An explanation of the Greek article

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http: //books .google .com/I

AN EXPLANATION

OF

THE GREEK ARTICLE,

IN THREE PARTS;

CONTAINING,

I. ANALYSIS AND REFUTATION OF DR. MIDDLETON's
THEORY.

II. AN ANALYSIS OF MATTHIJe's DISSERTATION.

III. AN APPLICATION OF THE ARTICLE TO OBSCURE
PASSAGES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

By JOHN JONES, LL.D. M.R.S.L.

LONDON:

PRINTED FOR
LOKaMAK^REES, ORME, BROWN, AND GREEN,

PATERMOSTER-ROW.

1827.

ADVERTISEMENT.

This llttle volume cannot boast of much previous pre-
paration : the design of it was hastily conceived ; and,
doubtless, marks of haste will appear in the execution.
Nevertheless my idea of the Greek Article has long been
fixed ; and I was able at any time to cairy such a work
into effect

The article is a word of constant recurrence ; and yet
in very many places its use is doubtful and controverted.
The most effectual way to ascertain its true signification,
seems to me to bring in review before the reader the
mistakes of those who have written on the subject, llie
theory of Dr. Middleton and the Dissertation of Matthias,
prefixed to the second volume of his learned Grammar,
are highly esteemed and in general use. The estimation
in which these writers are held, render an examination
of them the more necessary : for if their speculations be
erroneous or defective or obscure, they not only mislead
the generality of readers, but dispose them by their high
authority to acquiesce in wrong notions with the confi-
dence of truth. In this work I am a mere directing*
post, warning the student against the mistakes into which

these lenmetl men would plunge him, and pointing ouL
a path that may lead him out of a wilderness otherwise
inextricable.

Neither Dr. Middleton nor Matthlie has translated
the passages quoted by them from the original authors.
This omission confines the benefit of their labours to
those w)io have already made great progress in Greek.
I have removed this inconvenience by rendering into
English as many examples as I have thought fit to select
for animadversion. This places my little book on a level
with the mere learner, for whose use I intend it.

The repetitions which recur in the course of the work
were unavoidable ; as I bad to go over the same or simi-
lar grounds in two different authors. If my views be
correct, they will be the better for being repeated ; as
they will leave a fuller and deeper impression on the
mind of the scholar.

The doctrine and illustrations which present them-
selves in this small publication, will be found new ; and
if tliey be also just, thej* have a fair claim on the public
favour. Defects and errors will doubdess be found in
it ; but the candid will overlook these, as accidental or
trivial, if upon the whole the work prove useful and in-
Btructive.

1 uminaMX iair Jii/f'rai"' T birir.* tarn '■'
wilKi iwoni'iMi" * 111 "in tniH !iH>t .■i.'<\

AN EXPLANATION

•TH E GREEK ARTICLE.

1

Analysis and refiitation of Dr. Middleton's theory on the
Greek Article.

Section 1.

Much of late years has been written on tlie Greek Article ;
nevertheless a rational account of it appears to me still a de-
sideratum. The voluminous work of Dr. Middleton is known to.
the publiCj and has been received with that credit which is due
to learning and talents directed to an useful object. But this
able writer will appear to have encumbeted his aubject with
an useless hypothesis. Hence his explanations, even when
light in the main, are rendered obscure and circuitous by a
theory foreign to the question. I propose to examine this
theory, and place the passages explained by virtue of It in a
much more clear and simple light without it. If my purpose
be answered, I cannot fail to benefit the student in Greek by
removing one great difficulty in the cultivation of that noble
language.

In the first chapter our author briefly states the diiferent
notions entertained by gtammarians respecting the Article in

Greek ; and in the second he thus states liis own ; " The Greek
Prepositive Article is the Pronoun Relative o, so employed that
its relation is supposed to be more or less obscure : which re-
lation therefore is explained in some adjunct annexed to the
Article by the Participle of existence expressed or understood."
— "Hence the article," continues he, " may be considered as the
subject, and its adjunct as the predicate of a Proposition, differ-
ing from ordinary Propositions, only ds assumption dilFers fnm
assertion." The adjunct annexed to the article he calls il
predicate.

This definition is gi'ounded on the use of the Greek article
in Homer, to whom as an article it is supposed to have been
unknown, what is strictly so called being the invention of later
times. This is the opinion of Heyne, whose words, as quoted by
our author, are to this effect : "That Homer knew nothing of th
article, and that i with him is equivalent to aumj or txciyas h(
been repeatedly remarked : and the remark has been confinnc
by Ihe inquiries of many lenrned men, especially of Wolf an
Koeppen." To this Dr. M, assents ; and expresses hb wondi
thai what ha.i been acknowledged to hold true partinlly, shoii'
not be perceived to hold true universally.

Accordingly he infers, that as the article of Homer is a pR
noun, the article of other Greek writers must be the same pi^
noun. This conclusion he fortifies by the authority of it'
Stoics, who called the pronoun a defined orlicle, when no ai
junct was requisite to explain the object of its relation ; u
an undefined article, when, for the sake of perspicuity, an ai
junct is annexed, (see p. 1 9.) Of the pronominal or defined u
of the article without an adjunct, frequent instances, he ol
serves, are found in the Ionic writers, xuch as Herodotus; ai
by the Dorians ; and adds — " By the Attic writers it is so ei
ployed Udder certain restrictions ; as after prepositions, in join
ing together persons or things, the names of which are sup
pressed; in partition and opposition ; and where it is followed
by the subjunctive article S(. (p. 20.)

In explaining the uncertain sense of a word or in determininj
a nature, the first object of inquiry should be by meant i

m

etymology to ascertaiii its origin, and through that lU priwurjr
signification ; and then to trace ita difterent applications, by the
assistance of those analogies which direct the mind in forming
and associating its ideas. If this were adequately done, the
result in every instance would be plain and simple, soon com-
prehended, and easily retained by everj' person of ordinary ca-
pacity at all versed in the question of language. I will subject
the Greek Article to this investigation ; and all the obscurily
which our author has found upon it, and the still greater ob-
scurity in which he has involved it, immediately disappears.
The Greek article o, :j, to is the Hebrew article n {he or ho),
and this la an abbreviation of «n (/lea or hoa), preserved in the
Chaldean, aud signifying behold,— en, ecce. The primary power
of it then is to direct the attention to an object already ex-
pressed or known by implicalion, and thus bring it a second
time within the notice of the reader. If tlie object of its rela-
tion be already expressed, its reference is relTospectme, and the
article takes the nature of tlie relative pronoun. Let us illus-
trate this by one or two of Dr. M.'s own esamples : o ya.p ^a-
o-Aiji x^'^'^^^'i ('!■ *■ ^0 — ' ^°' ^^ being angry with the king.'
Here the article is expressed by our personal pronoun : hot
this is an accommodation for the sake of brevity ; for 6 points
U) Aioi "'Of immediately preceding, and should be repeated to
make the sense complete : b ya,^ Aws vh; — ' the son of Jupi-
ter being angry with the king.' Here, though the article ap-
pears to be a pronoun, it does in reality still retain its own use
and character, and is only a substitute for a pronoun by way
of convenience. That it is not a personal pronoun is evident,
because the noun referred to couLd not then be repeated without
the pronoun itself being displaced. Again, I ya^ ^^Sij, mean-
ing yap Xpunjf, ineiitioned in the preceding verse.

As the article in instances like these is only a substitute for
a pronoun, it is equivalent either to a pronoun personal, or
relative, or demonstrative, and might be rendered in English
either by he, mhOf this or thai ; the contest always suggest-
ing which of these is most convenient to render the sense of
Jjie ori^nal intelligible. Thus in ver. 73, t,v ha. (xavrotruv^v,
b2

ran tlmpi into

tf*tpi into; AmAAwv — njy here is evidently for ^i"— 'i
account of his skill in divination, which Phoebus gave him.' So
again in 11.^.271. nnr>.6vi\is'i!nix<ip'^ritri>( ...ray^es,&c.
— roti for raih-oy — ' Place this,' &c. And so in all other places
the context suggests the nature of the pronoun for which the
article is substituted.

But the natural use of the article as meaning to behold, su[h
poses the attention to be directed fomard to some person or
thing. Hence the reference of the article in its true character ■
is always prospectwe ,- and the position of the noun either im-
mediately succeeding it or at tio great distance, together with
the corresponding variation of gender and termination, holds
forth, without any suspense whatever, the object intended to
be brought within view. The article points out the name; and
we recognise that name either as a new character necessary to
be explained, or as an object nlrendy known and familiar, but
necessary to be repeated in the progress of discourse. Tht
article then in all cases defines ; but its definitive power solely
arises from the direction which it gives to the mind, and front
the mind instantly recognising: the object which it serves to
point out.

A pronoun is a substitute for a noun going before ; and a
reference to this noun renders the succeeding pronoun suffi-
ciently definite. The article, we have seen, is capable of sucft
retrospective reference. Its application in this capacity wa#
found too vague to answer the purposes of speech ; it WM
therefore deemed expedient to divide it into two distinct wonlSj
by adding { — of, the common termination of adjectives and
nouns in Greek. Hence the affinity in sound and sense between
o; and i, the former bearing a retrospective reference and con-
stituting the relative pronoun, the latter prospective and form-
ing the article.

The article then b a definitive ; and its various powers ii
answering the purpose of definition may all be classed undn
the following heads.

1. The names of things being the names of whole classes j
s the names of species comprehending individuolsj or e

kinds comprehending species. The article is used to express ■
one individual ia opposition to other individuals of the same

2. Aa the clftssea of things are very numerous, though not
infinite like indiriduals, the article is frequently used to express
one class or description, in contradistinction to other classes or
descriptions of things. This may be called the ipeci^c or generic
sense of the article; and though this sense is not unknown to
the corresponding English article the, the Greek article in most
instances of this sort can be expressed only by circumlocution.

3. Proper names, or the names of individuals, such as those
of men, of gods, countries, lowns, i»oiin(ai7« and riuer*, being
already as definite as they can be, have no need of the article
before them. Nevertheless, proper names of every description
have it frequently prefixed, to define or to render prominent
the common name underslood,

4. Patronymic and Gentile names, being names of whole
classes, more commonly admit the article for the purpose of
distinction.

5. The names of individuals have their office or character,
also their Patronymic or Gentile names, succeeding them with
the article in order to distinguish tliem from others of the same
name : as Iwan^jf 6 /Saimrif, ' John who baptized' or ' John
the baptist,' to distinguish him from any other John ; Iijo-du; o
Na^ap«i9(, 'Jesus the Nazarene, Jesus of Nazareth,' and not
any other of the same name.

6. When a person is known in u particular character, the
article is prefixed to his proper name to mark him as a person
already known under that character. Thus Solon was known
as a legislator, Socrates as a philosopher, Nestor as an orator.
Homer or .fflschylus as a poet ; the article, tlierefore, is often
preGxed to their names to distinguish or render them promi-
nent under their known attributes.

7. The article is often repeated after the noun to which it
belongs, to supply its place, or to connect with it some peculiar
quality, some circumstances of time, place or possession,

6. The article is often prefixed to neuter adjectives or par-

liciplea, also lo verbs in the infinitive mood, converting t[
by this into abslracl nouns, and marking them as such.

9. The article U prefixed to a present or past participle
express in connexion with it the agent of an action.
■ypa^uir, ' he who writes — the writer :" i ypw^oMgyas, ' he
accused — the accuser.'

1 0. Things possessed can only be defined by connecting
with the persons to which they belong. The article in
instances is but a connective, and can be expressed in Ei
only by the posseasives my, thy, his, her, our, your, Ihei

These applications of the Greek article all arise from its _
mary power ; and they will be illustrated by such exampleai
present themselves in the sequel. Had it been a pronoun, "
reference must necessarily be retrospective. Dr, Middli
assumes this as a fact ; and he ia necessitated to prove that the
object of its relation ia future. This is self-evident to eveij
one acquainted with the first principles of the language ; sad
the necessity of such a proof is a suflUcient evidence that
whole theory is erroneous.

" It is evident," says he (p. 22), " that the reference is soi
times proleptical or anticipative : and this circumstance, addfid
to the generical agreement, induces a suspicion that it will
alvrays bear, if not always require, to be so explained. Let us
observe : On opening the dnab. of Xenophon at hazard, I find
(Book iii, not far from the beginning) the following; passage :
'O jj.sym ZevcipiSy, ava/yvoiif r/jv eTtiirTa7yr,v , ava-MiviSteu Zw-
xpserci riZ Aflijvwiiu v^pi r^s ffopsiaj. Kai a SiuxpajTjf wrojrrsu-
caj, jiti] rt wpos TtJ{ iroAewj ol uica.ifiov mj, Kupuu <ptMv yevei
irithv-si i Ko f as vpiiTiii.ios n's ^a,y£3aii/,mois,&c*. Througl

Pf oienuB c

lunling for his joining tlie famous

" " is genergls wns a friend of XeDOpboii,'
wlia inites lo him inTiting tiim to join the army, and alfering hii. ialerccs-
Hon wilh Cyrus for his fnyoumble receptioD and promolian. Xenopbon
Ehows Ihe letter to SocraleB bis master and friend, wlio with Ma <
istic good acosc and caution expressed his apprehension that, as Cyrus
known to fatour the I-acediumonians, he might incur the Jealousy
picion gf his ovm people if he openly joined a prince devoted
It of tli^ mail.

^

tiuB passa^ let us attend to the reference of the article, as ob&a

OS it is used ; — o/**vroi, Who ? The reference must not here be
considered as retrospective j for since Xenophon was last men-
tioned, mention had been made both of Cjtub and Proxenus :
if therefore the reference be to Xenophon, it is diBtinguiahable
only by the addition of his name. To what does Tt* refer in
avayjitvs njy cvi^oXijy ? The last feminine substantive is ffa-
fpiiti, and emroAi) has not yet occurred : the reference is to
sTttraXijy subjoined, which alone the writer could have in view.
Zwx^ccTEi tuj AS^gvaiw : here the reference is not to ^uixparti
generally and absolutely, because such a reference would be
useless ; but it is to that distinguishing attribute of Socrates
which is annexed, viz, his being an Athenian. Tijf Ttipeias is
similar to r)j» firiroAijv. — Km o Suixpar^f : here it may be said
that the article may refer to Socrates just mentioned. Certainly
it may : but the writer did not think this reference sufGcieutly
marked, or he needed not have attempted to make it plainer by
repeating the name. T^f ira^seuj, similar to rr^v Eiris-ah-ijy. 'O
Kopos is similar to i ^laufcenjs. Toll AaKE^tuftavioi; : no plural
substantive has yet occurred: this is evidently an anticipation
of AaasSeuiMymis. In the same manner we might proceed, and
with the same result, to the end of the volume."

The theory which our author would iUuBtrate and establish
by these examples is simply this : The article being a pronoun
has a retrospective reference ; but as this is obscure or ambi-
guous, the object is again repealed, and ia then said to be an
anticipation of its object. But this I conceive is an abuse of
language, entirely arising from an erroneous system. The ar-
ticle does nothing beyond pointing to an object succeeding it :
whether that object is known as soon as the eye reaches it, de-
pends upon the object itself, or upon its name ; and this cir-
cumstance further depends, upon the previous train of the dis-
course. If I pointed the attention of the person 1 address to
something at hand, this act on my part is not an anticipation
of the object seen, nor is it otherwise connected with it than
as it leads to the result j namely^ the seeing of it, and recog-
g; it as a renewed impression, or one entirely new. This

n precisely the Cfue with the article. It marics out the

succeeding it ; and the concurrence of both serves to recall in
the mind of the reader ilie corresponding idea aa already known;
and under that definite character he agmn repeats it, in ordw
to continue the discourse. A few remarks on the above einn-
ples will at once prove the truth of this statement, and lh(
fallacy of the theory before me.

In the sentence preceding the above entrnct, Xenopbon.
Cyrus, and Socrates, are mentioned for the first time without
the article ; but when in the paragraph the notice of them h
renewed, the same proper namen have each the article prefixed
— j "Eiydfuiv, Sojxpaxiji, a Kuptf. The article then naAr
them under their rea])ective names not only a.s men, but at
men already mentioned, and the mention of whom is again
newed for the purpose of further information. Dr. M.
aware of thb use: and he presently adds (]J. 24), "If
^ioKparv,! above it be said thai i will naturally refer to Swi
T^f in tlie preceding period, it must also be granted that Zi
xpniTjE annexed is needlcNsly introduced, and is absolutely wil
out meaning." Tlie definitive force of the article arises fr(
its power of recalling past asKociations ; but it possesses
power only by its concurrence with the noun defined :
name Sionparrjc is not therefore unnecessarily introdut
and so far from having no meaning, the article without its nosj
would leave the clause without any meaning at all,
further to be observed, that the article in the above instances
placed immediately before the defined noun. Thus Xeaxpt
rtuAfljj^aiw, 'Socrates the Athenian.' Here is defined,
Socrates, but the Gentile name of the people of Athens j anl
the article thus marks him out as Socrates, who was one
those citizens, in opposition to any other man of the same nan
The noun AaMJaifiovioij ih not noticed before ; yet it has tl
article prefixed. Its use here therefore is not to intimate
renewed mention, but to hold forth the people of LacedEemt
as a class of citizens, in contradistinction to those of Athej
designated in the same clause.

It is to be observed further, that the power in the ar ticit

ncHin^ past aasociations is not limited to the previous notice
of Qie noun defined by it, but in many cases extends to circum-
stances obviously implied or closely connected with the train of
the discourse. Thus Xenophon describes himaelf and Socrates
« men of Athens; and in the same connexion he writes ■sptis
rff woXtoii ; meaning not, oa Dr. M. nsserts, the city of Athens
by way of eminence, but Athena lu the city to which those men
belonged. Moreover, Xenophon says that he communicated
the proposa] of Proxenus to Socrates, who was at Athens. This
communication was tlien made by means of a kuer. The writer
therefore marks the name with rqv the article, as of implied
DOtoriety. The same remark holds with regard to r^f mpEi»s :
the expedition wa.i the very subject of the letter, and could not
I Imt be recognised as known, though not actually expressed.
Our author supposes that the repetition of the defined noun
it the consequence in many instances of extreme caution on the
put of the writer against obscurity. " Of this extreme caution,"
■ays he, "there ore some remarkable instances in /EHian. I
irill adduce one of these, in which the predicate of the article
lasumes an unusual form, while it strongly supports the doc-
trine that such predicate is the object of a relation supposed to
he obscure. The passage will be found Var. Hist. lib. i. c. 30.
'0 fuy Xmcivs avy Tw /SanAEi T» f/,eipaxiov. Now only two per-
sonst the king and the youth, had been mentioned ; and the
king seems by the context to be excluded from answering to o,
which of course will therefore relate to the youth. The writer,
however, has subjoined ra {tstpoKiw ; a convincing proof that
he considered such an addition as explanatory of the relation
intended in the pronoun : for else it has no meaning at all."
(p. 25.)

This is a striking proof that our author did not fiilly compre-
hend the sense of the article which he undertook to expldn.
'O it means i Ss epw/iifos previously mentioned by ^lian— 'the
person loved by the king — the favourite' : and this is as clear,
aa tiee from all doubt and ambiguity, as that i yoLp, in II. a. 9.
e yap Ai»r u'loj . What then was the object of the writer
joining ri impxtiny ? because the article holds him forth

10

tat woi a youlh, and yet, though a youth, having H

honour to ride with the king, which wns hardly consistent wi'
his usual habits and pomp, or even with decorum*.

The ancient grammarians, though native Greeks, had 1
clearer notion of the article than Dr. Middleton. Apollonis
speaking of the relation of the article, has the following wori
as quoted by our author : " Sometimes the relation is to si
person whom we anticipate ,■ where the article appears to 1
indefnite: as when we say, ' Let him who hath slain o
be honoured ;" for here the article refers to a future penwi
(p. 21.) The same grammarian, as quoted in p. 32, again sat
that the article is sometimes employed indejmitely, as in f fi
frnvvwrw^aas ri/iao-Siu, being applied not only to defined pi
4ons, but also to that which in its nature is most undefined; I
in a vipntaTay xivcTrai, which is the same with ei rtf ■Ksgfmii
On this Dr. M. remarks : " These instances and this admisaie
of the great grammarian are alone sufficient to excite a s
that the reference of the article is very different from that whi<
is commonly supposed ; for surely nothing can be more impn
hable than that any thing, in its nature one and the c
should be subservient to purposes diametrically opposite. El
ther the article marking deflniteneas must be essentially diS«el
Irom that used to signify indefiititeness, or else its reference mg
be of such a nature as, properly understood, to combine at
unite in one form these contradictory appearances. Sout
philosophy ofl'ers us only these alternativee."

* Our aulJior quotes also three other passages in LatJa, as instances'
eitremc caution Bgainst obscurity : one islrom Cicero; theoth^twofh
C«sar. "Bellum tantum, fuo biUo omnes premcbantur, Pompeius confbci
(Tic. "UllraeumlDciuni^iiainbcoGenDaniconsederant." Cos. 'TKam'
ttait, quo die, frumentum militibus metiri oporteret." Cms. Dr. M. equi
mialakes the object of tliese pnssiiges :— Cicero does not repeal Mis fbrfl
salie of perspicuity, n-liich was altogether unnensEiiTy, but for the saka
Emphasis or fuller impression ; asif iieluid thus written, " Fompey bron^
to an end so great awar — a war in whicli all were oppressed.'' Ceesar III
a similai end in repealing toco and die. " Beyond that place — the very
ia which the Getmans rested." — *^The day was at hand — that d

Sound philoBophy, as applied to language, comprehends the
plain and simple light of common sense : and if the writer con-
fined himself to the surface of things instead of plunging in
fruitless speculation,, he would have detected the fallacy of
ApoUonius's doctrine. The article in such instances is not in-
ilefinile: it defines as usual, though not an individual in contra-
distinction to others, yet the subject of the verb, and is in this
case tu be rendered as a personal pronoun. Thus i Tupayva-
xTOvijffaf, ' he having slain a tyrant,' or ' he who hath slain a
tyrant.' Here 6, coalescing with the participle annexed, gives
the mind a full idea of an agent of tliat class, and being a com>
plete description of such an agent b synonymous with it — ' he
who hath killed a tyrant' — 'a tyrant- killer.' Thus defined,
not indeed by the article alone but by its union with the par-
ticiple, the agent becomes a fit subject of the attribute predi-
cated in the verb, ' a tyrant.kilier should be honoured.' So
again in the proposition a Vipmaxuiv v.irekai, ' he walking —
one that walks — a person walking, — moves himself.' In these
examples the definitive power of the article has one object, and
it affects that object, which is the defining a claas of agents of
whom such and such an action ie afGmied. The argument of
our author is, that as the article here does not deSne an indi-
Kidiml, it does not define at all. One from this might infer
that Dr. M, knew nothing of the generic sense of the article :
but the inference would not be altogether true, though he evi-
dently has no clear notion of it, nor was he aware of the extent
of its application. The power of the article with its adjunct to
recall past associations, and its generic sense, being overlooked
by this writer, he constructs a very strange and complicated
tnadunery to account for these phtenomena. "The reference
of the article we have seen is anticipation." And he adds (p. 35),
" It becomes important to ascertain the limits of this anticipa-
tion ; — is the itpeaker always at liherty to anticipate an adjunct ?
AMuredly not ; for then the article might be useii without ne-
ceuity or meaning. The limits however are plainly deducible
from the principles already laid down. We have seen that the
article and its predicate together constitute what I have de-

12
nominated an assumptive proposition : the quntion is o
What are the eases in which an assumptive proposition m
be employed? Evidently it can be employed only tvherel
assumption contained in it is admissible from its being the I
sumption of that which will immediately be recognised in a
sequence of aoraethJng which had preceded j or else, where U
only conditional, the subsequent assertion not being intend
to apply in any greater extent than is conceded to the a
tion, Now the legitimacy of the former kind of BssuDiptionil
bemanifeat, if we consider that in making it we do nothing m
than assume of a pronoun those attributes or properties whid
either from previous mention or from some other implied ci
are immediately understood to belong to the person or t
which the pronoun represents. Thus, if I have been s
of a horse or of any thing in which the preeence of a horse>^
implied, ewpaxx ny I'mrai' will be a. legitimate as8uiiq>tio£
otherwise it will not : for the assumption will not be ai'
not being intelligible."

From this example it is cleaT that the assumption here meai|
is the retrospective reference of the article, and its power Eft
connexion with the context to recall past ideas, which tW
purpose of furtlier communication renders necessary to be n
pealed, and consequently then limited and known. Here ii
deed our author acknowledges the defining power of the a.
but he presently adds (p. 3C), '"Still however the article is di
in its nature a definitive : for then what is usually called i
indefinite sense could not have existence : it answers the p
pose of a definitive merely xara n^i-^ctipiMis •■ in strict truth I
adjunct has a better claim to the title, being, as we have see
added to the pronoun to ascertain its relation. — Of the oth
kind of assumption, the case is somewhat different ; it has fl
retrospective reference or effect : and in order to render it legi
mate, nothing more is necessary than that the assertion cob
neeted with it be bounded in its extent by the limits of the ai
sumption: thus a nepiVaruiy xiviiTat is asserted of every oB
who wnlks about, and of no other, whether such persons be m<
finite in number, or finite, or none at all, So Aristot. de Mori

'Nicom. lib. iv. c. 2, Ayavium ra. avfuiv epya, oi ywelf n
ffoi^rai. Here we find two seLs uf persons assumed, the one
comprehending a very large proportion of the human race, and
the other only a few individuals : yet since the extent of the
assertion is in each case exactly commensurate with that of the
assumption, the assuroplion is perfectly allowable. So also
Arixtotle (ibid.) has said, TrXaurciv ou paiioy to* e>.zi>^eptv. Thin
assumption is also legitimate, whatever be the &■ gree of libe-
rality existing among mankind : the proposition is only that,
supposing a man to be liberal, it is difficult for such an one to
grow rich."

The generic sense of the article sets aside this reasoning,
and the system which it Lt intended to illustrate, as altogether
nugatory — oi ywtif ksi oI ireiijTai, 'the parent and the poet
love their own o&pring— such as are parents, such as are poets'
—in contradistinction to other beings who are not in the same
predicament — ' love their own.' So again in the last instance,
' It is not easy for the liberal to become rich'-^'for him that is
liberal or one that is liberal'— in opposition to the selfish and
stingy — ' to become bo.'

In the fiftli and last section of this chapter (p. 38), the author
states the subintellection of the participle of existence, as a
copula between the article and its predicate, " If," says he,
"it be admitted on the proofs already given, that the article is
no other than a pronoun, the subintel lection of the participle
{tey) becomes a necessary consequence ; for else between the
pronoun and its predicate there will be no more connexion
than if they concurred in different propositions. 'O av^p must
signify. He or the man being or assumed to be a man 5 or else
the pronoun and the substantive have no common medium, no
principle of union, by which they can be brought to act together
in developing the ideas of the speaker. The conclusion will be
the same, though the reasoning will be somewhat different, if
we suppose tlie predicate of the article to be an adjective. Thus
in the proposition 'O ayahi Siox/jarijs piKoffopei, — iaya-ias is
equivalent to uiy aya.i<>s, as Gaza indeed admits." Gaza is
but poor authority against common sense. What our author

■ to the copula between the article and its predioK
undentood, is really the effect o( jiixlaprmlion ,- fof such isih
liiw of association, that when one idea is placed by the aide d
another, they coalfsre ns belonging to each other, and any
foreign word interjioaed would be nn incumbrance intemiplin!
rather than promoting their union. "The good Socrates philv-
iNOphizes." Is there any medium wanting to connect these wof*
liesidea their collocation > The words belonging to each odxi
are at the side of each olher ; and the mind immediatelvreo;-
nises their affinity and dependence, On this supposition alio
natural and simple. But Dr. Middleton's system is a compiri
and heterogeneous moss of things scarcely intelligible. TV
reference of the article is anticipation ; the noun defined a p^^
dioate ; the participle of existence understood being a cupuli
l)etween them ; both together an assumption, and the assertion
connected with it, hounded in its extent by the limits of (be
assumption. Upon this principle every proposition howem
simple, if it iiave a defined noun for its subject or object, iK i
complex proposition virtually containing another, and perhapi
still another in itself. How dilt'erent from this is the great law
of aEsociation on which all the phenomena of language are
constructed. This theory nevertheless ha.i nothing lo support^
it but the application of passages evidently mistaken : and yet.
n by which the author wishes it to be tried.

In the third chapter, p. 45, the writer proposes to show that'
his theory is capable of solving the principal plixnomena, or
account for the most remarkable peculiarities in the usage of
the article. He observes, that the insertions of the article are
reduced to two kinds, arising out of one property, viz. its anti-
cipative reference ; for the anticipation must be either of what
is knovpn, or of that which is unknown : in the former case, the
article with its predicate is subservient to the parpose of retro-
■pective reference, in the latter to that of hypothesis. Of (he
former class, which he calls renewed mention, he gives the three

15
■"following examples. Xen. Mem. 3. 13. KoAi^-iinVf fi nm

B ta'X'jp'BS axii\av9ov, ijpeTo Ti ^aXfvaim T^ bspa/navn, ' seeing »
^ certain person severely punishing an attendant, Socmtes asked
g why he should be so outrageous, to ttie servant.' On this Dr.
j M, reraarta, " In the first we almost anticipate axuAouStu ; and
g on finding the synonymous word SspairovTi, we of course have
_ no difficulty in perceiving thuE the article and its predicate
f form « renewed mention of axoAoufloj above." Here we have
; evidence that in this instance our author mistakes the article
, altogether, and grounds hts explanation of it on a palpable
error, into which 1 wonder so sagacious n writer should have
&llen, The noun axoAouBoj is used only by Xenophon, to ac-
count for the question put by Socrates to the severe master,
and therefore could not have been referred to in the phrase tai
^ipcmam, used by the philosopher. The import of the queetion
slated in the original is simply thie, " why he was so outrageous
towards one that icailed upon him, and therefore was entitled to
his indulgence." The article and its noun, therefore, is not an
instance of renewed mention, bttt the description of a character,
which places the cruelty of the master in a strong light towards
one, who by serving him bad daily claims on his gratitude and
compassion *.

The next example is, (jE3chin.cont.Ctes.§56.)'OuT'Sf tf^Jewf
TOif tfaA*fHOif Nu/^pcsiov ^uy«f eyevsTo, tijv npio'ir oux uirtfieiyei;.
' He (Demosthenes) having betrayed the chapel to the enemy,
made his escape, not having sustained the trial.' i must here
remind my reader of a remark already made, that the union of
the article and its adjunct serves by association to recall a
previous idea, whether directly expressed or not. Thus r^v
xpis'tr excite anew the notion of treachery implied in irpohus i
and its literal meaning ' the trial,' is but an abbreviation of
' (Ae trial of his treachery.' So again (J 54),'OTa» ml'suJovrai
aopira Jtai aa-afij vnpiavtai Xeyciy, foCoufwvoi tsc E?,ey)(6v.

• Piofessor Dunbikr, in tht' latter end of his Exercises on the Greek.
Syntax, bos giien a brief view uf Dr. Middleton's Theory ; &nd Troni liis
quoting lliia very inslance he appears to have orerlooked tbe blunder com-
miited by the author. See Exercises, p, 274.

'Whin tfaejr (fiuthless Btatesmen) lie, the^ efideavoor to >^

things viigiie and indistinct, fearing the refutation." Thep»
mised verb ^tuSwrai, supplies the refutation of what? — ihe relt
tation of their lies. Thus in every instance of this kind, th
article and its adjunct, by referring to some precedin|f woit
serve to recall some notion which, na being obvioue, is omittal
in the original, but which should be supplied to avoid abrupt-
nesB in a translation. To do our author justice, he isnotfnrf
a right explanation of the last two instances ; and if he
been versed in the law of association, he would have pli
them at once in a simple and tangible light.

He gives (Thuc. lib. 2. §. 59.) ij voo-of iismttro dfcu xoj i
Ae/AOf, as an instance of the article being used x»t' efo;^f, ^
way of eminence ; and he thus renders the clause the celebrakt
plague, and the Peloponnetian war. But this I apprehend il
not the case : the object of the writer is in distinct and e
phatic terms to represent the plague and the ^ax both
concurringiiioppressing the Athenians ; as if he had said, "'
struction by |iestilence and destruction by war, at one and '
same time, bore them down." An intended empha.sis or C0B>
trast of this sort acts most frequently in colling forth the nw
uf the article — ij mrii, 'the plague,' in contradistinction to j*»>
AefWf, 'Ihe war.' " Very nearly allied," says he [p. 50), "tolbl
use last mentioned, is that of the article prefixed to
noiim ; that is, persons or things which exist singly, or of wU
if there be several, only one from the nature of Ihe case can
the subject of discourse. The first example given is, I concei
little to the purpose : Lysias Orat. Gr, vol. v, p. 1 39. axwy
fas Supixs iiffj^ity as f^t yu/aixtuvTriv. Many nouna co
prehending innumerable individuals of the same elasa are
limited by the circumstances of the case to a definite numl
In such cases the article b necessarily used to mark the intent
limitation. Having wrenched the doors — what doors ? of oounri
the doors of the place spoken of. The article fas therefore H
used before 3ufaf, while the second article, njv, is used to
the chamber of the women in contradistinction to that of th^F
men. Under the same division may be classed the nuraeronf

17

exsmples in which the article has the sense of a possessive pro-
noun." (p, 50.) Dem.de Cor. J 59. Hytira hcas-os aurior, ouj;!
Vi^ rarph xai jji i^^rpt jutny yeyey^irflai, aAAa xai tji nenTptit.
'Eachofthem thought that he was not born alone loriAe father
and the mother, but tor the country.' The clauses ' each of
them — the fatlier — the mother — the country," coexisting in the
mind, suggest by their prosimity that they belong to each other.
The idiom of the English requires the original article to be sup-
plied by the possessive A« .- ' Each of them thought that he was
not boni for his father and his mother, but also for hi» country.'
Thus also, Theo. Idyll. 3. 92. a.>.ysia ray >te<fa>.ay, ' 1 ache in
the head.' Here KEi^aXigv coalesces with tyia implied in the
verb, and the words must be rendered ' I ache in mg head —
my head aches.' So moreover in the third example (Plato
Theaet. vol. li. p. Ifi9), it^ia-x^es tsv yauv, 'apply the mind.'
Tile last words coalescing with ru understood, are equivalent
to 'apply thy mind.' " The language then of our author, that
the article has the sense of a possessive pronoun, is not correct -,
and he should hare said that the coalition of certain ideas simul-
taneous in the mind rendered it expedient to express by a pos-
sessive pronoun in English a relation expressed by the article
in Greek. "Riis expediency takes place, though the possessive
and the article have no affinity in themselves.

Our author adds {^5. p. 51), "The same kind of reference
will serve also to explain the article, as we usually find it pre-
fixed to the names of the great objects of nature, Dem. de
Fals. Leg. vol.i. 426. Ovts nrr,>.iDv r,ffy_uvirfa o'l Tnur« irai-
ovfTe(, flUTs TTji' yijv, &c. ' Those who do these things feel no
Bharae either in the face of the sun or of the earth.' The ar.
tide is here used not because the sun and tlie earth are among
the great objects of nature, but because they stand in contrast
with each other. The use of the article raises them as it were
from the page, and make.s them prominent as objects, in the
presence of which such agents ought to feel ashamed, A con-
numeration of objects necessary to be disti[iguislied, and cal-
culated to fill the mind with awe or magnificence, with desire
or aversion, must necessarily have the article in Greek. Thus
c3

^

xiv. 15. Avs TtoruD' riur f/iKTsuunr eutrpefeiv tn rv
nv ^lorfa., Of Bironjo-f Tot- topafm, xai njc yijv, xbj r^v 3aA».
ff-ar, Kai ^ai-ra ra ly avToif. ' Front these vain idols to lnni«
God the living one, who made the heaven, and thewiA,\
Ihe sea, and all things that are in them.' "

" § 6. Moreover the article is frequently prefixed to a^
lives of the neuter gender, where they are used to indicateuai
attribute or quality in its general or abstract quality:" as in Hi^
pol.431. ft a-tu^pty tus iitain-a.^(iv xaMy. Plato, vol, i. p. "
Xrye iij r. (f^s to oiriev koi ra avoo-iov. On these esamples
author remarks, " In all these cases the reference of the artdt
is more ohicure than in the case of teneuied mention strietlj*
railed ; but yet is explicable on the same principle : for iniJ
of them it is something which is easily recognised, though
hitherto particularly mentioned." (p. 52.)

This remark appears to me quite foreign to the question:
nor can I believe that our author would have made it, if fc
really understood the true force of the article in instances Ik
these : for the article prefixed to a neuter adjective so describi
a quality as to become independent of the subject to whicb
belongs, and to place it in direct contrast with its oppiwiK.
Thus fi aw^pw, ' that which is temperate or chaste, '-
perance or chastity, in opposition to intemperance or undu»-
tity i TO o«ov, ' that which is holy or pure,' in oppositian to
impurity. These undoubtedlv are abstract qualities : but tbcj
are only so far abstract as to be independent of any subject
which they belong ; and if they have any reference, they refe
only to that quality to which they respectively stand oppoeed.
It is this opposition that renders the idea prominent, and gins
to the article its proper force,

"\ 7, p. 52, Correlatives are words in regimen, havings
mutual reference, and consequently so circumstanced that if the
first relate to the second, the second must relate to the first. 11*
Greek writers mark the relation in the second, wherever it n
necessary to mark it in tlie first. In other words, where the
first han the article, the second has it likewise." Plato Thei^
^rol. ii. p. 126. r, TW yiwpytv Sii£«, a.\haL w Juiafirtii xapia.

irSocrates in the dialogue says, * If the question were, Whftt

I : wine would prove sweet and whnt rough > the opinion of the

I, htubandman not of the harper would have must weight.' Here

g: the article haa a generic sense, and serves to mark one of a

class of men employed in dressing the vineyard, roS yiiopyw,

■ • the husbandman.' The same is true of Tou xiSapirou. ' the

I harper.' The article characterizes the men thus employed as

' opposed to each other ; and this is the only relation between

I them. They are correlatives only as they are contrasted; and

as both sustain this contrast, the article is properly put before

eacli.

" J 8, p. 55. The reason is similar io the case of partitives,
between which and their respective toholes the same mutual rela-
tion subsists." Heshouldhavesaid the same mutual o;ipoMti(Hi ,-
but even then the author would be chargeable with inaccuracy
and want of discrimination. A partitive expresses a part, in
contradistinction to the ichok. The word expressive of this
part, such as adjectives in the comparative and superlative de-
greea, requires Ihe article to mark the intended distinction :
but the term which expresses the whole has the article, not be-
cause it stands opposed to its part, but to another class of
things. Thus in T«ju,eyif-(tT'^yaio-;:^p«ii',T(i marks that portion of
base actions which are pre'Cminently so implied in xia-^^fcvr :
but rwv is used before this, not as related to to, [/.syifii, but as
bearing a tacit reference to r« xrAk, ' things fair and honour-
able.' Thus again in Plato, ffsXXoi riuy so^uiv, the first has
no article, because no opposition between the many and the
few is intended ; while -riav is prefixed to o'o^iuv because it ex-
presses the wise and learned, in contradistinction to oi iSiwreu,
' the vulgar and uneducated.'

