Ιδ----10.
65
µενος ἐλάκησε µέσος, καὶ ἐξεχύθη πάντα τὰ σπλάγχνα αὐτοῦ: 19.
καὶ Ὑνωστὸν ἐγένετο πᾶσι τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ, ὥστε
κληθῆναι τὸ χωρίον ἐκεῖνο τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλέκτῳ αὐτῶν ᾽Ακελδαμὰ,!
1 Ακελδαµα, so C, Syr. Harcl., Chrys., Vulg.; Αχελδαμαχ SQA 4ο, 61, Tisch. ; AxedSapax B, so W.H., Weiss ; Ακελδαιµαχ D (Blass in B -δεμαχ), so Hilg., and other
variants; in Gig., Par. -emac(h).
that St. Luke here follows a different tradition from St. Matthew, xxvii. 6 ff., and that it is only arbitrary to attempt to reconcile them. But Felten and Zéckler (so too Lumby and Jacobson) see in St. Luke’s description a later stage in the terrible end of the traitor. St. Matthew says καὶ ἀπελθὼν ἀπήγξατο: if the rope broke, or a branch gave way under the weight of Judas, St. Luke’s narrative might easily be supplementary to that of St. Matthew. Blass, zm loco, adopts the former alternative, and holds that thus the narrative may be harmon- ised with that of St. Matthew, rupto fune Iudam in terram procidisse. It is difficult to see (as against Overbeck) why πρηνὴς Ὑεν. is inconsistent with this. The words no doubt mean strictly “' fall- ing flat on his face’’ opposed to ὕπτιος, not “falling headlong,’”’ and so they do not necessarily imply that Judas fell over a precipice, but Hackett’s view that Judas may have hung himself from a tree on the edge of a precipice near the valley of Hinnom, and that he fell on to the rocky pavement below is suggested from his own observation of the locality, p. 36, Acts of the Apostles (first English edition), see also Edersheim, “bz supra, pp. 575, 576. At all events there is nothing dis- concerting in the supposition that we may have here ‘‘some unknown series of facts, of which we have but two frag- mentary narratives’”’: ‘ Judas,” B.D.?, and see further Plummer sub v. in Hast- ings’ B.D. ἐλάκησε: here only in the N.T. λάσκω: a strong expression, signi- fying bursting asunder with a loud noise, Hom., Iliad, xiii., 616; cf. also Acta Thoma, 33 (p- 219, ed. Tdf.): 6 δράκων φυσηθεὶς ἐλάκησε καὶ ἀπέθανε καὶ ἐξεχύθη 6 tds αὐτοῦ καὶ ἤ χολή, for the construction cf. Luke xxiii. 45.
Ver. 19. καὶ γνωστὸν ... πᾶσιν τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσ.: the words have been taken to support the view that we have here a parenthesis containing the notice of St. Luke, but if St. Peter was speaking rhetorically he might easily ex- press himself so. But many critics, who refuse to see in the whole of the two verses any parenthetical remarks of the