Vers. 1—15. Parallel passages: Matt. xxvii. 1, 2, 11—26; Luke xxiii. 1—7, 13— 24; John xviii. 28; xix. 16.—Judicial processes. I. JESUS SENT FROM THE SaAn- HEDRIM TO PILATE—FROM THE JEWISH TRIAL TO THE Roman TRiau. 1, The first stage of the Jewish trial, After the arrest at Gethsemane, our Lord was conducted back to the city, across the Kidron to the palace of the ex-high priest Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the actual high priest that same year. The influence of this functionary was very great; his age, astuteness, riches, power, perhaps presidency of the Sanhedrim—all contributed to it. In answer to the inquiries of Annas about our Lord’s disciples and doctrine, the Saviour appealed to his teaching in the synagogue, in the temple, always in public; and referred him to his auditors on these occasions. This reply was construed into disrespect towards the ex-high priest, and resulted in the first act of violence, apart from the arrest itself; for one of the officers struck Jesus with the palm of his hand or with a rod (Admoya), as rendered in the margin. This was the Jirst of the three stages of the Jewish trial. Here we remark (1) that both Jews and Gentiles took part in arresting Jesus and conducting him to the high priest. ‘The band and the captain,” or chtliarch, that is, tribune, formed the Roman or Gentile element ; while the “ officers of the Jews” composed the Jewish element. Thus from first to last “the Gentiles and the people of Israel” combined against the Lord and his Anointed. The mention (2) of both Annas and Caiaphas as nigh priests by St. Luke (iii. 2) tallies with the fact that, owing to the arbitrary interference of the Romans, there might be several high priests alive at the same time; that is, those who had held the office and been deposed, and the person actually exercising the office. Of course, according to the Law of Moses, there could only be oue high priest at a time, and that rightful high priest was the hereditary representative of Aaron. Even in the Roman period the high priesthood had not become a yearly office, though the frequent deposi- tions and displacements occasioned many changes and much confusion. Thus Annas had been deposed in the twelfth year of our era by Valerius Gratus, the immediate predecessor of Pilate fn the procuratorship of Judea; yet, so great was his influence, that he had his own son bleazar, his son-in-law Caiaphas, and four other sons subsequently appointed to the high priesthood. (3) The preliminary inquiry before Annas might elicit information with regard to the extent of discipleship, aud so of sympathy among the rulers, as in the case of Nicodemus, that migit be calculated on; not only so, it would result in a prejudgment of the case through the shrewdness and influence of the ex-high priest. Further, a higher object—an object most probably nct dreamt of by either Annas or Caiaphas—was antitypical. We read in Lev. xvi. that on the great day of Atonement, Aaron laid both his hands upon the head of the live, or scape, goat, and
332 {THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK. [cu. xv, 1—47 a