The name 'Jesus' before that of Barabbas in Mt 271*- 1' is an interesting reading found in a few cursives, in the Armenian Version, anil in some copies of the .Jerusalem Syriac, AVith this insertion Pilate's question runs thus : ' Wliom will ye that I release unto you ? Jesus Barabbas, or .Jesus which is called Christ ? ' This reading was known to Origen ; and he does not condemn it, although he thinks that the many MSS which omit the ' Jesus ' are probably right. Ewald {Life of Christ, p. 241), Renan {\'ie de Jesus, p. 400), Trench {Studies in the Gospels, p. 296), and others defend the reading ; and Meyer conjectures that the common name suggested the substitution of one Jesus for another. But the reading is rejected by all the best critics. It would be amazing that the true reading should be lost from all uncials, nearly all cursives, and all the more ancient versions. The words of Jerome, ad loc., do not necessarily imply that ' Jesus Barabbas ' was the reading in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. He says : Iste in evanijelio quod scribitur juxta i/c^imos lilius magistri eorum interpretatur ; which may mean that this document contained the words, ' Barabbas, which being interpreted is. Son of their Master.' But if the Gospel according to the Hebrews bad 'Jesus, Son of their Master' for 'Jesus B.arabbas,' then this may be the source from which the name ' .Jesus ' got into some copies of St. Matthew. If tlie name was not in the Gospel according to tbe Hebrews, then wc may adopt Trcgelles' conjecture, that the interpolation arose first in v,i' through accidental repetition of the last two letters of vuit; the .second IN being afterwards interpreted as an abbreviation of '{riaovy. The copies known to Origen seem to have had the 'Irfirovr in v.'" only. That Barabb.xs had this name, and that the evan- gelists missed the startling coincidence, is not probable. A. PLUMMKU.
hnrtex Scrihner^x Sons
246
BARACHEL
BAEJESUS
BARACHEL (Skjhs 'he whom God blesses').— Only in .Job 322-«. the father of Elihu, described as ' the Uuzite,' probably a descendant of Buz, second son of MJcah and Nahor, Gn 22'-'. See Buz. W. T. Davison.
BARAK (p-!5, BapdK, 'lightning-flash.' The name is found in Punic, Barcas, surname of Hamilcar ; Saba'an, zpiz ; Palmyrene, pin ; de Vogii^, Syrie CentraU, lxx>'i. 2 ; Ledrain, Diet, des Noms Projires Palmyr. 18S7, s.v.), son of Abinoam ; his history is recorded in Jg 4 and 5. He was summoned by Deborah to be her ally in the struggle against the Canaanites. He dwelt in Kedesh-naphtali (Jg 4"), and was probably a member of the tribe of Issachar (5"). Hence he belonged to the district which had suffered most at the hands of the Canaanites : perhaps he had been actually their prisoner.* He receives from Deborah the plan of the campaign ; he is to move his troops, 10,000 men of Naphtali and Zebulun, in the direction of Mt. Tabor, while she undertakes to attract Sisera's army towards the same place, and promises to deliver Sisera himself into his hands (4»- '). The writer does not regard B.'s urgent request that Deborah should go with him as worthy of blame ; nor is it necessary to interpret the prophetess' announcement that the honour of the expedition will not be his but a woman's, as a punishment for his hesitation (see Moore, Judges, p. 117). B. collects his forces at Kedesh, moves to Tabor, and opens the engage- ment by a rush down the mountain (4"'- "■ ", cf. 5^') ; the battle is fought out at the foot. In ch. 5, on the other hand, the battle takes place along the right bank of the Kishon (w.^'"^'). "The Canaanites routed, B. pursues them to Harosheth, and then follows Sisera on foot, and comes up to the tent of Jael to find him lying dead, with a tent-peg through his temples. According to 5', B. joined Deborah in singing the Ode of Triumph in ch. 5.
In 1 S 12" the LXX, Pesh., and many modems read Barak for Bedan. B. thus becomes a repre- sentative leader along with Jerubbaal, Jephthah, and Samson (?). This agrees ■n-ith the impression as to B.'s position which we gain from Jg 5.
G. A. Cooke.
BARBARIAN St. Paul (1 Co 14"), wishing to
emphasize the fact that the tongues with which those pos.se8sed of the Holy Ghost spoke were not any intelli;;ible forms of speech, and that hence they required an interpreter also inspired, says, ' If then I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be to him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh will be a barbarian unto me.' Here he uses the word in its proper sense as one who spoke unintelligibly. So Homer, in whom the word first occurs, speaks of the Ka/ies pap^apdipuvoi (H. ii. 867), tlie Carians who spoke in a strange tongue. Since the word Barbarh means in the earliest Arm. the language of a race or people, Homer may have meant the Carians who spoke a barbarh, that having been the Carian word for their national language. However this be, the word Barbarian means all through Gr. literature a man who did not speak Greek, especially the Medes, Persians, and Orientals generally. The Romans or Latins were called Barbarians by the Greeks even to the latest days of the Byzantine Empire, and at first even called their own tongue Barbarian ; though from the Augustan age onward they excepted their own tongue. In the same way Pliilo, a Hellenized Jew, calls his native Heb. a barbarian tongue, and states ( Vita Mvsis, § 5, vol. ii. p. 138) that the Law was translated from Chaldaic into Greek because it was too valuable a treasure to be