LrrBRATDRB. — The Lexx. and Comm. ; Farrar, Christ in Art, bk. ii. ; P. Deanuer's art. ' Christ in Art " in vol. i. ; Dora Green- well, Patience of Hope, pt. i. ; Seelev, Ecce Homo, ch. iv. ; Denney,- Stud, iii Theol. 169. "J. C. LAMBERT.
MALCHUS (MoXxoj). — The name of the man whom Peter wounded in the right ear at the arrest of Jesus (Jn 18'").
Malchus was a common Semitic name, though not certainly met with among the Jews proper. By both Delitzsch and Sal- kinson it is vocalized DT^5, which is no more than a trans- literation. Josephus (see Xieses index) mentions five persons who bore it under the form of Ma/.x«; or Ma/j^*"'! whence an original ""'pc has been inferred (Dalman, Gram. Aram. 104). But the true Greek form seems to have been Ma/..^:*? (Periplus marii Erythrm, cf. Miill. Geogr. Gr. Min. i. •I'i); and i^^C, pronounced "3'7~, appears in three inscriptions {CIS ii. 158, 174, -218) that may be dated with some confidence between B.C. 40 and A.D. 40." In these inscriptions the name is Xabataean ; but the root IT is common to all the Semitic languages, and appears to belong to the unhistorical period prior to the separa- tion of the various peoples. In AssjTian it is a designation of a subordinate ruler (Schrader, COT i. 23), a prince rather than a king. While there are instances of its use in relation to a god (cf. Boehmer in Expoi. Times, xvi. [1905] 473 ff.), there is no need to see in it anything more than an allusion, serious or playful, to superiority" in rank or in pretence.
The bearer of the name in the Gosiiel narrative held a position of trtist in the household of the high priest, probably Caiaphas (Jn 18'*). It has l>een assumed that ' the other Evangelists sup- pressed the name (Mt 26'^', Mk 14-'', Lk 2-^') with a view to protect Peter from revenge or an action at law on the part of the Jews. It is at least as likely that they were ignorant of tiie name, or of opiiiiim that no purjxise was to l>e served by its mention. There is no evidence that Malchus was exceptionally active in the arrest, or anything more than an onlooker. Peters forward rush, when his indignation could l>e restiained no longer, towards the group of which Jesus was l)ecoming the centre (Jn 18^), suggests rather that Malchus was on the skirt of the group, and not immediately engaged in binding Jesus. He liappene<l to l>e in Peters way in his attempt to rescue his Master, and may well have been personally unknown to the mafority of the disciples. If John was the unnamed disciple who was ' known unto the high priest' (v.'5), possibly liecause he supplied the family of Annas with fish (according to an old tradition : cf. David Smith. Drn/s of Hit Fle^h, 46.>). he would l>e acquainted with l>oth Malchus and his kinsman (v.*) ; and the mention of the name in the Fourth Gospel may l>e taken as one of the undesigned indications of Johannine author- ship. The healing of the ear of Malchus is re-
106
MALEFACTOK
MAMMON
corded by Lk. alone, but is an essential part of the story (cf. Expos. Times, x. [1898-99] 139, 188), and exactly such an incident as Avould be likely to attract the notice of a physician, and so to calm the soldiers as to make the subsequent remon- strance preserved by each of the Synoptics jjos- sible. The natural order of events was first the healing of the wound, followed, while Malchus' friends were crowding around hiui, by the rebuke of Peter, and then, as soon as the people were ready to listen, hy the taunting protest in regard to the manner of the arrest. Thereupon Jesus consented to be seized, and in perfect self-posses- sion passed on to His trial and death.
R. W. Moss.
MALEFACTOR.— Two Gr. words, whose shades of meaning are indistinguishable, are thus trans- lated in NT : (1) KaKOTToiSi or kukov iroiwv (lit. ' evil- doer'), Jn 1830, 1 P 212-1* 415. (2) KaKovpyoi (lit. 'evil-worker'), Lk 23^2. =«. 39^ 2 Ti 2^. A V renders KaKoiroios 'malefactor' in Jn 18^", ' evil-doer ' else- where ; but RV gives ' evil - doer ' throughout. Again AV renders KaKovpyos ' malefactor ' in Lk 2332.33.39^ 'evil-doer' in 2 Ti 2», while RV makes it always 'malefactor.' This illustrates the NT Revisers' uniformitj^ in the ti'anslation of words.
In Lk 23^- the best attested text is erepoi KaKovpyoi Svo, not Erepoi dvo KaKovpyoi (TR). Hence it is main- tained by Alford and others that we ought to read 'two other malefactors' (without a comma after 'other') instead of ' two others, malefactors' (AV and RV). There is really no difficulty about adopting this rendering, which does not imply that St. Luke assents to the judgment that Jesus was a malefactor, but merely states the fact that He was led to execution as such.
D. A. MACKINNON.
MAMMON, or more accurately 'Mamon,' is the transliteration of the Gr. equivalent for a late Ai'am. or Syro-Chald. term denoting ' wealth ' or 'riches' or 'treasure,' Avhose etymology is still a matter of dispute (ef. the articles s.v. in Hastings' DB and Encyc. Bib.). In the Gospels it means worldliness in the form of wealth, and occurs twice — («) in Mt 6-*=Lk W^ ('ye cannot serve God and mammon'); and (5) in Lk 16®-", where it is de- fined, or rather described, as unrigfitcous, the latter epithet being applied to it not only in the Targums, but as early as En 63^" ('our .souls are satisfied with the mammon of unrighteousness, yet for all th.at we descend into the flame of Sheol's pain ').