ed through the whole. Instances of such omissions, in the like cases, are very numerous. I admit, also, in regard to substantives in general, that the article is sometimes omitted, when the meaning is definite, but hardly ever added when it is indefinite. I am not certain, whether, in the two verses now referred to, should be rendered a son, or the son.. Plausible reasons may be advanced for each. I have avoided the decision, by rendering it in both verses, God's son, which may mean either. This, as I signified before, is the method I choose to take, in cases which appear doubtful. But if the words in connection be ever sufficient to remove all doubt, they are sufficient in v. 54. That the expression in question came from one who, as he believed a plurality of gods, could scarcely have spoken otherwise than indefinitely, is perfectly decisive. Let it be observed, further, that the same indefinite expression is used in the parallel place, 39. See ch. iv. 3. N. ch. xiv. 33. N. Mr. i. 1. N.

Mr. xv. 56. Mary Magdalene, Mapian Maydaλnın. It might be rendered, more literally, and even properly, Mary the Magdalene, or Mary of Magdala, in the same way as Ines Nagagn is Jesus the Nazarene, or Jesus of Nazareth. There can be no doubt that this addition, employed for distinguishing her from others of the same name, is formed from Magdala, the name of a city mentioned ch. xv. 39. probably the place of her birth, or at least of her residence. The appellation, Magdalene, stands now, however, so much on the footing of a proper name, that any the smallest change would look like an affectation of accuracy in things of no moment.

61. The other Mary, n aan Magia. Sc. Another Mary. But this last version is agreeable, neither to the letter, nor to the sense, of the original. I should not have taken notice of it, were it not to show how grossly the import of the articles is sometimes mistaken, and how strangely they are confounded. This learned writer, in his notes, after mentioning the common version, the other Mary, adds, "This might be proper, if "there were but two Maries," I answer, it is sufficient to the present purpose, that there were but two Maries, whom the Eyangelist had mentioned a very little before, to wit, at v. 56. These were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James

and Joses. He now again names Mary Magdalene, adding, and the other Mary. Can any person, who reflects, be at a loss to discover, that he says the other, to save the repetition of the mo ther of James and Joses? In order to evince the redundancy, not to say, insignificancy, of the Gr. articles, this author produ ces two other examples, which, doubtless, have appeared to him the most convincing. The first is, Mt. x. 23. Όταν διωκωσιν όμως εν τη πόλει ταύτη, Φεύγετε εις την άλλην, which I have rendered, When they persecute you in one city, flee to another; but which is, in the common version, When they persecute you in this city, Alee ye into another. Now, to me, this passage, so far from showing the Evangelist's negligence, in his manner of using the articles, proves his accuracy. If he had expressed the first clause indefinitely, όταν διωκῶσιν ὑμας εν μια πολες, and added, φεύγετε εἰς Ta aaan, this writer's reasoning would have been just; nor could there have been a clearer evidence, that the articles were some. times used without any determinate meaning. But as the first clause was expressed definitely, propriety required that the second should be definite also. Eis Ty, therefore, in this place, is equivalent to ↔ Tv EXEVY, and opposed to ev în mod ταυτη. Since our translators, therefore, rendered the first clause, When they persecute you in this city, they ought to have rendered the second, flee into that, or, into that other: for this is one of those instances (and there are several, as has been often remarked by grammarians) wherein the article has the force of a pronoun. I have chosen, in this translation, to express the whole indefinitely, as this manner suits better the genius of our tongue, and is equally expressive of the sense. The other way, in a language wherein it flows naturally and easily, does not, I acknowledge, want its advantages in point of vivacity. But to begin in one manner, and end in the other, offends alike against propriety and elegance. The other example, taken from J. xviii. 15. I should admit, without a moment's hesitation, to be clearly in favour of Dr. Sc.'s doctrine, if I did not consider it as an erroneous reading. See note on that verse.

3

63. Within three days, μeta TρEIS spas. Ch. ii. 16. 3 N. 64. Command that the sepulchre be guarded. This, as being a servile work, it might be thought, they would not ask to be

done on the Sabbath. But we ought to reflect, that they asked this of Romans, whom they did not consider as bound by the law of the Sabbath. Jews, to this day, do not scruple to avail themselves of the work done by Christians on the Sabbath. See the note on v. 65.