Id the second section (p. 57) our author shows that the ar-
ticle is subservient to the purpose of hypothesis, and is the re-
presentative of something of which, whether known or unknown,
an assumption is to be made. Of this we have examples from
Dem. de Cor. § 71. o <ruKo^a>rTjf, ' the informer;' from § 94,
■rw twouy toAittjv, 'the well-disposed citizen;* from Xen,
Mem. 3- 1 . Toy (ur^anjyijirovfa, ' him who is about to conduct

i

■ 20

«n army luccessfiiUy ;' from Arist. de Mor. Nic.3, 6.
imof, 'the good ' or 'the well-informed.' " In these
Bays he, " Ihe article is used, according to the grammaiiaai,
iadefinileli/ : nnd this circiiin»taMce, combined with the gtad
notion of the defining power of the article, is one of the taiao
which have led to the opinion that its uses can never bt deK!'
mined with certainty. If, ho-wever, the article be a proDixD,
the subject of a proposition of which the adjunct is the buo^-
tive predicate, it is evident that the pretended ambiguitj^''
no existence : for the object of the article's relation is eq«Ji
defined whether that object (as in the ciise of renewed mtnliMl
be the person who has been spoken of in the preceding jn-
tence, or whether it be some person or character now inW-
duced for the first time. In both eases the article is dearly
plained by its predicate ; that predicate, indeed, may requirr I
to be understood vrith greater or less latitude, the degreeol I
which the context and the general tenour of the argument wil I
decide with sufficient exactness. Thus in the example froit I
Demosthenes, if cuxopavnjf had recently been mentioned, m \
should immediately infer that i o-uKofuvTTjf was the renewej |
mention of the same person. As the context stands, we dea
perceive that o rdxa^ayTti; mean every person of whom «
parn}( can be predicated." The term nKipKrrr/t design)
that whole class or description of persons who are employed^
informers or false accusers ; and a vuno^airnjs in this instai
must mean, not erery person of whom truKmpaynjs can be p
dicated, but any person who comes under that descriptii
The article is used here, as in the other examples, in its geni
ggQge — ' he who is an informer, — the man who sustains tl
character, whoever he be, is base.' Clas.ses of things in 1
most philosophical sense are numerically individuals : and hei
they sometimes require the article to distinguish them from ei
otiier as much as things that are absolutely so.

Dr. M. was not unacquainted with the generic use of the i
tide to ii certain extent ; for he adds (p. 58), " In the sai
manner the article is employed plumlls to denote whole cUii
and descriptions of persons and things." But why limit tl

21

use of it to the plural number ? If it be used plurally ta denote
dauea, no reason can be aasignc'd why it should not be used in
the singular to express one class. The theory of Dr. M. ia
rormed to account for the dlffictiltiea arising from tliis unphilo-
tophical limitation : for the generic use of the article in its full
extent, will account for its use in all cases where it is thought
10 be superfluous or arbitrary. Alter noticing that the hypo-
thetical BB well OS the other use of the article was known to
Homer, he subjoins (p. 60), " To some one of these heads we
may refer every insertion of the article of which the Greek
writers supply examples ; and every such insertion will be ex-
plicable in one of the two ways proposed ; either that the ar-
ticle with its predicate denotes a relation immediately recog-
nised by the hearer ; or else, when no such relation can be re-
cognised, they serve conjointedly to indicate an hypothesis.
The article itself is in each case the same, the object of its re-
lation being known to the speaker, thougli unknown to the
hearer, till it is explained by the predicate."

This statement will be found true if we set aside his peculiar
xystem, and substitute in the room the generic sense of the ar-
tici^. in eac'n instance the use of it serves to recall an idea
already presented to the mind, or to describe some class or
classes of things in opposition to others. In every ease, there-
fore, the article is the »ame — a definitive with its adjunct, and
not a pronoun with its predicate. This distinction is not merely
verbal. Our authors hypothesis wraps up the article in a cloud
of unmeaning wordn j and the opposition implied in it cannot
be seen. On the contrary, its generic Bignification places the
contrast, which it is intended to mark, and which constitutes its
fcrce and propriety, in a clear and simple light.

In section 3. p. 60 — 71. our author enumerates the cases
where the article is omitted. But 1 shall not follow him in this
discussion, as promising little advantage to my readers ; con-
tenting myself with one general remark, that wherever a sub-
ject or quality does not require limitation, where the writer did
not feel it necessary to render it prominent and emphatic or to
contrast it with its opposite, there the article is always omitted.

1

^Vbit«ction4. p. 71. be notices two cases of insertion and
VDUnioa cvmbtDed. One ca»e is that of the n^ecf and predi-
cate of propositions, in which the subject b generally found uiitk
the article, and the predicate jciiktml it. Of this, the first
example tsAmt.Anal. Po6L2.3. su ysLa iri n eri-rcSoy ay^a,
«udf re vx^iuc rriTEJov, ' the surface — ihat which U sur&ce, is
not figure ; nor is thai 5gure — thai ahich it figure, surface.'
Here >^f^ used as a predicate in the first clause is without
the article, but has it as (he subject in the next ; and the rea-
•onableuess of this will appear, if we consider that as a predi-
cate it onlyexpressesii property, or the negation of cproperty,of
the subject, without any reference to something else: whereM
T3 ry^fta, generically taken, means precisely the same thing
aa o'pnjii.oii with this difierence, that the article holds it forth as
surface, in contradistinction to another thing which might be
supposed to be surface.

The second esample is Arist. de Interp. c. II. 'O tffBfamf
irf iffUT xni ^<oiy, xai tinur *at r^i/.tp». Here i prefixed to
atipiaVif marks man out as a genus — ' he icho m man,' — man,
or maniind, it. cppo;;t!?r. to "ther kinds, — ' is an animal twiN
footed and domesticated.' Therefore o avSpants is the subgMt '
of the proposition : hut ^loay and Smun and -^ftxpir attacfi to
the subject, as its distinguishing attributes: accordingly, they
form the predicate without the article, as presenting no oppo-
sition or reference to any other attribute which might render
its application necessary. The third is (Plut. de Aud. Poet,
c. 11.) Zuiypaipia ftE* ^Sfyytfttvyj tr' ^ ■Koiijirif, it«i^fif J* a-iyiS-
va, ■q ^aiypx^ia.. In this example, -^ ^orr^tri; does not mean a
renewed impression of some particular poetry, but generically,
' that which is poetry — the art of poetry." The predicate ^w-
ypafia, meani^ painting in ita fullest extent, but is limited by
^iiyyofi^yyi to a species of painting. The same thing ie true
of the next claase : ■^ ^oiyoa^ia is painting generically, and
ffonjo-if, which means poetry in the same extensive sense with
jj ironjo-if, is here limited by eiytSa-a. — ' The art of poetry is
vocal painting, and the art of painting silent poetry.'

Our author illustrates these examples on false grounds, and

hi therefore, as it appears to me, circuitous, indistinct, t
some things erroneous ; yet I will here copy his illustration of
the first example, as my readers may possibly see in it more
than I can. " The point to be examined," says he, " is. How
comes it that this insertion and this omission should be neces-
sary to the pjopositions ? Now it is to be considered that these
are conversant not about particular, but about universal truths.
But universal truths can be declared only by mating the sub-
ject of the declaration universal : and this is effected by means
of the article in its hypothetic and inclusive use. Thus in the
first example, ra eameSw signifies the thing (being) surface, in
every thing of which surface can be predicated, or surface uni-
versally : so also ro ffXTJfia in the second clause, is figure in its
most comprehensive and extended acceptation. But let us
attend to o^fiK without the article, as it is found in the first
clause. Is it there tnte that the writer speaks of figure univer'
eally i Certainly not : for to say that ntrface in its most com.
prehensive sense was not figure in its most comprehensive sense
would indeed be true, but it would fall very short of the meaning
of the proposition. Aristotle plainly intends to say that what
is surface is not figure at all ; which is saying much more : for
that which is not figure generally and abstractedly, may yet be
figure particularly. Thus a triangle is a figure ; but the defi-
nition of figure comprehends mucb more than the definition of
triangle : consequently the proposition that surface universally
is not figure universally, would comprehend much less than that
which says surface is not figure at nil."

Here the writer proceeds on one palpable mistake j namely,
that the predicate without the article is not of equal compre-
hension witli the same noun, as wben a subject it has the ar-
ticle : whereas it is equally the same in both cases, the article
serving not to givfi it extension or universality, but to mark its
ndjunct as the subject of the proposition, and to hold it forth as
one whole description of things in contratllstinction to some
other description.

But cases not uncommonly occur in which the predicate as
well as the subject has the article. Thus Flut. de Plac. Philos.

^^ - — 24

3. 1. (ri it £ ^er i *<>os- Here aa the subject and predict
are alike murked with the article : they are known as suditi!
the order. The lirat article holda its adjunct forth as goiliii
opposition to man, or any other class of beings : ihe seoii
rharocterizes the predicate, as mind or intelligence, in «oirtik
distinction lo any other thing, and as being that thing Asa,
and nothing else. The proposition, therefore, is precisely Ihii
in English — " The divinity is pure intelligence."

Let ua suppose the predicate of the same proposition to I*
without the article and with it, and the difference will be tbt
more sensibly felt. Thus Plato ThcKt. vol. i. p. 157, Ovk
turrc fogeJBv « &ta.itr,Tii$ ej-i Qe^Suipof. Here the article is pre-
fixed to 9e*ir)jT0f, though a proper name, to mark bim tte
more distinctly as a man, and tts the subject of the praposilioiL
' No one would ihink that he who is Theeetetus — the man TTie-
stetus — is Theodorus.' Next let the article be prefixed olsoto
the predicate, on 6 ©eairijrsf ej-i i ©toJwpef. In this case 9b-
SvpOf in point of prominence, emphasis, or contJ'ast, is placed
precisely on a level with the subject — ' that he who is Theseletu
is he who is Theodorua," or ' that the man Thetetetus is the man i,
Theodorus.' But according to Dr. M. (see p, 76.) the m<
of the last is, ' Socrates could never imagine Theietetus
Theodorus to be the same peisun.' But this sense cannot b6
extracted without evident violence to the original. His reasoM
ing is not worth quoting. Thus again, ij ijfovi] Efi cvyaitr, ' tim
pleasure — that which is pleasure — is good.' This may be true:!
but put ij ijiavij Eri t" a.ya.^w, what then is the sense ? «v
%t¥ is literally ' that which is good,' — good, in opposition 10 «*
xfiwavi 'that which is evil.' Good in itself, without any mixtint
of evil, is the highest good. Accordingly the Latins inteipnl
Tt ayaSev by iummuni bonmn, or the supreme ideal good aa div
cussed by the philosophers. The above proposition then »,
"pleasure is the highest good," which is evidently false.

The propositions in which the predicate as well as the subject
has the article are by our author called conueTtlhle or redpTocaU
propositions. I apprehend this distinction to be no more than
a cloak to disguise the want of clear ideai on the subject, though

it is but fair to say that in many such cases the subject and pre-
dicate are but two different names of the same person or thing,
and therefore commutahle without any material change id the
sense.

Dr. M. next adverts (p. 79) to the following canon introduced
by Sharp and Wordsworth ; " When two or more attributives
joined by a copulative or copulatives are assuiiiLd of the same
person or thing, before the first attributive the article is insert-
ed, before the remaining ones it is omitted." This our author
endeavours to conUrm: and he gives the following as one of
many examples in illustration. Plut. Vit. Cic. Ed. Basil, p. 68.
'PtofTMi i vloi KM xXij/Joofiof Tou TiSv^itflroj- ijYayaKrei. Here
the article is used before uioj, but not repeated before xAij^c*-
y,os. "The reason of this usage," says he, " if the nature of
the article has been rightly explained, it will not be difficult to
discover. In the first example, a is the subject of an assump-
tive proposition, of which ula; xai nXtipnoiJ^s is the predicate,
toy being ns usual understood ; a.nd the meaning is, that he
(Boscius; being both son and heir of the deceased &C. But
what will happen supposing the article prefixed ! We shall
then have two assumptive propositiotis,and two subjects coupled
together : i. e. w'of and jtAijf om/AOf will then be assumed re-
spectively of two distinct persons : they cannot be assumed of
one and the same, if the article be a pronoun i because two ar-
ticles coupled together and yet having reference to the same
person involve the absurdity of joining an individual to him-
self.-

This absurdity follows only on the supposed truth of a theory
which is itself absurd ; and the principle is thus easily ex-
plained. It is a known principle in Greek and in Latin, that
an adjective quali^ing one noun must be extended or repeated
to qualify other nouns, if any such succeed it. Thus, alii yap
roi fpis rs tpikij, mUfi-in n, fj.ax_o.i n, II. a.. 1 7S ; that is, rm tpig
n fiAi), «Aj;*oi T£ ^lAoi, ,u.a%ai rs fJiAai. The article being
itself an adjective, follows the genius of other adjectives in this
respect j and accordingly in the above instance it virtually af-
fecto xAijpovofiOi as well as Wf, and is, in point of sense, as if it

26 1

had Wn written 'PiuirxfJt i itn; xai i xXijpora/iOf . Tliia indtd
Ihe writtT would have done, if he wished lo render ihe iMt*
lation as dislincl and prominent as the first — ' Rosriun ibi w
and (fte heir", &c. This is precisely the effect of the article in&
glish, nnd it is no other in Greek. If the two nouns were nmw
of two different persons, the article was raore likely to lw»
pented; because being in themselves distinct subjects, the mile
muBthavefeltdestrous to convey that impression to his rendra:
but even this he often left to their own good aense, unltnht
had a forcible reason for the repetition. Thus avirei^of ifB
aurstf Tov DtTfio* jtai !w»*i;v. Acts. viii. 15. But in chap. niJ.X,
the sacred writer repeats the article, xat tirr^ysipco' £twypin
T0> riauMv xai tov Bapvafev. The reason of the repetilinl
that Luke wished to render Bnrnabaa no less ihan Pad a]
minent object of the persecution. He felt that liiinself,
wished his reader to have the same impression.

We have a similar instance in Ji»hn ii. 22. -ncti etrirti
ypnif^ xal rw \iyw, iv etven a Iijirftuf. 'They believed &
Scripture, and the word whicli Jesus anid." Here the anicle'l
repeated for two reasons ; one was, that the Evangelist wi«W
to fix the attention upon the icord which Jesua said, as well »
upon the prophecy from the Jewish Scriptures, as objects if
their belief. The disciples tJiett understood the one,
the other ; and they believed both. The other reason was, ihti
the article -rf. before ypAS^ couhl not be carried forward, «
would be necessary if omitted, without changing its termina-
tion, which would be abrupt and disagreeable. And here 1 (in
to point out a circumstance of some importance which pervade!
Greek compositions, yet which has escaped the notice of Dt,
Middleton. It is this : When two nouns of the same g«nd(r
and number are joined by a copulative, and consequeDtl;
placed in the same case close by each other, the last is aSertci
by the article prciixed to the first with the same invaiiaMe
sub intellect ion as two quantities in algebra with a vincultw
over them, the copula supplying the place ot plus or minus. I
will illustrate this with exaiaples taken from our author. Den,
de Cor. J 27. i ffujifouAif K«i jJi;Twp tyia, for i pr^r-jip. j^rfiin.

cont, CtM. § 81 . r»» &\ilixjif.iY xai ^lAiirvov, forrw fc^nm*.
Plato, vol. xi. p. 3 1 . TT,y axiifiay xai avajSe-JiritLy, for ttjv aTOii-
fivviw. Arist. Eth. ad Eudem. i. 8. to vcurtfur xoj ui-MO)-, for
« vFipi*- Plat. The*t. vol. ii. 1 34. fttragu row Teioui'TOf xw
Taffvswflf, for mu lar^oi'Tof : as we should say in Knglish
' between Ike agent and patient,' instead of ' the agent and
the patient.' The same practice holds of course in liie plural
number : thus Thueydides, in init. rwy niy-iiTSwvr,<nwj xeu A6ij-

NUtvi', for nZy
Tt HM KoifiwSws, for Ti
Tliis canon applies
usage of Greek writ
tongue. Thus Ephes
for rtu @iaii. Hence

Xen. CEcon. p, 4SI. rei'j -rpa.yuihvs
ravi xwjMui'aiif,
the N, T. in strict conformity with the
rs, and niih tlie syntax of the Greek
V. 5. n rij j3af i\£ia toS Xpis-ou xai ©iow.
Hence this omi$.sion is properly marked in our
a by supplying o^— 'in the kingdom of Christ
and o/'God.' Again, Tit. ii. 13. Tou fi.iya.hou Otau xai Zwr^pof
ij'fuuf lijMu Xpirov, for Teu Smr^^of, ' of the great God and of
our Saviour Jesus Christ,' This part of Dr. Middleton's work,
tfaough elaborate, is altogether tedious and nugatory, and seems
beyond any other part calculated to bring into disrepute his
judgement as a soand critic. In every inslanoe of words thtis
conjoined, whether they mean the same or two different persons
or things, the reader must depend not on tlie use of the article,
but upon the exercise of common sense, which he is supposed
U> |>osse!iB.

StCTlON 3.

in Chap. IV. p. 95, our author considers tlie use of the
article before proper names. " On what occasions," says he,
" the Greeks prefixed the article to proper names, is aniong the
most curious enquiries connected with Greek literature. — Apol-
lonius has said that proper names, on account of their inherent
peculiarity, require not the article sa much as do nouns which
express only common ideas : and indeed, if they had originally
taken the article to define and limit their meaning, it might
well be urged that they needed no such assistance. Harris
appears to have felt the force of this objection j which could

not but occur to him, since he supposes the article t€
tiling distinct from the pronoun, and that its use is only to de-
fine, ' Upon these principles," says Harris, ' we see the reason
why it is absurd to say o eyit, or i <ni, because nothing can
make these pronouni^ more definite than they are. Hie same
mny be asserted of proper names ; and thougli the Greeks my
a "Zuinpa/tiis, i' SavTiTTinj, and the like ; yet the article is a mne i
pleonasm, unless perhaps it serves to distinguish sex

Dr. Middleton's theory is simply this : The article being''l|
]jrono«n has an obscure reference, and the proper name c " '
object referred to is subjoined, to remove that obscurity, '
a common practice with Homer,'" says he, " when he ha
casion to allribute any art to his gods or heroes, to defer AJ^
mention of tbeir names to the conclusion of the sentence, and
first to ascribe such act to persons obscurely referred to In the
corresponding article placed at the beginning." Thus II. «, 488.

TToSa/ KJXui A^^iJiAius, — that is, o Aioytvijf uiof &c. Again, oi h
EXi^oi repwwTai Kuitpi; re jcai apYupoTa^os AffoXAiuv. — II. S. 20.
ai Se effefitgav AflijvaHi re xa.i 'Hp;, " In all these examples it
is observable," says he, " that the writer is in no haste to deJ
dare the name of the person whom he has in view ; but that Mfl
mind is intent rather on the act to be attributed to him, dH
whom the article at the beginning of the sentence is the tm(^|

porary representative. But examples occur in which tiBJH

article and proper name are brought nearer to each otheffl
AvTap a aurs Dc^O'l' ^fuMs Arpsi, iroifiEn Kaajy ArpsMf ti
ivt^vxwv cXiWs ■naXvapvi Qusr^- Avra,p o avrc &uirac Aya-

" In these instances we find the wriler using the article with _
less appearance of utility than in the former examples; becauafl
here we have merely a particle, by which the mind it kept nH
little or no suspense : and unquestionably, if he had writtd^|
simply Ueh.o^'i <"< i" the next line he has written Ar^BVS, dMH
sense would have been sufficiently clear, though that the P^li^ljH
here spoken of was the same with the one just mentioneaf
MPOuld not have been marked with equid distinctness. Or w9

the pronoun be employed, the proper name might be more
safely omitted than in most of the preceding examples
irould be supposed to refer to IleAturi in the preceding verse,
and the addition of the name is an exercise of that extreme
cautionj instances of which have been already noticed."

It is scarcely credible that a man of sen.^e and learning, aneh
as Dr. M. unduubteilly was, should thus trifle vrith himself and
his readers. The adjective in Greek and Latin admits of being
separated from the noun it qualifies, without any obscurity or
suspense ; the similarity of termination, of case, gender and
number, serving to point out their mutual relation. The article
follows the analogy of adjectives in this respect : and though
by a word or two, or even a whole clause, it anticipates its ad-
junct, the separation can create no possible suspense or ob-
scurity : for the reader, if competent, recognises the anticipated
noun as imtantaiieausly as a glance of the eye. Why then is
the article prefixed to proper na.mes ? Assuredly to define the
common name implied ; to bring that name forward without a
formal use of it, and render it prominent to the reader, or to
renew the impression of a nam.e known as already noticed.
Thus in the above example, II. 3. 105. 6 neXtnl/, the man
Pelops, already mentioned in the preceding verse. On the
same principle i ©ujs-ijj, in verse 107, is hut a renewed men-
tion of ©ufr^ in 106. It is here to be remembered that when
the article marks a proper name, it does not mark it as one
bearing that name, but as an agent or object designated by
some common appellative. It is the character which it bears
under this appellative that alone entitles it to notice : and the
article relates to the proper nEune only so far as they both
coalesce in describing one of a kind without its generic deno-
mination. Poetry, it is well known, allows a greater latitude of
inversion than prose compositions; and though Homer, as a
poet, availc himself whenever necessary of this privilege, he
never exceeds the bounds of perspicuity. Dr. M. asks the
question (p. 100), " Does Homer ever place the article imme-
diately before a proper name : and in this case what are the cir-
" The obvious answer is, he does ao, whenever the
p5

metre allowed it ; md he does othenvise only when r
required. Our author goes on, " On the celebrated jtassage (B;

«. I ! .) ouvEjta ray Xporr^r ijrijM-Tio-' xpijTrjex, Heyne, after si
(erring that the article, especially as prefixed to proper name
wtu confessedly unknomi to Homer, and after giving sol
conjectural emendatione of preceding critics, concludes, 'niU
experiiri potest ;' whilst Wolf declares, ' nihil dubilo quio tw
Xpiinjy poeta dixerit, ut personam fama celebrem et anditoii-
bns jam turn, quum primum ejus nomen Rudirent, i
It is certainly a difficulty that Chrysos was now for the fcil'
time mentioned ; but whether this difficulty be so great, th
we must introduce ft) or Toi into the place of Tov, without of ■
authority from Editt. or MSS. deserves not merely for theukt
of this passage, to be carefully considered." After a long i!i^
cusaion of no importance, he concludes that the solution gi
by Wolf will be the true one, if understood with some modit
cations. "That Homer meant to intimate that ChrynesW
well known is of itself too vague an ai^aertion : Chiyses nl
not, independently of the circumstances which precede the ma
tion of his name, better known than moat of the persons spokd
of in the poem : but as having caused the pestilence just me)
tinned, he must have occupied the thoughts of the speaker, ai
his notoriety in that particular view, the hearer vrould r
recognize." The difficulty here, however, is all imagioaiy :
if the German critics on Homer, with Middleton in the numbed
possessed on this occasion a ray of common sense, they won'"
have dissipated it at one breath. The article occupies the p
sition in the verse which the laws of metre assigned to itj ta
is intended by the poet to defin e apijTtjpa. — Xp-jnjy toc oLp^^fi
— ' the son of Jove raised through the host a destructive pe»«
tilence ; because Chryses his priest was dishonoured bjf
Atridea.' Homer, so far frona supposing Chryses known U
fame, puppoaes him not known at all; and therefore altisi
giving his name describes him ns a priest, and that the priest of*
Apollo.

In p. 105 our author justly observes, " It is of the charactcfi
^pid essence of poetry to disregard minute relations and de-^

31

pendences : and in proportion as it departs from the style of
narration and indulges in lofty flights, it is negligent of per-
spicuity : for which reasonj in Pindar and in the chorusses of
the Tragedians, the article more rarely occurs. Homer's style,
it is true, la less artificial, and approaches nearer to the narra-
tive kind : but even in Homer it was not to be expected that it
should be regularly employed on every occasion in which writers
of prose would deem it necessary. . . It will happen therefore
that, though Homer never uses the article before proper names
without reason, he commonly omits it without scruple : and
consequently, in the instances in which it immediately precedes
the name, being so very few, nothing like a rule on the subject
can be deducible from his practice."

For this reason he would willingly look to tlie prose writers,
such as Demosthenes anil Xenophon, for detecting the laws by
which the article, as it respects proper namea, is inserted or
omitted. But in their works instances occur in which the
article has been added or omitted from ignorance of editors or
the carelessness of transcribers ; and on consulting difl'erent
MSS. of the same Greek prose writer, there is more disagree-
ment than on any other point whatever. Accordingly he ap-
peals to Aristophanes, whose language except in the chorusses '
is most simple and unaffected, while his metres have generally
protected him from the critics. On his autliority then he lays
down this law, — that the article is put before proper names only
when the same person has been recently mentioned } or when
the person is from some cause or other of such notoriety, that
even without previous mention he may be recognised by the
heater. (See p. 100.)

Now if we consult common sense, we may infer that some
misconception has taken place with regard to the second case :
for if a person be of such notoriety as to be recognised as soon
u mentioned, what need was there to place the article before
his name to define him or make him known ? The truth is, that
such persona were each known under some pre-eminent cha-
racter ; and the use of the article in such circumstances, is to
bring forward to view the character by which he stands distin-

32

guished. Thus xa-r hirr^Jhw or KStr' 'OjH^^dov, meana simply —
according to jEschylus or ' Homer" : but these men were pre-
eminent as poets. Arisloplianes, Aves 80?. says, xara Tw
Air^uAov — 910. xarct rav 'O^y^pw, 'according to the poet
ffischylua — according to the poet Homer,' In a similar way
Solon was known as a legislator, and Socratea as a pkiloiopker,
A writer therefore might say i SiKuiy or 6 Swupanjf, though
not previously mentioned, as tacitly referring to their known
character, and thus rendering them prominent. (See Nub. 144,
11 88.) But our author is mistaken in regard to Neatofj in
Terse 1055 — rav Hgrop ayopijrjjy : for this is an instance of
the transposition of the article on account of the metre, similar
to that in II. a. 1 1 . — Ner<'/=« tov ayuf^jnjy, ' Neator tlie
haranguer."

"Sometimes proper names became a species of common
names, and then more naturally admit the article. The name
of a Play is usually derived from the leading character in it.
Thus S UijKeijf, AioXof, i MiJ^sxypof, i T^XefSf were dramas
composed by Euripides, and mentioned in Ran. 81*3. In auch
instances the article, as 0r. M, observes, is never omitted.

" The names of Deities and Heroes have also very frequently
the article prefixed. Thus, i{ A^paSiT^ means i; Sea AfptSir^ ;
Zeus, i 9eflf Zivi ; i CIijAeus, i -^puif UiiiJus. (Kee p. 1 1 0.)

" Lastly, proper names of places, whether countries, cities,
mountains, &c. commonly, hut not always, take the article i'"
as ij AiyifB for -^ yijirof Aiyiva, ; ■!) AiCuij for ij yij or J(Olf^
AiCui; ; ^ hifot, -0 viXis AivOf ; i'EtpOf, 6 mTajias 'ECptf. Out
it should be observed, as I believe it generally true, that when
the common name is expressed, the article is dropped ; as ij
Aivof is equivalent to Aoof ToAif ; i 'ECf o; to varajLts 'ECpSf.
(See Herod. 7. :>7, US.) It should further be observed, that in
some cases the gender of the proper name diHers from that of
the common name : thus a a9w( or ^ Rapuji, the names <>(
inountmniii the generic term of which is rt tp

In Chap. V. our author considers the use of the nrticle before
abstTact nouns, or the names of attributes and qunliilfN } a sub-
ject, he observes, of greater difficulty than any other which
belongs to the inquiry. " It is to be premised," soys he, " that
nouns of this class are capable of being employed in two dif-
ferent ways : though they always express abstract ideas, they
may be used in a more or in a less abstract sense. ASmm fur
example will signify injustice generally, but it will also express
erery particular act of iijjustice, by the contemplation of which
we form the more abstract idea : and in this latter use these
nouns in Greek admit the plural, or, which is equivalent, they
are in the singular capable of being joined with words indicating
tbeir possible plurality. It is true that instances of this kind
do. not very frequently occur: but their occurrence, however
rare, sufficiently proves that the names of attributes and qua-
lities may be of particular, as well as of general application ;
and consequently that an expedient, by which they may be
known to be employed in their most general meaning, is not
without its use. TTiis, if I mistake not, is the force of the
article in very many passages in which a superficial observer
might regard it as being a mere expletive : and we shall
farther perceive, t)iat where the sense of these nouns is meant
to be limited, the article Is invariably omitted." So upon this
doctrine, the article, instead of defining, extends the meaning
of a term, and limits it by its omission. Following this novel
idea. Dr. M. reduces the rules for inserting the article before
the names of attributes to the four following. 1. ^Vhen the
noun is used in its most abstract sense. 2. When the attribute
ia personified, 3. When the article is used in the sense of a
possessive pronoun. 4. When there is reference either retro-
spective or anticiputive.

From Plato (vol. iv. p. (18,) we have an example of Hie first
case, — 1) aSiKia Kai jj aKoXao-ia jj.ryiroy '''toy avTo/y Kaxty en,
'JUJyftice and intemperance are the greatest of all existing

34

evils.* Now according to our author's theory, the article a
put before a^ixia to mark it in its most coropreheosive signifir
cation. " In the same manner,*' says he, " as oi a^ixw wi
signify all who are unjust, so rj a^Kia will mean every act, of
which injustice can be assumed." But may not rj a^ixiamesD
also some particular act of injustice ? in other words, may it
not have a reference retrospective or anticipative ? The artide
then prefixed to the names of qualities, has a parHmlar and
general application. These constitute the first and fourth caaa
laid down by our theorist : and they are nuuiifestly not (olf
inconsistent with each other, but they completely neutralize
each other. For in the first case, the article is prefixed t9
generalize the idea, in the last to circumscribe and recall it by
a renewed mention.

But let us bring the question to the standard of truth aad
common sense, and we shall immediately perceive the use of
the article. Khyua, means injustice in its most comprehensiie
sense ; i| a,hytia, may either mean any particular unjust actioa,
^r generically injustice in general, contrasted with the principle
of justice : and this intended contrast or opposition constitutes
the force of the article.

According to the second case, the article is prefixed to the
names of attributes personified. '^The reason of this practice,"
says he, " seems to be founded in the notoriety of these ima-
ginary persons, (p. 125.) How can this be? Personifications
are arbitrary creations of the fancy, invested with forms new,
and, until then, unknown to the reader. Besides, when the
name of an attribute is personified, it becomes, as far as the
personification goes, a proper name, and as to a proper name
the article is prefixed to it. Thus r^ Kaycia and i^ A^eti^, alluded
to in Xenophon (see Mem. lib. 2. c. 1. §. 22.), mean 'the
woman Kakia, the woman Arete.' These therefore have the
article put before them, not because they are personified ideas,
but because they are represented as individual beings belonging
to a whole class.

'^The use of the article before imaginary persons," he adds,
[' may farther be explained from the perfect abstracMnes^ witfi

TtMch Httributes must be regarded, before they admit personi-
fication. The mind cannot form the idea of ij Af inj, a person,
till it has learned to comprise under one general notion all the
various acts which can be denominated virtuous." This is
much as to say, that a man cnn never become a fine poet
unless he be a minute philosopher. Nothing is so adverse to
the power of fancy as the dwelling upon the subtle distinctions
and relations of abstract ideas. The investing inanimate objects
with life and motion, which personification implies, is the soul
of poetry , and the soul of poetry is the being free from the
trammels of logic and metaphysics. This corresponds to the
bet : Homer in personifying Njjcij (victory) in II. ^, 339, avoids
the article as an incumbrance on his imagination. In II, i, 500,
he personifies Art), also without the article ; though in the
next line, having occasion to renew his notice of it, he uses
the article before anj : and even Plato (vol. iv. p. 76), speaking
poetry in prosaic numbers, places ^tXasa^ia as a real being
with Akibiades an'd Clinius without the insertion of ihe article.
In speaking of Homer Dr. M, observes, that that poet rarely
malies use of abstract terms, amJ still more rarely, if ever, doex
Tie employ them in their most abstract and general sense.
Some persons perhaps who have read the Iliad will be surprised
to learn tiiaX apyi' «'^X"''''J. P"^'fj ^^■c'jieBia.vaiSLia, evSaiftona,
SiKawffunj, ^yisia, effirip.'), and many others of t!ie same kind,
are words which do not occur in the wliole poem. Tiyf, a-iutn,
'""JC' ^'"-V' '''^X'Vi tt""^ found only in the dative, indicating
merely the manner in which some act is performed. This may
be denominated the adrerbial use of abstract nouns, and in this
use of them, they are always artariflroKj. Instances however
occur in which Homer employs the article just as it is used in
other Greek authors, The II. X. 762. ourap Ai^iXXeuf o&f i^f
apmjs ttTrofriirsTcti. ' but Achilles will enjoy the virtue alone —
will confine to his own benefit the virtue peculiar to him, — hU
own pre-eminent prowess.' If "we draw forth the full meaning
of Nestor, the contrast at which the article points is this,
" Achilles is willing to .suffer the Greeks to have the full benefit
ia resentment, by refusing to join them ; but he envies tt

t

36

benefit of hU own auperbr valour" — i^; etperT/S in opnait
lion to Tou ^a\ou implied and tacitly censured, Telemadw
charges the suitors with tievouring his goods, and ruiniag In
hoube : one of them answers, ^fttif S' au vtioiSey[j.siat ^[«rt
rK*ra ivtuaTiis aperin fpiiaiYijiey. (Od. p. 205.) 'On theiM-
trary we contend for pre-eminence, wwting here every d^i'
that is, 'we stay here contending with each other, hofnngli
win thy mother, us liie prize of sliill and valour to be confend
on tlie best' — itepi t^s afs'njf, ' to exhibit a trial of pre-emiBOU
virtue, and not for the less honourable end imputed to then b;
the son *.*

In section 2nd he considers thu omission of the artick
before abstract nouns, the cases of which he reduces under ih
following description. " Where abstract nouns are the prefr
cates of propositions not intended to be reciprocating, Ih
article is omitted." — In propositions which merely assert V
deny existence. — After verbs nuncupative, where the noun it
question is the name, by which any thing is said to be called
PlatOj vol, iv. p. 37. xaXw ro xefaXaTov, TUXaxtiay, notfip
KoXoxeiav, because the article would then hold up 'flattery'
in contrast with something else to wliich it stands
Ta Kstpa^Oior is elliptical for xara ro xEipaf.aToy : 'I call <
flattery by that which is summary — by a summary name,"
is omitted in exclusive propositions. Dem. vol. i. p. 529,
oSptuii afopijTarspw , i. e. ' than any kind of insult.' Hod
article been used in this place, the meaning would have
•more intolerable than all insult.'" All this assuredly
erroneous, and Dr, M. would not have thought of such
planalion, if it were not necessary to prop up his systen

• Dr. M. ill remarking on Ilomer bu the following note in
" W« flnil indeed in the Odysuy S. 206. Iiiiu riit i^itSc i^Iuhuui
Damin, Che ciicellenlLcxicugtapber, renders by ■ propter (olnn pi
eiplaining rit by 'miimi or t.mf. Yet Apollonius, j
ample with ii i f^fifa Siiivi : his interpretation therefore Bupposes ti
be not in concord witb ic;irii(, but dependent on it : and this is ccmfi
■l)le with the context. On«m(irSj in the lliud A. 762. BentleybuM
jeetured J< »i"h the E'

37

ijtffpifi'f would either mean b. renewed impression of some insult-
bing act already stated, or generically ' insult' in cont'radistinc-
B^on to any other species of injustice. It is this contrast in the
Binifld of the writer, or the absence of it, that is the sole cause
fOf the annexed abstract noun being annrthrous or otherwise.
gWhy for instance has Plato declined the use of the article in
■such phrases as these, i i^} i%MV xaxiav, h f)(iMi aiiwai' ?
.assuredly not because the use of the article is inconsistent with
kverbs signifying to have, to obtain, qt to partake ; but because
jl he uses these nouns in their general acceptation, without con-
: trasting them with their opposite virtues.

" On the same principle it is," says he (p. 129), "that in
li the common phrases ayoiaf, a.i^x'^rijy, &c. tfXivTia,yeiy, Sixtjv
iiSovat, ifvx"f* ayuv, and many more, the article is invariably
' omitted. Since in many of these phrases two words are em-
I'played to convey the meaning of one, and in all of them a
Jl^ingle verb may be imagined, which expresses the meaning, I
shall consider this as an Hemliadys, and shall hereafter refer to
ivhat is here said of all such phrases under that appellation,"

" In the same manner we may account for the anarthrous
■use of abstmct nouns, when they are employed in the dative
-case adverbially. In this sense they are of very common occur-
rence } and are sometimes so joined with real adverbs, that
their import cannot he mistaken." Thus Orestes acknowledges
that he murdered his mother, Jw^ h, xa>iUi[ jity au. And De-
mosthenes (p. 4 1 ), futrn S' UTta,p^Et Toij vapiijfi 7a TiSy atnrruiy,
* The things of the absent (from their duty or from the field)
by nature belong to those who are present,' itisn is here
anarthrous, because it is used generally without an intended
opposition to, or contrast with, any thing else, and it may be
rendered by the adverbial form, 'naturally.'

But the article with an abstract noun in the dative or ablative
is of common occurrence. Dr. M, was aware of this, and it
was necessary that his system should undergo another twist to'
account for it, " In these examples," says he, " it is to be
' observed, that the manner in which any thing is said to happen
or to be done, is not spoken of with reference to any particula-

38

jiubject, to which such manner is more especially attribotiliie.
Diit the case may be otherwise : the manner may be advcrtei
to ns being the attribute more especially of the subject in qao-
tion : and then the article will be prefixed^ and will, ai intk
instances already mentioned, have the force of a poHeM
pronoun.'*

Thus (Arist. Rhet. lib. ii. c. 15.) Caf9'< rf fbyi^fLi? jxaAAsyijn
sxmh, 'They live by the memory more than by <Ae bopt'
Here the clause rf |xyi;f&>) stands in immediate contrast wilk
rri sXmoi, the former being a character of the aged, whohn|
on the recollection of the past, the other that of the young, ite
dwell on the future. Each coalesces with the personal pranoa
implied in ^eJo-i, and in our own tongue the possessive dor
becomes a substitute for the article — * They live by thdr I^
collection more than by their hope.*

Thucyd. 5. 72. rrj sjxirsipia Aaxe^aifi^ovioi t\aa'awBtm$ ranb
rf, oLv^peia shi^oiv ov^ Tja-coy 'irepeysyoiMvot, * The LacedBBO-
nians though at this time inferior in skill, showed themseha
not less superior in bravery.* On this passage Dr. M. has Ik
following note. '' In this passage, it may be supposed tint
both EjXTTEif t^s and av^peia should^ according to what has bed
advanced above, be anarthrous. Bauer, however^ in bis es-
cellent edition of Thucydides, has shown that rr, Mftiesipia mrt
be rendered per ariem hostium, and by ly we must plainly
understand, by the bravery of the Spartans. The articles thel^
fore are necessary, the nouns not being employed in the ad-
verbial sense, but with reference to particular subjects."' (See
p. 131, note.)

