiers. The common people on ordinary occasions, or when employed in manual labor, seldom appeared otherwise. What our Lord says, ch. 13: 16, "Let not him who shall be in the field turn back to fetch his mantle," is an evidence of this; for these two, the tunic and the mantle, completed their dress.

2 "The soldiers," oi veavioxo. E. T. "The young men." A common denomination for soldiers among the Greeks. Had the evangelist said νεανίσκοι τίνες, or simply νεανίσκοι, 1 should have rendered it young men. The definite expression οἱ νεανίσκοι points to a known part of the company, which could be no other than the soldiers. Though this incident, recorded by Mr. may not appear of great moment, it is, in my opinion, one of those circumstances we call picturesque, which though in a manner unconnected with the story, enlivens the narrative, and adds to its credibility. It must have been late in the night, when (as has been very probably conjectured) some young man, whose house lay near the garden, being roused out of sleep by the noise of the soldiers and armed retinue passing by, got up, stimulated by curiosity, wrapt himself (as Casaubon supposes) in the cloth in which he had been sleeping, and ran after them. This is such an incident as is very likely to have happened, but most unlikely to have been invented. It is proper to

add, that of vɛavioxo are wanting in the Cam. and two other MSS. with which agree the Vul. Sy. Cop. Ara. and Sax. versions.

53. "All the chief priests," návres oi doxiegeîs. Vul. "Omnes sacerdotes." The interpreter seems to have read iεps. But this reading is not warranted by any MS. or version, except the Sax.

The Fr.

56. "Were insufficient," loa ovx joav. E. T. "Agreed not together." Vul. "Convenientia testimonia non erant." Between those two ways of rendering this passage, translators have been divided. Er. and Zu. are the only La. translators I have seen who agree with that here given, "nec erant satis idonea." translations also of P. R. L. Cl. and Beau. the Eng. An. and Wes. concur with mine. On a doubtful point, where the words appear susceptible of either interpretation, one ought to be determined by the circumstances of the case. Now there is nothing, in the whole narrative, that insinuates the smallest discrepancy among the witnesses. On the contrary, in the Gospels, the testimony specified is mentioned as given by all the witnesses. The differences in Mt. and Mr., one saying, "I will rebuild," another, "I can rebuild;" one adding, "made with hands," another omitting it, not only are of no moment in themselves, but are manifestly differences in the reports of the evangelists, not in the testimony of the witnesses; nor are they greater than those which occur in most other facts related from memory. What therefore perplexed the pontiffs and the scribes was, that, admitting all that was attested, it did not amount to what could be accounted a capital crime. This made the high-priest think of extorting from our Lord's mouth a confession which might supply the defect of evidence. This expedient succeeded to their wish. Jesus, though not outwitted by their subtilty, was noway disposed to decline suffering, and therefore readily supplied them with the pretext they wanted.

59." Defective." See the last Note.

61. "The son of the Blessed One," o vios rou εvloynτov. Vul. "Filius Dei benedicti." In the Al. and two other MSS. we read Θεοῦ τοῦ εὐλογητοῦ. But it is entirely suitable to the Heb. idiom to employ the adjective tuloyntos, without the noun, as a distinguishing appellation of God.

70. The clause καὶ ἡ λαλιά σου όμοιάζει is wanting in the Cam. and three other MSS. with which agree the Vul. Cop. and Sax.

versions.

72. "Reflecting thereon, he wept," inißalov Exhaus. E. T. "When he thought thereon, he wept." There are not many words in Scripture which have undergone more interpretations than this term, nißalas. The Vul. perhaps from a different reading, followed by Er. Zu. Cas. and Cal. says, "Cœpit flere." In this also agree the Sy. the Sax. and the Go. versions. Ar. "Sepa

[ocr errors]

