Page:The New Testament in the original Greek - Introduction and Appendix (1882).pdf/351

attested aspirate of the African Hadrumetum prescribes πλοίῳ Ἁδραμυντηνῷ, as the name of the obscurer Asiatic city must have had the same origin. In proper names transliterated from the Hebrew or Aramaic we have in like manner exactly followed the Hebrew or Aramaic spelling, expressing א and ע; by the smooth breathing, and ה and ח by the rough breathing. This principle, manifestly the only safe guide in the absence of evidence, sanctions Ἅβελ, Ἅγαρ, Ἁκελδαμάχ, Ἁλφαῖος, Ἁνανίας, Ἅννα, Ἅννας, Ἁρέτας, Ἁριμαθαία, Ἑμμώρ, Ἑνώχ, Ἑσρώμ, Εὕα, Ὡσηέ; also Ἁλληλουιά as well as Ὡσαννά. In Ἃρ Μαγεδών, Mount Megiddo, the common identification of Αρ with הַר is accepted. It is true that the rare form עׇר, denoting a 'city', is represented in the Ar-Moab of Num. xxi 28; (cf. xxii 36;) Is. XV I, (transliterated by Theodotion in Isaiah, but by no other Greek authority in either place,) and in the Αρσαμόσατα of classical authors, the name of a city near the sources of the Tigris. But better parallels on Jewish soil are supplied by Ἃρ Γαριζείν, Mount Gerizim, from two Greek Samaritan sources (Ps. Eupolem. ap. Eus. P.E. ix 419 A; Damasc.Vit.Marin. ap. Phot.Bibl.345 b 20 [τῷ Ἁργαρίζῳ]: cf. Freudenthal Alex.Polyhist. 86 ff.), and by Ἃρ Σαφάρ, Mount Shapher, from the LXX of Num. xxxiii 23 f. in A and most MSS. The context points to a 'mount' rather than a 'city'; and the name Mount Megiddo is not difficult to explain, though it does not occur elsewhere. In Ἁλφαῖος we follow the Vulgate Syriac (the Old Syriac is lost in the four places where the name occurs), which agrees with what the best modern authorities consider to be the Aramaic original. We have also in the text accepted the authority of the Syriac for Ἄγαβος (from ענב) : but Ἅγαβος (from חנב) is supported by the existence of a Hagab in Ezr. ii 45 f.; Νeh. vii 48. In like manner Ἐβέρ, Ἐβραῖος, Ἐβραΐς, Ἐβραϊστί have every claim to be received: indeed the complete displacement of Ebraeus and Ebrew by Hebraeus and Hebrew is comparatively modern. All names beginning with י have received the smooth breathing. No better reason than the false association with ἱερός can be given for hesitating to write Ἰερεμίας, Ἰερειχώ, Ἰεροσόλυμα (-μείτης), Ἰερουσαλήμ.

409. On the other hand an interesting question is raised by the concurrence of several of the best MSS in Gal. ii 14 in favour of οὐχ Ιουδαϊκῶς, the only other well attested reading οὐχὶ Ιουδαϊκῶς being probably a correction: nowhere else in the New Testament is any