65. Ye have a guard. Some have thought that the guard, here meant, was the Levites, who kept watch in the temple (L. xxii. 52. N.); others, that it was a band of Roman soldiers who, during the great festivals, guarded the porches of the outer court, and had it in charge to quell any tumult which might arise there, or in the city. Of this guard extraordinary, at their public solemnities, mention is made by Josephus (Antiq. 1. viii. c. iv.) That it was not the Levites, the ordinary temple watch, who are here alluded to, appears from the following reasons: 1st, The service of that watch does not seem to have extended beyond the walls of the temple. 2dly, If their assistance had been judged necessary, the chief priests had no occasion to recur to Pilate for obtaining it, as, by the constitution, they who served in the temple were under the sole direction of the priests. 3dly, As the day, on which the assault seems to have been dreaded, was the Sabbath, it is probable that they would choose to have Roman soldiers, whom they could lawfully employ, and who would' be restrained by no religious scruple, rather than Jews, for suppressing any tumult on that day. 4thly, Had the guard been Levites, they were accountable only to the chief priests; whereas, being Romans, they needed the priests, as mediators with Pilate, before they could be induced, by a sum of money, to propagate a falsehood, which reflected so much on themselves as military men, and even exposed them to punishment. Lastly, the name xxi, here given them, which is neither Gr. nor Sy. but a La. word, shows clearly they were Romans. It may be objected, But, in that case, would the procurator have said, ye have a guard, thus representing the Roman soldiers as under their authority?' I take this to be no more than a civil way of granting their request. As, in modern language, we should say, 6 The guard is at your service.'

CHAPTER XXVIII.

1. Sabbath being over, os caßßatav. E. T. In the end of the Sabbath. This could be spoken only of Saturday evening; for ⚫ the Sabbath ended at sun-set. That this is not the meaning here is manifest from what follows, which shows it to have been the dawn on Sunday. O before a genitive often means after. Besides, in the Jewish idiom, the evening is understood to include the whole night, from sunset to sunrise.

66

2. There had been a great earthquake, Zarμ EYEVETO MEYAs. Pearce after Markland says, rather commotion, i. e. in the air." Wa. disturbance. Though it is acknowledged that GGμ signifies not only earthquake, but sometimes tempest, whirl. wind; the first is the common acceptation, from which we ought not to depart, unless when the words in connection require it. This is certainly not the case here. Markland imagines that the word nay, applied to the guards, v. 4. was intended by Mt. to prevent mens mistaking the import of the word cμ, v. 2. If this was the Evangelist's intention in using that verb, he has not been lucky in the choice of an expedient, for car here, till of late, appears to have been understood by all interpreters for earthquake.

2 From the entrance, año τn Ivgas. These words are wanting in the Cam. and two other MSS. There is nothing corresponding to them in the Vul. and Sax. versions.

9. When they were gone, às de εñogevoνтo. E. T. And as they went. Dod. and Wy. As they were going. If, in Hellenistic use, accuracy were observed in regard to the verbs, the last would be the only proper way of rendering the expression. But from the very different nature of the Oriental tongues, there has arisen, among Jewish writers, an indefinite application of the Gr. tenses and moods, which renders them, in some cases, not a lit. tle equivocal. The expression employed, Acts xx. 18. ¿s de ñaÇEYEVOVTO πPCS AUTOV, is extremely similar to that under review; yet no Eng. interpreter has scrupled to render it, When they were come (not coming) to him, as this is a meaning to which the words connected evidently confine it. Now, as the words are susceptible of this interpretation, candour seems equally to re

quire it, when it is essential to the consistency of the sacred historians.

2 This whole clause, ὡς δε επορεύοντο απαγγείλαι τοῖς μαθηταίς aur8, is wanting in the Sy. Vul. Cop. Arm. Ara. and Sax. versions. It is wanting also in the Cam. and many other MSS. Chr. appears not to have read it. It is rejected by Mill and some other modern critics. Beside these, one or two MSS. which retain ὡς δε επορεύοντο, omit απαγγείλαι τοῖς μαθηταις αυτ8, which are also the concluding words of the former sentence. As the latter clause, when retained, makes not the smallest alteration in the sense, I thought the above authorities might be held reason suffi. cient for passing it.

3 Rejoice, χαιρετε. E. T. All hail. The term hail, in saluting, rarely occurs now, except in Scripture and poetry. However, as, in some cases, we have no word which can properly supply its place, as it is very well understood, and by Scriptural use, as well as antiquity, rendered respectable, it ought not, in a translation of the Gospels, to be entirely laid aside; at the same time, it must be owned, that when the salutation stands alone, as in this passage, or is not accompanied with some compellation to the persons saluted, its appearance is rather awkward. Our translators have been so sensible of this, as to judge it necessary to insert the word all, to render the expression fuller. But even with this addition it still sounds oddly, and has been rarely copied by later translators, some of whom have preferred the way of circumlocution. I salute you, says one. Cold and formal. God save you, says another, which seems to imply some impending danger. To me, the literal translation of the Gr. word appears, in point of propriety, as well as simplicity, preferable to any of these methods.

14. If this come to the procurator's ears, av axovσIn touto exiI 78 nuvos. Wo. and Wa. If this come to a hearing before the governour: that is, to a judicial trial. That this is the mean. ing appears to me highly improbable. In such a public inquiry, it is not easy to conceive how the chief priests and elders could interfere, without betraying themselves and risking every thing. But nothing can be more likely than their promising to use their secret influence with the procurator, to induce him, (in case he should hear the report), to overlook it, and thus prevent examination altogether; a promise which, doubtless, they have faith