rans se flevit." Be. "Quum se proripuisset, flevit." Dio. "Si mise a piangere." G. F. after Be. "S'estant jetté hors, il pleura.' P. R. Beau. and L. Cl. as Dio. "Il se mit à pleurer." Hey. "He burst into tears." Almost all our other Eng. versions of this century, An. Dod. Wes. Wor. Wy. have it, "He covered his head," or "his face, and wept." Schmidius and Raphelius have warmly, but not in my judgment successfully, defended Be.'s version, making inßalheev to mean, se foras proripere sive ejicere,' to rush out. Elsner has clearly shown, that the examples produced in support of this interpretation conclude nothing; and that the word, as its etymology suggests, denotes more properly to rush in, than to rush out. Accordingly, when it is construed with a preposition, the preposition is always εἰς or ἐπί, never ἐξ or ἀπό. He therefore prefers an explanation which had been first given by The. and afterwards defended by Salmasius and others: "Having covered his head, he wept." Yet the Gr. commentator does not give this as the certain meaning of the word; but mentions two interpretations, leaving it to the reader to make his choice. His words are, ἐπιβαλών, γὰρ φησὶν, ἔκλαιε, τοῦτ ̓ ἐστιν, ἐπικαλυψαμένος τὴν κεφα Χ λήν, ἢ ἀντὶ τοῦ, ἄρξαμενος μετὰ σφοδροτήτος. But has any authority been produced for rendering inßaleîv, by itself, ' to cover the head?' The authority of The. himself, a writer of the eleventh century, especially on a point of which he is evidently doubtful, will not go far. Pains have been taken to evince that the Greeks and Romans (for nothing, if I remember right, has been affirmed of the Jews) had such a custom; but not that it was ever expressed by the single word inßáll. It is natural in man who weeps, to endeavor to hide his face; not so much to conceal his emotion, as to conceal the effect of it, the distortion it brings upon his countenance. But the matter of consequence to Peter was to conceal his emotion altogether. Now, he could not have taken a more effectual method of publishing it to all around him, than by muffling his head in his mantle. This could not fail to attract the attention of many who had no opportunity of observing the change on his features. I consider the version of this word in Dio. Beau. and L. Cl. as made from the Vul. or the Cam. the only Gr. copy which reads noĝaro xlaitiv. Hey.'s seems to be a free version of The.'s, άoğaμevos εκει κεμετὰ σφοδροτήτος, ἔκλαιε. In regard to what appears to have been f's fall to in the oldest manner of translating the word inßalov, he began,' I in der Webshould, with Palairet, have no objection to it, had the words been

ἐπέβαλε κλαίειν, and not ἐπιβαλών ἔκλαιε ; for, though no phrase in Scripture is more common than he began to do for he did, we do not find a single instance in which the first verb is expressed by the participle, and the second by the indicative mood, (I might add, or in which inßalleiv is used for to begin'). Now the form, in idiomatic phrases, must be carefully observed, for they hardly ever con

vey the same sense when differently construed. Simon of the Oratory, after Gro. makes this participle equivalent to the

adBut it is remarkable, that though the verb inßáll occurs very often in the version of the Seventy, they have not once used it in translating the Heb. 0, which is also a very common verb. Palairet follows Ham. who has given a version which differs from all the preceding, "He looked upon him [Jesus], and wept." But our former question recurs, Where do we find inßálλw, without any addition, used in this sense? Not one quotation where the verb is not followed by ὀφθαλμούς, ὄψεις, or ὄμματα, has been brought in support of this meaning. The meanings would be endless which might be given it, should we form an interpretation from every word that may be contrued with inßállo. After weighing impartially the above and other explanations, I think with Wet. that the sense exhibited by the E. T. is the most probable. That there is an ellipsis in the words, is undeniable. Now, we can never plead use in favor of a particular signification of an elliptic term, but when we can show that such is the meaning of the word where there is the same ellipsis. To say nißalleîv means 'to look upon,' because inßalleiv opaluous has that meaning; or, that it signifies' to cover the face, because βαλλεῖν φάρη ἐπ' ὅμματων has that signification, appears to me so extraordinary a mode of reasoning, that I am surprised to find critics of undoubted learning and discernment adopting it. If I should produce examples of ἐπιβαλλεῖν τὸν νοῦν, οι τὴν diavolav, as signifying to think of a thing, to reflect upon it, than which nothing is easier, I should give full as much probability to this signification of the word inßalleiv, when alone, as has been given by any quotations I have yet seen, to the most plausible of the meanings above-mentioned. But more can be said here. The verb by itself is explained by Phavorinus as admitting this interpreration. Επιβάλλει οὖν τις νοήματι ἤ ἔργῳ, ἡγοῦν ηκριβωμένως καὶ ἐπιτυχῶς νοεῖ, ὁ καὶ ἐπιβόλως φαμὲν. Suidas explains ἐπιβολή by Evvota. And of the word used singly in this acceptation, Wet. has produced clear examples from Polybius, Theophrastus, Plutarch, Diodorus Siculus, Diogenes Laertius, and several others, to which I refer the learned reader; and shall only add, that if these authorities do not put the matter beyond all question, they at least give it a greater probability than has been yet given to any of the other hypotheses.

CHAPTER XV.

5. "Answered no more," ovxéti ovdév áñengiðŋ. E. T." Yet answered nothing." But this implies that he had answered nothing to the former question; the reverse of which is the fact, as appears

« PreviousContinue »