How the articles became necessary, because the nouns not
being employed in the adverbial sense, but with reference to
particular subjects, is what I do not comprehend. Dr. M. seem
here puzzled, because the articles cannot take the sense of the
possessive without an evident absurdity. But had he attended
to the order of the words the difficulty would have vanished.
The writer had mentioned rovg itokefnovg in the preceding
sentence, and in consequence of his arrangement, ly efjLiCMipt^
coalesces with them, and not with Aax^^oi/xovioi which sue-

ewds. Had the historian thus said, AaKsiai^wofisi ry t^impM,
the sentence would have been solecistieal : but as it is, t^ ly,-
mpia. belongs to the enemy, and rf. avlpfia. to the Spartans.
Each noun has the article, becauKe they stand in direct oppo-
sition one to another, and the sense may be expressed by llic
possessive their. I invite the attention of my reader to this
paaaage, as exhibiting a remarkable instance of the latent power
of aKBociation, and of the precision with which the writerf of
Greece obeyed its dictates, though possibly they were strangei's
to tt a£ a theory.

InChap. Vll, p. 136. he considers the construction of the
article with vks, or stiraf, iXvs, itiro;. With respect to the
first, the rule which he lays down is this : " When ir«f in the
singular number is used to signify that the whole of the thing
implied by the substantive with which it is joined, is intended,
the substantive has the article; but when it is employed to
denote that every individual of tbat species is spoken of, then
the substantive is anarthrous." For this rule, which I believe
has no other foundation than the theory of our author, I would
substitute the following remarks, as more intelligible and in-
tttoctive.

1. Hie article is generally put before the noun, and not
bebre irSs or dvaf ; and its use is quite Independent of these.
Thua {Dem. deCor. § 59.) vayTa mr aiojyx JieTErsAEKE
fini^ed the life all of it — he spent all his life,' or ' the whole
of his life,' where the article has the sense of our possessii
Herod, lib. ix, p. 328. ij iVirof itna-na., ' the cavalry all of it —
the whole cavalry.' Thuc. 2. 57. rr,v y'^v ir£iro.y irEfiov, ' they
cut up the country all of it— the whole country.' Xen. Hell,
lib. iii. p. 292. diraii n s-paTm\^.a., ' the armament all of it
ttgether — the whole armament.'

2. This same principle, as is reasonable to expect, obtains
is'the plural as well as in the singular. Kai vepi varai tus
KKnryapias mvtew. (Arist. Rhet. lib. ii. c. 9.) 'We must ci
•ider concerning the categories all of them— all llie well known
categories.* Dem. vol. i. p. 706. vapa. vavTas tou; viiutii,

e2

Ibid,
p. 759. avi ira<ri rsij ffoAirais, ' upon all ihe citizens.'

3. Sometimes the article is put before ntaf rather than its
adjunct, merely to avoid cacophony and to obtain a more
agreeable sound, without any alteration in the sense. Thus,
vag oftiAof, 'the whole band,' instead of -eas i e/j-ikti, which
would be attended with a disagreeable hiatus. Thus also, -j
vara s^ouirix is, on the same principle, preferable to ■ffaaa ij
e^iufia, 'all the authority' or 'the whole power.' In Lysias
c. Agorat. vol. v. p. 514, we read, toTj va<ri aySfwmis I«E«T£
imaia ^'^fitraa'Bat, 'you will appear to all the human race to
enact righteous decrees,' ird<ri being inserted between rale
aySpumois to please the ear by more varied terminations.

It muRt however be observed, that when the article is put
before waj, whether in the singular or plural, it is Intended to
place the collective sense of the adjunct in a more prominent
view. Thus Herod, lib. h. p. 336. r» ccn-avTi rpanveSa/ nixf-r,
' to conquer with the whole army,' that is, ' in every part of it,
in both wings, as well as in the middle.' Xen. Cyrop. lib. vii.
p. 111. iuS' ar olitayrif cipevSoynj-rai fieiyiiav iravti ahiynf, 'the
filingers — oi vavre; all of them together, all in a body — would
sustain but very few heavy -armed infaninj.'

4. The noun is often omitted, and the article is used with
taf alone. 'ITius (Ariat, Rhet. lib. ii. c. 2.) toTj wairi apyiXetai,
'he is angry with all," that is, xv^uivms. Xen. Cyrop. lib. viii.
p. 1 32. irioifporvyijv vols xan sft/mtei, ' he generates modesty in
all,' i. e. all men.

Similar observations might be made respecting 6\ts, iutu,
o$c, cxEH'Sf. The article is never placed before them, and its
use therefore is independent of thera. Its application where
these definitives occur is to be discovered from the conte:it,
and its uRual acceptation will be sufficient to account for it.

Thus (in Demosth. p. 709.) oAijv tii» inXir, ' the whole city:'
the city is definite, and therefore has the article ; iAijv marks the
city altogether, and not a part of it. So also (in Arist. Rhet.
lib.ii. c, 4.)«pioX(ivTOv^io^, 'aboultheir whole life.' Whenthe

4)

idefinite it is of course anarthroua, and tiiat imJe-
itlyufcXg;. Demosth. p. 7G2. Eviaurov oAav, 'a whole
Had the year meant been one determinate year, the
tnal would have then been rsv enaurov ixty. "When o\as,"
aays Dr. M., "ia used in the sense of teholly or altogether, its
Kubstnnttve is anarthrous; as in Demosth. vol. ii. 1110.
V^a-^K iXir er'v ij Siairinx. Here itXx7ji.a. is anarthrous, not
bnrause sXoj has this or that sense, but because it is the pre-
dicate of the proposition. ' The treaty is a complete fiction.' "
When either of the definitives hrii, iSe, cx.Eivas and the
srtide affect the same adjunct, each of them hns its proper
force, the latter holding it forth generkallij contrasted with its
opposite or some other kind, the former as the immediate sub-
ject of discourse. Thus in rauTO, ra. iiTjpia, the article marks
&ifpixsia irralimiol beings or beasts, in opposition to us or men,
mentioned in the contest ; rauret holds forth the same term as
beatU which had been just noticed, and therefore immediate
objects of attention, 'these beasts — these animals which are
irrslionnl.' (See Plato Lach. vol. v. p. 199.) Thus again,
(Xen. (Econ, 6, 2.) eri /J-^y Y«p ■eena, iurtj trs^i};, ra Sia^i-eiiiv

I? *X"' XP^"'^'^'' "-^"irorspa Je a'urij 5 lySna. ro jl-ij Svm-
TeSvT* katsiv, ' that poverty is certain, when a person
n need of a thing, has not whereby to use it ; but tliis
I less grievous, when a person cannot find it on seeking
iHg misplaced.' "Yhe first somj irina has not the article,
t it means want that is absolute, and uncontrasted with
oaite. On the other hand it is placed before tthia
bectlUse it denotes a want that is specific, and is contrasted
with the object which supplies it,

The distinct use of the definitive and the article in the follow-
ing instance is most obvious. A person had his eye struck out
by a man that had but one eye; the sufferer threatened to put
in force the law of retaliation, 'an eye for an eye.' Ateiaijo-si
Tl( ^lysrai sy^^poi «%flpuj hx tyjir7i o^9aXfiO>', irj aurou cxKviiii
nStty ny eta., ' to strike out this which was one — this single
one' (Demosth, vol, i. p. 744.) " This usage," says Dr. M.,
;h it be uniform in the best prose writers, was unkoD-wn

42

to Homer, in both of whoee poems, iorog cemip and liailir
phrases are sufficiently common. The article therefore in tiii
instance, as in some others, was not originally deemed neco-
sary. It is however not difficult to account for its insertion tf
a period when all nouns employed definitely came to have the
article prefixed to them : for they are never more restricted b
sense, than they unavoidably must be, whenever they are joiBeJ
with 6uro;.*' (See p. 142.) Homer avoided the usage of fafHi
anjp and the like, not because he was unacquainted witk it,
but because as a poet he was raised above the minute dis^
tion which is implied in it, and which a prose writer finuidft
necessary to mark.

In Chap. VIII. our author subjoins a few remarks on the
pontion of the article in the concord of the substantive andtbe
adjective. With regard to the position of the article, comnoB
sense requires that it should be placed immediately before tbe
word it is intended to define. If it define a noun, it is prefixed
to that noun ) if an adjective, it precedes that adjective. Tha
(Dem. de Cor. § 55.) Qo-a ir^O0^x£ rov ayeciov iroAirijy. If in tfas
sentence the orator meant to hold out some man as a dtixt$t
in opposition to others who had not that privilege, he wooii
have said ayaiov toy itoXii^v 5 but as he designates the god
cituerif in contradistinction to one of a contrary character, be
puts the article before ayaiov,

Xenophon observes of Cyrus, that, though he spoke mod
and vehemently while a boy, he used fewer words and a gentlef
tone of voice, as he grew older. To7^ jxcv Xoyoig ^So^xj/tiftH
sxp^TO KCLi 77 (pwvri rjtrvx^Tepa. The words which the writer
wished here to render marked and prominent, are XoyoT; and
ftioyy} ; he therefore distinguishes each by prefixing the artide.
Had he put the article before ^payvrepois and y^vv^airspa,^ the
sense indeed would have been the same 5 but the prominence
and contrast, intended between the nouns, would have been
sunk out of sight.

Now let us see what the author makes of this plain and
simple principle when viewing it through the medium of his
own dark and confused system. " The article," says he, ''as

43

. every one knows, is found very commonly prefixed to ad-
-: jectives ; but adjectives are not^ strictly speaking, the predi-
: Gates of the assumptive propositions^ of which the articles are
the subjects. In o Sixmos an^p the construction is 6 a;y BauLt^f
: art^p, and in i $iKouof alone there is no other difference than
: that av^p is understood. This is sufficiently evident from what
has been already shown. The predicate therefore in such cases
is always the substantive expressed or understood, conjointly
i^th its adjective, the two together being considered as forming
one whole. Of these two^ however, the substantive is the more
Important ; since it may alone be the predicate of the article,
which the adjective cannot. In the adjective some substantive,
if not expressed, will be understood 5 and what is here said
respecting adjectives will apply equally to participles. On
these grounds we may account for the positwriy which the Greek
usage has presented to the article in immediate concord, where
one article only is employed, and also for the order of the sub-
stantive and the adjective, where the article is repeated.'* 'Mn
concord then, where the attribute is assumed of the substantive,
supposing one article only to be employed, it must be placed
immediately before the adjective.**

He illustrates this by an example from Herodotus : ^opvaXw^

r'ov ewTifis TYfS ArriKT^s X^P^i^> ' *^^ ^^"^ ®^ Attica being thus

taken by the enemy 5* the object of the writer was to specify it

in contradistinction to other lands } and this he does by means

of the adjective Arrixij^ , which is rendered still more prominent

and distinctive by means of the article prefixed. Had however

the historian thus arranged the clause, the sense would have

been the same — dopvoLkwrou eov(n}$ r^g X^f"'}^ ArriKrj$, On

the position, as it stands in Herodotus, our author observes,

'^ The reason of this position is plain. If, for example, we had

jread sova^s r^s X^P^^f *^^ sense would have been complete ;

the mind of the reader would be satisfied : the article would

have a sufficient predicate in x^P^^» ^^^ ^^ should look no

further. When Amxi/js precedes %a;^ij^, this does not happen ;

X^P^S or y^; or something similar is expected.** (p. 146.)

'^ We are next to consider what will happen, where both the

i

PART IL

Afialysis ofMatthia^s account of the Greet jhiicU,

Division 262. — See toI. ii. p. 382. ThIS learned grammnB
thus properly defines the artide. — ^'^ It. serves to signify Ihl
the noun with which it stands, indicates either a det^mioft
object amongst several^ which are comprehended under fte
same idea, or the whole species.*' He next obserfes (U
Homer and other old poets use it in the sense of the demoi-
strative pronoun— this. Thus, in II. a. 12. 6 means 'tki
person/ supposing that the poet points to Xffvaiijs, andtsf
eLTfoiva (v. 20.) ' this ransom/ This however is not correct; \
is an abbreviation for o Xpvo'ijs, to be repeated from the pt*
ceding clause, and ra marks UTtoiva as the things which con-
posed the ransom — tJie ransom money. 'Deliver the girito
me and take the things which I bring for redeeming her — tab
the price of her redemption/

These poets, he observes, never use the article before projpet
names. But he limits this observation by remarking, that theie
are several passages where the article is put according to tiifi
Attic idiom, even in those poets in proper names, where it op*
pears to signify a designation, e. g. II. a. 1 1 . toy Xpvtniv i^tifci)''
aprjrrjpa,. What the learned author here means, I do not know;
but he seems not to have been aware that rov, placed where it
is on account of the verse, in reality qualifies aprpryl^a, as hai
already been observed. ' He dishonoured Chryses his priest.*

Our author seems not to have been aware that a patronymic
name comprehends a whole class, and therefore naturally ad-
mits the article to distinguish one from any other of the same
name. Thus, A/ayr< h fj^aXtrc^ Mfpovi ^upv •pivs roy TiM-

45

^^^^ 1} tiMi last^ because he wished to render prominent, not no
''''^;udi the measure which secured success, as the circumstance
-:vi!f tiiat measure having been proposed by himself.
,..*: ''Apollonius has remarked that cfto^ i 'gatyj^ is not equivalent
.'!t I i §iMs TCaxi^p : the difference is, that in the former position
J f Uie article, the verb fr< is to be su]^lied between ff&o^ and
«.' toefi^p : and the sense is * mine is the &ther j' whilst in the
nMa something is to be a£Srmed or denied of one, who it
-cdready (»«tt?ii6d to be my father." (p. 145.) This remark is
, ijpercritical. If I had to say simply that my father is dead, I
^Jtmld have written h bims leamip aits&ayg : but suppose I had
:.:30.Mrf that my father was dead, and that in opposition to one,
L jfliose father was not dead, I should then detach the possessive
j&om the article, and make it prominent by placing it first or
Jait : thus, sfjt^og 6 ifatrjp or 6 ican/ip sjxof at^idvi^ *my father is
;<lead^' though Ms father be alive.

4?
he raised in particular tlie mind of Ajas the Tela-
him who was the son of Telamon,' to distinguish him
OileuB. On this principle may be explained, i
xparspss AiiiLijiift, i. e. Aiaii^iSiii a TuJeiS*);, Diomedes
Uie son of Tydeus, or rather ^laj^iijSijf T{j?ciS-q; a xpa^tptf,
'Diomedes the brave son of Tydeus :' so again, (Od. X. 518.)
«* Tij^e^iJij* rjf cost EvfuituXoy is the same with Ev^vwuXay TijXe-
fiJij» riy r,paia,, ' Eurypulus son of Telephus the hero — the
Iteroic son.' 'O Bfiapiai; ^c/aSLift-o; meiins, Bpiapsuif 6 ii-eyx-
iiili.ai, 'Briareus the magnanimous,' (Hesiod. fl. 734.) In these
inalmices the article is transposed for the salte of the metre ;
and of this Matthias seems not to have been aware.

The following passages he says approach very near to the
Altic idiom. This remark proves that in many places at least
be did not know the true force of the article, and conceals his
want of knowledge under technical phrasen. 11. t. 74. ra T\t)-
Xfi^ao efXSuip [a n^^XciJcta to ee>\iuip, in ^. \22.-ra.rtii^ta.
means /iw armg, the article marking riuyja as coalescing with
(lar^xXat.

Matthis was acquainted with the theory of MiddleWn, though
he does not mention him. His remark is, " VVilh these we
must not clau those passages, where Homer, as it were, pre-
pares us for a proper name hy means of the article, and the
two are separated by two or more words:" see II, «. 409 ;
!. 20. and Hes, fl. 632, where we read p.a.(,ya,vri — oi ftev a.if>'
lJ<pigA^( 06{UO{ Ttryes ayainf oi 5" zs OuKUfiiroit Seoi, ' they
fought— the Titans from the lofty Othrys, the gods from
Olympus.' The article here lias its usual signification, but is
separated from its adjunct for the sake of the verse, or of that
pleasing variety of termination which the arrangement in Greek
admits. The succeeding remark is equally erroneous. " In
these passages the article is put for the tlemonstralke pronoun,
and the proper name following is put in apposition as a more
ejiRct designation of the pronoun." This is the doctrine of the
German critics : but it must be classed among the dreams of
learned men. Heyne makes a similar remark on ihe beginning
lurth book of the lliaUj where tlie poet by means gf

48

B uwit UMnl&t gods in contradistinction to tkt i
whose narrative closes the preceding book.

DiTieioN 2t)3. — " When the subject of the discourse ia
definite, the Greeks do not use the article, e. g. Herod. 7.!!?.
hmt tUKi Afityei', ' a horse brought forth a hare,' or suppliaiB
place by rn : as yuyij rif, 'a certain woman had a hen.' Hu
aya9oyis 'agood, any good thing;' ro ayaBoy or TayA.
'good by itself.' This he illustrates from Lucian. D. MM
xiii. 5. Ejraivwui/iri pel' es to xaMof, uif xizj roji-g pEpgfV
rdyaiau, npn f tf ras vpa^eit xai ray ir>\iioToy. Here-nv/<it
doex not mean good by itself or good absolutely, but the[»^
dicamenl good opposed to that of evil as discussed by the ph-
losophers. The speaker is Alexander lashing Aristotle fot li
meanness and adulation. The article before jtaAAof, tpalwi
and ffXouro*, as coalescing with pi understood after it:
conveys the sense of the possessive my — ' he praising m
while in regard to wy beauty, as this also is a part of Ui
good' — the supreme or chief good sought out by Aristotle—
' one while my actions and my wealth.'

The prevailing fault of this grammarian is that he s
has clear ideas, and in consequence he huddles things togetbv
the most irrelevant under a cloud of words. "In Englith,"'
says he, " the indefinite article is often used, although t'
noun of the proposition expresses a definite person or ot^ectiS
in this case also the article is put in Greek : e. g. he is a «'
man, o-o^sj y^'-p ° ^*'^iP- (Pla^to. Repub. 1. p. 156.)" He mi^^
have spared himself the trouble of this remark, if he gave 4
literal version of the Greek * tht man is wise,' raeuii
Simonides. Here the article has its usual and approprii
sense, nod it b little to the purpose that the same thing cov
be expressed diJTerently in English or in German.

We have already seen that the subject of a proposition a
being definite generally has the article, while the predicates!
serving only to define the subject, without any reference 11
something different from itself, is as generally without it, "
other cawes," says our grammarian, " if the predicate be a d
finite object^ of which it ia af&rmed that it belongs to the gi

jtBf al idea on the subject, then the predicate has the article ; t.g.
;Philem, ap. Slob. Floril. Grot. p. 211.) i(,sr;»ij sri rdyaSov,
IPpeace generally (no particular or definite peace) is the ubs-
.Iract good.' The article is here placed before the predicate,
jkecause it holds it forth as the predicament good, opposed to
K^ xaxs* evil ; and this is the pure or perfect good spoken of
(by the philosophers — 'a state of peace is the highest good —
icomprehends in itself every thing that is good.' The predicate
ikaa the article in the following example, because it is a repre-
isentattve of the possessive pronoun : Toiiro auro ri xoXairif eri.
fro Si^piy f-ov TTjv ij'u;(iiv tas rwfta, ourav, Luc. D. Mort. xvii.
)liot 'this is just the punishment of which we speak/ but 'this
fvery thing is my punishment, that my soul, as if a real body,
is subject to thirst.' The next example occurs in xiii. I . ttuTi
TO xpaviw ^ E^*n] sfi, ' this skull ia t!ie Helen whom thou
tseekest.' 'lliis is not the sense : the article here marks the
'generic term ytiyij understood — 'this skull is that woman of
known celebrity, viz. Helen,' or ' this bare skull is Helen, a
woman once so celebrated for her beauty.'

Division 264. — " According to this definition the article is
also put, where in English it is never found."

" 1. With the demonstrative pronouns, luTat, iSs, ixeivts, in
order to express the designation more strongly." Herod, vi. 45.
ou Se vpeTiptv, weoMts-q ey, t(Jv yaipmiv rtuTEuv MapSonas vpty
1] (Tpeaf Bire%eipiiiuf sa-siijiraTO. Here it is to be observed, regard
must be always had to the position which in prose the article
occupies immediately before its adjunct : this it affects without
influencing any other word in the clause ; and as it is not
placed before these pronoun!', it has nothing to do with them
more than any other word, but has its usual signification quite
independent of them. Thus, in the example from Herodotus,
riSv coalesces with the Bfuyoi just mentioned, and must there-
fore be represented by the posseasive pronoun. — ' Mardonius
did not remove Irom these their places, till he made them sub-
ject to him.'

The same remark holds with regard to Tas and the prono-
minal adjectives cji-tii, cof , rJneTE^Of &c. navTEj avflpwirfK mean

H i50

"*'b11 men generally ;' wavn; i, aySpavai ' the men all of ikc
pointing to some men known, or generically all such beinpi
men, or all raLioniil cretitures, in conlradislinclion to thosewl
nre not rnlional. Moreover w of mu is 'a son of thine'— a W
whether an only son or one of several ; but a a<
him nan son of the person addressed, in contradistinction I
niiy other that might be supposed lo be his father — 'asoni
is thine — thy own 8on."

In following this learned grammarian, a sensible readerofia
feels that he expresses his meaning circuitously and indi3tiiKl|f
when, if he had adequate concoptions, he would have exii
himself in direct, few, and intelligible terms. " The arttt)^
adds he, "is omitted when a still nearer definition follows: fi(
(jEschyl, I'rom. 627.) nv, Ul, raTirrh uVoupyjjo-ai p(apiv, '
o-flv epydf constitutes the predicate, and the nearer definilil
lies in what word follows — but not if the nearer defini
eluded in the substantive «pyov — vw^furepoy to e^yoy." Indl
first instance, TctTs-Je umipYijTM x^P'" '* *^^ subject, and M
ipycy is the predicate, as he states, the connecting verb bfli
understood — ' to administer favour to these nympha is t
business.' This is the reason why the article ia not preGn
'l^ere must be a strange confusion in the ideas of that ma
who calls the subject a definition of the predicate. On At
contrary, in the example from Herodotus, to tpyoy is the sdii
ject, and therefore has the article prefixed ; whereas ■^ftsrtfW
the predicate, and for this reason is without it — ' the woifc
the fulfilment of the prophecy Just mentioned — is our part.'

" With tiie interrogative pronouns iroTof, Tif, but onlj'-w
reference to something preceding, the fuller explanation ^
which the question is to produce. Eur. Phien. 718. a 5" e[u
f<,aAi5-« TttiJS' ^jtw fparrwy. ET, ra. iroTa vau-ra., ' What thin
are mostly in the way, these I come about to tell.' "i
answer is, as if given thus, woTtt Tavra ra ijKeif <ppa.ff<av, '
whBt sort are these, which thou art come about to tell' — r<t
the sense of the relative iJ. Prometheus tells the Chorus (1.24
that he withheld mortals from foreseeing death : the ChoB
asks in return, t» ttoIov lopuiv r^s-St potp^axov yoo-oii. which

malady, whicli thou hiist discovered." So
ie quefltion ra ri (Aristoph. Pac. 696.) means ToSn n, What
is ? and in line 693 tx ri is equivalent to ri raZrx.

"The article is sometimes used with itLafo;." Thiic. 5. 49.
tara, rot offAm;* btas-ov- Here ejcaro* means each of the
heavy-armed infantry mentioned in the preceding sentence,
and has no connexion with the article, which is here used to
mafk oirAir)]* as a lenewed mention in tlie sinf^ular number of
iir^ras in the plural. Thus again, G. 63. x-oltx ft,v ^jte^av
ix«5T)f, w^oisuo-aii awSaocoui', The Syracusians, on hearing of
the expedition intended by the Athenians, were at first filled
flnth consternation, but they recovered their courage as the
time of their arrival each day advanced. It is curious that
Matthite here omitted apiiaiQ-av, on which the propriety of the
article depends : for it marks not simply ' each day,' but the
advancement of each day till the fleet actually appeared.
Without vcrtiwfo.v, the writer would have said xar' ■r,ii.iBCLv
ixaritv. Xenoph. Anah. 7.4. 11. xai ijyefiwi' (xeK ^v j JfD-ffonjf
hutrilS f^ii oiKioLf. Here t^j before oixiaj expresse.s its coalition
■wth Q Jtmronjc as his possession — ' the master of the house,
Moh one — the master of every individual house — was a guide.'

DiriijiON 265. — "The article b put especially, even where
otherwise it would not be put, when it is to be expressed, that
the substantive to which it belongs has been already mentioned
or is something commonly known." The meaning of this verbose
and intricate sentence is, that the article repeated supplies the
^lace of a noun preceding it, or serves lo recall the notice of
■ noun already menliuned. Thus, XaAKi^Ef; rac eit ApTsin^iui
nMn wapep^flfiEvoi. {Herod. 8. 46.) — ra; supposes tta.; before
mentioned, and the passage should be rendered 'the Chalci-
deana supplying twenty ships those (sent) against Arteniisium,'
the article in such cases taking the sense of the personal pro-
noun. Tiuv EiKOffi ►£uiv occurring in Thuc. I. 49. is a correct
example of renewed mention. In Lucian D. Mort. 4. I. is a
dialogue between Mercury and Charon. The former says, in
•ettling their accounts, that he had bought for him an anchor

52

tor five drachinaF, Ayxocor trntXafLtfte rxe^ira vtrfs ipttviiwr.
This appeared to Charon a high price ; he replies with an oath,
riar *f»Ts arr,^a[>.TjT, ' 1 boaght it for the five;' lliat is, • 1
gave fuU five for it, as I haye mentioned." The writer might
have rppeated xtm !fayy.arw ; but the repetition would be
too bald, and be substitutes rait in the room.

He next refers to the Ljs. of Plato, vol. v. p. 212, as an
ejiample of renewed mention, which is not to the purpose.
Hippothates standing in conversation with a group of men,
and seeing Socrateft passing liy, calls to him to step aside and
join thero : Afu^a S-rj eii3uj ^jmov m var^E'aAAiif ; ' Will yoa
not Ktrike aside towards this place, and straightly join tu 9'
Socrates replies, lltT Xjyeif, xai lapa, nrag no; Ujixs ; literally,
'Whither do you mean, and to whom those you?" that is,
' whom do you mean by iho^e you call you, and whom you
wish me to join.' Here rovs stands for the relative out. The
passage is very elliptical — nvt; eiai, iuf XcyBij oft^s TceuTap
iuf xaXcif i^e ircuaCaXXfiv ; A similar instance of the article
prefixed to a personal pronoun occurs in the Philebus, vol. iv.
227. ^Eivav ftEv Totvuv En ■tfiaima.y miev iti rav t}te, etciA)
reuS' duTujf iivt;, ' Since you say this, it behoves the me-^
such an one as you describe me — to apprehend nothttt.
formidable.' Here tov tu-s is equivalent to £/*e TOiofroy ^~

or f/AE vfaf rov iivrws ct^St — ' me whom you thus accost.

ITie instances which follow are all widely mistaken,
the same manner," saj-g he, " when in the form or's
quisqtiii lit, the preceding word is repeated, it is accompani
by the article. Horn. H. in M«rc. 276. (j-r^re rim aXXov oirunra
^owy Kftiirw ajj-irepatav, dirinf a'l ^ies £i<ri. Apollo charges
Mercury with stealing his cattle, when a mere boy ; this he
denies, saying that he neither stole them himself, nor gaw any
other that did it ; thus evading the charge by limiting it to the
cattle, and this he does by means of the article — " I never stole
such things of yours as are cattle," meaning that he only stole
his quiver or other things belonging to Apollo. Horace alludes
to this passage, and represents Mercury as having stolen the
cows as well as the quiver.

I

65

He next quotes the Ortstes 412, and there follows the mii-
take of Professor Porsoa, SavKeiMii.cy 5ssT(, on vot eim e! Sesi.
Orestes justifies llie murder of his mother by saying, tliat he
*as commanded so to do by Apollo ; and then remarks, ' We
■re slaves to the gods, whatever the gods may be.' ©eoT/ in
the first clniise means the gods in general, and is therefore
jut the article ; while nl beat signifies the gods in their
nature or made of existence, in contradistinction to men
beings. This contrast is expressed by the article. The
and existence of the gods were points discussed by the
fllSosophers, to which discussian Euripides, who was himself
« philosopher as well as a poet, alludes in the clause 'whatever
tiw gods are.' According to Parson and Matthice the article
here answers to the Latin pronoun ilte, iste—' those gods,' that
it, 'those gods 1 have just mentioned :' a limitation altogether
poerile as quite unnecessary. Our grammarian is not more
successful in his last example. " In the same manner in the
predicate. Plat. Apol- S. vol. i. p. 42. outsi la avSpes h^yaTai, ai

The enemies of Socrates had for a long time been spreading
reports calculated to impeach and vilify him. These attempts
were made behind his baeii ; and he harrfiy kn»w either the
debmaiion or i[s authors. If he knew the authors and their
charges, he could e;isily meet and refute them: but us, like
BMassins, they accused him only in the dark, he deemed them
fcr more terrible than those who faced him in the court of
Justice. ' Such as these are my terrible enemies, and not those
who meet me in this open court, and whose calumnies being
specified I am able to refute;' — oi prefixed to ima marks the
contrast which Socrates intended between those who thus
D^umniated him in secret, and those who stood before him
accusing him to his face : and it) this consist the beauty nnd
force of his argument. The explanation of Matthite is merely
this — 'graves itii accusal ores.'

Division 2CC. — " Sometimes the article seems to be put in

fto iodefiaite sense : but for the most piut, even in this case, a

r3

54

definite relation may be traced, though not in every point ^1
with reference to the context. " This he illustrates from FliU, T
Rep. I . p. 151. AAXn TO TOu ©sftiroxAssuf ev «;t£i, i tuI S^t- f

mKi* £u!oxifii!i aTTSxpivcLro, on, our' ay auros Xefinpnf m, bw I
^arw e/Btsro, our' tutimj, Aflijva7oj, ' The saying of Tbt- I
miiitoctes is happy, who to the Seriphian upbraiding t
saying that not on his own account, but on account of All
city, he waa illustrious, answered, that neither himself beiiig»r
Seriphian would have become a man of name, nor h<
nian.' The explanation of Matthite is, "The article isjiA^
this, because it was a story well known in Athens j
brnted Seriphian." The fact is ijuite otherwise ; Xeotaitia
ASi;vKiof are gentile appellatives, comprehending' two L
classes of men } and the use of the article here is
person belonging to one class in opposition to the otiier, !(
'S.epupnii, ' to the Seriphian' — one that was a Seriphiar
native of Seriphus, to distinguish him from another that w
citizen of Athens.

We. is equally mlstftken with regard to the instances &
the Charmides of Plato, vol. v. p. II 1. em rou xecXati vaM
&c,, ' of that beautiful boy,' as if tiie speaker alluded to K
boy known or already spoken ofj whereas the article b
placed before jtaAou, and not iroifof, designates him a:
that was beautiful, in oppositi<)n to one ugly ; and in the lasi
taken from the Phsdrus, vol. x. p. 282. mravTr^trnf St *aiI/>«
rdj voo'Suvri Vipi Xoyjiv a.x.iijy — liirfli], ' Pheedrus vvaa delighlti
in having met one infected with the love of hearing discourses ;'
meaning Socrates, who, like himself, had caught the msaiD
for eloquent and learned orations. This our grammartBD
renders ' that passionate lover of orations Socrates." Tie
truth is, the article placed before yunvvTi marks Socrates not
as a man known, but as one infected with passionate admi-
ration of Lysias. " This takes place especially with the put.
ticiple, when a person or thing only designated generally, is
yet in some measure defined by the action which belongs to it.

iiLBtiii9''*>^tl> 'h^ subjunct is put; e.;. in thephnwe
i«<r» 01 Xtydrrei." Thia observation he endeavours to illus-
trate by a long string of examples, which, if reduced to sense,
., means this, that the Greeks used the article with a [jarticiple
. present, past, or future, to express the agent or subject of dis-
< course, as giving a more adequate descripiion thttn tlie coni-
jaoa name. Thus a'i h-eynyTsi, ' those who speak — such as
. speak,' equivalent to 'speakers,' but more to the purpose of
I the writer, as more fully discussing or contrasting them in
that character. Thus also roSj woA.epijo'oi'raj *iAivrruj, ' such
as would war with Philip.' Dem. p. 14. 4. Plai. Meaex.
p. 278. rev tptSvrcL, ' one that was to plead." Xen. H. G. 7.
5. 24. Ttuf cSeX^jD-tivraf ^eveiv, 'such as would be willing to
remain.' Anab. 2. 4. 5. o ^■yTjsai'.tvas, ' he that is to lead.'
Isocrotes Areop. p. !4■l.D,;^a^£7roT£po>'■:5^«*£XEl^oif toTj ;^f oyoi j
tupiTy Ttui j3oi;Xof*£>oL'f apx^"'' 1 •'"'' '"*"* /*lJ" itsf*£toiif, 'In
thoae tiroes it was more difficult to find such as wished to
govern, than now such as in the least solicit it.'

" Another case is where after verbs signitying ' to call" the
predicate substantive is accompanied by the article." Thus
Xen. Cyr. 3. 3. 4. a S' Ap^ttiij trufi.vpineij.%s xai oi aXKoi vxt-
ftf ayipuiVii, avaxaAouvTEf Toy eiicf/Er'^y, rw avSpa Toy wyafloK,
' But the Armenian accompanied him and all the other men,
calling him one that was a benefactor, a man that was good,"
Anab. fi. 6. 7. ol i' a}\!\iii ol vafatTSf eXiyeipwiri ^a.\Ksiy ray
^EgiTTjrov oLyaxcLMvyTet rav irpoSoTijv, 'And the rest of the
soldiers who were present attempted to pelt Dexippus, calling
him one that was a traitor.' From the language of Matthix,
the reader would conclude that the article used in these and
similar instances has sonie secret affinity to the participle a.yei-
TiaXavrres ; whereas it is quite independent of it, as serving in
the first instance to hold out Cyrus as a benefactor, and not a
datrot/er as other warriors were ; and in the second, as sup>
poHing Dexippus to be "abetrayer," and not a faithful friend
of the army he commanded.

This application of the Greek article occurs in ^achylus.

where Mercury first accosts Prometheus, v. 9.i2, nowkipj |it='^
in chains : l*^

r«, rtY ffofliri'i ">' Vix-pail CvetviKpat | **T

Tiv f^auaciofra tis Baus, toy E^i]ij,fj9ai{

' I aildress thee one (A(i( art a wiiliist, one that art excftdujll'
bitter against the Gods, one thai hii-sl offended i^insllhw-
one that onferrest honours on ephemeral mortals^-one liil
haul stolen fire.' The use of <he article here is to matli ?»■ \f
melheus as sustaining the character implied in the s«c«efii|
ndjuncts, and not iu ojiiioaile which the sufi'crer mightduo.
The reader can understand Matthiffi only from his ex^
and his referring to some obscure and vogue principb
blind shows clearly that, though he hns taken eo much piuffl
to espliiin the ailicle, lie was himself utterly unacquninied
with its use, even where it is obvious and simple.

Division 267. — "The article is not only put with
stantives, but also with adjectives, and participles withoul
substantive, and with the infinitive ; to all which it gii
sense of substantives." An adjective in the neuter lenit^
nation often expresses an abstract quality ; the use of it will
out the noun to which it belongs, Icadit the render without I
effort to consider its signiGcation as independent of the id
ject it qualifies, and this is the very nature of an abstract \At
An attributive thus becomes an abstract noun without d
assistance of the article ; though it has i(8 use in marking d
abstract quality as distinct from the subject in whi<^ it-
found, or from some other quality with which it comtuanl
its concrete state, or from that to which It stands (^pn^
But, as I have already observed, the article and its corre^ranj
ing attributive are to be regarded rather as combining tu gt<
a description of an abstract idea than to form that idea j
itself: thus ro tvnx^s, 'that which is fortunate,' and mi
be considered in a general way as synonymous with tuTi/j(it
though not strictly such. So m mrov, ' that which is to I)
trusted,' Is the same with ij Tir'f, Eur, Phmn. 275.

* v/uuf, 'thnt which is stupid in you,' with ij araiiriijria,
'your stupidity,' Thuc. 1. 69. ro eji-ov vsohii-w, 'that which
'■a willing in me,' with iJ ir/isflujiiia, ' my willingness," Eur.
MedL 178. 'Inlikemanner to uycTJsoy is put for iljieif, to i/tov
or fa. Efi-a for fyui, Eur. Troad. 355. Similar to tliLs is the
nnion of the article with interrogatlves and pronouns, to n,
'the sulMtance;" to «7o», 'the quality;' to jtOtov, 'the
quantity,' Aristot. Ethic. I. 6. Plat. Epist. vii. p. 133. "Ad-
jectives in ixof nre used in the neuter with the urticle and
without the substantives, in two different senses :— in the sin-
^lar they express generally a whole, ro woXirixo)', (Herod. 7,
103.) 'the citizens' — iroM'ra;i, considered collectively as abody.
In the plural they signify any circumstance determinable by
tbe context, in which the radical noun is concerned, or the
history of the people; as raTpwix-a. (Thuc. 1.3.) 'the Trojan
warj' Tn "EAXijKa, 'the Grecian history.'"

Nothing can be more simple and obvious than the facts
here stated; and our grammarian would not have expressed
tbem in this manner had not his ideus bceti naturally confused
and indistinct. In such expressions as to 'E}\?\r,nMv a noun
ii nnderstood, which the sense or the context obviously sug-
gestBj as in Thuc. I.I. to tpuX.w or tho;, 'the other Grecian
tribes, the rest of the Grecian nation :' so ro Aaipixoy or ro
Bxpiapixoy supposes the same intellection : so to vaXifiiuy
means not the citizens collectively, but the body of the citizens
capable of bearing arms, and constituting the power of the
state, such a word as TeXts, or iriirTayi/ia,, or n^Of, being ob-
viously understood. This is the case in the phrases to iirsix-oy,
ro ir^-iriKoy, 'the cavalry" or 'the infantry:' ro tvavrwy
means fttpii, ' the adverse party — the enemy or adversary,*
Thuc. 7. 44. TO Koiviiy scil. ayaSov, ' the common good,— the
common weal." ro JinjKoov sciL ntpa, ' that part of the state
which is subject to the ruling party, the subjects of the state.'
As to the plural form, to. Tpai'ixtt, the noun ■apayfi.a.Ta. a ob-
viously implied—' the Trojans' affairs.'

Division 263. — The Grammarian observes that the article
prefixed to certain adjectives or pronouns changes iheir peculiar

5S

signification ; as xXXti, ' others ■,' ol aKXoi, ' the rest ;' ^ aXXif \
'ex\xs, 'the rest of Greece,' Thuc. I. 77. — iroXAoi, 'many,""
01 1^o^Xol, 'the many, the multitude;" ttAcisuj-, 'several, •
more ;' el vxeiwi, ' the most.' 'Hf Si xai oiKtioi Oi TXtor^f
(Ion, for irKsidvei) oL-Siisa,v (Ion. for a.i^isrra.v) nu; Tupavtouf,
'as others the greater number— as most others, — dismiMed
the tyrants' — aurof, 'himself,' ipse, but a auira;, ' the same
idem—Talhar atnos the same, i auTof , ' the self same, the very
same' — icxv-ns, 'all;' oIiravrEj, the whole, all together, ^a-
o■l^elJlra( tx wavra irsa i^ re «ai Tfiii;x«ra avfian. (Herod.7-
4.) ' having reigned six- and- thirty years in alt he died :— eXiy«,
' few,' oi oAjyoi, ' the few,"

In the commencement of this division our author obnerveir,
that the article prefixed to adjectives gives them the sense of
substantives. This he illustrates by oi 9vi;roi, 'the mortals."
Neither the principle nor the example is correct) oi 9>^W
means ' such a.s are mortal,' in opposition lo the gods who
necer die. The fact is, that adjectives with the article often
describe classes of men or things, when held forth in contraat
with their opposite:! ; but this is quite foreign to the question.

Division 269. — In division 266, our author has virtually
considered the case of the article with participles supplying
the place of agents. To this he again recurs in the present
division as if it formed a distinct subject ; as ol xo^axEaorfEf,
'such a.s flatter' or they who flatter, for flatterers ; ol tpiXtn-
fouvres, ' they who philosophize,' for philosophers.

The article is sometimes used with neuter participles acttre
or passive in describing things ; as ro fepby, ' tliat which caiAa
away — fate ;' to ^aTi^onitty, ' that which is said, a saying a
maxim," CEd. Col. r^f •snXicos to TifiW(i£»oy, sell, re i^epts, 'that
portion of the state entrusted with honourable oflices — the
dignitaries of the stale or simply the dignity of the state,' far
^ Tif.li], which Matthise too Eoosely renders ' the estimation in
which the city stands.'

He further observes that in such cases the article is some-
times omitted. This might be expected in the poets, as in
Pindar. Olym, 13. 24. A similar omission occurs in Plato. Leg,

lii. p. 384. iMipifici 3t w^f^iroAu p.a9iuv fi^ [taitrftf, xu S
ytyufj.yairij,gyis nS fiij y£yuiJ,yaTii.et'ju, ' he who has learnt
differs widtly from him who lias not learnt, and the disci-
plined from the undisciplined," fiaflwy— ftaSovrof for o /taSuii'

"The neuter of the participle is often put in a collective
lense as an adjective." Thus in Herod. I. 9?. ro etifmrsov is
equivalent to &i sm^jirouyTtf , ' tliey who collect or frequent.'
But in fact irXijSof (a multitude) is here understood, which
Matthiie should have specified, that the learner might see the
the bottom. On the samf principle is to be explained
for nus MsiievitTOLs, Herod. 7. 239. and ti ^ouAb-
'ibr TivEs j3eu\oi.(.Evci, in Thuc. 7. 43.
lother leading fault of this grammarian is, that he never
KSlis a general principle intellig;ible and edifying, as founded
in cominon aense, but has occasionally recourse to vague tech-
nical temiH, seemingly for no other end than to conceal his
own want of dUcernroent under the appearance of profound
enuliton. Here we have a striking example of this affectation.
"Thciwpof the participle in the masculine and feminine for the
■ubstantive is idiomatic; the participle with the article is the
some as the Latin is qui, and the finite verb : in Hom. It. i[r.
325, TOv •itpO!j)(o*'ra. SatiniBi, ' he has his eye on the one that
keeps before him, or on him who Tteepa before him.' Xen. Cyr.
Z. 2. 20. iii<rxfi'>* a^riAeyeiv, /xij WX' «>' ■eXs's-a- >tai irovounTK
Nai oi^iXiZtra. ra xoivoy, rourty xeu i^eytrwv aCioCcflai, ' It is
dishonourable to gainsay, but that the one who labours most,
and most benefits the state, is deservingof the highest reward."*
This, it is evident, though formally distinguished here, is no new
application of the article, but is the very same with what we
have seen above.

Division 270. — "The article with a substantive expressed
or to be understood from the context is often joined to adverbs
and prepositions with their case, to which it gives the signifi-
cation of adjectives." This is in liis usual style of mysticism.
The purpose of language is not only to convey our ideas, but
to eouTey them with the utmost brevity and dispatch. Hence

when in a phrase or sentence a word or two can be omiiied
without prejudice to the sense, the omission takes p
is the foundation of the frequent ellipses which occur in Gtnl^
and more or less in all other languages. ITius in the cawrf
the article, i anu iroAif is ^ nyia taaa. vnXis or woAij ^ w
' the city which is above — the upper city;' «i mre atStvn,
scil. svTEf, 'the men existing then,' or merely oi rnrt, 'thq
then, the men of that time." Herod. 8. 8. KaSfiow ToiiaAu
ma, Tpopij, for rsS ovrof volKki, ' new brood of CadmuB.la
existing anciently' — 'young offspring of ancient Cadowu"
Thuc. 8. 1. 01 Tram tujv rpaTiuriuv, not ' the best soldiers' U
Matthite 'mnBlates the phrase, but ' such as were alwpftB
soldiers,' that is, entirely of that profession, and not citiznitv
merchants. The very soldiers who had been eng-aged inllc
battle but escaped by flight, attested the defeat : yet theAllic
nians for a time disbelieved these very men who had At
strongest motive to circulate a contrary report, oi eyyvcsit
yeyws for i( ovrif, ' who being- nearest of kin — ■ '
lations.' The article is joined to prepositions with their con)
as ra. ei; rov yoXeftov. (Xen. Cyr. 6. 4. 5.) ' the things fbrdi
war — warlike stores,' %fi]fjiaro; being obviously implied, il
Kara. naua-aviM. {Thuc. 1 . 138.) scil. vpayii.HTei, ' the affiol
respecting Pausanias. 6i xa,0' -r/fixs is for il avris y.aff ^aiti.
' those even with us' — even in age — ' our contemporaria,*
distinct says the grammarian from xafl' ^f*a; without the ai
This distinction respects a passage in Aristotle's Poetics, 2. !•
fu/LiDuiTfci Gt i/,iH!iufj.tyoi ^tXricras i} xab' ■^li-as, 'those nit
imitate, imitate better characters than even with us — even w
our times — imitate better characters than among na or amoni
our coniemporarieK.' There exists therefore no such distiw<
tion, excepting in the imagination of this grammarian. tvTaipt
tw ;^oi'OB, for IV Tuj XP^*V °''^' "'P* '''"'rou ;^ovou, ' in the ttm
existing before this,' Demost- p. 1250, lAtkTiaSr,v nr t
Mapaiwvt eis rt ^apaipav efiSxhs^v ((Inj^io'avTo, ' Miltiado, T
him at Marathon, they decreed to cast into the pit," tiiat is tW'
fiaj^jjirafifl-ov, as the context evidently supposes, (See Plat J
Gorg. p. 150.)

L

61

l^-'DiTisioi' 271.—" Under this head come the phrasea sJ af«fii
Mr nfpi with a proper name, which indicate the person signified
^ly the proper name with hia companions, followers," &c.
4ferad. 1. 62. ot afi.(pi IliviaYpa/rw, that a, ii ayrss ctfipi nmo--
ftpeerw, 'those around Pisistratus — those of whom Pisistratus is
i^te centre or chief— Pisistratus and his followers ' li npt &pa.-
fraCw>iiy, 'those around Thratybulus — ^Thrasybalua and his
ipoldiers.' 01 aiijpi Og^ia,, (Plat. Cratyl. p. 264.) ' those aroniid
^Orpheus — Orpheus and his disciples." 'Onripi KsKpava,, 'those
,aTOund Cecrops— Ceerops and his assessors in judgement.'
,Xen. Mem. 3. 5. 10.

This periphraj^is is intended to represent a person as a man
iOf consequence followed and attended upon by others, though
possibly no more than ilie individual may be meant. (See
Herod. 3. 70. Plat. Epist. ix. p. 165. II. y. 146. Hipp. Maj.
p. 5. Xen. H. G. 7. 5. 12,)

But this phraseology is not corlined to proper names : it
is sometimes used to express the object which persons concur
in puTBuing; as 01 itEpi fiktaofiav, scil. wrtSf 'those about
philosophy — who study it;' el irefi T151' ^pay, 'those about
hunting — huntsmen;' ra ctftpi «oAew9v, scil. itpa.yfi^a.Ta, or
Y^Y^-ta., ' the things about the war,' — equivalent to to, aoAe-
fjbixK, ' warlike affairs,' or ' military stores ;' ra wept @r)?at(ias,
' the affairs about Thebes — the history or constitution of
Thebes.' Isocr. ad Phil. p. 92.

Division 272. — "The article also stands before several
words together which collectively have an adjective sense."
It is not easy to say wliat the learned grammarian means by
this sage remark, nor can I infer his meaning from the example
adduced by him, though the sense of the article be obvious i
that example. It is this, AiopiriZi, voTepaif Asyfif rav apy^ovTcc
re xxu ny upsiv-fayui, rov, tuf einf tt-KUy, )j Toy axpiSu f^tyip-
vov TUT cDtpitira.T'fi, epi), >oya) ap^etret otra, (Pint, de Rep.
vol. vi. 1 75.) ' Define to me, whether you mean by the rulerj
and the man superior to the subjects, (that is, the man in power
over them,) him who is so, as designated in one word, (that is,
in a vague and general language,) or in a strict logical sense —

liim, he answers, who is really a ruler in the atrictest Bcnae—
Toy ap^irret, 'the ruler' gencrically — one thatisaruler,opposed
to those who are ruled.

Division 273. — " If a word be added to a substantive, with-
out a copula to define it more accurately (apposition), tiui
word is put with the article. This is either a substantive at
an adjective, participle, adverb, or preposition with its case."

Our author loves to be circuitous and general, where he
ought to be direct and specijic : and it is difGcult not to believe
that he often affects mystery to give his readers a notion of ha
profundity. The proposition here laid down is neither more nor
lees than this: — ^Vheo a person's name is mentioned for the 6nt
time, it is necessary to subjoin his parentage or the name of the
place or nation to which he belongs, or his character and office,
to define him, or to distinguiah him from any other of the same
n;ime. The word thus subjoined, as meaning the same person,
must agree with the preceding by apposition ; and aa its ol^t
is to distinguish one from others, it must also have the artJcie
before it, Thus, Kuajapjf i raii As-Jiayavt tchj , ' KnarcMf i
Xsyoffoiof, ' Hecatteus the historian.' Biajo Qpt-^viv;, 'Bias
the Prienean.' It is however to be observed, that the article it
not always used before the name which designates the parenla
or the place or the nation to which the said individual belong*^
as, 'UpoJoroj'AXixafjmffS-iuf; QouxuJiJjjjAflijyitTof ; ^xJ^iSf Ef»-
TOKAEifou. The omission of the article in such cases as iheM,
proceeds on the supposition that the word subjoined to the
proper name is of itself sufRcient to define it.

When a proper name is introduced, it is often followed not
by another single word to distinguish it, but by a whole clause
to express some circumstance or quality characteristic of il,
and most worthy of notice ns ppculiar and prominent. This
comprises the next division, and our grammarian expresses it
in the following manner.

Dlvision 274. — " If a pa.rticiple or adjective be added fbi
the sake of definition, it has regularly the article, as also t]K
substantive to be defiaed, if it be not a pronowt personal, ttit
takes n'"" 'n adverbs and prepositions." Herod, vi. 47. Maifu

63

ijy Tiar \israKKiav ^aoaaifH/iTara, to. hi inrmts avivptf sC p^cc
&a.vov K-rKTOMTs; T^» vtjiTtiv Tatnjv, ' The most surprising by far
of these mines were those which the Plicenicians found out —
those of them who with Thasus colonized tliis island " — 91 xri-
iravref to limit the persons who found them to that portion of
the Phceniciana who colonized the i.sland. £sch. Agam. 181 .
ZiJYa. Ss ■fi; wpofpavuis Effivixia y-Xa^iuv, TEuJsrai ippeytuy to vxy,
fl-ov ^pwtiy ^poTOus oJwinivra, roy Traflij ftnSsf Sf*r« xvpua; *;^eiK.
' He shall fully reap the fruits of a wise mind, who in the exer-
cise of wisdom addresses songs of triumph to Jupiter — him who
directed mortals in the path of wisdom— /lini who authorised
sufferings to convey instruction,'

It is not necessary that the subject thus described should
always be a proper name, but maybe a personal pronoun.
TTius the amiable Polyxene in the Hecuba, 364. effeir' i^ia; o-v
Se^jnrm taj^uiy i^ptya; ru^aij,' av, Ins apyupov ^ uivjjrsrai rijy
'Exropas v-ninv, ' Perhaps I might have some cruel-minded
master who will purchase me for himself for money — me one
that is a aister of Hector, or me who am,' &c. So also Her-
cules now dying, in th^Trachinin 1 1 03. vuv f a!f atapSpas xat
xxTSifpa,K.wii.£yOi ruiphTJf uir' anj; ^xvEiTfifiSij^ai rsLXag T^saplS^s
fujTpOf cuyof(.ct[r/*E>Of, nv xar arpv- Z^ya; auStjSEif ywtf,
' But now thus enervated, and torn to rags by a secret fiend,
am stormed like a city after a siege — I miserable one that m
named from the noblest of mothers— one that in said to be the
offspring of Jupiter above the stars — i pointing lo eyw implied

Division 275.— " This apposition in the pronoun personal
often serves to expres.s indignation and irony." It may ex-
press anv thing else, as well as indignation and irony j but
what it expresses depends not on the article, but on the sense
of the term it defines. Such remarks as these are quite puerile,
and a whole volume might be filled with them on the Greek
article, without one word in it expressive of the peculiar sense
of the article. Take the follovritig example from Sophocles,
Klect. 300, where ElecCra speaks of her mother and ^^glsthus
her gallant : £uy f ' em-tpvyei it£Ka,{ i kKsohi auiy ra-uret, fUftpioj
a 2

64

fi-n'^as vMiviievo; , ' With her the bridegroom being at haod,
instigates these things — this one that in every respect is impo-
tent — one that is a complete pest — one that makes war m

DrvtsioN 276. — " Every d'esignation which is adjoined Wi
noun by a participle, an adjective, an adverb, or a prepostioii
vniili its case (whether the noun conveys a perfect idea of ibdf.
independently of this designation, as in the proper apposition,
or not, but requires this designation to make it complete))
the Greeks place either before the noun or after it : in tbefiot
of which cases it stands between the article and the noun be-
longing to the article ; but in the other succeeds it with Ibe
article repeated."

The meaning of this in plain and direct terms is, that the ar-
ticle, when used to define or connect, is placed before the nocd
it immediately affects, and not before the subject od which that
word depends. Thus Thuc. 7, 54. r^s te vnupij^iaf rpnam
tr't'Tat, xai T^f aru) ryjs vpos -rai rsiyei oiro^^^'twr Twy fcrAirw,
' The Syracusans erected a trophy both of the naval engage-
ment, and of the capture of the infantry on land — that at the
fortification.' Here the second t^; is intended to connect A'K-
AijJfBUff, the capture of the infentry, with the spot where it oc-
curred ; it is therefore placed before Vfos Vifi 7s>%£i, as iraine>
diately connecting it. MiMmSiiy o'l E;^6poi vm Sixartipiov vfOf
ywnt aJitufav TvpoMnits r^s sf Xs(3(r8vi)9'ai, (Herod, vi, 104.)
' His enemies dragging Miltiadcs before the tribunal expdkd
liim from the government — that in Chersonesus' — r^j, connect-
ing the government with the place where it stood, is therefore
placed between them^' the government which was in Cher-
sonesus.' Isocr. ad Demon, p. 5. ra.s ijfova; tdt^pev^ ra.f (ura
it^Tjs, ' he pursued pleasures— iftose with glory.' ad Nic. p, 18.
V^eitei xa,l ffUfi.^epii t^v rujv ^avihtwy yvai\i.yjV iituTOMirifniS
iX^iv vspt nJiv SwauuiY, wtnTep mas vofiouf Via; xaXiSf xttfiMmi,
' it is becoming and expedient that the judgement of ralen
should be immoveable respecting the rights of their subjects, u
are all well enacted laws.' Here the first roSj, serving to matlt

tiie lams, in cuiitradistinction to those rulers who administered
them, is placed before it; while the second Toiif precedes KaXui;
ttetjieyiu;, as defining laws founded in eternal justice, opposed
to such as are fickle, ax depending on the caprice of tyranls-
Tbuc. i. 108. ra, reip^ij r« eauroiy to, u-axpa. airtTiXEn*. Here
the first article defines f^ixv ^^ mean that species of build-
ings called walls; the second limits those walls as belonging
to themselves, namely, to the Athenians; the third specifies
what walls they were — ' the long walls,' walls so called at Athens
in contradistinction to other walls often spoken of. viii. 77-
01 Se affo Tiiir TerpOMHirioiv iti^'^hyTes tf tijv Safioy, ol Sexcc VpST-
SeuTM—-^(ru^a^ty, It is manifest that the^Iause ^i Sexa, vper-
Seuveu is introduced aa a further description of the general ex-
pression, ' those sent to Samos ;" and in English should have
vis. or nameli/ before it — ' Those sent by the four hundred to
Samos, namely, the ten delegates j' or it might be expressed
thus more naturally : ' The ten delegates — those sent, or who
were sent, to Samos by the four hundred — remained quieL'

DiTisioN 277. — " In like manner genitives are placed either
between the noun by which they are governed and the accom-
panying article, or with the article repeated after the noun."

What benefit the learner may derive from this remark re-
specting the position of the article, I am at a Iobs to know;
but if he be blessed with sagacity to trace things to their ele-
ments, which Matthiee never attempts, he can learn much from
the examples subjoined to it. Plato Phsdr. p. 369. aXA« Stj njy
TOU ffi ovTi pTinpixiii rs xai mflavotj ri^yijn Voif xai vaiev av ng
Svrain inpiim.uSa.i. ' The art of him who is truly oratorical
and persuasive how and from whence one may be able to supply
it for himself.'

The article, and indeed adjeclives and participles being de-
clined like nouns, have terminations similar to nouns. This
is always the case when they are of the same declension, which,
as is well known, is very common. Now to avoid the monotony
orssmeness of sounds arising from thesimilarity of termination,
it is the practice of the Greek and also of the Latin writers to
aepaiKte the adjective from the noun it qualifies, by introducing

id

66

B woid, a drtmnutsace, or a clause between them, thus pto-
ducing a pleasing variety in the final syllables of the scntencE.
Thus Plato in the above sentence has separated r^v from riy^-
y-^y by inserting mu ^iiTOpinna « xai trifla»ou ; and he has agaio
diversified this monotonous clause by reading rou tiu o*ri pvn'
piKw. Nothing would have been more disagreeable to a Gr-
cian ear, or indeed any cultivated ear, than the monotony gl
thiN sentence, if the words had been arranged exactly as tlwj
depend on each other,

" The genitive," says he, " stands very frequently before [bt
article and the noun, e. g. Xen. Cyr. G. 3. 8, oui-exoAim xa
iiTTEitfi' KXi ve^ta* itat dpfiaTaiv nui ijj-eftovaf aat Twv p.^x"'"'
xai rtur miua^apuiv rovs o.pyfiyra.i xai taJv dpf^afia^tSv." In ihii
example moat of the words end in wr, the genitive plural, Tht
historian was aware of the disagreeable monotony likely to rift
from their continued recurrence ; and to prevent this, he puts
the genitive, dependent on ratif ■^yi^Lavas, before these words,
while he divides those which depend on lavs ap'^avrois, placing
some before and others after them, thus producing the grraiesi
variety of sounds which the construction admitted. But tbb
has no more to do with the article than with any other wordji
the sentence. He adds, " This takes place particularly in the
participle and article, where the proper name accotnpania
them. e. g. Thuc.i, 105. nspo-tuy xai MijJwv ol y-aTapuyti^nf
vuLi hiyvvTiiDy 01 jJ-tj ^uvawos-ayref. ' Tliose of the Persians and
Medes who deserted, and of the Egj-ptians who did not revoU
with them.' " The proper mimes here are put before the ardde
and participle, not on account of some mystical virtue in the
article, but merely to avoid cacophony. This would be felt if
the order were changed ; as ai KSLTapuycivrci UepriSy xch M^Im'
Ts jtai AiywirTwv, &c.

The position of the article in the following instances anses
entirely from its use as a connective, and for the reason, if
reason it can be called, stated by our grammarian : Herod, v. 50.
atta SiXao'irjf rJjs loiym, ' from the sea — that of the lonians—
the Ionian sea ;' o S^jj-oi o Aflijvaimi', ' the people — that of ihe
Aihenians — the Athenian state or community."

iW casei contEtined In the Otaervatiotu are quite inr^TOOt,
as the repetition of the article proceeds upon a principle un-
connected with the question of its position. Plat. Apol. S. vol. i.
p. 70. oux fX ^^jiiariuy -^ ajSTij yvyyi-toi, o-Wo, tj apeTtjf ')(f^-
^wfa. xai r aXf^a ra,ya.^3. nis etyQpufirois dieavra,, ' Virtue doea
not spring from wealth, but wealth springs from virtue, and all
other things which are good among men' — ra aX/,a, other
things, in contradistinction toyjrrjff.atoi; raayaSa determining
those things to be good, as co-ordinate with to. xaita. From
Plato Polit. p. 332, he alleges to TauTov, ' identity," contrasted
■with TO Sarspoi', ' diversity,' its opposite ; and remarks on ac-
count of the intimate union of the article with its noun by crowt,
it seems to have been seldom considered that there was an ar-
ticle in the composition. Certainly dare^ev is n hepM coa-
lescing into one word : the article being thus absorbed is again
repeated. The same may have been the case with tbhto ; but
1 rather think that tkuto is tlie neuter of auras, l)y the same
analogy that nura is of ioTos ; and it favours this idea, that the
abstract rauranj; ' identity' supposes raurs or rauroj to have
been in existence.

Division 2/S, — " Sometimes in Ionic writers, particularly,
e. g. Herodotus, the article is separated ivom its noun by the
governing word or by another." Thus riiir Tij rptinioreuy,
Herod, v. 101. rdJr riva; Sapv^ofuiv, vii. 146. ss tsu ^ojpnv
iSiamu—rov for rivas. The article is separated from its ad-
junct in these and similar instances, evidently to avoid the
concutrence of similar terminations so disagreeable to the ear.

" Sometimes the article is separated from the word to which
it belongs by an independent proposition." ripijf Ss rovrais
■KOi a.Tt^KOMaa.s TeiJ, oiroTe ^ou\oivT9 cuaro', ywoMia. aysirScu,
srafff £v soifiaif nay auipMruiv Ttu; yati.i\is woisio-Sni, (Xen. R.
L. 1. G.) 'He (Lycurgus) besides these things, having restrained
each, when they severally wished, from leading home a wife to
himself, ordained that they should contract marriage in the
vigour of their bodies,' The order of construction is nvoTtaavas
iK.a.fiy rw ayeriai yuvaixa, otky enaroi (SouXoivro, era^ev, &c.

Division 279. — " The article often stands in the neuter be-

J

fore eiitire propositions, which are to be united with ilie tot

of the proposition, or are quptations, if they are determined ia
the construction by other verbs or prepositions, or are foUomd
by a verb as a predicate j also by single words which have »
be explained."

T!ie meaning of this in plain language is, Wlien a writer af-
firms or declares a thing to render the subject of his affirmation
prominent, he marlis it by premising to in the sense of that,
namely, or the like. Thus Plato Leg. vi. p. 305. xai fj-srxaii
xmritiMS vvep auruiv Aoyo; vjiveira,!, to, ^aKxn xai a-iST,pS inn
ihai to. -Tstxt f**^^"' 1 yijlva. ' The poetical language eoa-
cerning them is justly celebrated, namely, that the wulls ougW
to be of brass or iron rather than of earth.'

This same particle is mode use of to specify sayings or quii;
rations. TO rou 'Opijpou, ou J" lyai am ipuas wS' cnto iteTfa,{ •
aXk' Eg avS^KWKiv, (Apol. S. p. 80.) ' that of Homer, :
am I made of oak nor of rock but of men' — ro, for ro
' that saying.' iicepta.; to, khi lat d^-ui ^nvnu, xai to o
(urtjcToi'syai, xai to, Jikh; o-ae'^erui vw pocou, xai ra, rets '<
pm; elvat Jiaf camo ra; autas — wti ffawa, iva en Jjnaiii,
Sasyeypaips, (Demosth. in Aristocr. p. 893.) 'Having
over Ihnt, ' and if he should be convicted of slaughtei
that, if he should appear to have slain, and that, let him ui
the trial of murder, and that the very same-punishment sh<
-be inflicted on him which is infiicted on others — having omil
these and otherthings, which were just to mention, he wrote
indictment.' In this passage to is equivalent to ' that clauf

Single words when esplaiaed or quoted have generally
before them ; as Dem, pro Cor. p. 255. to i' ufxeif ii
njv irsAjv Xeyiu to ovoficc u^tif, ' When 1 mention you, I mi
the state.' But when a word is introduced grammatically in-
stead of TO, it has the gender which the grammar assigns to It
as a part of speech; as i] iix, meaning ■BfiiSe<ri{, ' the prepo-
sition Sia. ;' ]}' r/ia, scil. avrwvu^io, ' the pronoun eyia
sell, oTjvJifl-fio;, • the conjunction evet.' This ia precisely on
principle that, when the article is prefixed to proper aaroee,
sfiecCs the common name understood.

^

When the article marks the subject of aa affirmation, it may
be in the g;enitive, dative, or accusative, an well as in the no-
minative } as ttiCfp aS ev aAX^ m\et ij au-nj Sa^a, lyeriy raif rt
ap^Duai Kot a.p)(i'j}i.iyiis, ttej^ rou, wfito-s 'iei apytiv, xaj tt
-ravrti av roin tiij svoy, (Plat, Rep. iv. p. 351.) 'But if in
another city the same opinion subsisted in those wlio govern
and in the governed, concerning that, who ought to govern,
in the same city this should subsis-t.' Phtsdon. p. 232. ovh ye
aS inro ^aiSuiyas uVsps^EaSai roy Siftfiiay Ofi.iXiyet; -fiB, irt
toLiiwv i iaiSojy tfi, oA^a in fieysflof e%h i iaiSaiy vpts «)»
^ififMw tfjt.ix.panj'ra, ' You allow that Simmias is suqjassed in
bulk by PhEedon, not in that, because Phfedon is Phsedon, but
because Phicdon has magnitude in comparison with the dimi-
nutiveness of Simmias.'

This use of the article is not unfrequent in the New Testa-
ment. Thus, SBliftrws siiTev curftu ■ro ft Suyxreu wirsSa'aSyiriora.
SuvarctTui ms-evoyri, (Mark ix. 23.) 'Jesus said unto him that,
if thou art able, all things are possible to him that believeB.'
Jesus said thai thing, ' If thou art able to believe, sctl. that I
am able to do it.' Kat ei rif krapa eyroA^j w wutuJ Tuj Myif
aycactpa,\a,iajita.i, (v rtu, Ayatrrjiiii my irXigriov ws isejrn,
(Rom. xiii. 9.) ' And if there be ary other commandment, it ia
comprehended in this saying. Thou shalt love thy neighbour u
thyself' — £y riZ, in this, namely. Thou shalt love, &c.

Division 280. — The article is properly in the gender which
the noun belonging to it requires ; but with feminines in the
dual the article is often put in the masculine, e. g. fia xsipn,
' the two hands,' Xen. M. S. 2, 3. 18 ; rui rifi-fpa., ' the two
diqrs,' Cyr. 1 . 2. 1 1 ; Toi yuvaiKe, ' the two women ;' rai ttoAw,
•the two cities,' Thuc. v. 23. The reason of this seeming
anomaly is, that the dual number ia used to express the number
tieo, or pairs, which generally cons- ists of male and female, and
therefore takes the gender of the leading noun. This practice
having once prevailed, it extended in time to di/ada that are
both feminine.

Division 28 1 . — " ITie article often stands before a noun be-
longing to it. When a noun which has just preceded ia to he

repeated once again, the arttcT« betonging to it stands aloitt"
Isocr. ad Nicocl. p. 15. ol TUpawa veranjitairi wrs tsAXoi; oa-
^iffCijrij*, vtTiptr £f IV afio» if-.tffitu tOv ^m* riar Ihairiviim
f<.(y, sTieiKWf Se ttparrwriay, t) rov ruiy rvpayytuovrair. ' TyiMB
have BO acted that many liave doubtedi whether it is better H
choose the life of men who lead a private life, but act jtnd*^
or that of men in absolute power.' Here ^io» being previmiili
expressed, rar supplies its place in the succeeding clause: not
does its omission occasion any doubt or obscurity. Bat lk(
general principle underwhich this and the succeeding exampfei
should be cJEissed, has already been noticed. See Divisit*^.

The following instance, however, is attended with some ob-
scurity : a^Eif ro si; Ti;i' Xiav, nrXsi fi; rqv Kttuyo*. HereU
may be doubted to what td refers ; but as Chiou was his fel
object, and having relinquished this, he sailed afterwards lo
Caunus, the reference must be to vAeiv nnderstood, ' Hutinf
given up his intention of sailing to the former, he sailed to <k
latter island.'

" The article often stands without the noun, and has the
genitive ofa collective noun following it; as li r9u Sr}fito,1\!Ui

8, 66." The article, like pronouns and adjectives, is often usrf
partitively, and this is the case here — ' those of the people,' 4.
expressing the part, and Sr/p-au, the whole, of which the oMt
(iwflpMWoi) intended, formed a part.

"The article also, without the noun, when the speaker i»
doubtful how he shall designate something." Dem. pro CflR
p,23 1 .2! . ij rair aXXuiv, fiTt XJ^ najiioiv, Eirt ayroixt, eit
«/tpoTefa EdTBiK, Here the speaker was going to aay ij
but before he comes to the noun, a doubt arises what to cil
the motive which actuated the other Greeks, and in expresMDJp:
this doubt, he throws ihe noun to which the article points, lot*,
another form, making it dependent on EWtTv in the accu8ati*lt|
The genius of the English requires the noun to be first «ki
pressed, and then again repeated. "The baseness of the oth
Greeks, whether it be fit to call it baseness or ignoranM<
both these."

A noun is often understood, being omitted for the

thewk«4

^brevity, when the nature or termiaation of the adjective qnnlify-
ling it, or the drift of the sentence makes it evident what noun
is intended. In the same manner the termination of the article
inot unfrequentiy supplies the absence of its adjunct, without
maty prejudice to the sense; as in Herod, 6, 15. eis njv iavruiv,
tmeaning evidently yi» — ^ ■^li.eTtpa scil. yij. So also in Plato
Jhil, p. 2. xara ye njv efii)», that is, EjK.jjj' yrtui(».ijy, ' according
Uo my opinion.' Thus too ij ctapnv, ' the morrowj' supposes ^
i^uspaavpm, 'the day of tomorrow;' while the context makes
i|t dear that in such examples as the following, oSos is intended:
;,£8chin. Socr, 3. 3. (u; ^s Sarrov njv irafa feix"! "t^'i'-ev, 'as
isoon as we had gone the way along the wall :" so fr^y f''.x>r^>,
'xvlien fully written, is xara njv T-a^uTj)" oJof. In the same
manner ihr is obviously implied in njy suflaav, Herod. 3. 134.
' the right road — straight on.'

" The noun also is omitted when the speaker thinks proper
to avoid mentioning it from any cause," Plat. Epist iv. p. 85,
a,va^iJ/*n]irjteiv St ofwu; M -^jJ-di aufovs ort VptKnjxti wXsoi', ij
■sa-iSttiy, Tiiv aXXuiy atflpwsoiv Siaifspsiy, nHf airSa Sijkw. Plato
in Ibis place seems to have been entirely mistaken by our
learned grammarian ; for the writer does not mean certain
persons whom he had some reason for not mentioning, but all
other men who came within the knowledge of the person ad-
dressed ; and the article therefore is in the sense of the rela-
tive, "Yet it behoves us ourselves to bear in mind, that it is
our duty to excel more than children other men whom you may
chance to know."

" To this class belong the phrases, fta ro», fio. njv, vij toy,
when the name of the deity, by whom the person swears, is
omitted through reverence." Plat.Gorg.p.44. Arist. Ran. 1374.
DiviKioN 282. — The substance of this division is, that the
neuter article is found prefixed to adverbs and prepositions,
with their cases, to mark portions of time and place ; as ro
Votq^l, 'the time before, hitherto;* rt ■ep'xTui, 'forward;' t«
iraXai, 'of old;' rorpiv, 'formeriy;' Toourtjiai, 'immediately;'
•ra»uy, 'nowj' ra (xa^ira (maxime), 'mostly;' to. ■sa.fi.va.y,
' entirely."

72

" [d the Bune manner the article la put with adverbs hi A
genitive:" turoi ■jra^a.x^yjfi.a., 'on the instant.' Also within

infinitive following : to *uy sivai, ' the passing now ooiv ' n I

njfbfpav fivai, ' the passing to-day — to-day.'

The following are instances with j>repoaitions : vt a
(Ajax 1376.)' henceforth — for the future;' mrpanurau
this, hitherto,' Thuc. 2. 15 ; ra tm rourm, or tw evi n%l
* hereupon,' Plat. Gorg.p. i42 ; ro xafl' iauroy, (Xen.AnakC
6. 23.) ' individually— by himself.'

The article is redundant in such passages as the foUomngiit 1
Ji icarj!in[» aXXijy K^TT)!', Plat. Min. p. 139, for xaTahtf,
&c. ; -to fisv h (ppay^nms n xai ^Jjcijf vspt, Phil. p. 307. TV
fallowing are elliptical : Toe*' iu.t,ioxKa,fa. jitpag ra ev'tiu,'m
far as lies in me ;' rs firi « or rouiri re, ' what depends on jv>;
Eur. Hee. 518 ; ro ei; *f«, 'what concerns me," Eur. Iphig.T.
697 ; Saf«i « rouJ' y avSpOf, Soph. (Ed. C. 649, 'be confi-
dent as far as concerns this man.'

" The article is also put adverbially in the neuter w
jectives and substantives j" as to vpurtitv and va vpui
^tj' mtoku oi uif TO iro?.u, 'for the mostpartj' toAi
'for the future.' The article and its adjunct are
bined into one word, ravapts, roffaXai, vo^fiiv ; ro ,

Division 283. — " As the article is used in the neut«r«
adverbs and prepositions as a parenthetic expression, so it
quently occurs also with participles or with its noun i
genitive as a shorter parenthesis. The most common phn
of this kind is to Aeyo/isvov, ' that which is said — the sa '
for tainrep Xsytrm. Plato Sophist, p. 291- <rx''^V "■•". ft
njv irpOCiiiJ.ia.y Xiyop-iyor, iys roiauTOf ay mfe lAoi i
' hardly, that which is said according to the proverb, su
one as this would never capture a city,' — we should say,
cording to the proverb — to use a proverbial saying.' Of tUt 1
sort are the following words of Sophocles, (Ed. C. 140. fuvfyKf I
apui TO fa.TiJ^!ifi.£yiy, ' 1 see with my voice as the saying i^jf I
where Kara, is understood— xktk to paTi^ofuvey, 'accordia^H I
what is said,' or ' according to the proverb.'

The phrase ro ToiJ Ma(i.w9'jv<>K>u is somewhat different^ h

73

V ^ijfui, ' according to the saying of the nunedian.'
(See Plat. Alcibiad, toI. v. 41.) Precisely similar is the expres-
sion re nS 'Ofiijjsou already considered, another instance of
Tphich occurs in the Thecet. p. 138. To this may be added ro
TWv ffw^ovTiw', ' the saying of those who joke, — as one says in
joke.' Rep. iv. p. 332.

"This kind of phrase," says the grammarian, "seems to have
arisen from the idiom in ^ 273, and the article appears to stand
in the accusative as if in apposition to the whole proposition."
This may be admitted in cases where the governing verb in the
sentence ia transitive ; as in this instance, xcu ev, ro nor
Sjtofl"'^. Unreuiy vept Xeysif, Lach. vol, v. p. 18?; where ra
t£v Xxtiiiar is the object of ^sy^is, ' you tell the case of the
Scythian horsemen,' or ' you tell of horsemen, what Is said of
the Scythian ;' where, if this be right, ro is equivalent to S, and
ia the nominative to XeycTAs. The simplest way of accounting
for it is to suppose the sub intellection of xara ; or ro may be
taken for the relative 3—3 eri A£yo(xsvo», ' which b that
said.' This is evidently the way to account for n KepaAaioc,
in Plato Theset. p. 151, ' what is summary, summarily, princi-
pally :' or TO ^eyiro*, Thuc. 2. 65, ' what is the greatest ;' ra
3* «<r^aTov, Plat. Epist. 8.p. 160, 'what is the lowest or worst j'
ra Ss ifwnuiv o-%srXjwraroy, ' the most wretched of all.' Isocrat.
Pac. 170.

Division 28'1. — " The neuterof the article is often put abso-
lutely with the genitive of a substantive, and in that case sig-
nifies; First, every thing Co which the substantive which is put in
the genitive, refers." Thus, in the Phcenisse of Euripides, v.4 14,
Jooaste nsks her son whether the triends and guests of his
father had not obliged him ? To which he replies, fu g-^airrE,
to. ^lAiuK f oufev, ^c rif fuffru^ij, ' bless you, the concern of
friends is nothing if one be unfortunate,' — va. ^>\m for ra
wpeuy}M.ta. pKuy, and this a poetic circumlocution for ^i\ai —
' friends have little concern for one who is in adversitj-.' So in
line 393. ra, nav ^eier is but an ellipsis for re. itfa.y^3.t& tajy
^tuiv, ' the transactions, the visitations of the gods ;' and in
yp. 78, ra tm ^hvtwv, ' the concerns or rites of the dead —

^o^. 78, ra. -rm i

I

74

the honoan or the dead.' Hence the riprtMuna ra tz* AJi)-
raiiai fptn'r, (Herod. 8.7 j.) 'tofsTOOT the abin of the Alhe-
nians — lo faTOur tbdi interests — to be on their side.'

