278
ἀδελφοῖς ταῦτα.
καὶ ἐξελθὼν ἐπορεύθη eis ἕτερον τόπον.
19.
, Vs > , > δν’ πο. ~ ΄ ρ Γενομένης δὲ ἡμέρας, ἦν τάραχος οὐκ ὀλίγος } ἐν τοῖς στρατιώταις. τί
ἄρα ὁ Πέτρος ἐγένετο.
19.
Ἡρώδης δὲ ἐπιζητήσας αὐτὸν καὶ ph
εὑρών, ἀνακρίνας τοὺς φύλακας, ἐκέλευσεν” ἀπαχθῆναι : καὶ κατελθὼν ἀπὸ τῆς Ἰουδαίας εἰς τὴν Καισάρειαν διέτριβεν.
1 ουκ ολιγος om. D, Gig., Par., so Blass in β, and Hilg., may be '' Western
non-interpolation,’ and for ordinary reading cf. xx. 23. η πως εξηλθεν, cf. Par.? “aut quomodo exisset”’;
Belser, p. 65.
At end of verse B adds cf. Blass, p. ix., for defence, so
Σαπαχθ., D! reads αποκτανθηναι, so Hilg., but Blass rejects—certainly looks like
a gloss.
St. Fames; Zahn, Einleitung in das N.T.,i.,72; Lightfoot, Galatians, pp.252 ff. and 364; Hort, Ecclesia, pp. 76,77. In this mention of James, Feine points out that a knowledge as to who he was is evidently presupposed, and that therefore we have another indication that the ‘“« Jerusalem tradition’’ is the source of St. Luke’s information here.—eis ἕτερον τόπον: all conjectures as to the place, whether it was Antioch, Rome, Czsarea, are rendered more arbitrary by the fact that it is not even said that the place was outside Jerusalem (however probable this may have been); ἐξελθών need not mean that he went out of the city, but outof the house in which he had taken refuge, cf. ver. g. For all that can be said in support of the view that he went to Rome, see Felten, 1. s., pp. 240-244, Knabenbauer, p. 214. Harnack, Chronol., i., Pp. 243, apparently is prepared to regard the visit to Rome in the reign of Claudius, A.D. 42, as not impossible, although unprovable. But see the whole question treated from the opposite side by Zoéckler, Apostelgeschichte, pp. 233, 234 (second edition). The notice is so indefinite that we cannot build anything upon it, and we can scarcely go beyond Wendt’s view that if Peter left Jerusalem at all,,he may have undertaken some missionary journey, cf. 1 Cor. ix. 5.
Ver. 18. τάραχος (generally ταραχή): only in Acts xix. 23, although several times in LXX.—otx ὀλίγος: only found in Acts, where it occurs eight times (litote’s) οσα, το πο πα, που aa, and for similar expressions Luke xv. 13 (Acts i. 5), vii. 6: see Klostermann, Vindicie Lucana, p. 52, and Page, in loco. The guards would answer for the escape of the prisoner by suffering a like penalty, cf. Cod. Fust., ix., 4, 4. --τί ἄρα (cf. Luke i. 66), Peter has disappeared, what, then, has become of
him ? (Grimm, sub v. ἄρα (1.), and Winer- Moulton, liii. 8); it thus marks the per- plexity of the soldier as to what had become of Peter.—éyév.: Blass, quid Petro (ablat.) factum sit.
Ver. 19. μὴ for οὗ, as often with a participle. Simcox, Language of the N. T., p. 1δδ.---ἀνακρίνας, Acts iv. 9, xxiv. 8, xxviii. 18, Luke xxiii. 14, of a judicial investigation, cf. also 1 Cor. ix. 3 for this judicial use by St. Paul, see Grimm sub ν.---ἀπαχθῆναι, “to be put to death,” R.V., only here in this sense in N.T. absolutely ; so Latin duct in Pliny, ad Traj., 96 (Page); Nestle, Philologia Sacra (1896), p. 53, cf. Gen. xxxix. 22, xl. 3, xlii. 16, LXX, use of the same verb of carrying off to Ρεῖσοπ.- κατελθών: Herod was wont to make his residence for the most part at Jerusalem, Jos., Ant., xix., 7, 3, and we are not told why he went down to Czsarea on this occasion. Josephus, xix., 8, 2, tells us that the festi- val during which the king met his death was appointed in honour of the emperor’s safety, and the conjecture has been made that the thanksgiving was for the return of Claudius from Britain (see Farrar, St. Paul, i., 315), but this must remain un- certain; he may have gone down to Czsarea “propter Tyros,” Blass, see also" BD! x, p: τος: