XXVIII. τ---2.
537
XXVIII. 1. ΚΑΙ διασωθέντες, τότε! ἐπέγνωσαν ὅτι Μελίτη ἡ νῆσος καλεῖται. 2. Οἱ δὲ βάρβαροι παρεῖχον οὐ τὴν τυχοῦσαν φιλανθρωπίαν ἡμῖν: ἀνάψαντες γὰρ πνράν,; προσελάβοντο πάντας ἡμᾶς, διὰ τὸν
1 Instead of επεγνωσαν ΝΑΒΟ” 13, 61, 68, 137, Syrr. P. and H., Boh. read
επεγνωµεν, 5ο Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Blass, Hilg. Blass with Gig., Syr. Pesh., but retained by Hilg.
διασ. om. by Instead of Μελιτη (Tisch.,
Κ.Υ. text, Weiss, Blass, Hilg.), W.H., Κ.Υ. marg. read Μελιτηνη with B*, Syr. Η,
mg. Gk., Arm., Boh., Gig.
2 \* has προσανελαμβανον, so Blass and Hilg. ; 137 has προσελαµβανον; Vulg., Par. reficiebant ; Gig. refecerunt, and Blass takes the word in his text as = reficie-
bant.
Wendt thinks that this may have been the original reading.
For ava.
(Meyer) ΝΑΒΟ 61, 68, Tisch., W.H., Blass, Hilg., Weiss read αψαντες.
Ver. 44. τοὺς λ., sc. ἐξιέναι ἐπὶ τῆν γῆν.--οὓς μὲν . . . οὓς δὲ, Luke xxiii. 33, and in classical Greek.—émi σανίσιν: “some on planks and some on pieces from the ship,’”’ Ramsay; the planks which were in use in the ship as dis- tinguished from actual parts or fragments of the ship in the next clause; in LXX, Ezek. xxvii. 5, the word is used of planks for the deck of a ship (Cant. viii. 9, 2 Kings xii. 9 (?)). Breusing, pp. 45, 203 (so Blass), takes it of the boards or planks which were used for keeping the cargo firmly in its place. The furniture of the vessel had already been thrown overboard, so that we can only think of the pieces broken away as the ship stranded, or perhaps broken off by the escaping crew. ἐπί: here used pro- miscuously with dative and genitive in the same sense.—éyévero: with infinitive following, characteristic of St. Luke, Friedrich, p. 13.--- διασωθῆναι: on its use by St. Luke here and in xxviii. 1, 4 (Luke vii. 3), see Hobart, pp. 9, 10, 284. For the remarkable correspondence be- tween the details of the scene of the shipwreck and the topography of St. Paul’s Bay see not only J. Smith and Ramsay, but Goerne, p. 374, Breusing, p. 204, and Vars, p. 257. Breusing and Vars both admit that it is not safe to trust too much to tradition, but in this case, as they both point out, it was only likely that St. Paul would have won loyal adherents in the island who would have handed down every detail of his visit to their children, and the local tra- dition is in striking accordance with the description of the sacred narrative; see further Introd., p. 8.
CHAPTER XXVIII.—Ver. 1. δια- σωθέντες, see on xxvii. 43. Used by Josephus of his own shipwreck and escape, Vita, 3, and in Xen. and Thuc. ef coming safely to a place.—rére ἐπέγ.:
not imperfect as in xxvii. 39; here de- noting the immediate recognition of the place after they had once gained safety (Weiss, Rendall, C.H.). St. Paul’s Bay is several miles distant from Valetta, the harbour which the sailors doubtless knew previously, see also Breusing, p. 190, Vars, p. 243, and J. Smith, pp. 140 and 148, 4th edition.—MeA(rn, see critical note; Malta, cf. Diod. Sic., v., 12, Strabo, vi., 2, Ovid, Fasti, iii., 567, Sicula Melita as distinct from Melita Illyrica (Meleda). There is no need here to refute the view that the latter, in the Adriatic Sea on the coast of Dalmatia, is meant. This view depends chiefly upon the narrow view of the meaning of the Adria xxvii. 27, see also below on wv. 2, 3. It was first put forward in the tenth century by Constantine the Por- phyrogenite, and was advocated in the last century by a Dalmatian monk, Padre Georgi, himself a native of Meleda, no doubt jealous for the honour of his birth- place and his monastery. Its chief cham- pion may be said to be W. Falconer, in his Dissertation on St. Paul’s Voyage, 1817, republished in 1870 by his nephew, Judge Falconer. This last was an un- successful attempt to controvert the argu- ments of J. Smith in favour of Malta, who may be said to have established his case to demonstration (see for a candid description of Falconer’s view “ Adria” (Dickson), Hastings’ B.D.). More recent nautical authorities have most decisively confirmed the view of J. Smith, cf. Breu- sing, p. 190, and Vars, p. 242. Quite apart from the strong local tradition in favour of Malta, and the testimony of the Apocryphal Acta Petri εἰ Pauli in favour of Γανδομελέτη (Gosso-Malta) (for re- ferences to Lipsius’ edition, Wendt and Zockler, in loco), it is not too much to say that Meleda could not have been reached without a miracle under the