Secondly, " it Bignifies paiticnlarly that which any one has
done, is wont to do, or has befallen him ; in which case the anicle
ifl in the singular." This circuitous and m5^tical iletcriptioo
might have been spared, if the grammanan had observed that
verbs intransitive ofUn have after them the corresponding abi-
tiact noun ) and that the place of this abstract is not unfre-
ijnently supplied by the neuter article. Thus, uurgi Saxw /ui n
rau ItmiiM iTTou ■KfVitrUtxt, Plat. Parmen. p. 93, that is, n J
TaOijfj.o, vezoyicyai, ' to hare suffered the suffering— to hue I
experienced the fate of the horse of Ibycus.' 'OfLoifiepM !
itxtif fv n KOI Siftfua; iEtitvai Vi rwt ■wmloni, fi,^ tof aAi}9M(
i avifLis "rijy ^vxt' sx.tMyaSo'a.r ex. tto roi^rsf ttafvea,
I%edoD. p.l76, that is, JEticvtu fatiTfiM. 'Yet you and Simmiss
■eem to me to fear the fear — entertain the fear of chOdren,
lest the wind should really blow away and disperae their souls,
when coming out of iheir bodiea."

Division 28j. — "This is a periphrasis merely of the i
stantive in the genitive case ; as to. t^s afrftji, Thuc. 2. 60, «
Ts ofyTfi Plut. Brut. 21, fonj ofyij," Thb remark should han
been above, and then the preceding Division and this she
have been comprehended under one. It should however be
remembered, that this species of circumlocution is not with
its effect; and the writer has adopted it for the purpose of
leaviog a fuller irapreiisioQ on the render : and in many in-
stances the sense is not the same. Tims in the above exaiD]dc
from Thucydides, xcci Vfiiirisy(i>fit^iu }i.ai ret rff "^y^S ffuur ■(
tfi.i yiyevjjToi, ' the effects of your anger towards me \
happened to me expecting them,' — ' the measures dictated I9
your resentment towards me have not overtaken me unawares.'
A translator might doubtless without much prejudice to the
sense say, ' your anger has not overtaken me unawares :'
but this does not come up to the full import of the original.
So also Ta -r^t ifivupiat mean, not simply 'skill or expe-
rience,' but the effects or fruits of their skill. Thuc, 7. 49.

J ^ I

^e example In Euripides, <Iphig. A. 33.) Tx 3iwv iurw
M»oftir«i, purely periphrastical — ' the decrees of the gods have
been 8o enacted'— tk vofttirftaraj or ^sa-^aTO., which in regard

!to the sense is the same as if he had written si ^sm 6iitio ^ou-

Ik Instances however of circumlocution often occur, especially
|l in the poetij, which have no other object but orniiment or
novelty, 01" emphasis, with little or no voriation in sense
firom the simple language. " The Greeks add to this peri-
ptirafiiB the adjective and participle, in the gender of the word
"Which is the subject of the periphrasis, and in the case of the
' article." That is, the adjective or participle succeeding the
periphrasis agrees with the case, gender, and number of the
noun depending on the neuter article, aa if it had been simply
.used without it. Thus, Philoctetes 497. ra rwv Stawtuir rivjiw
' ar afutcpw ii.epti Toi9Vfi,eyti rar oixai' ijvciyar j-oAoy — ra riuv
StetxavuiY, for it Smxdi/oi, which is implied in voiou/^voi — ' the
; messengers holding my request (a message sent to hLs father)
' in little regard, pursue their voyage homeward' (without fidfilU
ing it). Thus /*s* (Tiafpoya-i tfou xoi 9 ffafoi^iai;ofii»oj enitr^u
Xvfis (Karors, ts jiijiey ayay irapaiuXsvOfievas , w weiSovrai, «
St Twv a^paviav Te xai CSpirn'v fn^Kpi f/.ayias ij ir^aipa ^Jon)
xaTtxovaa. ■ntpiZoYiTws airepya^erai. Plat. Phileb. 279. 'The
proverbial saying ever restrains the temperate who obey its
dictate, to pursue 'nothing too much;' but excessive plensure
taking possession of the unwise and the wanton, even to mad*
ncss renders them notorious' — to riHy a^pofui* re xai vSpirojy
for rouf atppivas rt koi ufpij-aj, which form is supposed in
■Sipit^rtu;.

" In the same manner the possessive pronouns are put with
thearticle instead of the personal pronoun : e. g. ra aii-eripot for
u{uiSt Herod. 8. NO; rd^ici, for ryui, Eurip. Androm. 235 ; to
eju-w for «(*». Plat. Thest. p. BO."

"Both senses are united, Eurip. Troad. 27. vowi ra. rwv
5tuKi, fiufe riiittfiai ilE\fi, v/here ra ruiy ^eojy joined with yo^iT
lignifies, 'the reverence towards Ihe gods," but with ou TifiaffSai
are instead of ci de^i."

^*n are instead c

b3

I

70

>N 286.~-In this and the following sectioM, «f
grammttrifin treats of the uriicle in the sense of a pronoiDi,l»
'•riiich he touched in the beginning. " The Homeric idicB,'
■ayi he, " ia preserved with what is called the Allic iJioB
chiefly in Herodotus, and other Ionic nnd Doric writeis, lA
use of the article is found also in the Attic writers, ttat^
more rBrely. Soph. Elect, 49. o yap nsyiras avrtis ■evwtm
Sopu^eyun." 1 have alrendy remarked that the article in insHBB
like this is an abbreviation; imttTcvs, just preceding it, trijtl
be repeated, but is omitted for thesnke of brevity, asnolincn-
sistent with perspicuity — 6 yap teuyoTtuf, ' the man PhRnoMi
was to the home of Atreus, a guest the greatest among therf-
avn's, that is, e» auToTj ^m^tuiri. In Plalo Epint. vii. p. IIB.
TO is for Tmirt — t» f (i;^£ J^ ttuis, ' how this was.'

To this belongs the expreasion Vfii vnZ for lepa rourau ypm*.
'before this time — heretofore j" tov >cai -rw, 'this and ihit
man.' Plat, de Leg. vi. p. 31 6.— ro xoj to, * this thing and ttal
thing.' Dem. pro Cor. p. 308.

Division 287. — The Attica use the article for the pronoM
before the relatives Ij, irvts, Iws. Thus in Homer, II. f. 171.
^/ t^a.y,iiv at ifipi epLjj.syeii aX\ai¥, ran avani Aiixii;>> tpiSatJM
yefieraaun, 'Assuredly I thought thee in mind above othto
as many of whom as inhabit the rich-soiled Lycia,' It istnt
that the article is used as a pronoun relative or demon stialirt
in connexion with is, ocsas, oios, but its use ia independent of
these, and is neither affected nor determined by them. Hit
article is capable of such and such senses, and the content
alone suggests the true signification which it must have in that
connexion. Thus, Od. ^. 1 18. sirio-rairSai nepSia, o'a c\rsai
rir axouofiev ouSe ■saXaiwy, raoiv, a'l itapof ^irav sunKonofuhi
kynxMi. Here ratuv has no adjunct, and cannot have the
strict sense of the article ; but supposes iUTtKi-naiuSoiy Aj(tum,
which succeeding a] are attracted by it to be the same cast
with itself, * She (Penelope) knows those winning devices,
such as we hear no one of the ancients — those well-curled
Grecian women who were before" — ' well-curled Grecian
women," that is noble, or such as from their birth and ri

ftSi Bttenttan to their liair, as an ornament or badge of ^e-

dom and independence. Dem, in Androt. p. (il.'i. irui^tty ofuy
tWf mtursus, w ntSpEi ASijutiiji, ir^omjxii xai (lAtTiit touj, olir-
fi^ omj, 'It behoves you, men of Athena, to protect those
of this character, and to hate such an one as this.'

DiTiBiDN 2S9. — "The use of the article for the pronoun
takes place in a diviaion, where e }i.ty, i it ; il jisy, nl ic, are
Opposed to each other, ' the one, the other,' hi, iUi .■ e. g. ol
fiw eKij^uffo-Sf, Toi S' ijyei/JOyro f*xX' wxet, II. ^, 52. et j^iy, ' the
/oraier,' meaning the heralds ; Tn ie (for ei it) ' the latter,'
meaning the people — 'those (illi) proclaimed — these (ftj)
<]iiick]y assembled.' The indefinite tjj is used, if o ^tv, a Se
io not refer to determinate nouns which have gone before.
Thus in Euripides, Helen 1617^ ofi.tyrii, 'someone' — i St,
that is, i Se fi(, ' some other.' Diogenes, in hades, laughs at
Hercules for supposing that his aoul was in heaven, while his
shade was among the dead, and his body reduced to ashe^i on
mount (Ele, thus making himself three ; ci yap a i^tv ris ev
wpayio, i le tiaf ifiiv, ffv to eiJw^ov, ro !s o-iufia £v Oitjj jiaxj
^Ji5 yiyivi]rai, rpitt 5ij rauTa yiyerai, Luc. D. Mort. i6. 5.
* For if a certain part be in heaven, another a mere phantom
be with us, while thy body has already became ashes on CBte,
these things surely are three.'

Our grammarian observes thatj if the word thus divided be
a noun singular, i ^ey and i Ss are translated ' the one and
the other.' Thus Plate. Phtedr. p. 339. tou peuftaroj exeinu
Vt^yi, VohK-^i ^Ep<i^tvT\ vpis fW Epar'^y — -^ ^uiy eij auTw siu, ^
it oroit-eFoof^iyiv, e^ui amppEi, ' the fountain of that stream
nbundaotly flowing to the lover enters one part into him, and
from him being filled, the other part flows abroad.' Demosth.
in Pheen. p. 1 040. 25, i Sa aiti-Kpiya,-ti, hi, i ftey vsTcpafAEvis eiij
TW rirau, a Se eylay amttttfityai, 'he answered that the corn
in part was sold, and part of it lay stored within.'

These are e^amplea of the same thing divided into parts, and
the article is used to mark the partition. This use of it is more
frequently in the neuter gender, ro fi£», ro Se ; or in the plural.

ys fw K^txaTn, fee te Kapltulin 'j^ptunreu, ' they ute "an,
partly Cretan, partly Cnrian.' Here ra. is elliptical, and swidi
ioTTiva. — xarara fiiy irfay^ara, 'in some things they im
Cretan laws, in others Cftriati." Xen.Anab.4. I. 15. xairwn^

xai avairaueju.«*0[, ' thus they marched that day, partly »■»
what fighting, partly also resting.' Here again rx fuw ntW
xata riva ^uipia, ' in some places,' and n is adverbial 'V I
certain de^e, somewhat.' He observes that Herodototnl
others for ra fi^v, ra is, use rouro fs^v, rwrt St. (See boc
p. 44. D. Demosth. Sept. p. 4?4. 25.)

When a preposition governs the article, the paiticlef
and it succeed the preposition not the article ; ev fin afxi^k
avii.fwytuiiiy, I* ie toT<( eu, Isocrat. Areopag. p. 141.
things we agree, in others not."

One of these is frequently omitted. II. ^. 157. rii ^eLttftf
ipaftenfy, ^Ea-ywy, i !' oirirfls iiumaiy. Here ftuyanr is for 1 fM
tpsoyuiy, ' they ran by this way, the one flying, the other
ing.' The omission is natural in poetry, where the writer h>
no leisure for observing minute distinctions ; and where ibl
content supplies the defect. See also Eurip. Iphig. T. ISW,
Plat. Phil. p. 260.

" "Oi ftCT is used also in antithesis ;" euiSauf — £i re s-OYtfrrV
aoiSijy, ii /X£y a.p' eiprivtay, eitt Se reia^iyri) yyvamEf . HereJl
fuy is superfluous as to the sense and syntax, but t
duced to mark the apposition between the bards nnd thewomM
in the next clause — ol jitv aaiJoi — y^yaoiis Je, ' they placed If
them the bards, who caused to resound the mournful diigc
' they, I say, thus began, while the women sighed respondvelf.'
Either the grammarian has expressed himself very imperfecdf,
or the above is another instance of his attempts to conccil
under technical terras the want of clear views.

It is well known even to Tyros, that /hev and Se are coin-
monly used antithetically, to mark one clause in opposition tt
the other. Tliis is their force in the example which our aulhlF
-next subjoins, Od. x. 1 15. iaaiiy.eviif ■Ko.rBp err^Xov tyi fpu^
fi ffsBw lAlwr, itrTjnpviy rm p« <rxsSainy, xara. Jw^mij

n

•M^fiijv f ttui'Sf e%9). Here fiMjr^^Wf fiev oiuJccnv and ri/iijv
if eturdf are antithetical. * Having his brave ftither in the
mind's eye, if having come from any where he should cause
from his house the dispersion of the suitors, and acquire re-
nown for himself.'

1 " Instead of one or bothj the name itself ia also put." See
BHerod. 5. 91. Plat. Charm, p. 122. Thuc. 1. 48. The passage
<ftom II. u. 721, adduced to illustrate the preceding head, is in
Ireality an illustration of this. II. tt. 317. — HsrosiSai, 6 [iev Av-
■«AoXOf— ©paf"fiijSijjS',line32l. See also Thuc. 7. 86; 2.29.
TUt. Gorg. p. 117.

• "'Oi fiEv — Sb are not always opposed to each other, but
finstead of one of them another word is often put," e. g. Thuc.
'7- 73. Kai 61 |Uev timrTes (wr^Xflov, kki oi axiuffavrtf Stjf/ya-
Aav Totf fparijytiif Tujy ASijratuiy, * They on speaking thus dei-
parted, and they who heard announced it to the Athenian ge-
nerals.' The antithesb here lies between oi /hev EWovTEf and
xai 01 axoutrayrEf, where the historian uses xoj ot instead of oi
9t, and the remark proper for the grammarian to make was, that
St may sometimes be omitted in the antithetic clause without
any detriment to the sense. An omission of the ^n is stilt
more common.

The first division h ^iv maybe followed, in the room of ^ It,
by aXiof Je, See Plato Leg. II. p. 69. or Rep. II. p. 231, In
the plural oi y.cw for evwi 'jome,' is followed by aXAoi Is or
ktt^ii ffi ' others.' The relative o; is used not uncommonly
to express the like antithesis — ou'f, 'some men,' ou; ^e, ' others.'
Dem. pro Cor. p. 248. woAsif 'EXAsjyiJaj a% ficv avcupiZv, eij «j
it rovs ipvyaSas Ka-rayaiy, ' demolishing some of the Grecian
aties, restoring the fugitives to others of them.'

Division 239. — " The article also seems to be used as a pro-
noun in the phrase ev roTf, which mostly stand with superla-
tives ; in modern writers also with a-foSpa, [i,aKa, itavu, the su-
perlative being in the masculine, feminine, or neuter, and which
with superlatives answers to the Latin omnium, longe, mullQ,
The superlative does not stand in the case of taii, but in the
case of the noun to which it properly belongs,"

Among the vast heaps of jnrgon which swall this
Grammar, nothing shows more clearly than this division, the
natural inaptitude of the aathor to analyse and trace ccrtaii
forms of speech to their elements in the very language on whidi
he has engaged to write, and thus to benefit his readen by
placing the analysis before them in plain and direct ternM, 1
will explain a few of the examples qnoted by him, to whidii
shall subjoin his view of them.

1 observe then, ey rtiis is an abbreviation or an ellipsis
supposes some word or circumstance understood ; that
cumstance is to be supplied, the conte^it renderinj^
what it is. Thus Thuc. 1. 6. tv ro'i Trpiaroi Se Aflijvarflifoci
Si^pw xarsSf/ro. In the preceding sentence the historian
that all the Hellenes or Greeks had the common practicelf'
going about with arms for their defence ; in this he adds, " Of
these or amongthese the Athenians were the first who laid asd(
the use of iron weapons," Supply then 'E^X)j«f, and we hxa
ey m'ti EAA^o'i, an equivalent to iTftoroi nun 'E>,>,r,yiur.

Tlius again, Thuc. 3. 1. 7. t* rois irXerrai it) *^£s «'/*' "•''^'"S
syipyoi KuKXii ryeviyfa. Here nothing precedes in the contest
to which ey ro7f can refer ; we must therefore look for the n»t
of the abbreviation in the sentence itself. And as the sole ub-
ject of the writer is to place before his readers the extraordinaiy
things done at this crisis by the Athenians, it is obvious that
the verb eysvoiiTs used by him on this occasion is the wori
which supplies the ellipsis — iv ro'i, i. e. ev roij yeiofievwi,
' Among the things now done, the greatest number of ships
(they ever had) were made — and made effective by their beauty
and complete equipment.'

Moreover, Thuc. 3. 81. iurais wft^j r*9"if v^w^tapijaf, wu
£jo$£ jiaXAof, Sion sy -roi; vpuiTij lyevero. In eSo^e ia implied
aurttsi and to this, vinderstoo<it, ty toT; refers ; thus, ' the com-
motion proceeded in a savage manner, and it appeared the
more — appeared (o them the more savage — because it was the
first among them.'

In section 7 1 of the same historian, we further read, (Leyts-tr
Se xKi cr rols tpturoy iKaxuias r» fftx.reuii.a, tm tArfiaivn j

^^

B nXi;^fcap5o Ayl'if . The supply of the ellipsis is sugg^ested
by MoxioffE — »y Tiiis xaxuiveLn — ' among the things which af-
flicted the Athenian army, the greatest and the first was the
capture of the Plemroyrium.' Thuc. 7. 7J . e* roTj x'^^^""'^'"^''-
A^yov — *y roTf yjiKtitois ^OLXeitairstta. it^yw, eqnivalent to rwv
^a,\egiiniy_a.h£ituiTa,ri>., 'theyleadthemost wretched of wretched
lives.' Anjf £Y Toif (i,a\is-a trafTins toJ 3r,fLiv — n ran ouvw
evflWTioif, ' among those adverse to the people, he was the
most so.' Plat. Criton, p. 101. Asyavres if sc toij fiaXij-a
ASijvaian' syw aiTOif uiftsXoy^^xiuf rvyxctvui raurr^y tjjv iji^Xo-
yw* — £v To7f Afli5»aiojy (*aAircc &(*oXoyou(ri, 'among such of
■the Athenians as most agree with these, I profess that agree-
ment.' Plato Epist. X. p. 166. axovui ^iiayo; sy -nTg fiaXirci
kta.f^y e'vKi <re~ tr Taif hraipaii, ' 1 hear that among the as-
aociatea of Dion, you are the chief.' Herod. 7. 137. toSto pM
«y rolri StioraToy yctiyerai yiyveffBai — tv toij Seieij — 'among
■extraordinary things, this appears to me the most extra-
ordinary,'

It is but fair to quote what o«r author says in reference tg
these e^iamples ; and to do him justice he appears, after having
groped long in the dark, to have stumbled at length on some-
thing like the truth. "Frorothesecombinationsit isclear; l.thal
the formula tv n7f stands by itself, and is not to be joined with
the superlative following, since the combination ly ro"; npcarot,
tt Ttif vXiiTut, is at variance with this explanation ; 2. that td's
is neuter, because the superlative in the feminine ts put with
it. Hardly any explanation of this phrase can be given to suit
all passages, since the idiom of the language, apparently, has
given to it by degrees a greater extension than it originally
had. Thus originally in » roT; it appears either to be necessary
to supply the adjective or participle in the same case, and-in
the neuter, as (Plato Cratyl. p. 320.) o h Jokei iv raif y-eytg-ats
fMytrt* t1*ai, or that e» ro7f should be the same with «*
Towrsif, when it seems to be used a.fter spveral things previously
mentioned, the most important of which is to be thus distin-
guished. — This explanation suits particularly the passage in
Plato Euthyd, p. 71, and Herod vii, 139, In time it became

A

i

S2

merely a phrase to strengthen the superlative. A dHferent
origin, though it has a similar signification, may be assigned
to oftdia -rtis inyirnli (Herod. 3. 8.) — o-ECovrai i' AfaZm mf i(
ayOpMtuir of/^aiK To7s (/.aXira." Here ey«ia is adverbial j ayipw-
Ku/r depends on ftaMra, and ev rail supposes ffeCt^wyeif.
' the Atuba reverence oaths (iririf for mriat) like those who
most reverence them — they are amongst those who pay the
greatest reverence to oaths.' Our learned grammarian hat
here hit upon the true solution ; and if he had been at all
habituated to an analysis ol the Greek innguage, he would
have discovered a general principle which solves every passage
of the kind with the greatest ease and simplicity, the ellipsis
which Ev Tciif implies, being suggested by one of the leading
words in the same clause, I will subjoin one example more,
Demosth. Epist. p. 1473. 12. copija-fTe fte tumav Tiij tAijSh rijl
ojiSTtptfi nlf fAaXira i^oiwj — toij fiscXif* evywiri, depending
on i^oiiuf, ' you will find nne well-disposed to your people,
like or equal to those who are most so — you will find me u
well disposed to your community, as your greatest friends."

" The oblique cases of the article are olten used absolid^
as demonstrative pronouns." ThusT^I 'for this reason," idarto,
(see II. |3. 250, and Plato Theaet. p. 129.)— 'then — in tint
case,- (11. J. 290, a. 5 1, v. 723, -J/. 527.)

Thus also in the feminine, t^ ' here or there," for which r^Ji
is put elsewhere. This supposes iSii) understood — ' in thii
way or that way.' This Ls the sense in Hesiod, e. 206. tj o'
cii, ^ c' av eyia Vfp 9.ym — ' you go in the way in which 1
would have led you.' Qnle yaX-M; xai o-iJijpof nt rijf avr^
o'oAew;, sufE raXAo. Jus ij rpia. fui Vihei, a\Xa, ro fter rji^'n
ie iy, Xen. B. A. 2. 12. — 'Nor are brass and iron from- the
selfsame state j nor has one state more than two or three
things differing in kind ; but one state has one, another has
another." Here t^ supposes iroXei borrowed from the pre-
ceding clause ; and the grammarian is not correct in classing
its use here with the other instances, where it occars in an ad-
verbial form.

In the following passage (Eur, Orest, 350.) its use is dis-

Cributive, iy (wv — r^ St—' on the one hand — on the other,'
rather 'partly one — partly another,' to Sw/Mt rf fify o-' ;jJ((Uf
wpovifpxiiJ.ai TptidiEv iXSwY, rjj S" iSuiv Karartyto, 'having
come from Troy, 1 behold thee, houae, in one respect with
pleasure, in another seeing thee I lament.' Our author
might have ndded the following words of Jocaste in (Ed. T.
S57. tort 0"X' P''"'T"^f y <"' of^E f?5' sy" (Sxcifiaif*! ax ouvsx',
pore -rf, av urcpcr, ' So that as to myself, I would not for the
future look to the oracle neither in Mis way, nor in that may —
regard it in no respect as worthy of notice.' The neuter to
is used in Homer and in him alone for iia. to, and this for lia.
■rwroj • on this account, for this reason.' See II. p. 404.

Division 291. — The article is veiy often put in Ionic and
Doric writers for the pronoun relative o; ^, o. Thus ra /*b»
means a jt-sv in II. a. 125, while in the next clause it stands
for vaSroL. Herod. 5,37. Apira.Yop''iS »«' ^y Tp oA^iij luniji
twova (Ionic contraction of Tsauro) rouro ettoiee, tws ^ev
s^stiMiyun rwy Tvpn-y^uiy, twf V E^afe Tufaymuf — TooTovi c^t-
hica, 'Aristagores did the very sanne thing in the rest of Ionia,
expelling the usurpers ; but what usurpers he captured — those
he delivered up to their several states,' — nus Ss, for eu; Si.

"Of Attic writers, the tragedians only use it in this sense,
not the comic and prose authors." jEachyl. Agam. 535. axK
tv in anrairao-flE — Tfiiiui -KataTiuvl'M/Ta. tm Sixr^ipufiM Aiof
(tOKiKKTi, Tj xartpyecrat ireSay, ' receive him graciously after
having dug up Troy with the spade of justice-bearing Jupiter,
with which he overturned it* soil," — tj for j, quo sarcuto.
CEd. T. 1379, J«iftonu>' ayx>^fi.ai'^ rm i va.tirXTjfi,wv eyui —
awerffjir' E/ABirsr, ' the statues of the gods, of which 1 all-
miserable deprived myself,' — rm for ujv. Eur. Iphig, A. 1351.
^svyai nv A;^jXX£a tw iJeTii aio";tunfia» — reii for si', ' 1 shun
AchilleB whom I am ashamed to se«.'

k

The force of the ArticU explained as applied in th Vm

,^ Testament.

The Second Part of Dr. Middleton's volume is occupied ■
eitplaining the omission, or illustrating the propriety of A
Article, when used in various passages of the Christian S
tures. This is worthy of a scholar and a divine : and it ms|
be allowed, even by those who differ from him, that his n
are learned, libeml and ingenious ; though it be evident thK^ I
if he proceeded on an erroneous notion of the article, he a
throve but little light on the subjects which come under hit J
consideration.

The use of the article in various parts of the New TeOti I
ment has been a source of much doubt and controversy anUNtt fl
learned men ; and the hope that I may throw much lighl n W
this controversy, if not entirely decide it, is my motive &■ I
taking up the quention ; and if I be not disappointed, I si ~
exhibit to the theological student many passages of the'Sciqi-' I
tures in a point of view altogether new and interesting. Ik 1
order to accomplish this purpose, I have to premise two thiott'
which 1 wish to impress on my readers : Fitst, that the artidi
not only defines one individual or individuals in opposition H
others of the same class, but taking the kinds or classes t^ I
things as themselves individuals, marks these in contriulK- f
tinction to each other : Secondly, that the writings of the Nefl
Testament beyond any other writings grow out of local, a
peculiar circumstances, and must therefore derive their in't«
pretation from a full knowledge of those cireumstanceB; thi
they are drawn up with studied brevity ; that in conseque

1^^^^

brevity and locality which thus characterize them, more
-ii meant than is expressed ; that what is thus expressed points
..to something analogous lurking in the context, founded on
iHBOciations familiar to our Lord and his Apostles, and some-
^Smes more generally to the whole Jewish nation ; and finally^
lliat the article is an index pointing to this latent sense, and
||b«8 serving to bring it to light. This is all the previous in-
miction necessary to qualify the render for following me, and
I will endeavour to conduct him from beginning to enii with all
{KMsible satisfaction and brevity. I beg, however, to remind him,
Aat it is not my intention to point out every instance in which
ihe article is obscure or uncertain in the N. T. : I. purpose to
■elect only the most striking ; and so many of these as will be
Vnffident to illustrate its force, and enable the reader in every
Anibtful place to discover its appropriate signification.

Matthew.
Chap. III. 9. S-jmra.1 o Bea; ex twv AiOwv vovTwr eystpeu
fcxva r£ ktpa.a.fi.. — ©eoj and not 0£Oj, ' God,' in opposition
to man : ' though this be imposeible to man, the Almighty can
raise even from these stones children to Abraham.' John
painted, it is probable, to those present, whom the Pharisees
branded aa publicans and sinners. The metaphor is founded
on the analogy between ien, 'a son,' 'child,' and aben, 'a
stone,' in the vernacular tongue used by the Baptist.

12. xai ava.^£i -rov (rirov aurw eij ■rt]* airoSijKijv. — rr^v airo-
flijit^, 'the granary o/ /iim,' which coalescing with the per-
sonal pronoun auras implied in trvta^ei, may be rendered ' hin
granary.'

13. eVi Tdy Ii)^Jai':jv,—To>' defining irorafioc, or a substitute
for it, — ' to the Jordan.'

1 7. ourof Eri' uiof ftiu D ayaw^TOf . The people present
expected John himself to be the Messiah. Against this ex-
pectation the clause i uio; is levelled : as if the heavenly voice
had said, 'John is only my servant, the forerunner of the
Messiah. This (pointing to Jeaua) is the Messiah, who sus-
tEuns a character and title as superior to him, as an only son

Mid heir of a fuaily bean to one of the domeatlca'. — " Thit id;
son — my beloved son — in whom I am well pleased."

Chap. IV. 1. Tsri o I^o-owj avry^^Oij eis Tijf epY,u,iv, Set, "N
into a desert," says Michuelis, " but into Ihe desert } a piia
which must suggest to tlie mind of the reader the Great Oa{
of Arabia, in which the Israelites wandered so many years, mj,
wliich Mount Sinai is situated, or on the way to that mounta
Hee Exod. xxxiv. 28. 1 Kings xi%. 8. Tlie instant we imagij
ourselves in this Desert, the whole history, including bo^ i
arlitices of Satan and the answer of our Lord, receives exa
ordinary light." I confess 1 do not see this extraordinary ligb
but see clearly from the language, that the evangelist did a
mean any particular desert : — for eij Tijv Efijitcv means fiiT
5/uifay S/cifiOy, or without the article eij %iiipa.v E^r^fiov, 'a pll
that was solitary' or not frequented by men, and therefoK
for meditation. Jesus retired to a lonely, unfrequented, ip
in order to consider in which way he could carry into efe
most conformably to the will of God, the great i
now imparted to bim. It wrs of no consequence what d
retired spot might be', provided its retreat rendered it fit J!
the purpose : and this is all that the sacred writer means wll
he says that Jesus was led to a place thit was uolitory. 4

.3. El ui«f fTroij Geou, — r&i« <BiiM, and not ®sw, as re&niltf
to the declaration of God proclaiming Jesus to be his son it
heaven — 'If thou art really the son of God, as tbou b
recently been announced by God himself.' The reference-.
lost, if, wilh Campbell and Wakefield, we translate tUe claut
■' a son of God."

4. a^Y. ««' airu; fwi-tu (ijffET-ai 5 aviptavm. The article^
here wanting in the common editions ; but Griesbach has pi
perly restored il, so as to be uniform with the parallel ytaai
in Luke : and it marks a,vipuinas, not as oae of the kind) \
yet the whole kind, as Winer supposes j but iitan as a xatia
being, having a soul, as well as a body, to feed. ' As an b
(if immortality, man cannot live on bread alone, but an e

word coming from the mouth of God.'

f etflewj aipivrts to. j'lxTua,— ' the nets belongin

E

w

tofftem — rteirnets;' — so in ver. 21. svVaiitXim,* in the ship
inoicn to be Iheks — (fteir ship."

24. Kai iTiiotnjVEyxav ciuTaj ■savrai "Tivs Ka>i,ias i^atra;, 'They
broug-ht to him all tliose diseased, such as were disensed:' the
article and the participle equivalent to a noun — ' all invalids.'
Observe nvs is to be repeated in the next clause — Touf te mi-
mXous yaaoii Jtai jSairaetif cuvE^flwEvouf, &c. ' and such as were
oppressed with divers disorders and torments,' &c.

Chap. V. 1. oLvetii t\s to opsf, — not to any particular moun-
tain, but that which was a mount or a hill. ' He ascended to
an eminence.' Jesus in bepnning to announce the Gospel, led
his hearers to nn elevated spot, as an emblem of that moral
eminence to which he raised them as his disciples.

3. MaKStfJioi i'l irrw^" '^'? ifsufian" ' blessed are the poor —
such as are poor,' The higher classes of the Jews expecting
the Messiah's kingdom to be of a temporal nature, claimed the
privileges of it for themselves. Ag-ninst this arrogance, the lan-
gaage of Jesus Is levelled : ' The poor are blessed and happy,
because the kingdom of heaven belongs to them, as well as to
the rich, the great, and the mighty," Poverty, however, has no
Ueuing in itself, hut often insures this beatitude by its happy
e&ct on the mind ; by the virtues to which it inures the mind,
h ifl more favourable than wealth and power, — humility, sub-
mission to the divine will, contrition for sin, a sense of one's
Own unworthineas, nnd a dependence on God. This is what our
Lord meant when he added, ' such as are poor in the spirit' —
in a spiritual sense, in opposition to literal or external poverty,
Luke in the parallel passage, chap, vi, 20, uses oi ifruj^oi with-
out this limitation.

5. Maxapiai oi irpafi;- on etum xXijpovo/iijfl'ouD'i tt^ y^*.
* Blessed are the meek — such as are meek,' in opposition to the
angry, the haughty, and the revengeful. — ' Happy those who
bear opposition with meekness ; who receive provocation with-
OOt anger; who suffer injuries without retaliation, — for they
riiall inherit tlie land — the land of promise, of which the land
of Canaan is but the shadow. This land was taken possession
of and inherited by such weapons as the angry and selfish pia-

I, ' blessed are the pure,— ^
o those hypocrites who, whSi
are sttidious of external abb-

1 uiei &eiS xAijfljjffoyrai'-

■ions auppliedj but the celestial land to which I point, shullbe
possessed by those alone whose only armour is meekness, gn-
tie n ess, and peace.'

8, titau:Li>tai ii >^a6a.poi TTi xapii
clean in llie heart,' in opposition i
full of moral or Inward impurities,
tions and cleanlinesH,

9. Ma,>ta.fii>i ei sipTjnmtn' ovi i
' Happy those who love peace rather than war." The ptal
among the Jews looked up ta promotion and lofty titles, ;rii&
fighting under the standard of a triumphant prince, who by wn
and devastation should subjugate the notions of tlie earth, Ttk
is the pernicious error agiunst which the language of Jems ii
directed. ' Blessed are the peace-makers, for they shall be calM
sons of God. — This glorious title shall be conferred not on ihoK
who hope to distinguish themselves under the banners ofatiCf
torious deliverer, but on those who love peace rather than vu,
who study to preserve it among themselves and to promote il
among others.'

12. XaipETE xai ayaWtavif on i fiiffias n/MUf vo^f sy TtltH-
peudis' iuTw yap eiiwfay rtuf irpo^ijraf Teo( irpo Ofi-wy. — E» t^
ovpnyn'if, in opposition to iv r^ yj, ' though your only rewild
in this world will be persecution, you will be rewarded in hes*
ven, and there your reward will be great. But your rase is nol
singular, they thus persecuted the prophets before you." Hett
the last Touf i.s a connective in the sense of the demonatratin
pronoun — ' Tliey persecuted Iht prophets, those before yon."
As a connective the article may be rendered by he or who iridi
a verb, as in the following example, ver. 48. t<Ttfis tSr C[jti7s r*-
Xsioi, laatcp i 'Ka.n^p v\t.wv i cv ToTf fluparsTf re\sits sfJ- ' Be y<
perfect, as your Father; he in heaven — leho is in heaven, is
feet,"

13. "TjieTj trs ro aAaj iif yi^f . — ' Ye are the salt of the eai
— ^f y^iS ' the habitable globe" (see yixix in my Greek
English Lexicon) opposed to the land of Judea, to which the
instructions of the prophets were confined r God raised the

_ prophets to be the salt of the Jevre only, but the Apostli

3ey<
E and

WnAnua were to beeotne ' the salt of the whole world.' This cori'

■ trast is intended also in the clause, vf.eii ere to foj; rou xor-
firtS. ' The prophets shed a light, and thnt comparatively a faint

k light, on one favoured country ; you are destined to illumine
Y 4be whole world, and that with a light bright us the sun.' Ea,t
p ie n *Anf y,iiipx*^^, ey rtfi a,ki<r9yjveTai ; cif iuSev ir^^uei en, ti

u field shows from Schoetgen upon this place, that this is meant

I' oS bituminous or Sodomitic salt commonly used in Juden, and

I especially in snrri^ce to make it sweeter and burn better ; that

t it was easily rendered vapid, and of no other use but to be

1 spread on a pari of the temple, to prevent slipping in wet wen-

|i ther. This doubtless is the salt ILteraily meant. But our Lord

; xiqilying' it by analogy to bis disciples, meant salt in a moral

I sense, offered to all mankind as preachers of the Gospel. If it

■ lost its savour, it was to be cast away and trodden of men, vva
! •rw" etydpiowojy, men as rational beings and destined for immor-
' tslity ; and therefore having the article, to distinguish them from

' creatures that are irrational and perishable. The blessed Jesus
having now a full and certain kna^vledge of a future state, looked
upon mankind in a new light ; and he coniitanlly uses the article
to mark them as moral agents, as raised above other animals
by viewing them in the mild lustre of his own Gospel. Thus
in ver. 1 6 he commands them ' to let their light shine before
men,' cfurrpoirSiTi Twr ajflfnuyujy,— not definitely any set of men,
not Jews or Gentiles exclusively, but before all mankind, nil
that are possessed of reason, and therefore capable of distin-
guishing fair and honourable deeds from those of a contrary
character, and thus disposed to receive the Gospel, and to glo-
rify tiieir common Father by producing its happy fruits in their
lives and conversation. See also ver. 19; and chap, vi. 1,14, 18.
15. OuSa xmouo-i J^vxyf", xa-i -rihtzfiv a.uny im nv i^^Smv,
aXX' tvi «]* tivx""^"' — ' They do not light a candle and put it
under that which covers it, but on that which koMs it.' fj-aSity and
^ux*"*' being contrasted, have each the article to mark their
mutual opposition. " Campbell," says Dr. Middletop, " vindi-
cates the article in this place, by considering the bushel tuid ihe
candlestick to be what I have denominated monadic nouns ; one

■ 90

only of each would probably be foand in a bouse." This vlndt-
cation is nugatory. The bushel by being turned upside dam,
was convenient to aecure or to hiije anything under it : beset
it became a convenient name for a covering : the article nr
marks it as an instrument to answer this purpose ; while rf
marks hv^via^t as a stand to hold the candle to view. A slinilii
contrast, with a similar use of the article, will be found n
ver, 17i between ny yoftav and rws ■KfO^racs, ' the lavi mi
Ike prophets.'

21. 'Of i' ar ^tYKay, svt^of irou n xpia^i. Here Tfxpim
coalesces with the crime implied in foveusrp, and meaDS tboe-
fore ry apivsi nS ipDrtv, • Whoever murders, shall be liable »
the trial of murder,' — llie murderer will be subject to proseO-
tion and punishment. The note which Dr. Middleton huw
this clause, shows how far he and other learned men were frm
having; a clear idea of the article. " English version," says k,
" ' to the judfjement,' which to the unlearned may seem to s^
nify the punishment of a future state. Campbell says, ' to lie
Judges.' There can be no doubf that by i^ xpiTif is meaol
some court of judicature, but not the Sanhedrim. SchleuSKT
makes it to be the court of Seven established in every princifMl
town to decide petty causes. Wetstein understands it of the
court of Twenty-three. Between these two opinions there ia
probably no real difference."

The next verse presents a similar association : v£{ s tpyi^t-
ji.ey!i! rai aJsA^uj' dvrou eixr„ tuo^Of sf cti tv Kfitrii. — rf, Apini,
renewing the impression made by o/iyi^Sfievor, supposes tj
xpurft Tf( opy^s, ' Every man that is angry with his own tirolber
without cause, shall be liable to be judged and punished for it:'
— riS aSeK^tp duTiS should be rendered ' one that is bis own
brother,' as more adequate and emphatic. The article hi
similar emphasis in ver 43, Ayairijo-rif TOv vhtjo'ioy croa,'
iW.i9T)ir«if Tov ey^Spty fov, 'Thou shalt love him near Ihee,
hate him that Is lliy enemy,— Thou shalt love thy neighbour
hate thy enemy."

Chap. VI, 5. 'Oi uCTxpirat, ' the hypocrites — suchasare<
pocrites,' or those who in religion act a part or character
is not their own, as actors under a mask on the stage.

