Literature. — W. Arthur, Tongue of Fire. ch. ix. ; A. Maclaren, Holy of Holies, chs. vi. viii. ; Mason, Conditiuns of our Lord's Life oh Earth (1896), 84 ; W. N. Clarke, What shall we think of Christianity! (1899), 106 ; Forrest, Authority of Christ.
G. M. Mackie. PRiETORIUM.— The word occurs in the text of Mk 15^'' only, but in the margin of Mt 27-', Jn 182« 33 199^ ^vith Ac 23« and Ph V\ In the Gr. it is a transliteration of the Lat. prcetorium, which originally meant the tent of the commander of an army, and then the official residence of a provincial governor ; other senses, such as that of the Imperial bodyguard or even of a spacious country house, were gradually acquired. In most of the passages in the Gosjjels it is used in reference to a part or the whole of Pilate's official residence in Jerusalem, which was probably the palace of Herod the Great (see Pavement).
Two other identifications are supported by comparativelj' early tradition, but are not on the whole to be approved. Thai Pilate's house was in the lower city, a little to the north of the Temple, is altogether unlikely. The theory has failed to be confirmed by any discovery of the site ; and it is not easy to see why Pilate should prefer such a locahty, when the palace built by Herod was available as the official residence of the procurator. More can be said in favour of Pilate's occupation of the castle of Antonia, which stood to the north-west of the Temple area. It was a fortress and prison, and served as the headquarters of the garrison at Jerusalem. Josephus {Ant. XV. xi. 4 ; BJ I. V. 4) describes it as a citadel, with abundant accommodation, and connected with the precincts of the Temple by a pri\ate way. But. again, Pilate was not likely, especially when accompanied by his wife and household (Mt 2719), to stay there, when the sumptuous palace of Herod, with its gardens and banqueting halls, was at his disposal. It is true that the proximity of Antonia to the Temple would be a convenience to the priests and Sanhedrists, and save them from the toil of attendance at the more remote palace ; but Pilate was not the man to study the wishes or comfort of the Jewish leaders at the cost of any discomfort to himself. The arguments in favour of his adoption of the castle as his residence have been accepted, amongst recent connnentators, by Westcott (on Jn IS) and Swete (on Mk )5i6) ; but, on the other hand, Herod's palace has been preferred by Schiirer, Edersheim, Sir C. Wilson, and com- mentators such as Alford and Meyer. The practice at Jerus-olem would thus correspond with that at C<esarea (Ac 233*Xj).
Such a hj'pothesis leaves the passages in which the pra^torium is referred to without any seriotis difficulty ; and it becomes possible to follow the probable order of events. According to St. John, the trial of Jesus took place in one of the porticoes of Herod's palace. When sentence was pronounced, Jesus was led away by the soldiers to Antonia, where they were themselves quartered, and where prisoners were ordinarily detained. He was taken into a court, to which also the name of prri'torunn is given (Mt 27'-', Mk 15'^), and mocked by such of the soldiers as were ott' dutv. In this connexion
pra'toriiiiii denotes probably the place of meeting of the council of chief officers for the transaction of the business of the cohort and for the trial of offences in the absence of the procurator. Such a usage of the term is anticipated, if not illustrated, in Livy [Hist. xxx. 5, xxxvii. 5) ; and the existence of such a court would be necessary for the main- taining of order in Jerusalem and the vicinity. When the soldiers were weary of the mocking, the\' led Jesus away again to be crucified.
R. W. MOS.S.
PRAISE. — 1. Introductory. — Both in the OT and the NT the predominant idea of 'praise' is that of a tribute of homage in utterance, publicly expressed and rendered to God bj" His creatures. It forms the essence of worship, whether as offered by angels (cf. Lk 2'*- i^- -^', Rev 14«'-) or men (cf. Lk 193"'-). The subject of this 'praise' is either the excellencies of God's attributes and revealed nature (cf. esp. Rev 19) or the beneficent action of His providence, as shown more particularly in creation, revelation, and redemption (thanksgiving) ; cf. Ac 2^", Rev 15^*- In the Gospels Jesus is sometimes the object of praise and homage (Mt 2P* ; cf. Lk 4'^), and Himself often dispenses praise for certain qualities of human nature or character (cf. Mt gio Jill etc.). The praise of man bj' man is usually apjilied in the Gospels to unreal and hypocritical commendation, and is condemned by Jesus (Mt 6^, Lk 6-^ : cf. Jn S^^-" 12«).
2. Jewish usage. — In Jewish worship the element of praise occupies a dominant place, and has re- ceived rich and manifold expression. The title of the Bk. of Psalms in the MT. Scphcr TehiUtm * (and its variants) = 'Book of Praises or Praise-Songs,' is an indication of the emphasis which was laid on the note of praise in later Jewish worship. This note is alreadj- prominent in the Psalter itself (cf. e.g. ' O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel,' Ps 22^). The close connexion existing between the ideas of praise and thanksgiving (cf. e.g. Ps l(Xt* ' Enter his gates with thanhsgicing, his courts with praise') has already been pointed out in this work (see art. Blessing, § 1). Indeed, thanksgiving (Heb. /*w/f7/0— esp. for God's beneficence in crea- tion, revelation, and providence — is an essential part of praise. If a distinction can be drawn, praise pure and simple is rather to be associated with extolling God's perfections and holiness, while blessing (thanksgiving) is connected rather with thankful recognition of His goodness, beneficence, and mercy. But this is true only in a general sense ; the two conceptions are so intimately re- lated that one passes over into the other almost imperceptibly.