statement of Matthew (xxvii, 7), was purchased by the priests with the thirty pieces of silver rejected by Judas, and converted into a burial-place for Jews no) belong- ing to the oily. In the narrative of the Act- (i, IS. 19) the purchase is made by .hulas himself, and neither the potter's field, its connection with the' priests, nor its ultimate application is mentioned. That Matthew was well assured of the accuracy of his version of the occurrence is evident from his adducing it | ver. 9 I as a fulfilment of an ancient prediction. What that predic-
POTTER'S GATE
455
POTTS
Matt, xxvii, 9. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jer- emy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Is- rael did value, and srave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.
tion was, and who made it, is not, however, altogether clear. Matthew names Jeremiah ; but there is no pas- sage in the book of Jeremiah, as we possess it (either in the Hebrew or Sept.), resembling that which he gives; and that in Zechariab, which is usually sup- posed to be alluded to, has not a very perfect likeness to it.
Zech. si, 12. And I said unto them, If ye think good, give my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. And Jehovah said unto me, Cast it unto the potter; a goodly price that I was prized at by them ! And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of Jeho- vah.
Even this coincidence is somewhat doubtful; for the word above translated "potter" ("1111*") is in the Sept. rendered " furnace," and by modern scholars (Gesenius, Fttrst, Ewald, De Wette, Herxheimer — following the Targum, Peshito-Syriac, and Kimchi) " treasury" or "treasurer." Supposing, however, this passage to be that which Matthew refers to, several explanations suggest themselves :
1. That the evangelist unintentionally substituted the name of Jeremiah for that of Zechariah, at the same time altering the passage to suit his immediate object, in the same way that Paul has done in Rom. x, 6-9 (comp. with Dent, viii, 17; xxx, 11-1-1), 1 Cor. xv, 45 (comp. with Gen. ii, 7). See Jowett, St. Paul's Epistles (Essay on Quotations, etc.).
2. That this portion of the book of Zechariah — a book the different portions of which have been thought by some to be in different styles and by different au- thors— was in the time of Matthew attributed to Jer- emiah.
3. That the reference is to some passage of Jere- miah which has been lost from its place in his book, and exists only in the evangelist. Some slight support is afforded to this view by the fact that potters and the localities occupied by them are twice alluded to by Jeremiah. Its partial correspondence with Zech. xi, 12, 13, is no argument against its having at one time formed a part of the prophecy of Jeremiah; for it is well known to every student of the Bible that similar correspondences are continually found in the prophets. See, for instance, Jer. xlviii, 45, comp. with Numb, xxi, 27, 28; xxiv, 17; Jer. xlix, 27, comp. with Amos i, 4. For other examples, see Dr. Pusey's Commentary on Amos and Micah. — Smith.
4. The name "Jeremiah" may have been added by some later hand. This is the most probable view. See Jeremiah, Book of.
There are several potteries now in Jerusalem, as there seem always to have been. On the present spot shown as " the Potter's Field," see Aceldama.
Potters' Gate (""^"inri *l?d), a gate in Jeru- salem which led to the valley of Hinnom (Jer. xix, 2). It is therefore to be sought on the west side of the city, and is perhaps the same with the Valley gate, so named from that valley; and with the Bethlehem or Jaffa gate of the present day, if not with the Dung gate (see E ivald, Gesch. Israel's, iii, 06). The Hebrew name seems to be derived from 0"in, cheres, a pot (see Gesen. The- saur. i, 522). Perhaps the potteries were in the vicin- ity. Others, as Buxtorf and Ewald, would render the word East gate, but this would not lead to the valley of Hinnom. If the custom had obtained so early of casting useless things into the valley of Hinnom or Topheth, the word might be rendered accurately Pot- sherd gate, or Refuse gate. The reference in Zech. xi, 13 is probably not to this gate (Gesen. Thesaur. p. 619). See Jerusalem.
Pottier, Francois, a French missionary, was born at Loches in 1718. He was educated at Paris in the Seminary of Saint-Esprit. In 1753 he was sent as a missionary to the countries of Western China. His zeal was rewarded with the apostolic vicariate of Tse- tchouan, and subsequently honored with the title of bishop in partibus of Agathopolis. In 1769 he visited the Chen-si (more to the north), and there made more than sixty thousand proselytes. He died Sept, 28, 1792. Pottier wrote several letters on his peregrinations in the Celestial Empire. They abound in curious information about the principal Chinese' provinces, about Southern Tartary, and even Thibet. The author describes the mountain-ranges of Sine-Ling, in which he often found a refuge in times of persecution. There is little flattery for the Chinese in his account of their manners, but he thinks that they are not incorrigible. It is to be re- gretted that Pottier neglected altogether to give us in- formation about the natural history of those countries. His purpose was to write a journal of his life and of the progress of Romanism, rather than a work useful to the learned.— Hoefer, front: Bioy. Genirale, s. v. See Saint- Martin, Eloge de P. E. Pottier ; Nouvelles Lettres edifi- antes, vol. i and iii.