The Bezan " we " in XI 28 will satisfy those who consider the Bezan Text to be Lukan ; but to us it appears to condemn the Bezan Text as of non-Lukan origin. The warmth of feeling, which breathes through all parts of Acts dealing with the strictly Greek world, is in striking contrast with the cold and strictly historical tone of the few brief references to Syrian Antioch. If the author of Acts was a native bred up in Antioch, then we should have to infer that there lay behind him an older author, whose work he adapted with little change. But our view is that the Reviser had an Antiochian connection, and betrays it in that insertion, which to him recorded a historical fact, but to us seems legend in an early stage of growth.
Note 1. tt)v $pvyiav zeal TaXariicrjv x^Pav- The use of Kal to connect two epithets of the same person or place is regular in Greek (so Hav\o<; 6 xal ITauXo?, Saul alias Paul); e.g., Strabo speaks of a mouth of the Nile as to Kaveofiifcbp Kal 'HpatcXecoTifcov, the mouth which is called by both names, Canopic and Heracleotic, where we should say, "the Canopic or Heracleotic mouth". I need not dwell on such an elementary point. Another point of Greek construction comes up in XVIII 23 : when a list is given in Greek, the items of which are designated by adjectives with the same noun, the regular order is to use the noun
Note i. The Phrygo-Galatic Region. 211
with the first alone. Strabo has numberless examples : y6y, To>v Trapa/ceijjLevcov 'Apaftiwv eOvoiv Nafiaraicov re icai XavXoToTraieov icai 'Aypalcov ; 75 I, 6 ' ApKevdt]^ irorafib^ icai 6 ,Opovrr}<i icai 6 Aaficoras ; 8C2, to MevStjcriov crrofia icai rb TaviTucov (there are some interesting and delicate examples in Strabo, on which we cannot here dwell, of the distinc- tion between the double epithet and the double item) ; Herodotus, II 17, rb Be Bo\/3irivbv arop,a /cal to BovkuXlkov; and so Luke groups two Regiones as T171/ TaXariKrjv X^pav xal Qpuyiav, XVIII 23. The North-Galatian the- orists insist that $pvyiav in XVI 6 must be a substantive ; but they have not quoted any case in which a noun with its adjective is coupled anarthrously by icai to a preceding noun with the article. Dr. Chase quoted Luke III 1, rrj<j 'Irovpaias icai TpaytovLTiBos %<w,oa9 ; but the case tells against him, for Luke's intention to use 'Irovpaiwi here as an adjective is proved by the following reasons : —
(1) Eusebius and Jerome repeatedly interpret Luke III 1 in that way (see Expositor, Jan. 1894, p. 52 ; April, p. 289). (2) 'Irovpaia is never used as a noun by the ancients, but is pointedly avoided, even where 77 'Itoi;- palcov was awkward : the reason was that 'Irovpaia, as a noun, would indicate a political entity, whereas the Ituraei were a wandering nomadic race, who had not a definite and organised country. As my other reasons have been disputed, I do not append them here ; though I consider them unshaken. [Mr. Arnold's attempt to find one instance of 'IrovpaLa as a noun in Appian seems to refute itself, Engl. Hist. Rev.y 1895, p. 553.]
Note 2. 8if)\6ov t?)v <£. k. T. x&Pav Kco\v9ivTe<}. Many are likely to rest on the authority of the great MSS., and prefer this reading. It may be understood, by an
212 The Coming of Luke. Chap. IX.
ellipse common in Greek, " they made a missionary progress through the Phrygian land, viz., the Galatic part of it, inasmuch as they were prevented from preach- ing in Asia, and could not, therefore, do missionary work in the Asian part of it". But, if this were the writing of Luke, I should prefer to hold that he meant 8t,F)\0ov Kal etccoXvOrjcrav, using a construction which he has in (i) XXIII 35 ecpr) fceXevo-a? he said, " I will hear thee, when thy accusers arrive," and ordered him to be imprisoned: (2) XXV 13 KaTtjvTtjaav aanraadfievot "they arrived at Caesareia and paid their respects to Festus " : (3) XVII 26 iiroirjaev ef ew>9, o/JiVa? "he made all nations of one blood, and assigned to them limits and bounds" (here the unity of all nations is the initial idea, and the fixing of limits and distinctions is later). Blass, who thus explains XXIII 35, gives in his preface, p. 20, many examples of the present infinitive used in the same way (XVIII 23 igrjXdev Siepxo/xevcx; he went forth and made a progress through the Galatic Region, cp. VI 9 aviarrjaav <Tvv^r}Tovvre<i they rose up and disputed with Stephen, VI 11 virefiaXov avhpas Xeyovra? they suborned men which said [also VI 13], VIII 10 iTpocretxov XiyovTes they hearkened and said, V. 36 avevTT) Xiycov he stood up and said, VIII 18, XIV 22, etc.); and he accepts and prints in his text the reading of inferior authority in XXVIII 14 irapeKXrjdTjfiev trap avToU, eiripLeivavre<i we were cheered among them, and remained seven days. The usage is common in Paul. The use of aorist or present participle corresponds to the tense which would be used if the sentence were constructed in the fuller fashion, €<j>r) Kal £/cek€vcr6v but iffiXdev Kal Sn'ipxero (Blass diners in regard to XXI 16, which he says = <rvvf)X0ov Kal rflayov).