1 Ir TtV -Of rtF '^litSr nr entu^tty Saf ifftiy tyjiiftga*, '■ Give us
tlus day f/(e bread necessary for us, that which U essential to us.'
This precept wbh peculiarly adapted to the case of men nho^ aa
e^aged in the service of God, and encouraged to rely for sup-
port on his especial providence, were prohibited to lay up trea-
sures on earth, or to make any provision for the morrow. The
purpose of it, as applied to the Apostles, is to this effect, ' Give
us each day, as thou didst manna to our fathers in the w!lder>
Dess, the bread necessary to support us as men : give us more
especially that divine bread, of which the manna was the em-
blem, which is necessary to support us as ministers of the Go-
spel, and is essential to our nature as immortal beings,' With-
out regard lo this food of the soul, the prayer would have been
defective : and it would have been as beneath the character, as
it tras opposite to the practice, of our Lord, to teach his dia-
ct|>les, whom he commands not to be anxious about what
they should eat or drink, to pray for daily bread, without even
glancing at that bread from heaven, which supports eternal life,
and vriiich was ever uppermost in his mind, as the most im-
portant object of his mission. Thus he virtually repeats the
masim already used by him, that man as an immortal being
cannot live alone on that bread which feeds the body, (See.
erioovKs in my Greek and English Lexicon.)

12. 'ilf x«( rj/*£7f «fiefi£» roTf npuKcrats T,<iaiy. ' As we for-
give such as are debtors to us.'

13. Kai fii) eiff-ev£yx5j( ^p.af eif ■Stipa.ffiov , a,\\a, fSnai ■tjii.as
a,m roH mr^pov' art s-su efiy ^ iSaTiXeia, Kai :; imafj-is, kki ij Sa^x-
Hf nos cuiayas- — Am TiO jronipsu, ' from the Evil One,' from the
Tempter mentioned in chap. iv. as having tempted, and having
made thb very promise to, our Lord himself. The petition there-
fore has an immediate reference to the situation of tho.se who
were qualified by supernatural endowments to preach the Go-
spel, When tiie Apostles becanne endowed with divine power,
tiieir feelings as men must hare necessarily exposed them to
the temptation of employing it for the purpose of aggrandizing
or enriching themselves. The Tempter was sure to come and
make to them the false offer, which he had made to their Divine
Master before them, ' The kingdom, the glory of it I will give

4

92

atito you, if ye Tall duwn and worship me.' The petitioo thta
is iramediately levelled ngainst tills insinuatJon : 'Delivnn
from the Evil One, for thine, and not hU, in the kingdom.' Nmi
the clause deliver ua from evil or the Kvil One, if genaiily
taken, is a request to be defended from the evils o[life,ofte
strength of mind to support them, and as such forms a props
lubject of supplication to all Christians : but by connettiitgil
with the subsequent verse, ' for thine is the kingdom,
power, and the glory,' the whole petition is necensarily li
to the case of the Apostles, who, as being endowed with
bus power, and as the servants of a temporal prince, espettinf
to share in the administration of a lemporal kingdom, migM
feel temptation to use that power, to gratify the endif of avaiict
and ambition. Matthew, therefore, who wrote his Gospel early,
and wrote it among the Jews, has recorded the prayer in Uit
■tate in which it was adapted by its Divine Author to the pecu-
liar situation of the Apostles, But Luke, writing at a Inter pe-
riod, and writing too amongst Gentile converts, where the peti-
tion in its original application might be misunderstood oruis-
applied, generalized it by omitting the clause which limited il
to the first followers of Jesus in .ludea, i. e. by omitting tlM-
doxologt/.

17. Aftr^v Keyui w/ajv ot"( airex^VTt Vtv y-ifiw dutajy. — rs»
li.iviov duTuJv, ' that which is a reward peculiar or due to then.'
— ' These hypocrites, like actors, play a feigned part on the
stage of society, and they receive the wages of their hypoeriij'
in the plaudits and false estimate of the spectators.' " Mr,.
Wakefield," says Dr. M. " concludes his note on this pasjage
(see ver. 3) with a remark that the article prefixed to (uaiti
by the Evangelist, tke or this reward, proves in his opinion that
human applause, iviu; Sa^aaSuinv, ivns intended. But the a^
tide in this place is not to be rendered by the or tiiis -, it is
used because of duruiy following : tor when a pronoun depeoiJl
on a noun, the article of that noun is generally inserted.
these insertions the N, T. will furnish probably
examples : in the Lord's Prayer si.x occur. Such fanci&U;
terpretationa do much harm to the cause of criticism : frt
professed scholar like Mr. W. they were not to be expected.

JMr. Wakefield here assnrerlly mistook the force of the anide j
Iftnd notwithstanding tlie censure passed upon hinn, Dr, M. is
Kequally wide of the (ruth. For the article in every instance Is

always be
before tii^flov has a latent re-

kiodependent of the pronoun,
tOMigned for its application ; —
■ference lo their hypocrisy, the supplying of which rendem the
iWliole obvious.

p 82. '0 XD;^vof rou o-wf*arffj trtv i ofiaKpLo;. Here Is an
balance where the predicate, as well as the subject, of the pro-
rpcwitioD has the article ; and the reason is obvious ; for the eye
19 exclusively the light of the body : o therefore marks i^fla^f^cf
1^ aach, in contradistinction to the other parts of it.
f 25. In this verse, ry^'i'XV stands in contrast with ruj e-uij/.an :
lewb therefore has the article to nnark their mutual reference.
I But it is not always necessary to prefix the article to both : its
iq)plication to one of them is on many occasions thought suffi-
cient. Thus in ver. \9, etfi r^{ y^s is in opposition to w
ovfa.y<jJ in the next, without the article. This is the case too
in Tcr. 10, wj c* trnpayaj xtu sift T^f Y'lit ' **" '''^ earth,' Bm-
phatically, the great object of our Lord's mission being to
render the will of the Father known and practised over the
whole habitable globe.

34. Elf Ti]v ruipidv supposes ^'fXEpav, 'for the day of torn otto w
—for the morrow ;' and to. kaur^f implies ^prij/.a.Tx or irpay-
ftara, 'its own affairs or events,' A similar ellipsis occurs in
ver. 1 8, er rw Kpuitrw — ey riZ ipavepw, namely, X'^St^' ' ''' '^'
which is secret — He who sees in every secret place, will

pi

reward thee in
openly,'

Chap. VH. 6. Ml Sd
which is holy or pure ti
Here the article before

that place wliich is open — will reward thee

Ml) S-JJTE TO dyiiy voi; kuiti, ' Do not give that
nimnis that are impure, such as dogs.'
ri and ^aipaiv is generical, marking
classes of animals, which stand in direct contrast to ra dyiay,

15. npane-x^Brs is avo rtSv ^l/suSoitpoipyirm, ' Beware of such
prophets or teachers as are false,' — in opposition to the true
and faithful teachers of the Gospel. This is the contrast inti-
mated by the article. Aira -ruiy KXpifm avTiar ssriTTwrttrBe

IL

Kvno!, 'Ye flhall know ihem, not from their profession, nof
from their fair appearance, not from the honours and titles ihey
will pretend to confer on me, but from their fruits.' The article
before xo-pinav holds forth the fruits of their conduct, and no
other principle^ as the standard by which they should be tried

17. To Si troLVpov SctSpav x«piroU( Wi))T;f ouf VtteT. The Englisli
version is, ' a corrupt tree.' " This," says Dr. M. " ia the
sense ; yet the article is not without meaning in the GreeV, bol
is equivalent to v£v in the preceding clause. The venioii
might have been, eperi/ corrupt tree." This learned author wm
ignorant of the force of the article here, as in most other plaMS.
Its use is generieal, meaning that cluss of trees which are cor-
rupt or bad, in opposition to trees that are sound and good.
It is surprising that so obvious a sense of the article ghmiU
escape the notice of a maa who professedly wrote on Ik
Greek article. But in truth he was completely blinded by bis
twn dark and intricate system.

23. tiVi'Xvipiire air ejAiS ii ciya^Ofityti ttjv avofuar, 'De-
part from me, ye who work tFiat Khkh is ini?Hi(^ — that uAkt
it contrary to the law of God and to my Gospel ;' — njv artfw
opposed to ray yo^ov xai Teilf n'popiiT'aj-, which these imposton
sought to lay aside, as inspired by the Creator whom they af-
fected to consider as imperfect and evil.

25. TtieiMKiwra eiri t^v iterpav. ' It had been founded n
that mbkh irns rock,' and therefore affording a firm and soW
foundation, in opposition to tin 'T^v ami,oy, ' on the sand,' yttiA
was swept away by the flood, See Middleton's note, whi*
shows how he and others were bewildered on the most obviaus
application of the article.

Chap. VI II. 4. Xexufav Sst^ov Tip UpcT, 'Show thyself to
him that is the priest — to the officiating priest, whoeverlie
might be.' The article has a similar use in ver. 9, Koi >jym
rip Sav^ui fiou, nmijo-tiy rwra, xcu TtaieJ, ' And 1 say to him thil
is my servant — to a servant, not definitely any individOBl
servant, but a person in the capacity of a servant," And flie
centurion intimates that Jesus had (he same authority over the
<ietnons, which he had over his slaves.

i. . 12. Oi if i!ioi r^( ^a.vikiMf cK.fX))Si;a'Mi'£u us n, mtnf n
■£wrtf sy- fKiT trai o xXiuifl/AOf xai o /SouyfiOf rtuv (iovrtuv. This
verse contains an allusion to a feast celebrated by night, in a
splendid palace illumined by brilliant lumps, where innu-
merable guests are invited from every quarter of the globe.
The sons of the kingdom, the Jewish nation, will seek adrais-
■ion, but they will be excluded and driven back ti; re «-KOTef,
• into the darkness ;' — ro egiuTcf oy, ' the outer darkness,' — the
surrounding darkness which is heightened and rendered more
intense by a contrast with the illumination enjoyed by the
guests within. In that dreary situation, though the heirs of
the kingdom, their portion will be o sXaufl/isf, ' lamentation,"
in opposition to the rejoicing which would have been their
bappy fate had they not been excluded by their vices ; xai o
^pvyi'-oiis 7aiy aSo^ruiv, ' and the gnashing of llie teeth,' instead
of the joyful use which they would have made of them, if
allowed to sit at table with Abraham, Uanc, and Jacob, in the
kingdom of heaven. — Here the article occurs no less than Jiof
times, and ha.'; in each case its full force in expressing the con-
trast intended by the speaker. But let us hear Dr. M. " Thb
is another of the passages which might induce an English
reader, but superficially acquainted with the Greek language,
to suppose that its article may be inserted ad libitum. The
expression occurs in the N. T. seven tiroes, and always in the
same form ; the usage therefore cannot be supposed to be
arbitrary ; and the reason why the articles are inserted is plain.
The weeping and gnashing of teeth spoken of, is that of the
persons laf.t mentioned ; and the sense is, ' there shall they
weep and gnash their teeth.' WitTiout the articles the propo*
sition would hai'e asserted only, that some persons should there
tyeep; which falls ithort of the real meaning." This is not more
satisfactory than Bengel's observation, which Dr.M. sets aside
Ofi Tiugatory : Artkulas insignia : in hac vita dolor nondum at

!^0. Kai keyei a.uTui i Iigcouf' ed a^aiVEuss ifuiXiMs t^Miri,

tfux EVfi viv Try -AeOaXriY xf-irTi- When the Scribes and Pbari-

SOMflf Ife

96
iibrd healed all manner of diseases, sontflf
them nsturally concluded that he h»d intercourse with
tpiiits. The magicians who proressed to maintain such lutl
tercourse, frequented subterrnneouB holes
the darkness of the place formed concealment and importiw.
An instance is here given of a Scribe who appears to hm
imagined that Jesus had a retreat of this kind, where he hapli
to accompany him, to be initialed in the knowledge ofbJi
m}-Bteries, and to share in those treasures which his poM
must have earned from the people, and his prudence accsDt
lated in hia favourite haunt ; " Master, I will follow dx^
whithersoever thou goest. And Jesus saith unto hinii Bll
foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have roosts ; bmik
son of man hath not where to rest his head." Which is to tlu
effect: 'The deceitful and impure have indeed their holecor
denB, which they frequent for the purpose of deception or im-
purity. But I have no auch place of resort ; nor have ! aa
hidden treasure, in which my followers may partake.'— ai
a^wTTEKEf, ' the foxes' generically, as symbols of cunning nflD
who deceived others by their magical impostures. Hereiti
observable that our Lord for the first time calls himself i im
roS afipivitfiu, ' the son of the man ;* which is a Jewish phme
to express a real man, or one possessing the nature and con-
stitution of man. The propriety of the phraseology hereccfl-
siste in this ; The Scribe who addressed him, supposed that lit
was of a nature different fiona other human beings, as beingi
god in a human shape, or having some demon or divinity vrithio
him. Jesus negatives this supposition by representing himself
as one of the human race.

Chap. X. 17, Upoa-e^ere 5s am rwv aySpuivtav, — not any par-
ticular men. Jesus had just told his disciples that he Ehoulil
send them forth — wj ■Kpota.ra tv ficiruj \vxuiv -. he therefore
inserts the article before avipwitui*, in order to insinuate thai
the wolves, against which they ought to be on their guan),
were their own race. ' Beware of your own kind, who, while
they ought to have a fellow-feeling for you, and to be gmtefiil
for the blessing you otl'er to their acceptance, will

fwy of wolves in tearing you to piecea.- Dr. MiddleloD justly
rejects the supiiosition of Marktand, that Tioy ayipieiruiv here
means the Jews ; but he very honestly leaves the phrase where
he found it — in uncertainty and obscurity. " And generally, I
thiiik," adds he, " the word oLvSpaimi takes the article even
where no particular men are meant, but only men indiscrimi-
nately! unless some of the alleged causes interfere." In ver.
32, 33, sfi-TTpau-^iv tuv avfloowiov, and eiiVpoiriiv raa ntxrpcii,
merely because ihey stand in mutual opposition.

23. 'Orav 5e SiwuiuTiy uii£s sv ^f toXei raurii, fi-jyen rif
TTjr aXXig)'. When our Lord said, sy t^ iiokei raary, he pro-
bnbly pointed to a city within his view; and the next clause
means not 'the other,' supposing some Ivio to be intended,
but ' one that is another.' — ' When they persecute you in this
city, flee to that which is different,' or ' When they persecute
you in one city, Dee to another.'

36. Kai ex^pit ToD avflpuJirtui ol oixieaui mtoS. Here hy-
iptovao has the article, as meaning a rational being, to whom
the Gospel was to be addressed. ' Tfte man who becomes a
convert to my religion, will find his enemies, not as usual, in
mid beasts, not in strangers j but in his very domestics, who
have most reason to love and obey him.' This is a quotation
rrmn Micah vii. 6. as interpreted by the 70 translators. See
Or. Middleton's note.

Chap. XI. 2. 'O Se Iwetvi'i;; aJiouffas ev Tip ^^^/[{.aT^piui ra
ifya TeS Xfirow, 'When John heard in prison the works of
the Christ." The English version is *' the works of Christ," by
which the peculiar force of the passage is lost. The meaning
is, ' When John in prison heard that Jesus was doing such
things as he and all the Jenisli nation expected the Christ
irould do when he should appear.' Mr. Wakefield has properly
retained the article, and in his commentary given the follow-
ing pertinent note : " This is, I believe, the only place in
which our Lord is denominated the Christ by the Evangelist ■
sneaking in his own person. In other places, he calls him only
I JettM. And he appears to me to have used the characteristic
^^l^lation of our Saviour on this occasion, with a peculiar re-

ference to the doubts and misconceptions of John the B
upon this eubjcct." It is not however correct to say liiu te t
Evongetist speaking in hia own person calls Jesus ificOoil]
in this place : he uses it only as a title in the mouth of k
and his disciples, and applicable to Jesus, not immedlau^a
absolutely, but in consequence of the works which wereJ
veRally expected to be the works of the Christ, who
might be, and whenever he should come.

'29. Kai ivpTjfftTt auajravan raTj ^f'tr^aij CfuSr-
shall find rest lo your souls,' not to your bodies. OoiU
seems thus accosted some people that were busily engage
gathering corn. And the whole of the context furnishes strilmig
instances of that mctaphoTJea] language suggested by associi-
tion from the objects around him. The articles mark a siinBii
contrast between J'^^TI ttnd irui|,ia, in chap. x. 28, and ri.3Ii
and in many other places.

Chap. XII, 7i Oux ay xaTihiiaira.Te rai;; avairiciiti. 'Y<»
would not have accused ike innocent — such as are innocent m
blameless,' in opposition to the guilty. The force of the artitlt
here, its in most other places, was unknown to Dr. M,, whore
words on the occasion are ; " ^Vilhout tlie article the propon.
tion would have been exclusive, and would thus have denied
more than the circumstances required. The guiltless persoM
meant, are only Christ and his apostles," But roCs dvonnees,
though including Christ and his followers, is not confined w
them, but means a whole class, — ' all auch as were not deser-
ving of accusation or blame.' The Pharisees, under the in-
fluence of the same prejudice, and to answer a similar end,
would have been equally ready to blarae any other peisoo,
however innocent : and our Lord here imputes it to them as «
crime, that from selfish views they censured not those deserving
of censure, but such as were entirely free from fault,

29. Hujf Jurarai n; ewiXieiy fis ^i*" WJCfav Tou loyvftla,
' How can any one enter the house of the strong one — of one
that is strong ;' that is, one that has strength to repel tbe
assailant and defend his house. Here the article has a generic
sense, one that is slrong, in opposition to i

99

lliis is what Dr. M. calls h'jpothetic: and he is here rigiit,
though Wakefield is also tight in supposing that it has refer-
ence l*j Satan, i a.ya.hs, !i Kanof, are used by Homer II. e,
Tcr. 279i 38-1, as denoting, not individuals, but two whole
dasses, — 'the brave, the coward.' The same application is
ramiliar to all the Greek authors. We have it in ver. 35 of
this chapter.

32. "Of f a» Eiirti Kara Tou Xlvi\i\La.roi tou 'Ayiou. Here
the article is repeated to hold forth the spirit of God under
the influence of which Jesus acted, in opposition to an ' im-.
pure spirit,' such as that of Beelzebub, to which the Scribes
and Pharisees imputed liis works. ' To speak against the holy
^irit,' means perversely and wilfully to ascribe to an evil
tpirit, works which Ihey knew from unquestionable evidence
had proceeded from God alone. ITiis is the sin against tlie
Holy Ghost which Jesus imputes to his enemies, and which
implies sucA a degree of depravity as rendered them unfit ob-
jects of divine forgiveness either in that or the subsequent age.

35. 'O ayaSa/ avfl/iiun'Of . , . EKEaAAei ra. ayaSa ...i imr^pus
ofCaXXd mviipa.. ' The good man' generically, in opposition
b) i wotnjpof 'the bad,' — ra ayaSu:, 'things that are good,' in
contradistinction to ra myr,pa. But in the last instance the
article is omitted, vo>^^« for ra, •jtayijpa. It has already been
observed that, when two words stand in mutual contrast, the
article is often prefixed to one ; and to both only when
the writer wishes to render the contrast or opposition par-
ticularly emphatic or prominent. Here the omission is with-
out prejudice to the sense. See Dr. Middleton's note, which
shows how much he and others were in the dark on the sub-
ject.

43. 'Ora» ie ti axaSaprov mevfia EgtXfin swro row avipiMov.
' When the evil spirit goeth out of the man ;' not any particular
man, but man contrasted with a spirit that is evil or impure.
The article before each places them in mutual opposition, as
distinct persons or things ; and i^hen the evil spirit is gone, —
when his system of evil habits, or predominant passions, sup-
used to have been engendered by a demon, are separated

100

from nun^— iD&ii then remains what he was made by hia gretil
Creator, a rational being, restored to the Linage of bis MaW.
The iirticle in this place characterizes him as such.

Chap. Xlll. 44. Ey riji a.yp-f_. ' in a spot which was a field,'
in opposition to a garden or inclosure. The parable is foundd
on the state of morals at the lime in Judea. The person who
found tlie treasure would have thought it a direct act of ifr
honesty to take it away, as belonging to another. He iheieSm
compounds wilh his conscience by going and buying the fitU,
svithout apprising the owner of the treasure it contains. "Be
article," says Dr. M., " seems to have been originally insertd
from the frequent use of aypo; in the sense of ' the coontTTi'
and not from its being necessary in this place : here it mwl
signify an esl-ite or farm, as. is evident from rov aypur numt
following." Our Lord supposes 'a field,' because it wiJk
have been more difficult or impracticable to buy a house my,
garden or some other inclosure, and therefore the machinair
of the parable would seem less probable. We have a KimOv
use of the article in rnjipiya roS ayptiu, ' the lilies of the field,'
chap. vi. 28. that is, ■ wild lilies,' which grow of themselvw,
without care or cultivation, in opposition to flowers and planO
reared with care in a garden or nursery.

Chap. XIV. 33. Oi f ev ruJ wAoiuj ekiwfsf wpoirexunini
aurdj f.iyofTis, aXjjftt^j 0£o5 uiof eT. The men in the ship, who
made this confession, must have heard of the wonderful things
done by our Lord ; they also must have heard that at his
baptism he was signalized by a voice from Heaven, declarinfj
him to be the son of God ; that is, declaring him to have been
sent by God, and that consequently the power he displayed
was derived from God, and from no other source. The truth
of this report seems to have been the principal thing which the
manners doubted. They doubted not his miracles j but dicy
apprehended that he performed these by intercourse iriA
demons or evil spirits. The power even of Beelzebub Ihar
chief, though able to do things far above human power, was yet
supposed to be limited. Jesus on entering the vessel displayed
a power, an aulhoritv which he coidd have derived only fiioin

tiie Almighty, having stilled the wind and the waves by his
mere command. The result filled the mariners with instant
conviction, that the report of his having received a commission
from Heaven, and been marked out by a heavenly voice that he
was the son of God, was perfectly true. " Hence they ex-
claimed. Truly thou art the son of God," Dr. M. justly ob-
MTves thct the adverb aAijfliuj is expressive both of their former
doubt and their present conviction. This writer, however,
seems to have missed the principal point, a& he did not discover
that the men alluded to the scene which took place at his bap-
tiam ; thus acknowledging that Jesus acted in the name and
with the authority of God, and was not an agent in the hand of
Satan. But the words Oiau vnt are anarthrous : In the decla-
ration from Heaven, 'This is my beloved son,' &c. the article is
put before u'lOf : and when the Tempter presently alludes to the
same declaration, he uses the article before &ta-J. But why did
not the mariners adopt the same usage, if they alluded lo the
same event ! This is the plain reason : The heavenly voice
holds forth Jesus as ' the Son of God,' in opposition to John
who was but his herald, though supposed himself to be the
Messiah by the people. The language of the Tempter is with-
out this reference to the Baptist : vio{ therefore, in his mouth,
if without the article ; but Jioj nS &toii is a renewed mention
of what vras already known, and for this reason required the
article. Dvt these minute distinctions were unknown to the
■nariners, and accordingly they assert the same fact in general
terms, without any contrast or apposition.

'Vhm is capable of being illustrated by another singular inci-
dent. In chap. XV). 15, the people perceiving the miracles
of Jesus, supposed him to be either John the Baptist, or one of
the prophets : but Peter, on being asked his opinion, answers,
Zu t7 i XpiFas liiof tttu &ei)u rw tiiJvTOf , ' Thou art the Christ
the son of the living God.' This answer is supposed to have
been revealed to Peter on this occasion. The supposition is
absurd ; because it implies a miracle where there was no oc-
casion for it ; and because it is an established fact, that the
Universal Father made no connniunication whatever to the

103

Apostles, but through the intervention of his Son. Petanr
llie erroneous notions entertsineil by the people ; and
to mnke himself xvre of being right, he recalls to his nenun
the scene of Christ's baptism, and makes use of the IsnguagfoT
God himself on that occasion. The sagacity, the sound
sober aenKe, which Peter showed at this junctnre, filled Ik
blessed Jesus with delight, and drew forth from him the eiDlk
ordinary language which he uses in the sequel. Peter, ITH
observable, does not state the fact which was the foundatim tf
his opinion ; but our Lord knew it, and thus himself repeaUlt;
"Blessedartthou Simon Bar-jonas, for flesh and blood hath WH
revealed it unto thee, but my Father who ia in heaven." Hm
it is furthertobeobaerved, that the Apostle uses the article kt
fore both nouns ; and he did it for this plain reason, — that tbe
declaration which he makes is opposed to the several OjnDioB
entertained by the people. Thus the phrases viof &sia nai
i uio; raS ©tow or u'loj nS ©sou mean exactly the same thing j
with thU difl'erence, that when anarthrous, the ivords convey i
general assertion, but when limited by the nrticle, Xhey impl;
an emphasis, or opposition to something else.

Chap.XVIII. 3. Kai ywijirflsuif ravaiSia, 'as little children'
generieally, — such aa children in general are, — docile, humble,
free from pride, ambition, revenge and cunning. The pride
and ambitioiT which the disciples displayed, when they now
found Jesus confessing that he was the Christ, were the pas-
sions which distinguished the Gnoatk teachers. This drcom-
stance appears to have led our Lord lo animadvert on the
duct of those imjiostors on this occasion ; and the obstadhU
thrown in the way of his Gospel by their artful doctrines
vices are the offences, to. irxaxi'aAd, mentioned in ver. 7,wliiA
Dr. M., following Noesselt and Schteusner, erroneously takes to
mean the calamities and persecutions which awaited the Chris-
tian Church,

Chap. XXVI. 26. Erflio^riuy Sa aurwi', >M^ai¥ & Iijo-otlf rw
a^ray, xsti euXo)n;irwf, eKKact, &c. — Tor txprav, ' the loaf," apar-
ticular loaf prepared for t!ie occasion, it was necessary it
should be one, because it was designed to be an emblem'

103
me thing ; namely, the body of our Lord. To thU Paul Bllnda,

■B Campbell has pertinentl)' observed, — h; apTo;, h vwyM,
1 Corx. 17.

|i Our Lord appears to have had a peculiar method of cuffing
the loaf J and it was by this circumstance that he became
^nown to the two disciples at Emmaas. The loaf was not dis-
itribated, till afler the disciples had finished their regular meal :
iibr their Divine Master cut the loaf and blessed it while they
jwere yet eating. — The article before apny as used by Matthew
t a proper, not only because it means one louf, hut because it
) stands contrasted with to mr^piav, which succeeds it. Yel
f Mark and Luke in the parallel passages have omitted the ar-
; tide, and aproy in them is to be rendered by bread : and all
that is lost by this omission is the contrast between it and n
mTtjpiw : for the. unity of the loaf is implied in the saying,
'This is my body," preserved by both the Evangelists.

Mask.

Chap. L 1. A^j^Tou EuayyeXiDuIijtrou XfJirou, uifluTovOBjf.
As this EvangelLst has no reference to the expectation of the
people that John was the Messiah, uio; is without the article ;
but as he refers to the declaration from Heaven announcing
Jesus to be the son of God, he inserts it before Seou, as a re-
newed impression of what was already known. Dr. M. saw
nothing of this, and his note is as follows : " Here Markland
conjectures that we should read nu im, and he thinks tliat
the article has been lost by the homseoteleuton of Xp. preceding.
Titles however in apposition frequently want the article. It is
to the full as probable that vou before 0eou ought to he omitted,
OH in the Vat. 1209."

Chap. XII. 27. Oux er' o Seoj veitpaiy, aWa. Qsa; ^unroj*. —
@sos emphatically, ' he who is God — the being that is God.'
The construction is elliptical, o &eoi ouk sri Qeoj yexfiuy, ' He
who is God is not God of the dead."

Chap. XUI, !1. On yap ere vjm's it AaXouyKj, ctKKx to
n»«iiftaTo"A'/ioi', 'the holy spirit' communicated to the Apostles
after the ascension of their Diviue Master, to enable them t

^

i

104

work miraHes, and to speak with unknown tongues in atttcta>
tion of that fact. The article repeated holds forth this spiriln
holy or pure, in opposition to demons or unclean spirits which
were thought sometimes to take possession of men for dwelling
in them ; and which some believed, or affected ta believe, U)
have been the cose with Chriet and his followers,

28. Affo Se T^s ovx-r,! jiaisn -rny irapa.Zchr,v, literally ' Fion
the fig-tree learn the parable :' which is elliptical. ' Learn tbe
moral lesson which the cose of this fig-tree, by means of a pt-
rabte or comparison, suggests to you.' " The article," says Dr.
M., " is not without its use, as a superficial reader might con-
clude ; a particular similitude is founded on a particular tree."
I do notknowhow a reader that is not superficial might become
wiser by this remark.

Chap. XIV, 10. 'O louJuf i Itrxapiwrijf, t'li tiSv Saibxi.
" The first article," Bays Dr. M., " in a great many MSS. ii
wanting: and Griesbach prefixes to it the mark of probable spa-
rioosness. Judas had never been mentioned by this EvangeBst
excepting once in chap, iii. which is so far back, that the iiK
of the article would hardly be justifiable on the grounds of pre-
vious mention : and when it is subjoined that the Judas here
spoken of was one of the twelve, the spuriousncas of the article
is fully established. The second article also is absent from a
few MSS., and probably should have been omitted in all."

In opposition to this I hesitate not to say that, if there be ■
place where the article is appropriate and even necessary more
than any other, it is tliis. In those passages, where Matthew,
Mark and Luke, give the names of the disciples, the article be-
fore huJftf is omitted, — and for this reason ; because it is a case
of simple enumeration, without any contrast or opposition
ever. But here the matter is quite different. Judas is broi
forward not merely as a person distinguished by this
but as a moral agent acting on circumstances every one
which required to be distinctly marked: o Iou}o;(..,«ir£A9i
Toui apx'^P^'S 'i** vaf asw oaitoi/ auToij. ' The mai
atiip \«vSas, or i ^aya[/,eyoe Ioi;faf, < He called Judas ' did tl
It appears that another of the disciples was called Judas.

rendered it necessary to add his Gentile name in the most em-
phatic manner, — ihvias 5 iFxapiwnjj, 'Judas he that was laca-
riot.' This man, thus designated, acted this treacherous part
thougli hf tm SaiSixa, ' one of the twelve— though one of the
constant companions and the confidential friends of Jesus,'

36. Km t\eyev, ASSi o irccnip. On this Mr. Wakefield
observes, " Every reader of sensibility would rejoice at the sup-
presijion of i irar-^p as in the Arabic and Persian versions,"
This proceeds OD the supposition that a ^avtjp was used by our
Lord in addition to ACE'S, which is most absurd : the word is
inserted by the Evangelist as explanatory of the Syriac term :
as if he had written, ' And Jesus said, Abba, which means the
father.' The article 9 is prefixed to render prominent what we
OD auch an occasion should expresa by the possessive my —
'Abba, my Father.'

69. ^ffaiJicjo), "The article in this place," says Dr. M.,
" BS Biblical scholars well know, has been a source of great
embarrassment. St. Matthew relating the same transaction,
has, instead of ^ TtaiSimiTj, (' ihe maid ' recently mentioned)
aXAij, ' another maid.' To get rid of this difficulty, Michaelia
bad proposed to read simply iraiSimii}. Rosenmuller with less
apparent temerity has recourse to the common expedient of
making r, TraiJirxi] equivalent to iroyJisTtij rij, quo modo inter-
dum sumi arliculum certmt eat ; than which nothing is more
absurd in theory, or more f&lse in practice. The whole diffi-
culty, howerer, has arisen from the vain expectation that the
Evangelists must always agree with each other in the most mi-
nute and trivial particulars : as if the credibility of our religion
rests on such agreement, or any reasonable scheme of inspira-
tbn required this exact correspondence."

This is a liberal concession from one who believed the inspi-
ration of the Scriptures ; but it is misplaced. Matthew and
Mark relate the exact truth, though each relates it but par-
tially. From both these Evangelbts it appears that there
were more than one maid present, when the charge was brought
agiunst Peter. And the affair stood thus : Wliile he was warm-
ing himself, one of the maids of the chief priest, who knew him.

A

accompanied mth another, ctnne up and aecnRed him of
one of Jesus's companions: having denied it, he withdrew toi
porchon the outside. The young woman, who had hilherto
■ilent, followed to see where he went, and joined him to tel
persons there present that he was a follower of Jesus. Matlhaf
takes up the narrative with her who first brought the charge; an
then gives an account of the other young woman who foUoirt
him without, and who renewed the accusation after she hi
joined him and others in the porch, "And when he wasgm
out into the porch, another maid saw him; and said unto thd
that were there, This man was also with Jesus of Nazareth."
The first young woman, as soon as Peter had left in coiw
quence of the charge, staid a little behind, explaining and CM
firming the fact, that he was one of Jesus's companions. Haiii
done this to their conviction, she and a party of them then Eel
lowed him to the spot where he was, and where the charge i»
been repeated by her fellow-servant ; and she again renews ll
accusation. Mark has taken no noticeof the intermediate pH
acted by the Kecond maid, but confined his narrative to the piil
cipal. "And the maid saw him again, and began to sayl
them that stood by. This is one of tiiera." This is the daiiri
who first brought the cliarge : hence Mark calls her ij wojjjrt
The whole of this is quite in character. The person who mil
the deepest impression on Peter, was the maid that first and !■
had accused him: and as Mark wrote under his direction, '
was natural that he .thould not have noticed the other, as is doi
by Matthew.

John.

Chap. 1. 4. Kai:; ^ui^riy n tpui; ruiy ay^ptunuy, ' And theB
was the light of lite men— of the human race.' The light of d
sun belongs to all beings. Irrational as well as rational : d
life promised in the Gospel is the light of men, or of ration
beings only. 'ITie article marks this contrast.

21, 'O fffopijTqj ft G-u; 'art thou tke prophet?" not «
known prophet, but generieally, * Dost thou sustain the pn
phetic character ?' — ' art thou one that is a prophet ?" So i

clMip. iti. 10. Su e7i iiSxviiii>.9s nS lrpa^\, ' Diwt thou sus-
tain the character of a teacher! — art thou one that is a teacher
in Israel?'

To show the darkness that hangs over the article in instances
of this sort, 1 will here quote the -words of Dr. Middleton. " To
determine the precise meaning of the appellative {iiSxffjucMf)
is a task whicli I believe no commentator pretends to have ac-
complished. We know that Nicodemas was a person of high
coneideration, and a member of the Sanhedrim : and some sup-
pose him, and not without rea-^on, to be the same NicodemuB
who is frequently mentioned in the Talmud, in which case he
noR not in wealth and consequence inferior to any Jew of that
time. Still it will be asked, why did our Saviour say to Nico-
demus, 'Art thou the teacher of larael?' 1 have only conjecture
to offer; but even this maybe tolerated, where nothing certain
b known, and where even conjecture has scarcely been at-
tempted. It has been observed that the Jews gave their Doctors
high and sounding titles ; in the same manner probably as
among the Schoolmen in the middle ages, one was called the
Angelic Doctor, another the Admirable, and a third the irre-
fragable. Might not then Nieodemus have been styled by his
folktwers i hSannf-n nS lirpa.i^X ? On this supposition nothing
is more probable than that our Saviour should have taken oc-
casion to reprove the folly of those who conferred the appel-
lation, and the vanity of him who accepted it : and no occasion
could have been more opportune than the present, when Nieo-
demus betrayed his ignorance on a very important subject." I
quote this passage to show that Dr. Middleton, though he wrote
upon it, had but an imperfect notion of the generic force of the
article, and that he plunged himself and his readers in idle con-
jecture, instead of seizing the signification which lay on the
surface of the Greek text,

31, Aicc Toiiro r)>Aoy syw fv tip CSetn ^aimluir. "In
this water," says Mr. Wakefield, " pointing at the same time to
the river just by." This critic, like others, did not comprehend
the generic power of the article. John inculcates his subordi-
nation to our Lord by showing, that he baptized with an in-

hthcni K

ferior element— '£v rw iSati, 'water' contrasted with
dyior, ' the more divine and efficacious element, which
Messiah was to administer to his followera.' WakeGeld te-
quently translates the article very improperly by thu or l|g^
by that means setting aside the contrast which it bean iottc
sentence. Thus in chap, i. 9, 10. " He was not that light,lia
came to bear testimony of that light ; that true light wtiA
Cometh into the world to enlighten every man," Herenf^
means not litis or that light, but light, in opposition to ;' none,
' darkness.' It is synon}-mous with the Logos, now commit
catcti to the man Jeaus, which maltes God what he is, a radoail
all-perfect Being — all light, and in whom there is no daAnen:
TO (fuis T9 aXv;flivoy, ' the light that is the true or real ligbt^—
that moral and intellectual light, of which even the light of tht
BUn is bill a shadow and an emblem,'

Chap. IV. 37- Ev yap roarif/ i Myai er* o a.\i}$iyo[, in aAAtf
iri tnretpoiv, xai aXXot o ^epi^wr. " Beza," says Dr. M,
" remarks on this place, that every person moderately k-
quainted with Greek, must perceive tliat the article here is inad- |
missifale. AfewMSS.lndeedarewithoutit: but as Matthaeindl |
observeit,«f abesse et aJesaepoteH. If we render. In this instantt
the saying is true, the article must be omitted : but if. In the
is esemplified the true saying, the article is abtjoluteiy neces-
sary, aa in the Evangelist, i. 9 ; vi. 32 ; xv. 1 . Mark! and reftlhi
us in behalf of the article to 2 Pet. ii. 22, which has n( "
to do with the question ; for there the adjective precedat.
substantive, instead of follo^ving it. I cannot but obsem)'
MatlhEei, that he is the most accurate Greek scholar who ever
edited the N. T. — Griesbach prefixes to the article the mark of
possible spuriousness. In this instance, however, the great
majority of the MSS, ought, I think, to prevail : they are at
least as fifty to one."

Our Lord uses this maxioi in regard to his going down to
Samaria, and thus preparing the Samaritans, by what he shoeU.
say and do there, for receiving the Gospel, when a few years :
Philip, Peter and John, should preach it in that country.
Jesus meant to say simply that the proverb v

ndrdt«|
no#gJ

«d«a

8en««l1

sense, he would have said, ev nofu) o Aoyoj- tri iAij9ijfj hut he
says aXyiSinf ; which signifies two things very different from

ie, and also that
<T to the literal ful-
V, or the reality to
ir Lord marked this lost sen.ii: solely by
Seethe interpretation of w^ijSitoj in my

each other ; namely, that the saying is
verified in a metaphorical sense, as si
fitment of it as a substance Is to its el
its type or symbol. O
die use of the article.
Lexicon.

Chap. H. 25. Kai oti mi x^iia^y tT^ev W ris iJ.aprufyj<ni tepi
tw a-ripwaw, avrof ya.( iyiyuirxt Ti ^y tv tiZ o-iiptavai.
Wakefield has miserably perverted this passage, which he thus
renders. " But Jesus did not trust himself unto them, because
all leneK him : and because he needed not that any should tes-
tify of man. for he knew what was in man." The clause *be-
couae all knew him' should be rendered, 'because he knew them
all}' that is, he knew their mistaken views of his kingdom, and
that in consequence they would abandon him in the hour of
trial; he therefore did not put himself in their power, but kept
them at a distance. The article is used in the original, vtpi roS
twipwmu — ev tu avSgiuitai. And he thus adds in hLs notes, " I
own, however, that I do not at all understand the passage ; and
■m confident that no man can give any account of the propriety
of the article consistently with the common version. Some
talse reading, which I see no method of correcting, undoubtedly
obscures the text." The sense of the article is generic, and
the <»>ntrast expressed by it is to this effect : ' Jesus did not
trust himself to them, because he knew them all ; and because
he did not need that any should bear testimony lo him con-
cerning what is in man, for of himself he knew the nature of
man,' ' Mankind required his testimony respecting God, but
JesuB did not require the testimony of any concerning man ;
for of himself, without such testimony or information, he was
thoroughly acquainted with human nature.' The contrast is
between vtft roS ©eou implied, and wepi TtS oit^puivw expressed.

Chap.V.35. ExEiv^f ^v iXMyy^i iuara^fvo; xoi ifatyuiy. On this
Dr. M. observes, " Campbell objects to our version, ' a burning
and shining light,' on the ground that the article indicates some*

110
thing more. So fer I agree with him : but I do not beli
in this place there is any reference to the LXX, P»iliii cxsxi.17*
1 suppose rather that Uie allusion is to some phrase then
vogue among the Jews, to signify a wise nnd enlighteaid
teacher : and on turning to Lightfoot, one of the best illN
trators oF the N. T., I find tKat a person fomous for light M|
knowledge was called a candie: hence the title given tolh
Ruhbins, the candle of the law, the lamp of the law. I condnA
Ihereforethat our Saviour meant to say, 'John was* (to uteyati
own phrase) 'the burning and shining light.' Allusions oftlj
kind are much in our Saviour's manner." ,

This is tola cwlo wide of the truth. In the first place, 1|i
common version is not true to the original : this litemflyij
' That man was the lamp, the burning one, and maniieslim
(ipaiyujv in a transitive sense, and not <paiyo/i,evtf) the
being undemtood and meaning our Lord himself — *
manifest whom he was sent to manifest.' The attention of Jem'
was fixed on the late scene of his baptism. There we have
that God himself marked out to the surrounding multitude tte
blessed Jesus as i sias, ' his beloved son,' in opposition to iIk
Baptist, who was but a domestic or herald. A contrast Ic
effect our Lord now had in his mind. " He was but a li
shining in the midst ot surrounding darkness, in whose ligk
you exulted during the few hours of night, like those who
at the festive board. These hours soon ended) and thegli^
mering light of John, like that of a lamp, became extinct, aoi
the luminary, of which the light of the gun is but a faint erable%
rose above the horizon of the moral world' — a ^u^voj, on
is but a lamp, opposed to Tn piv; no K(iiriJ,«v. Our Lord
sequel continues his allusion to the testimony which the Father
himself gave him on that occasion.

Chap. VUI, 3 1 . Eav ujieTf n-sivijTs sr rur Aoyio T-tu efiaJ, aAf-
Swf /iaS^rai ftou ej-e. ' If ye persevere in the doctrine which b
mine.' This alludes to the false doctrine which the GnoBtict
would soon substitute for the genuine Gospel. Our Lord fore-
saw the wide prevalence of the Gnostic system in every placCi
^^^^ especially in Jerusalem, where it was formed by his enemies.

iiuiy of those whom Jesus now addressed became the yictinu
of this delusion, and he forewnrns them: ' Jf ye continue in
my doctrine, ye are truly my disciples — in my doetrine, and
not be led aslray by the specioua doctrine of certain impostors.'

44. 'Oral' XaAn ro iJ/suJof, the abstract for the concrete—
• When the liar Kpeaks, or When one thai is a liar speaks, he
■pealcB of his own, for he is a lia r, as also is his father.'

Chop. IX. 24. iioi !o£a* rtj &sw- ' Give glory to God ;' thai
is, to God and not to this man, for he is a sinner — Tijj @stp, '

Chap. XII. 24. Eav/t;) a X(nx6{ Tou riTouiriruJVEisTiii'Tfy airo-
tetrfi, ' unless the grain of wheat — that which is a grain of wheat
— having fallen to the ground, dies.' Our Lord considered the
grain of wheat put in the ground, after dying and producing
much fruit, as a symbol of his own death and rei-urrection,
catising many to believe in hira. Mr. Wakefield renders i
itMoui, 'this grain,' and adds, " an elegant designation of him-
self; on which circumstance the elegance and beauty of the ar-
ticle depends in this place." On thin Dr. M. remarks, "This ii
not the only instance in which Mr, W, has confounded o with
ivfit : he might as well have said that ^ yur;;, xvi. 21, is an
elegant designation of some particular woman; whereas nothing
can be more remote from the sense : he did not perceive that
the article may be used lujpolhetically." The hypothetical use
of the article is not very intelligible ; but the reader will easily
understand, when told that the article before xoxxoj marks it not
u some known grain, but as a thing which, being put in the
ground, having died there and sprung up again, produces much
ftuit, wn!» a symbol of the death and resurrection of our Lord,
and the consequent diffusion of bis Gospel,

Chap. XIII. 13. 'Xy-fii fiaveirt fi.i, i Aif ^KntaXs; xai i KupiQs,
xai xa,\Mj XeyeTf fijii yn-f. Mr. Wakefield considers the ar-
ticle here as the sign of the vocative, and thus very improperly
renders the vcrsr : " You say unto me, O teacher, and O
master ; and ye say well, for so I am."

This is the consequence of interpreting an ancient author
Hit knowing the facts upon which his language is founded :

112
for this is moat Pinpliatically levelled against the Gnostic m
poHtora. who, though they pretended to extol Christ beyondtt
nature of man, uaiformly dented any obligation on their parti
consider him as their Lord and Master. This infonnatimi ,
given us by Irenteus in words the most unequivocal. Thi
motive for refusing to acknowledge Jesus as their Lonl ■
Master, was to evade the obligution which they would be otiM
wise under, to obey his divine precepts and imitate his pore^
spotless example. Now Jesus caused this veree to be on recsi
in order to hold it forth to the world, that all his followen,
they were such in sineerity and truth, must and would acknm
ledge him under these relations. The sense of the verse thi
is, ' You accost me as one that is your Master and your La
— as one who sustains both these characters toivard youj n
ye call me so rightly, for so 1 am.'

There is another thing ohservable here — the repetition of II
article before Kupitf, which might be avoided. But it was d
object of our Lord to render both titles, tlie last as weU as t)
first, prominent and emphatic ; and its repetition vras then n
avoidable. But hear Dr. M., who in this instance was detfl
mined to sacrifice his good sense to the support of a systeni, i
the expense of truth. " The editt. of Erasm. Colin, and B|
gard, omit the latter article, I suppose, from a belief that
interferes with the usage which has lately been defended 1
Granville Sharp. No MS. however warrants the omisBioi
nor is it at all ne.-essary : for though both titles are meant I
be applied to our Saviour, they are not spoken of as being a
plied at the same time, but distinctly and independently, as
our Saviour had said. One of you calls me i AiSa<rKa\os, anotbl
i Kvfitas- The article then is necessary to each of the noun^
as must be evident on considering the reason of the rule. P&rtI,
Chap, iii. Sect, iv." Tliis is not interpreting the words of JesuB,
but putting in his mouth words different from his own.

Chap. XVI. 13. "Orav fs tX9>! ixiwof , ro n»aij/iar^f «Xi)flsM«,
oir/jo]o-£i uV«( t'S vsLsai njv a^ijflem*. 'When he, the spirit of
truth, shall come, he will lead you into all the truth.' This lan-
guage is pointedly levelled agunst the Gnostic impostors : they

113

wintnniril that the Apostles were illiterate, and that for this
reason Christ did not communicate to them all the mysteries
of the Gospel. In opposition to this, their Divine Master itssures
&em, that the spirit they were to receive after his departure, .
would reveal to them all the important truths which constitute
his Gospel, and which they had to preach to the world. The
wticle here twice put before aX'^iesa, cltaracterizes the doctrine
iriiich the Apostles were to preach as /nie, in opposition to the
monstrous falsehoods and fictions which the deceivers pretended
to be the true Gospel.

TTie Evan^¥list John explains this very passage in his Gpiatle.
After noticing those who denied the Father and the Son, and
aiSliag them liars and antichrist, I Epist. ii. 22, he adds :
"These things I have written concerning those who deceive
you." Tlie deception consisted in their pretending that they
were acquainted with certain suljlime truths beyond the know-
ledge of the Apostles, which rendered it necessary that the con-
verts should be taught anew by them. Hear now what the
Apostle says in regard to Ihis pretension. " As to you the en-
dowment (of the Holy Spirit) wJiich ye have received from him
remains in you, and ye have no need that any one should teach
you ; and as the same divine endowment which teaches you in
all things, is true and not a lie j as then it hath taught you, re-
main in it." ver. 29.

Chap. XVII. 3, 'Au-rij St eg-iy t} auwyms ^cutj, lyx yiytuvnuiri e§

The authors of Gnosticism were Epicurean Jews, and real, '
though disg;uised atheists. In defiance of the evidence from
nature and revelation, they rejected the all-mighty and all-wise
Creator, as an evil imperfect being ; and without any evidence
from either, they pretended to reveal a supreme deity of their
own fancy, which from eternity hail lived in unruffled ease and
inaccessible solitude. By this artifice they attempted to dig up
the very foundation of natural religion. Their next attempt
was to undermine revelation ; and this they endeavoured to do
by Haying that the Christ was not the man Jesus, but a God
g itt h im for a season. This God, they pretended, did

k

■ 114

not come from Jehovah ; but, on the contraiy.^e la
Btroy his works [ and thuR they denied Jesus to be the son of
God, or, according to the langunge of John, I Epist. ii. 21,
" They denied the Father and the Son." To these two aitM
and malignant dogmas, the language of our Lord is diictttj
levelled. " This is lile eternal, to know thee the only true God,
and whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ," — rtv aXtjlno*, 'hia
that exists in reality and truth, as evinced in hi.? word andin 1«
works,' in opposition to the feigned supreme diTinity which the
deceivers affected lo have revealed. Be it observed, that ihit
is the only place in which our Lord calls himself Jesui CKtitt.
The reason is, that he here directs hia language against those
who divided him, as if he were two separate or tndependeni
beings.

The author of this gospel, who was a competent judge, has
used this very passage in his Epistle, against the impostora, and
thus determines its primary application ; for at the close be thu!
writes : " We know that the Son of God is come ; and he hath
given us discernment to know the true God (toy aAijSwot) ;
and we are in the true God (ev riT aXijfliK^) by means of his
son, Jesus Christ. This is the true God {o aXijiiyof &stf), and
the life eternal." He then concludes : riy-ynx, (pv^a^art ita>-
Vdvi OLiii ruiv E(iiu>.uiv, " Dear children, guard yourselves from
idols," literally ' from the idols — from such things as are idols,'
in opposition to i sAi;9ivaf 0E»f, thiice mentioned in the pre-
ceding verse. The chief of these idols was tlie unknown God.
which the Gnostics pretended to have brought to light. "This
God," says tlie Apostle, " the Creator and Governor of the
world, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is the true God, and
not the unknown God which antichrist holds forth as an object
of worship."

Chap. 11. 47. '0 Se Kufm; irpoifeTiSsi rouf o'lu^^p^vovs m
iff.tpa.y T^ enx^tjrta.. ' And the Lord daily added to the cliG
those saved — such as are saved — such as preserve themsela
sincere and faithful members of it,' in opposition to those h

phalanx.

115

of destruction (ol aToA^ujMvoi), "who, after joining the churcli
for a season, yielded to false shame and persecution, or followed
after those impostors, nho immediately set up a false Gospel to
defeat the end of the true one.

The distresses which assailed the early converts were so great,
aa to be utterly inconceivable to those who have little or no
knowledge of the state of things at that period. Wherever a
ChiiBtian church was established, the Adversary made every ef-
fort to destroy or scatter its members. These members there-
fore, like faithful soldiers, were required to be constantly under
arms — to be steeled as it were with fixed purpose and unshaken
—to keep their ranks in a firm compact body like a
'hen the foe was preparing to run them down or
scatter them abroad. To this state of things the author of the
Acta alludes in the above verse, and still more expressly in the
following : " And the Gentiles who heard rejoiced, and mag-
nified the doctrine of the Lord ; and they believed, <u rimny as
arranged themselves (under its banners) for eternal life." Acts
»m, 48. 'Ocoi ^ffav rsTayi/.ctcii — in a reflex sense, as U very .
common iriift the perfect and pluperfect passive — 'as many as
put themselves in battle array." The use of the pluperfect here
KuppoEcs that the believers, as soon as they had enlisted them-
selves under the banners of Christ, were for some time drilled
and trained in the new doctrine, before they were enabled, as
it were, with all the advantages of discipline, to sustain the at-
tacks of the enemy. See Ephes. vi. 13. The Calvinists, 1 per-
ceive, make use of this verse as a powerful weapon in their fa-
vour. Dr. M. was onti-calvinistic; and he endeavours to wrest
from them the verse, by giving the following vapid interpre-
tation of it ; " They believed as many as felt a longing after
mmorlality."

Chap. V, 4. OVK c^sBTK avfl^tUTfoif, a.X\a.tiZ Qetp, "Thou
hast committed this falsehood not against men, but againstGod."
Dr. Middteton's comment is the following. " From a compa-
rison of this verse with the preceding onei as vpell ns from other
pOBBageg, theologians have in all ages inferred that the Holy
~~ t is God." The opinions of the Fathers may be seen in

Sttietr, rol, ii. p. 769. Wetslain, initeed, tins reraarlted, tbt
i @stf with the article is always confined to God the Falker. \
have however already shown that no such distinction is ob-
served : a 3co( anil 9ee; are used indiscriminately, except wbm
grammatical rules interfere. In this place &ew and tu &ta
would have been equivalent : thus ve have in this cbapUr,
ver. 29, Wfiflap^fiv Qstii fiaXAov ij aviptuirois. If, however, llie
article hod heen wanting in the present passage, we sbooU
probably have been told that the Holy Spirit is God only in aa
inferior sense,"

If Dr. M. hBd discovered the real object of the awful sceoe
here recorded, he would hardly have penned the above crilrcaia
When Peter and John cured the tame man, the people presnrt
had no idea of the source of the power with which they acted:
the natural conclusion for them to draw was, that they actedto
their own names, having immediate communication mth some
unknown demon, and being principals in the wonderful a&ir.
The mistake thus committed by the spectators, h placed beyond
all doubt by the language of Peter. " Men of Israel, why
wonder ye at this, or Why fix ye your attention on us, as if l^
our own power or godliness we caused this man to walk."
chap, ill. 12. He then explicitly informs them, that (he
iiource of their power was the Holy Spirit of God, com-
municated to them in the name, and through the medium of
the Lord Jesus, who had ascended to the right hand of the
Father, and who thence delegated this holy spirit of power k
substantiate, before the whole world, the great facts, that he in-
deed had ascended there, and would again return to raise the
dead and lead his faithful followers into glory. This explanation
was given again and again ; — finding it so remote from iheir
established prejudices, and being witlial very improbable in
itself, the people were unable to believe it. Ananias and his
wife appear to have been of this number. They sold their pro-
perty and gave it to the church, with a view to share "
common stock, but sequestered a part ; this act they ^p
bended affected the heads of the church only, and had
ference to the spirit of God. But the Almighty immedial

!17
took the affair into his own haodd ; and to oliow to all present,

and to all in Jerusalem, thuc it wus against his holy spirit the
offence was really committed, he recdled the breath which he
had given ; and Ananias and Snpphira fell dead at the feet of
the Apostles. This awful lesson decided the question : Peter
foretells their fate^ and the prediction was instantly verified j

showing that the Holy Spirit had doubly instructed him
■trate the secret designs of those at the time absent from
moreoverto foresee the consequence that w

ire, then, we see the full force of the Apostle's words to
AiKtniaa : " Thou hast committed this lie not against men, but
against God" — to! &eto, contrasted with the preceding avSpia-
«aif — emphatically against God, as one whom Ananias supposes
not to be concerned in the miracle, and therefore one whom he
could not have offended by this act of fraud.

13. TJjy Ss Mmwv avSci; iroAf.* KOAJLairSai auToTf' oAA'
ffiMyetXtivEv aoTauf i Aaoj, ' No one of the rest dared to adhere
to them (that is to the Apostles), but the people magnified
ttiem ;' which means ' No one after ttie case of Ananias joined
the Apostles as principals in this new and wonderful scheme }
yet, though tliey acted only a subordinate pari, such were their
integrity, zeal, and disinterestedness, that all the people loved,
honoured, and extolled them.'

xfSpuiy rs xai yuvaiixiuv " Multitudes of both men and women
were over and above added to the church, believing rather in
the Lord." — riif Kii^iu>, in Jesus as their Lord, and no longer in
the Apostle* as the supreme heads of the church.

Chap. VII. 20. Ksci ^f arcios riZ SelS, ' and he was comely
to God.' Mnschlefr, I believe, was the first who interpreted
this language ns conveying a superlative idea of Moses's beauty.
Mr. Wakefield, after him, translates it "divinely beautiful :"
aa if Stephen, now in the act of dying, with his mind fixed on
the awful scene before him, had leisure or inclination to com-
pliment Moses for his infantine beauty. Learned men sometimes
aeem to have thought that when they became biblical critics,
mid leave common sense as far behind them as possible.

I

\

" MoMB indeed vas known to have been very handsome. Tta
doubtless wiiN a recommenHalion to him wiih men, and espe-
cially with the daughter of Pharaoh. 'ITils is the circumstance
on which the language of Stephen is founded. ' He was bea*-
liful to men, he was also beautiful to God." While he pa-
■essed those personal tjualities which rendered him beantifBl a
the sight of men, he possessed also those mental qualities whidi
made him beautiful in the sight of God." The article taaAt
this contrast, and serves to bring it to light.

52. Km avejiTetvay T(U( vprnarayyeiXaiircis irspi rf^ tAw
CEtuf rou Stxaiou, Su ydy Ciiits ttpahraj xai poyETf yeyfr^tk.
' And they slew those who fore-announced the advent of the
Just One. of whom ye became betrayers and murderen,'
" 'Hiis term," says Dr. M. (o Jixaiej) " is evidently used tat
f^axr,y to signify Christ i" and then he shows in an e1ab«ate
note that he had been predicted under this title. This may be
true, because he was predicted as a suffering Messiah, and SM
that would sufler unjustly. This was the leading idea in the
mind of Stephen on this occasion ; he calls his Divine Master
tw j'lxaisy ' one that was just, — one who did not merit tic
cruel treatment which he had received from his enemies;" hia
claims as the Son of God being fully justified. He suffered in-
deed, but he suffered on innocent and righteous man. Those
therefore who put him to death, as a malefactor and blai-
phemer, were betrayers and murderers."

On this principle the following verse of Luke, chap, sxiii.47,
receives an easy and obvious exiilanation. Ifiuv Si 6 ixnTst-
Tapp^os TO ysviy.en)y, £S(i^a,trc ray @eay, Xiywy, Oyiuis i a-ySpiunf
iuTos Sixeufs ^y- 'The centurion having seen what came to pass,
glorified God, saying. Most truly this man was just." If we exa-
mine these words in connection with the awful xcene that called
them forth, we cannot possibly mistake their import. The cen-
turion might hitherto have been doubtful as to the claims of
Jesus, He had heard that God himself on a solemn occasion
proclaimed him by a voice from heaven aa his Beloved Son;
but now he saw the sentence of an ignominious death passed
j^led upon him : M tlie close of the scene, the Almij ~

no

interposes, nnd heaven and eartii bear testimony to the inno-
cence, to Che righteous olaima of the sufferer. This is the pro-
pORJtion which the centurion here asserts and enforces. The
aulTerer was a righteous man, and ought not to have been put
lo death, — he was certainly so — wruif' in truth,' or' in reality;*
thns Bckciowledg-ing and correcting his former doubt. At this mo-
ment "Jesus," it is said, " cried with a loud voice, saying. Father,
into thy hands 1 commend my spirit ; and having thus spoken
be expired." This address had a powerful effect on the centurion.
Jesus, while he lived, professed to he the Son of God, to have
derived his power and authority from him ; and now, in the very
face of death and amidst tlie agonies of crucifixion, he addresses
(he Almighty as his Father, solemnly and without hesitation re-
commending his spirit to his handB. This the centurion thought
could not be the conduct of one that was himself deceived, or
(hat wished to deceive others ; and he considered it as a decisive
proof of sincerity and truth. He therefore "glorified God,"
glorified him as the Father of the innocent sufferer, — as the
sole cause of the awful events which he had just witnessed, and
is the only source of the power by which Jesus performed his
miracles, but which his enemies imputed to an evil spirit.

The impression which the last words of the Saviour to his
Heavenly Father had on the mind of the centurion, is more
faithfully preserved in the narrative of Mark, chnp. \v. 39,
" When the centurion who stood near, and directly apposite,
■aw that Jesus, on having thus cried, expired, he said. Of a
truth this man is the Son of God ;" meaning that his recom-
mending himself to God as his Father in this last and trying
moment, proved beyond all doubt that he really was as he pro-
fessed, the son of God. The etKTjSuit of Mark is the same
with ovruif of Luke ; and both adverbs suppose that the cen-
turion now fully believed the claims of Christ, wjiich he before
doubted. It is further observubli;, that the clause " This is a
just man" in the latter Evangelist, is of equal import with "This
is the Son of God" in the former ; because if Jesus were just,
he must have been just and true in the character which he pro-
fessed to sustain ; and this was the son of God. Being in

120

{ore As] I

respect just, he was most unjustly put to death ai
rjthemer.

Chap. XIV. i 3. 'O Sc Uptvi nS Aisj no orrof tpo t^f

I fiorcSv, &c. ' And the priest «f Jupiter which was before

I Oty.' " Vulckenaer," says Dr. M., " in his Adnot. Crit k

I'N. T. would here read a Upius TtS too Aiof, He says thatfke

I klterpreters suppose that a statue of Jupiter was placed befeit

I fte gate of the city ; but that statues of the Gods stanfill

Vttusin the open air, and encompassed with &. ipxtf orttfi-

ta^Of, certainly had no priests allotted them. He canUBi

therefore that the Temple of Jupiter b here to be understood,

and that consequently we must read as above ; so IliBl ibt

first TOO may mark an ellipsis of lepou: and he commends Ca-

saubon for having similarly corrected a passage of Plato." Or.

M. justly rejects this emendation, but has failed to give the

true sense ef the paNsage. Valckenaer indeed is a. great Dsnt

in Greek literature ; hut his criticism here places him, as a id)-

lical critic, in no enviable light. A passage of Pausanias, coBp

plelely mistaken by Dr. M^, clears up the difficulty. Tim,

MftyrixXaf h mhi to ie^oi' Mso'njvioi; rtS'Hpa.xhsouf £ir«ii|n, xsi

§ri» exfos TK^'Uf i Sio{ iSpujj^uts, — which means that "Mau-

ticlua built for the Messeaians a temple of Hercules } and

(white this mas within the cify) , a statue of the god was erected

also on the outside of the widl ;" duubtless as an emb)

his being the guardian god of the place. See Paue.

)). 33?. Edit. Kuhn.

This was the case at Lystra, The temple of the tutelary di-
vinity was erected leilhin, while a statue symbolical of his office
lay without the walls. Luke had been a spectator of the trans-
action ; and his narrative exhibits the usual characteristics <lf
truth, — apparent incongruity on the surface, and real
at the bottom.

Chap, XV. 11, AXXtt Jia rft x'V^'f Kvpau I^roiiX/
tirsvou-ey irw^tai, xixfl' iy ipumv xaKsivoi.

In this verse Peter decides the question which broke out at
Antioch, and now much agitated in Jerusalem, Whether tfaf
Gentile converts were to be saved by complying with the liM

s erected

ibleaud^

i.lifai.'fl

I2t
of the Mosaic law, and especially by tlie rite of circumcision ;
or by embracing the Gospel qs a free gift of God through Jeaua
Christ. The Judaizing zealots insisted on the former ; the
Apostles on the latter. Peter's argument is conclusive, " We
(Jews) believe that we shall be saved by the grace of our Lord
Jesus Christ — by his Gospel, a free gift from God through Jesus
Christ to the human race : in the same manner Ihcy tthe Gen-
tUe converls) must be saved. Circumcision then is useless ;
and why imjiose it as an unnecessary burthen on their necks ?"
The article marks the contrast with circumcision — Sia T^f ;^a-
ftns, KU' DU S:ix vepiTOfiriS irifinOfJ-iy a'loB^val.

Chap. XVIII. 27. '0(-ita.payeroii.fnis vuvstaXeTa v<iXv n'f
mirtoKSfi SiA T^r x'^P"'!' ' ^^^^ having arrived, greatly as-
■iMed those who believed ihmugh the grace,' that is, those
who embraced the Gospel, whicli proclaimed the free pardon of
alt past sins to the penitent without the ceremonies of the law,
or as the Jewish zealots designated them 'the leorks of the
lav;* tia r^i ^itpins, in opposition to iia, epyuiv vep^eu.

Chap. XX. 'in. Uitji.a.i>sir rijv £XK^1;t^IaJ' row Qeov, ^*
wspitmiyjaara Sia, miJ iJiou dinaroc, " To feed the church of God,
which he (namely, Jesus) secuied around by his own blood,"
This I doubt not is (he true rending, notwithstanding Gries-
bach and others have attempted to set it aside as false. The
^MStle Paul has used the phrase ' church of God ' eleven
times in his Epistles, to mean an assembly of people dedicated
to God by the exercise of fallh and virtue. The noun £xxA.^o-ia,
'church,' WHS commonly used in the Grecian republics to de-
note 'an assembly of the people:' and hence when Chris-
tianity was introduced, the term wus borrowed to denote
an aasenibly of men in a peculiiir manner devoted to God —
iKiiKijTuz. ToS @ttii, the article being necessary to mark the dif-
ference between such an assembly and one collected for secular
purposes. In illustration of this I will quote one passage of
Origen against Celsus, p. 1 28, 1 29 ; see also Lardner, vol. viii,
p. 49. " As God sent Jesus, having defeated all the artifices
of demons, he has so ordered it, that the Gospel of Jesus should
prevail every where, for reforming mankind ; and that there

122
■hould be every where leaders, governed by law different fit
the churches of superstitious, intemperate, and unrighlcg
men. For such nre the manners of most of those who bi
to the chiiTchei of lite cities. But the churchtt of GtiM
strueted by Christ, compared with the churdiet of the p
among whom they live, are as lights in the world.
is there that must not acknowledge, that the worst of tl
who are in the church though inferior to the rest, are better ■
most of those, who are in the churches of llie people 1
^tance, the church nf God at Athens, is quiet, mild, and w
behaved, being UexirouH to approve itself to God, who is mei
all But the church of the Athenianit is turbulent, and by do
means comparable to the church of God there. The same ym
must also acknowledge of the church of God at Corinth, a '
the church of the people of the Corinthians ; as you must also
allow of the church of God at Alexandria, and the churches oi
the people of the Alexandrians. Every one who is candid,
and diligently attends to those things with a. mind open Vi
conviction, will admire him who formed this design, mi hu
accomplished it, — that there should be every where churcia
of God, dwelling witli the churches of the people in eveij
city. And if you will observe the senate of the churcha "^
God, and the senate in every city, you will find some sensUon
of tlie church worthy to govern in the city of God all o
world, if such a city there were. And on the other hand, you
will find that the senators of the cities have nothing i
behaviour to render them worthy of the distinction allotted
them. And if you compare the presidents of the churcha oj
God with the presidents of the people in cities, you will find
the governors and senators of the churches, though s
may be inferior to others, who are most perfect : nevertheten [
yon will find them to excel in virtue the senators and governon '
of the cities."

The Apostle asserts a doctrine which is the fundamental
principle of the Gospel, — the actual death of the Lord JesiB i
and this he asserts in opposition to the Gnostic teachers, ts
whom he alludes and calls " grievous wolves" in the awtM

133

fci«.^ ^

These impostors endeavoured to Bet aaide his death,
f denying that he had flesh and blood, or a real human body ;
ind maintaining in consequence that he suffered, rose from the
id^id, and ascended to heaven, in appearance oulij. This doc-
Urine, if received into the church of God, at once levelifd it vi-iih
E^und, the foundations of which the Apostle was most
0U8 to establish. " To feed the church of (lod which Jesus
red for himself with his blood." The original is ns^iis-siij-
i«a,n, a verb literally taken, which signifies to cause one thing
I to surround another, such as to make a hedge round a field, a
; wall round a town, a furrow or trench round a piece of land
ll'xaarked out for building. Hence it denotes to procure, lo fence,
l, protect, adopt. The allusion under vhich the term is here used,
' Jias been borrowed from the custom of marking out liy a furrow
; or some other means, those spots of land which were destined
' iOT building. The ground on which holy men assembled to
form a church to God, was it seems inclosed and sanctilied by
the blood of Jesus.

In these words are included three things ; namely, that Chrigc
was not without Jlesh and blood, as was maintained by the
antichristian teachers ; that, in order as it were to lay the
foundation, to consecrate the ground, to form the cement, to
fence around the church of God, his servant Jesus did in reality
shed his blood, that is, suffered in fact as well as in appear-
ance ; and lastly, that the death of Christ formed the great
line of distinction between tiie true and false believers. The
former, like an innocent and peaceful fiuck, are inclosed on
every side within its benign circuin fere nee ; the latter are e*.
eluded, and kept without like beasts of jircy, seeking to break
down the great barrier of their faith, and to seize the uns us-
pectmg victims of their baseness and violence.

The passage however, though genuine, and obvious as to its
meaning, is in a grammatical view inaccurate. But this is an
inaccuracy which may be justified and illustrated by other
passages in the N. T. and by what happens in common dis.
course witli people of every country. For in upeaking and in
writing it is not unusual with all men, to omit the agent or

124

principal subject of discourse^ if it be necessarily known wbo
that agent is, if the frequent recurrence of his name caDootfui
to recall the idea of him even in circumstances where he is
only alluded to. The Pythagoreans said and wrote, avroi Efo,
he said it. It was not necessary on any occasion to say ihA
avrog ^he) meant Pythagoras, llie speaker or writer^ thesuliject
of discourse^ the constant reference which his disciples made
to him as the highest authority « were sufficient to answer tk
purpose of defining him. In the same manner, it was a noto-
rious fact that Jesus had shed his blood for the benefit of man*
kind ; and the Apostles were constantly speaking of the gell^
rous sacrifice which he made of himself in this respect On ^
notoriety of this fact/as sufficient to explain his meaning, the
Apostle depended, when, carried away by the current of la
ideas, without any suspicion of a grammatical incorrectness,
he said, *' Feed the church of God, which he — he, who as we
all know died on the cross — secured with his blood."

The writers of the Christian Scriptures were plain men,littk
studious of grammatical propriety, when they knew their mean-
ing to be such as could not well be misunderstood. 1 wifi give
in illustration of this disputed text, an example or two of their
carelessness in regard to what is called the nominative caie»
John xix. 5. " Jesus therefore went out bearing the crown of
thorns and the purple robe -, and he said. Behold the man." H
we insisted on the grammatical construction, the italic he must
mean Jesus, whereas the sense or context makes it to sign^
Pilate mentioned in the preceding verse. Acts vii. 1 . " And tte
chief priest spoke, if these things were so j and he said" &c
And again in ver. 4. *' And the God of glory appeared unto
our father Abraham — and he left the land of the Chaldeans"
&c. In strictness, he should be a substitute for God; but the
context shows thai the writer meant Abraham,

My conclusion then is, that no argument against a verse or
a reading in the N.T. can be drawn from a grammatical in-
accuracy, if similar inaccuracies occur, and frequently occur, in
the writings of the same authors.

125

Roman a.
i&e clause fixawruvi] Qmu (chap. i. 17.) Dr. M. has this
" It may be right in this place to apprise the
j reader, that the style of St. Paul in respect to the article, a<
|, well as otherwise, somewhat differs from that of the Kvan.
(■ gelists. It was to be expected from the general vehemence and
. quickness of his manner, that he would in the use of the article
adopt a mode of expression the most remote from precision
1 and formality, which the Greek idiom admits." This remark
\ is plausible ; but a correct examination would warrant me in
I saying that it has no foundation in truth, the omission and the
I adoption of the article 'fie in g founded with him on the same
principles which regulate the use of it in the other Evangelical
writerB, Thus he uses u'lOf, Sioj, SwK^ii, xopiog, '"foj, fre-
: quently without the article ; and. this because he uses such
I words witliout the emphasis or coEitrast which the presence of
the article implies. On the other hand, when such opposition
is intended, Paul never omits the article. Thus in chap. iii.
18. ipatti &etu means ' the fear of God' generally, without any
contrast : had he written a f sSoj r»v ©tou, the words would
denof* also 'the fear of God i' but ' the fear of God' in oppo-
sition to ' the fear of man.' In chap. ii. II. Paul wi'ites Ou yap
fit vpoaiatoXTj'iiia, irapa, tw Qeaj : liad he written tfapa @eipr
the sense would have been this: 'for there is no respect of
person with God;' but the articl-e carries a reference to ro"r
cu&fwsiii; ; and the sense when fully drawn out amounts to
the following ; ' H'hile there is a respect of person with men,
there is no respect of person with God,"

Thus also in t!ie iSth verse, Ou yap ei attpaarat rou vo/wu
hxaioi ■aa.pix Tifj ©Eiu, a^x' ti ffoiijToii tow vofiou JixaimS^jirovrai.
• For it is not the hearers of the law that are just before God ;
but the doers of the law shall be justified with him," Here oJ
aKpnATai, and ^i ■stir,Tizi stand in opposition, and therefore have
each the article; — not such as have a theoretic knowledge of the
law, but such as carry that knowledge into practice — are just
with God, wapa ro! 0£^, though men may pronounce otkeneite.
u3

126

Pa«l often expresses by rijMs wilhoul the article not Liwin
generul, but particularly the Mosaic law ; on the other hand,
we here see i »eftijj meaning not only the law of Moses, bat
every iniilitution or cuslom of a moral nature which is deemed
law, whether human or divine — ' that which is law,' Dr. M.
asserts that the variety of scr.ses which this word bears in lix
wriiingH of Paul, is calcutated to produce great perpleKity to Ite
reader ^ I think quite otherwise ; as ihere is not a passage ill
all the Epistles where the context fails to supply an unerrii^
clue to ascertain its extent or true signification.

The Scribes and Pharisees who caused the death of our Lord,
finding all open opposition to the Gospel ineffectual, eniln-
voured to undermine it by substituting in the room a Gospd
of their own contrivance, better adapted to the depraved pas-
sions and prejudices of tht^ Jews and Gentiles. A leading
feature of thb new Gospel was the perpetuity of the Leviticfll
code : and in conformity to this principle they maintained, tb«l
justilication or acceptance with God was to be obtained, ool
by repentEince towards God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Chrixl,
but by strictly observing the rite of circumcision and olJwt
ceremonies of the Mosaic law. In insisting on these ceremo-
nies they liad two main objects in view j one was, to put an end
to the prevalence of the Gospel among the Heathens by in-
cumbering it with the rite of circumcision, which was most n-
pulsive and odious, and which even the Apostles deemed b
heavy yoke ; the second was, to supersede the purifying inSo-
ence of the Gospel, by substituting, as the means of dirine
acceptance, an external ordinance which had no connection
whatever with the duties of piety and morality. This was one
leading point in the system of the Jewish Gnostics : it ma
(abricatec! nt Jerusalem, and conveyed Ihence into the churcbctl
established by the Apostles, by means of their agents or mn-
gionaries. Hence it forms the chief ground of the dispute
observable in the Epistles of Paul, especially in thwe to the
Romans, the Galatians, and the Philippians.

The Phurisnicul teachers dignified Iheir system with the title
" Works of the law." To this the Apostles opposed the Gospel

127

of Christ, LIS offering to mankind tlie true means of ncceptance
with God. This they called I'x^P'f' ' S^^^^-' *"' ' f»vour,' as
holding forth the free pardon of sin, and the hope of immor-
tality to tKe sineerfly penitent ; or ij mj-K, 'faith,' meaning
such an influential belief in Chriet, as striking its root in the
heart produces in the conduct the fruits of righteousness. Thus,
chap. iii. 30. Eirinrep tls i Qeos, is Sixxtiu<rei - veiiTi>i*.yjy ex
mrews, xcg aKpoCurisv, cia t^s mfnus- In this verse the abs-
tract nouns wipirtiji.'^i' and aKpiCurt^y are used for the con- -
Crete } and the clause ex mrtcus, ' of faith,' or ' them that
belieTe,' belongs to both : — ' Since God is one, who will justify
Ae circumcised and the uncircumcised that believe, by means
of faith," — TTJs befure virctu} serving to characterize /aitft, in
cqiposition to the rites of the law, as the means of justification
with God.

Here Paul asserts the true ground of divine foi^ivenesa ; in
,ver. 20. he sets aside the false ground occupied by the Judai-
King zealots. Autri i^ epyiuv vOjIaou on SixaituSritrETai ■naaa, iraff
cyimtiDv auraZ, ' Wherefore by the works of the law no flesh
shall be justified in his sight." We have aheady seen that
when two nouns stand in opposition, the article is frequently
put only before one of them. Tlib b the case here, vojiou,
though meaning the Mosaic law^ is anarthrous, it being suffi-
cient to preS.v it to mrif, with which it is contrasted. The
same practice occurs in'ver, 31. No^asK iZv v.a.ra.py(iS[i.iy Sta
TTj( irirswf ; ft); Y^vatTo, tckXa, tafMv iro^(i.ty, ' Do we then
render the law of no eft'eet by our faith in Chrial? by no means,
but we confirm the law." — ' We confirm the law, because by
the law we have been made sensible of sin, and by faith in
Christ we obtain the forgiveness of it. Further, the law con-
inats of certain ordinances which are types of Christ ; these
types are fulfilled in him, and hence teceired their validity or
confirmation. Their end being thus answered, they are of
course set aside, as no longer useful or necessary.' Mr. Wake*
field thus renders the verse : " Do we then destroy law by this
fiiith? br no means i we rather esteblbh law." Dr. M.here

123

be taken ink ■
ntext: for'nkfl
itly undentssll

I, thst "rsitts without the article must be ti
sense of moral obedience, as is plain from the context : f
opposed to faith. Few texts of scripture rightly v
are more imporrant. Our own version, from a cause whichtiB
been already noticed, does not place in the clearest liglil tht
truth herein taught," This note, the substance of which tlit
author learnt in the school of Macknight, is assuredly erro-
neous. Moral obedience is what the law could not produce;
instead of being antecedent to faith in Christ, it necessarilj
follows it as its effect. The will of God more fully revealed in
the Gospel ; the example and precepts of Jesus which coil
upon all men to repent and nmend their lives, the promise of
divine grace to support the penitent and the virtuous ii
face of danger and in the hour of tribulation -, and above all,
the death, the resurrection and ascension of our Divine Master,
pointing thereby to a happy immortality for the righted
these lofty and glorious truths contain the only motives suffl-
ci&ntly powerful to change the nature and secure the ratud
oUedience of sinful men.

Chap. 11. 17. \St rrii louJ<t7ftf ETrovou,a!;^, xai tTta.yaitcan'^vf
yofia/. Here the article is essential, though Griesbach has a
eluded it as spurious. This Jew not only confided in the law
of Moses, but confided in it as the means of being; justified with
God, in opposition to the Gospel which proclaimed the forgive-
ness of sins on the sole terms of repentance and reformadoii.
The conduct of this Jew furnishes a striking illustration of tiic
fact, that the mode of justificntion for which he and his bretfnen '
pleaded, had no connection with the moral virtues. For while
he reposed in the law for this end, he wils guilty of theft,
adultery, and robbing the temple. Josephus has subjoined a
short account of him to the testimony which he bears to Jesna
Christ i and that historian stigmatizes him as wicked in every
respect. Paulina, a lady of lank, the wife of Saturninus, and
an intimate friend of the emperor, became a convert to Chris-
tianity, and made through this Jew a splendid present to the
temple at Jerusalem. This he sequestered, appropriating it ta

129

his own use. This is the meaning of the apostle, when apo-
strophizing him, he asks/ " Thou that hatest idols, dost thou
profanely rob the temple* V*

The Apostle in apostrophizing this wicked Jew, ver. 1 7, prefixes
the article to vofAU), because he contrasts the law with the Gospel
mentioned in the preceding verse : but in ver. 25, where no such
contrast is intended, it is used anarthrous : Uepirofji^ri [ji^sf yap
offBXsl, Bay vOfjLOv Ttpaxrcrrii* say cb ira/aaCarijj yofAOw yg, ij lespt"
TO[M^ri cav ax§o^vrM Ysyovsv, ' Circumcision will avail thee, if
thou wilt carry the law into effect -, but if thou be a transgressor
of the law, thy circumcision becomes uncircumcision.* Here
p^fAOs, though without the article, plainly means the law of

^ The account which Josephus gives in his Jewish Antiquities, B. xviii.
e. d, $, is to this effect. ** A Jew resided at Rome, who having been accused
of transgressing the laws, fled from his country to avoid the punishment
which threatened him. He was wicked in every respect. During his ren-
dence at Rome, he pretended to unfold the wisdom of the Law of Moses,
in conjunction with three other men, who in every way resembled himself.
With these associated Fulvia (or Paulina), a woman of rank that had be-
come a convert to the Jewish religion, and whom they prevailed upon to
send for the temple at Jerusalem presents, of purple and gold. These they
received, and converted to their own use."

Now there is reason to believe that this wicked Jew was one of the
Gnostic teachers at Rome. He pretended to teach or unfold the wisdom
or philosophy of Moses. The religion of Jesus was the religion of Moses
developed and carried to perfection. All the Jewish l)elievers considered
and spoke of the Gospel as the wisdom or philosophy of Moses. Josephus
subjoins the character of this man to that of Christ : and his object as-
suredly was to wipe off* the disgrace which his misconduct had brought on
the fair name of Jesus and his religion. The Aposile Paul in his letter
expostulates "with this Jew, telling him, *< Thou gloriest in the law, and
yet dishonourest God by transgressing his law ; for the name of God is
eril spoken of through you among the Gentiles." chap. ii. 23. The as-
sociates of this impostor were the magicians to whom Tiberius was de-
voted. They represented to the emperor that Jesus was one of the pagan
Gods ; and they prevailed upon him to propose his dciiication, and to place
him with the Gods of Rome in the Pantheon. This fact is laid open in
Jones*s Ecclesiastical Researches, chap. x. p. 248 ; and also more fully in a
email volume, entitled A Series of im^wrtaiU Facts deinunstrating the TnUh
of the Christian Religion, chap, viii. p. 72*

rmSM

MoaM, becaoae arcumciiion is a part of it, which fonncdpirl
of no other law.

Chap. IV. 19, 20. Kai fiij affBwijrexj rf vtrti, tu Kinit^

©(WOW JiiMpiSij Tjanis'ia, aW' (»*5u>afito3q itJ vir*!, *ou(tii«
riZ 9t(Z. Here the article abounds, because the
by it stand in contrast with each other : ' not
r^ nrci, though weak in boJy, being about a hundred yeaai
— ' he hesitated not in regard to the promise of God thro^
the want of faith ; but became more powerful in faith, Iho^
\ueaker in body, giving the glory to God,' — ascribing thefulfi-
ment of the promise, not to his own natural vigour, but lo Hit
miraculous inteqioaition of God.

Chap. V. 13. A;^i yap yo^du i^aptta ^v sn xovfLoi- ijiApta
h oux eWayt'Tiu fiij oyrai vifj-iv. The Apostle having the too
rs^m so often on his tongue, divests it of the article witboul
prejudice to the sense, unle&s some contrast or intended oppo-
sition rendered it necessaiy. Its use in such ca.ses becwM
anarthrous, on the same principle that titles of men in office a
of rank are so. This could create no uncertainty or confuaioaj
because it was the language of a Jew addressing Jews, who by
' law' could residily think of no other law than the law of Moso.
Paul reasoned ivith the Jewi.th zealots on their own princtphi)
and lie felt himself restricted to the very sense of ritual obso-
vances which the .lews of that period usually attached to il,
On the clause ajy"* *Sf*»^j Dr. M. observes, " Here is an in-
(tance already noticed on ii. 13. vo/mlt ia equivalent tot tunics,
but the article is omitted on account of the preposition." Thit
ii puerile, ^

V. 20. No/tof Je ffafeioTjAScy. Dr. M. proceeds : "Locke,
Roaenmiiller, Schleu-«ner and Michaelis, and indeed most of the
commentators, understand this of the law of Moses ; in which
cose it must be admitted that the rejection of the article is not
here authorised by any of the canons. Macknight, however,
has a different e\planation of the passage. He well contendl
that vapfir^^^Ev cannot be said of the law, since it signi'

131

mtered pTtBUy, as in Gal. ii. 4, the only instance besides the
which the word occurs in the N. T. So also the
onilarly compounded words, va-ptiuv/ia, 2 Pet. ii. 2 ; rapiicr-
, Gal. ii. 4 ; ■saptiffhoi. Jade 4. But the Mosaic law
s unhered into the world with all possible pomp and notoriety.
flacknight therefore understands yafio; of the Law of Nature."
'. M. then iiuotes his note, subjoining to it the fallowing re-
' Perhaps, however, in such cases voftof had best been
mdered a Rule of Life : this exactly accords with Macknight'a
" n ; for in his Commentiiry he says. Law secrelly entered
into the world as the rule of man's conduct : and such a ren-
[dering would be more generally intelligihie than the term lau>,
I to which the English reader annexes no very precise idea."

The compound ff«f enr^xSev literally means ' entered in at the
' side,' and does not necessarily signify ' entered privily,' unless
. m cbvrch or a house be the object, where the door is the only
I lawful entrance, and where to enter by the side would be to
enter privily or unlawfully. Change the object of allusion, and
the sense of the verb is also chitagect. The law of Muses did
I not form the first link in the great chain of providence, which
was to introduce the Christian Dispensation. It stood at a great
distance from the loss of Paradise ; there it waited at the time
and place appointed for it, till the march of events came up to
it, and then, as it were, fell in with the procession, taking its
station at the side, and thus proceeding forward till its tem-
porary end was answered in the advent of the Messiah, and the
final establishment of bis Gospel. Taken in this point of view,
the Apostle used it as the most appropriate verb which the
Greek language could supply : and it apjKars to me surprising
that any critic could be found so infatuated, as to suppose it can
signify the Law of Nature, which existed from the beginning,
and which the Creator himself has interwoven with the very
frame and condition of man. No wonder that the Apostle Paul
should be thought obscure and perplexed, when critics take the
liberty, often in support of their own system, to pervert his
words in so shameful a manner.

Chap. VIL 21. Eopiiniiii apa r» ny-ty Tip dcAarri cftsi nn7»

i

132

ro xaXov, 6t( cfioi to xaxoy ^apaxjnreu. This vene is wMf
mistaken by ull the translators and coimnentatois. The CB^
struction is this : Eiptanw apx jri ro xaxov «^oi irgmxtujii
ffbO< ruf d£Aovrf xara rov yoftoy vM£7y ro xoAor. ' I fiod tlKniji
that evil is present to ine — to me when I wish according tstilfe
law to do that which is good.* Here the object of <B^inai.ii
on sfjLoi TO xflxoy irafiaxeiroi,— cfioi is repeated on account rfik
remoteness in the first clause from this verb on which it i^
pends, and rov vofuov is elliptical for xara tqv vo/lov.

The PhiirLsaical teachers, or rather the wicked Jew, tbeic»
presentative in the church at Rome, while they confided in #e
law for jiisti6cation with God, indulged in the grossest sini, It
b therefore a main point with the Apostle to hold forth the hi
as making known the existence and evil nature of sin, «ndtki
to condemn the impostors as sinful on the veiy principte If
which they claimed acceptance with God.

This Jew, as Josephus informs us, associated with men lik
himself, wicked in every respect : these were the Egyptiip
priests and Chaldean astrologers, to whom Tiberius^ though i
fatalist, had been exceedingly devoted. These men maintabwd
that the Creator was an evil being, and that the Law which lie
delivered by Moses was arbitrary and unjust. Clement of Alex-
andria has recorded the sentiments which were afterwards taqgfct
in Egypt by these men and their followers : and Theodora^ il
his Commentary on this very place, furnishes us with a Bpecimei
of the manner in which they blasphemed the Almighty Cieitfor.
" Those," writes he, " who live in indolence (meaning the
Gnostic monks of Egypt) and are averse to the painful totib of
virtue, blame the Lord God for having given (Adain) the com-
mandment. For if, say they, he knew not what would come to
pass, how can he be God who is ignorant of the things to come.
But if, while he foresaw the transgression he laid down the
commandment, he is himself the cause of its violation."

These impious sentiments were among the fundamental prin-
ciples of the Gnostic system -, and they appear to have been in:
troduced into the Roman church even before the Apostle wrote
this Epistle. Hence we feel the force and firift of his m^giunent

MB

L 7. " What then shall we a&y ? Is tiie laxv iitn t Vf
ana ; but I knew not sin excepting through the law — so
e law is holy, and the commandment holy, just, and good.
i then that which is good (ihe law) prove death to me ? By
I, that it might appear siiii working di'Uth in
e through that which is good ; tliiit sin by means of the
'ment might become exceedingly ninful."
r. Middleton's criticism on ny tcfttv is the following. " The
t here is andcipative of what in subjoined: the law or
iciple which the Apostle is about to describe as impelling
1 evil, even when he is endeavouring to practise virtue.
erhttis (ap. Wetstein) would expunge ro naKov, so rus to
jOBBke ny vajny dependent on -Tcclety. This reading would im-
iderstond rev vo/xsi' of the Mosaic Law, a sense which accords
lipet with the argument." So j-Ofisf, which, according to Dr. M,,
idsewhere means the Law of Nature, Moral Obedience, Rule of
U^e, here denotes a jtrincipte anpetling tis to evil. This is a
monstrous position, from a distinguished biblical critic, and this
in the very face of the Apostle, who maintains that the Law was
boly and good, as pointing outuin against certain unpostors
mrbo arraigned it as eoil.

As Paul was an Apostle of the Gentiles and pleaded their
cause, some of them might infer that he was averse, or at least
indifferent, to the welfare of his brethren the Jews. Thl>i in-
ference the Apostle was anxious to preclude ; and he thus n.s-
serts his heartfelt grief (or their obstinacy and degraded state :
" I speak the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience alno
bearing me vritness in the Holy Spirit, that I have great grief
nod continued sorrow of heart on account of my brethren, my
kindred according to the flesh ; for I too (I as they now do)
once gloried in being an anathema from Christ," chap. ix. I — 4.
The Egyptian Gnostics disputed the privileges which had
hitherto distinguished the Jews a9 the chosen people of Got).
Abraham, they might suy, was a Chaldean, Joseph an Egyptian,
the Christ, as being a God, did not belong to the Israelites ac-
cording to the flesh. They blasphemed even Jehovah as an
imperfect evil Being, and pretended to have revealed a god of

U4

their own, who was perfect and supreme over all. Tlxse
positions of the impostor^;' nit&}"fh'^6ceecl8 thus to set ande,
irff.4, 5. *Omv§f hwiv l«fWi^kh€u*£lN4mi^iarMA4 fc(sikcu

OUtp whr/^ru$ «x T%9s^auSva4^ 'Who are-bmcliiei jnfyirtteii
the adoption, and the glory^ and the cotienflinlli>'and!tb0]j|i«kt
of the tew, anid ihesenricet and thei^aadm8y^a^mmut-4k
fathers^' and mr wmou m Christ accordmgtto theiflcth, i^tfA
k the great rcalhy» >6od over all to be bLessed ipr ewet^ ■':*- -
l'( Herc^ooeuM a remarkable' ellipsis^ 'thoog;l¥'aii ellipskt^^
justified by » similar practiee'in allCrreek'Wi^iM^^inttf'ApMA
woekiibave written car 6 i^y^* te« 5 >bat'pere^vit)g^tlie^*l|l
oapbony* this woald have- oceasioned, he oHHtt«d (ip;tiit(hM
the reader to supply Ihe omission from the precedkig daiiSfiii
whereiit occmv tiuee times. The sentiment it con tains ik, — M
the God of Israel is the only supreme God, and not the QA
wimm the Gnostkai pretended to hate rerealed t as if hesalf,
^:llds holy and all-perfect Being is worthy to be praisedifltfi
biassed, and not to be blasphemed as he is by the antiohiiMiii
teachers.' This seems to be the true solution of .a pasisje
sddrlfcibeyond any other has occasioned dispute and perples^
among, divines *.

'''* Di^ impostors called their unknown Supreme God Suthos or Balkot;

attd llle Apostle mentions by name diis fictitious being at the close of-dK

imiycediif^chspter. ^ For I am persuaded that neither Deatby iiar Vfk

^»f^f^r^eff,por PrivcipaiUieif nor PawerSf nor things preeei^ nor tl^ip

to come, nor Height {Hyjtsoma), nor Depth {Bathos), nor any other being,

will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.**

That the deceivers called their Supreme God Bathos, we learn from I^

.Mens, p. 7. In the Excerpta of Clemens Alezandrinus, he is etyled Battoi:

't| Ityn (the female mate of Bathos) fAnm^ w^m tSp ^avrtn 9^*QXw9s9^m9 i»

r«v.B«4«f. This Bathos they represented as higher than the Creator-ef thi

^Ojrld ; v^^fnk»r%^9» rt x«u fAu{/»t tm/ m «u^tn juu yn* »«u vtttra rm sr^ tuttm

9ls,wfiri»0rH Os«ii. In reference to a representation like this^ the Aposcie

here gives it the name of v^atfM, That he adverts to the Gnostic nodoa^

4Uid that the names used in this place are copied-from the ChMstio school^

will appear evident, if we attend to the accounts given by

m

.,,l.CsB!?f?'"iM'fl..i..

h).oi»en%9, "Tlicre.is no passage in the N. T; wftich
Sigivcn rise to mare dispute on the subject of tlw article thati
the jiresent. Some criufs wilt hate the article here to be
: others aHirra that it is the tncWiic roj formi-,
\t^ a.'lhird cinss thinks tiiaiTw eK-rpuifAan in aiedxa.r i^'Oj^v."
jPwb'lhe greatest difficulty here is to asceFtirin (he troe sense of
EMTBUiiz, as applicable to the cai-e of the Ajiostlc : nndtliiR
n done by recurring to its origin, it being the Mrb
)i,anotiier form of Tf aum, *1 wound,' 'bruise-,' axTftefna
I tb^a ,is an Rbstract noun a))j)lied to theftelus, which makes it*
H^emi^f e prematurely, in conse<{uence of a vjouiid, brni^ or
! ,4<W)0 violence received by tlie-moEher — on untimek/ birth, abar-
I iim' Thi* '^ it.'* iMiial acceptation : but it bears no analo^to
$hc< circumstances uf i'uul. Yet we may deduce from the tiune
fffymology n meaning; n:Hural enough, which is exactly oppJi-
gnble to htm : f>traJiji.a, may mean the ftEtus who$e birth is
IMOtracted by some oiMtruction, and which at length is brought
tsilight by e^itraordinary means, that is, by making a wound
«r incision on the parent. The Cesarean operation was then
^ell known in tiie medical world, and the Apostle seems to
allude to it. This acceptation meets the case of his conversion
with great exactness. He did not receive his moral birtli from the
l>eginiiing, and it was at last efFected by an estraordinary inter-
position of Providence. Even then it waa brought about not
wMiont violence, being made blind for a season j and a thorn

BjJlplianiuK on tfipBuliject. The fihtei and endless gmraliigiei {\ Tim. i.3.)
wUdt^tbeyinvenlcd, Ind no otlier object than lo Reduce [he Cornells from
the love of the Universal I'atliar. 'I'tie prinnry liiik« in that chUirof llc-

^aJ'^ipb. p. 69. or ibii impoiluis vho taugbc ibese fidJoiu, he ihin
((Kak) near ibe clam : " 1 beaeei^b you. hreibrcn, rnnHi those who nuik«
ditiJKiBs, and bring ofleneci conlrarj lo iho ilocuine ye have Immt ; for

M.h men .n> not u

rvniuof

IT LonI Jetus OiriM, but .la

n or dKHr 1

•mMlf."

■^mf^m

ir2

M

m^^

^

M

136

fiTcd in his Besh, that in, b wound inllicttd on Irnti, whicK'fie
hoie through lire, as a atandin^ memoTial of the scene that pni^
duced hie conversion.

The nrtirle here in soon erplairtrd, ' He also showed himeelf m
to UD,' luatcpef nu atTpaifj.stTi, * as one whose birth is proLracMd ji
beyond itt due eeOHOn — us one that ie brought lo light by in* '■
cision or e:ctraor(iinaiy means.' t^ere the article is generic, '
andiiiHi'ks ihe Apostle in a nnetiipliorical sense, as one of thai
class of things, it Ik mntrutar iliat Dr. M. did not see this,
espeeiatlv as he reiejn to Ihe fallowing words of Lake, xviti. 13.
i &eas, IkKvirfTi fioi ruj afAafiriuKiZ , ' God be merciful to me onr
that u a sinner,' that is, one of that clai<H who have traiti*-
greased thy law. So again in 2 Cor. xii. IB. xai <ruTiiserEiXB
ray afeApev, ' 1 have sent with him one thai is a brother — one
bearing Uie relation of brother — a brother ;' see Rom. air. Ifl.
where a similar sense of rev aieKfot occurs. It is on this pna-
ciple that we are to eicplnin such patsRges as the following' j
i ayavav tov irspor, ♦Oftov vswt^ijptuxt, ' he who kiTes one tlikt
is another,' and not merely hJmself-~' one who loves others BS
wett as himself^hath fulfilled the lavr.' Thus in tfacaexl vetae
ayaatr,atii toy K>.1^a^ey 9itij ut faurev, ' thon shall love OM Ant
is near thee — thy neighbour — as thyself.'

2 ContxTuiANs. . ^1^

Chap. Vn, II, E* iraiTi wyerrio-ari hcwnof dyvos ^auM
rip TpnyfiuiTi, Winer, who has published an useful and elBWP
Tat« Greek Oramnmr for the M. "t. alone, explains ruj xptcyf^wei
to mean some knomn fact., " which vou well recollecl," No,
this IB not ib^ meaning; it is here, as usual, antithetical, point-
ing to Tui Kayai, ' you have made yourselves pure in ail things,
in deed an icell as in profession.' See a trannlation into Eiigliih
of this work by Moses Stuart, p. 5 1 .

Chap. VIIl. 18. iu»(Tr6fti|»afi.iv Ss fur' auiTtS rov aAe^ptn, h
i tvunii IV TW luxyytXiO! ita, 'Bo.atiiv ruiv SKV.KT,<riiiiif. UtK
r^Q coalescing with ro> aSiKpov, suggests by association :tJut
the Gospel meant belonged la him. Moreover, tr in (his rose
signiHes ' by means of,' a sense which il often Itas elscvihi

■ S3T
t'tritb him the.brotber, whoM pntiRCb^menwef
n ull the churches.' The brother here meant is
'iiui calls a fellow -tmvdlcr in the next verse.
j^traoriiinary interest which iho fame of Jesus excited
^Dut the world, called forth many spuriouK narratives re-
n and hia works. The misrepresentation* and fidse-
s thus circulated, caused Luke early to compose a fuithful
memoir of his Divine Master : and as he had long been the
coadjutor and faithful companion of the Aposlie Paul in esta-
blishing the churches, it became a precaution absolutely ne-
'cessary to deliver a copy of thift genuine Gospel to each
church, as they were leaving it. Thia was to be a safeguard
sgainst the false gospels which were sure to gain admission
after their departure. And here we are very incidentally
Airnished with a happy testimony to the early existence of the
Gospel of Luke; toils reception as genuine in all the churches ;
nnd to the estimation in which the author of it was universally
iteld for Rdelity and truth. The passages are very numerous
in (lie Ni T. where the article, as in the present instance, te
to be rendered by the |M)s.sessive pronoun. I'ur example,
,1 Cor. KV. 24, orav wapaSw Tijv ^aci^tiay ruj Gtai xon tlarpt,
' when he shall deliver n]i the kingdom to the God and Father,"
that m, • to his God and Father,' which in the common version
is improperly rendered ' to God even the Father.'

PniLipptiNS,
Chap. 111. 2. B?.iirtTi nus xuras, /SXeffir* rouf xa.xiUf tffct-
■rai, ^XeitiTt riji' Kararo^ijv. ' Beware of the dogs, — of such as
are dogs ; — beware of such as practise evil; beware of iheir
mauling you.' Wherever the Apostles establbhed a church,
the Pharisees of Jerusalem, by means of their missionarief,
caused the Gnostic system speedily to be introduced into it.
These emissaries, wliile ihey pretended to be brethren, and to
teach the Gospel, were the bitterest enemies of the Apostles
and their cause, and the secret instigators of all the persecutions
they endured. They entered as shepherds of the flock) but
they were soon found, as our Lord forewarned his disciples, to

W^wtsih aheep'a clothing. Thin is th« circumiitanoe whitA
unruItU the propriety of the Apostle's advice, ' Beware of tbt
dogx ; beware of their mauling you.' Philo, in the kccoUI
which he gives of the followers of Jesus io Jiidea, has notictd
the sufferings which they thus endured. "This eflecl," a/l
he, "is evinced by the many powerful men who rose ogainM
these holy men in their own country. Some of the persecuton
being eager to Kurpans the fierceness of untamed beasts, omit
no mtasure that may gratify their cruelty ; and they cease ml
to sacrifice whole flocks of those within their power ; or lilu
butchers, to tear their limbs in pieces, until themselves an
brought to that justice, which supetintendn the aflitirs of neo.
Others of these persKulors caase their snarling fuiy to aasumt a
different form. Indulging a fpirit of uwelenting senerity, thtf
addrtu their victims with gentlenens, diiplay Iheir incolerul
'tpirit in affectotg miiitneM of speech, thru retfmbling dogt udM
going to inflict ent>eiiomcd uiottnds. By these means theyoeca*
sion irremediable evils, and leave behind them throughout
whole communities, monuments of their impiety in the em
memorable calamities of the sufferers. Yet not one of those
persecutors, tehetker open or disgaited, have been able to sub-
Btantiate any ftceuBation against this band of holy men." Thfe
is taken from a book of Philo entitled Clavra trxivSaior g»w
iXeuflepov, vol, ii, 44,}, p. S65. See also Jones's Ei-cler. Sf
searches, chap. iv.

The Apostle further admonishes the Philippians to beware
of the same, as men laho practised evil, deeds. These impostors
indeed were not only immoral in the extreme, but Ih^ redtlced
immorality lo a system, and openly gloried in the tna«
ihameful actions. Yet they pretended to be free from gvilH
and to enjoy the divine favour in consequence of llie privil
•ecured to ihem by the law. To allow tlie worthlessnessi
those immunities, Paul enumerates them, and maintains
he had equal right to rely on them, if they had any vnli
we are the true cu-cumciHion, who pay a religious service ta
God in the mind ; and boast in Christ Jesus, and have noconr.
lidenu in the flebh i for if any one may presume to h&ve

nessd^l
nstuH
. "J"*
vice ta
loconr.
to h&ve MikK—

•i^th day, of the race of Uratk ; of the tribe of Benjamin ; a
Hidirew from Hebrews ; with respect to the law, a I'ivirisee'}
Mth reupccl to zeal, a peraecutor of the church j according W
Avrighteowiness of the law, blameless. But these thiags which
mte gain, 1 count but \ofiS in respect to ChriBl. Nay, indeed^
|-vount all thin^ but Iosk in respect to the excellence of the
knowledge of Christ Jesua my Lord." Here we see enumcta
rated those teorks of the Late in which the deceivers confided,
and on which they affected to found their hope of salmtion.
FVwm these privileges they held themselves righteous in the
sight of God ( while in a moral vievt, they gloried in theit
■hatne ; resembling those dogK, which were prompted by fiii^
to bite men, and by hunger to devour the groHsest filth.

Cliup. IV. (i. Tct aLiT^}/.xTa, uu.uiy yvajpt^isHw m^ii Tor @sw,
'Letyour supplications be made known to God,' that is, M
God, and not to ratn. The Apostle here gently rebukes thai
aetentatious display of prayer which generally prevailed among
the Pharisees. Thci^e hypocrites pruyed in the muNt public
places, that they might have glory of men. See Matt. vi. i.
The antithesiti to this clause is given in the preceding verse j
TO BrifiMf ufAiJi' yvcerBijTu) Trarriv aripiam;, ' let your eqllityi
meekness, btrbearance, clemency, and moderation be known
tomen ;' these are the proper virtues which as Christians yoo
should dispi:iy bf'fore the world. God is the ontv object of
pnyer, and to him all prayers should be directed ; ami if fmra
ostentation yen pray in public, you become hypocrites.

On Ephes. V. 5. Dr. M. has a very long nole, the ot^eet ef
wfaidt is to justify the Canon introduced by Granville Skarpr,
'fhis renders it aectssar}' to take a short review of that Caitoni
though its merits have been cursorily discussed in pnge^ft, ftc.
The Cnnon is thus stated by Dr. M. in p. 79. " When tvro ot
more atlributivc:, joined by a copulative or copulatives, an
assumed of the inme person or thing ; before the first Httii*
billive the article is inserted ; before the remaining ones it i*
omitted^"

Mr. Cogan, sn accomplished Greek scholar, in a Journal

F

140

tiRrAThf Mcnlhlf Repoiitor]!, (»M ttie Number for Nmedw
1824, |i. 6-19) hM diwuMed this queation, and allowa the Can *■
1o be generally true. When 1 consider that Mr. CogTin,!hoi^
bimulFn man of su|>eru)r intellect, seems alvvnys to hoTeaRjl
reverence for nuthority, this concession cannot surprat rf
But in truth the Canon itself in mere rubbish, n-ithant t^R'*'
foundation in truth, and grouniled on B power that Is rt^F
foreign to the artirle, and to the purpose for which it is flppUtCl
This will ap|)ear from the three following remarks.

First. It Ik the usual practice with Greek and ulsowiihLl
writers, Ihnt when two or more nouns are connected by a
putative, the adjective qualifying the first, and limited to it Iff l*"
its ]x>sition, is supposed to be carried forward, so as to qndi^ 1^
the succeeding nounit, in order to render the sense complCtt I"
The article, partaking of the nature of ndjectives, admits of the i"
name eilension Hence when it marks an attributive but onutttd
before another conjoined to it, the omission is lo be supplied b|f
the reader, in order to render the construction, and even th*
meaning of the writfr, complete, This has already been iHui-
trated by examples j but I will repeat a few, Thus 'Fwnaifi
iitof xai xXiiDovoftsf, ' Roscius the son and heir,' for 'I'te^uis i
iiif vat i xxijiovsiiss, • Roscius the son and the heir ;* 'O n^
CluAff »«' pJiTOjp lym, for juti h pr,roip. '0 oTiwf ayTTj; xai vtft-
tpyi; Aii^offSiviif, for i eiPxo^stvTijj xai s veenpyai. But why,
it maybe asked, has the writer omitted the article before tht
second attributive, if its repetition be necessary to complete ^e
sense or the construction ? If he wished to make the second at-
tributive prominent or emphatic, he would have supplied it; but
as he had no emphasis or contrast to mark, he has left it to be
supplied by the reader.

Secondly. This omission takes place even when the persoM
or characters are different, or when the attributives charactenH
different persons or things. This practice is not rare or casu^
but pen-ades e^ery Greek writer. Thus, rov kKi^atipM ttm
♦lAnnr**, for tai rdyti^vvoy. AKrefJiav vf^s aurtvf tc» HtTpir
xat Iwayvijv, {Acts viii. 14,) for xeu rsv luiavti]f. So in theb^
ginning of Thucydides'j tw veAE/i«y ntMviyyiffiiov niu A|M
ytuujy, for rwr AfliiHwv. 1

m

y;.3)ie-ottiis.sioB. o£ tht article ia still more, com man. beTora aJw*
tf^Ct -nouns or attributives. Xen. Mem. lib. ii. c. i. si atSpsm
t^..Svta.T<ii roAif aia,ySfci.s xxi aiuystraui, for oi Jmaroi — rouf
aSpiiarsuf. Aridt, Elti. lib. i. c. S, to iiparifciv xai asspoy, for
r{i ijs-efw. Plato Theaet. vol. ii, p. 134. ftEraEu tou mtaSvT);
luuieajT^ivTos, for tdlI irarp^avTOf, ' between the agent and the
pfitient.' Gorg- vol, iv. p. 32. ro a^nsv xaa vipi-my, for to
ffefiTTsv : T9 o"duiio> x«( alixoK, for -^a afixo*.

The reason of llie omission in these and in innumerable othfii
instMices is, that the correlative term is not intended to convey
an emphasis or contrast. The u^e of the corres|)onding English
article in all such cases is precisely similar. Thiw, " The king
and queen," for " the king and tk-e queen." " The husband an^
wife," for " the husband and Oic wife." " The son and heir,"
for " the son and the heir." " The first and last," for " the
fint and Uie last." Here in Greek and in English the oraN^ion
and the repetition of the niticle are founded on the same prlnr
riple.

Thirdly, When two different persons are conjoined by a ^-
pvLklive, or two different attributives are annexed to the same
person, the article is repeated by the writer, if it be his object
to render the last emphatic and prominent like the first. Thus,
ActBsiii.50, iwi firjyeipav Juuyftaf siri tov UhuXw xai r»> Sojt-
MCfty : as Luke wished to hold forth Bamabas no less than
Pawl as an object of perHCCution, he repeats the article. TbjB
nguM be done more adequately in English by repeating the
pwpoaition ; ' They raUed a persecution against Paul and
against Barnabas.' Without a repetition of the article in Greek
wd of the prepowtion in English, tlte notice given of fiamnbai
would leave n feebler impres.iion on the reader. See ano^lter
euuaple from John ii. '22, in page 2S. John xiii. 1 3. vn^tt[fu'
»lSr* jis, i ii iatTKdXoj KOI i Kupwf, ' You address me as the
MoBter and the Lord— as your Muster and ijnur Loti.' ,1d this
OKampk too the Evangelist felt himself called upon to render
lite Iwt. title as prominent as the 6.tsA : he therefore reijeuti the
mitit: tliuugh both are attributivefi of one and the eame person.
Agftiu, iiv,.(i. M-yu avrip i l^'Wf, cy" *'^' ■)' We/, Mt-^,*))!!

I ^ - .^^ - ^ .^.

Iim, Ktu :;' ^oH}, ' Jenus Mys unto him, 1 am the wayi artd^

truth and the Hfv,' the article being repeated before ' truth,' |
' life' to show emphalieiUly [hat these attributives heioDgedu
Jesus as well ax ' way,'

The repetition of tlie article answers the same end w
l%e conjunction. See 951 — 95^ o( the Prometheut(]vioteAa1nijd
page 5G. To the same elfect Cailirhoe, in the beautiful aqv,tf,
Chariton, thus pathetically describes the several relations i>rlii^
Chreas hore to her — rsv irdXirijy, tw sfarr,y, ray t^aininy,.i]
vuftfiB*, ' tnj fellow -citizen, wy lover, my beloved. Jiy s.
lis being more emphatical and impressive than. Tf(». ara^
tparr,y, ipui^ivQv, iru^^nv, 'ni^ fellow, citizen, lovef, bcto
spouse."

It remains now to explain on this principle a few of the pa^j
sages which may be supposed to illustrate and confirm the
Canon, for which Mr. Siiarp and Dr. M. contend. I Cor. xt. 24,
eraiv rapaSui njv SatriJ^iav rip 9s^ km iretrfi, ' When he sluJt
deliver up the kingdom to hk God and lather.' Had the Apostla
tliought (It to render itttTfi emphatic, he would have said riL
vnTpi, ' to hli God and hU father.' Ephes. v. 5, «» tj ^a.a■^\iig^
nv Xiis-aS xoii ©eou, elliptlcally for TtS ©«ou, or rou ©ew V^TfUn. _
'In the Iclngdom of Christ, and o/ God his father.' 1 'rira.v.;yihl
emiVin* ToS QmS^Ksu Kopioii lijrou Xpr«u, ' before God. and ttm' J
Lord Jesus Chr'ist,' elliptlcally for svcbVki* too Ku^uu liyaftl
Xpirou, 'before God and before the Lord Jesua.' See Rl|flkfl
2 Tim. iv. I. Titus ii, J 3, vpoirSex'^l'-f"" ■"}* ^aKJi/jiaK iXjnfttr
nai iiri<pa.vciar rrjs i(i£ij( roC /leyaAou ©fioiT xai <rai7(fe( ■^UriSf
I^ffou Kpiriu. In this verse are two ellipses of the article t trji
f/Mxapiav tXTiJn, KXi njk i«if!t»eia» — rou fi.iya.Mv ©tsC koj tw
ffsaTTjpts, ie. ' expecting the blessed hope, and i/(e glorious ap-
pearance of the great God aad ol Jesua Christ the Saviomi of
us — and of our Saviour Jesus Christ.' 2 Pet. i. I , w SiKojofvJi
rpv &ioii -^ji-m , xai trui-r^pos lr,s'<ii! Xfiifw. Here ia on ellipsis
of rcu and ■^j/.diy — xa.i rau rwr^foj rifi.uiy Ii]ff*iJ ^pifw, ' in the
righteousness of our God, and of our Saviour Jesua Christ.' A
similar ellipsis occurs in ver. II. rw Ku.aiou if»i!i jtof o-«TflW4
Ijm Xpij-sir, for KOH Tou (TiuT^f o( ijfiwi^. I ;i,L(,o-l-iIriuirtg

m

**ttUHng'flft ihlhistryofoiir tlessed TjoM, his only designation
WtA that of JesJii. This is his usual name in the four Gosptit,
Ifut after his resurrection he is culled by tieveriil names, such
Oi Jesus Christ, or our Lord Jcaus Chrhl. This is the manner
W'^liich he is denignated in the Book of the Acta, and in th^
fijilStles. The reason of the change is to be found in the in-
KoAiction and preralence of the Gnostic system. The authori
df'tliaC imposture separated th« Christ from the man Jesuit
naking the former a god dwelling in Jesus for a season, but
entirely distinct from, and independent of, him. To set afule
tHs nrtifice, the Apostles always join the two appellatives as
expressive of one and the same peison. Further, the (loostics!
though they affected to extol Christ, uniformly refused to ^-
kWbwIedge him as their Lord and Master. This is said by Ire-
ftttUB in express terms, p. 9 ; and the reason was, that by d^
ctining to atknowledge Jesus as their Lord, they evaded the
M)Kgation of being like him in virtue and holiness, and secured
10 themselves a license for the gross immoralities to which they.
were abandoned. The sincere followers of Christ were aniiguj^
CO mark the dtfl'erence which, in this respect, subsisted betweea
ihfm and the impostors. With this view the Apostles, in thtar
discourses and in their writings, annex Ku/iiof or Kvsio; yiu-uiy to
tile usual designations of their Divine Miwter, thus declajina
that they considered him as their Lord, while the fulee teacherL
rejected him under that character. Thus Rom. xvi. 18, ni yajj,
■nnvTii rat Kupiai rjfiiuc lijiriu X/jfcu on SiUf^iSive-iy, 'for sucli
riKR as these are not servants to our Lord Jesus Christ." Thii
hO^^uage is peculiarly appropriate when considered in connexion
*rtth ihe fact attested by IrenEens. " They own not ihemaelve?
thfe' Jiervants of him whom we acknowledge as our Lord, aiia
itolibte as our pattern." This formula constantly trcurs in tK?
EJiutlesj andil must have had some end to answer, and thatot*
*rfaiportant nature. Sec verses 20, 24, of this chapter. See
ftoHom. vi. I. I Cor. i. 2. 3. 7.8. 9. 10. "

''Tht Ttrtt Rpi*itle to the Thesaalonians was the first of those'
wrttten byraul; and as it was sent to that ctiurch sbori aftet
its e»tnbliKhmenl, it appears to have preceded Ihe introduction

i

144

of Gnoftticisn. But tlw emiaMuiet of that iiystem lost no time
in iotroducing it) and to secure a temporary success to their
imposture, tliey presented to the church a letter which they had
folded, as if they had reoeived it from Paul himself. See 2 Thes.
iL 2. This came to the knowledge of the Apostle^ and was the
means under Providence of calling forth the Second Epistle to
the Thessalontans. The manner in which he concludes this
letter is memorable : *' The salutation is by the hand of me
Pteil, which is my mark in every Epistle, thus I write : Theja-
vmtrrfour Lord Jcmus Christ be wkh yoa all.**

Now the question is, how such a mark could secure this or
any other letter of Paul from interpolation or forgery. Hie
doctrine taught by the impostors ftirnishes the true answer to
tfab question. They maintained that the Christ was a god dif-
ferent from the mail Jesus ^ and though they extolled him as
divine, they denied his claim as a Lord to be obeyed and imi-
tated by them. The mark then lay in the sentim&it, which
the deceivers would not avow, and not in the writing, which
they could easily imitate or forge. Here then we have a re-
markable fact : The wisdom of Providence had so ordained it,
that the very signature which established the authenticity of the
Epistles of Paul with the churches to which, at the time, the?
were addressed, should become a pledge to us and to all nations,
that those Epistles had been written in opposition to men who
ta(!kght certain erroneous notions respecting Christy aa the mean
of subverting his Gospel.

THE KITD.

>m0t

Printed by Richard Taylor^
Shoe-Lane.