1 Here in mss. and Edd. the order is confused by the insertion of the text xvii. 34; xviii. 1-3, and the transposition of the sentence marked (a), in consequence of which the first sentence of (c) has been misunderstood, as if it meant that St. Paul thought it enough merely to sow the seeds at Athens (tewj mod. text Cat. twn logwn), "because the greater part of his life was now passed." So Cat. is further betrayed into a misconception of the following words epi men gar Nerwnoj eteleiwqh, adding o IIauloj, as if it referred to St. Paul's martyrdom: and so Ben. mistakes the matter, major' enim pars vitae illius jam (entauqa) transacta erat. Nam sub Nerone consummatus est, as Erasm. occisus est:' though the opposition to the epi men N. in the following clause apo de Kl., might have obviated this misapprehension.
5 This would be better transposed thus: kai mhn, fhsin, hgagon auton proj ton anq., all' qouden sxusan. Mod. text, "but they only brought him," etc. What follows is confused by the transposition after ora goun entauqa of the part (a) beginning with the same words.
6 The mss. have qEllhnej as in some copies of the Acts and Elz., but the best authorities Gr. and Lat. simply pantej. We adopt oi 'Ioudaioi from the Catena, and Chrys. evidently understood it of the Jews.
7 Here A. b.c. insert the sentence ora touj pistouj k. t. l. which mod. text rightly removes to the comment on v. 8, and after it, ora pwj o n moj kataluetai loipon: which unless it means, "See here the beginning of the judgment on the Jews, the dissolution of their Law, and overthrow of their nation," of which Chrys. speaks in this sentence, is out of place here, and belongs to the comment on v. 18, i.e. to the beginning of Hom. 40, which in fact opens with these words. So mod. text understands them. "Mark how the Law, begins to be dissolved from henceforth. For this man, being a Jew, having after these things shorn his head in Cenchrea, goes with Paul into Syria. Being a man of Pontus, not in Jerusalem nor near it did he haste to come, but at a greater distance." The innovator's meaning seems to have been, that he shore his head in fulfilment of his vow, not in Jerusalem, nor near Jerusalem, but at a greater distance, viz. in Cenchrea." But St. Chrys. is here commenting on Claudius' edict (see above, p. 240, on v. 2): "See here the beginning of the judgment on the Jews: it was hasting to come, but it began not in Jerusalem, nor in Palestines but at a greater distance-at Rome, in this edict of the Emperor: ouk en 9Ierosolumoi, oude plhsion espeuden elqein alla makroterw."
10 There is no sufficient ground for the supposition of Chrys. that the Sosthenes here mentioned was a Christian and the same who is saluted in 1 Cor. i. 1. On the contrary, he was the leader of the Jewish party who persecuted the ruler of the synagogue, perhaps the successor of Crispus who had become a Christian. The reading 'Ioudaioi of some inferior mss. in v. 17 which is followed by Chrys. would easily give rise to this misconception. The true text is most probably pantej, meaning the officers of the governor. The representatives of the Roman government, then, attacked Sosthenes, the leader of the party which was persecuting Paul. Thus their effort ended in failure. And so indifferent was Gallio that he in no way interfered. Paul's accusers were thus themselves beaten and the whole effort at prosecution miserably failed.-G. B. S.
11 h de oikeiwsij tou X. pleon, Sed familiaritas Christi magis. Ben. Chrys. said above, that the most powerful consideration was this which is put last, "For I have much people in this city." The meaning here is, That there was "much people" to be converted, was a cheering consideration: that Christ should say, laoj moi polnj estin, speaking of them as "His own," was the strongest inducement.
12 b.c. oti hlegxqh foboumenoj h ouk hlegxqh wste mh (C. mhde) paqein. A., ote elexqh wste de mh paqein, (which is meant for emendation: "This was enough to rouse him when it was spoken: but, that he should not suffer," etc.) Mod. text, oti hl. foboumenoj, h ouk hl. men, all' wste mhde touto paqein. We read Ouk oti hlegxqh wj foboumenoj. wste de mh paqein, 'Egw eimi meta son. The accidental omission of ouk may have been corrected in the margin by the gloss h ouk hl. But the sense seems to be otherwise confused by transpositions. "It is true, even the number, and still more Christ's oikeiwsij of them, prevailed with him. This was enough to rouse him. But Christ begins by saying, "Fear not," etc. And in fact the danger was increased, etc. Not that Paul was reproved as being afraid, etc.
14 Kai edidacen oti ta toiauta dikastikhj yhfou [ou, this we supply,] deitai: alla ataktwj panta poiousin. Mod. text edidace gar (h te toutwn qepieikeia kai ekeinwn qrasuthj, from f) oti ta toi. dik yhf. deitai.
15 Here, between the parts g and h, the mss. have two sentences retained by Edd. but clearly out of place, unless they form part of a second recapitulation: "Therefore he departed from Athens." "Because there was much people here."
18 ou gar outw to ubrisai pleonekthsomen autwn, wj to didaxqhnai oti ubrisamen eautouj. B. and mod. text tw ubr., tw did. The oti om. by A. b.c. Sav. is supplied by mod. text. A has deixqhnai, Sav. dialexqhnai. The construction is pleonektein ti tinoj. "We may think we have got something, viz. the pleasure of having disgraced them; whereas all that we get, in advance of them, is the being taught that we have disgraced ourselves."
19 kai triton (om. C.), oti ubristhn einai ou xrh. This cannot be, "for a third reason," or "in the third place," out seems rather to mean "the third party" spoken of in the preceding sentence. Perhaps it may mean, As the judge does not himself arraign nor even interrogate the criminal, but by a third person, because the judge must not seem to be an ubristhj, so there is need of a third person, kai triton dei eij meson elqein oti. ...But the whole scope of the argument is very obscure.
20 Old text: ubristhj, klepthj kataratoj kai drapethj: kai wj an eipoi tij spoudh eisiwn, kaqaper ekeinoj pantaxou periblepetai ufelesqai ti spoudazwn, outw kai outoj panta periskopei ekballein tiqelwn. We read ubristhj. Kai wj an ei tij klepthj katar. kai drap. spoudh eisiwn, pant. peribl. uf. ti welwn, outw kai outoj kaqaper ekeinoj pantaperisk. ekballein ti spoudazwn. But it can hardly be supposed that Chrys. thus expressed himself. The purport seems to be this: To be abusive is to behave like a slave, like a foul-mouthed hag. (see p. 200.) And the abusive man, when he is eager to catch at something in your life or manners, the exposure of which may disgrace you, is like a thief who should slink into a house, and pry about for something that he can lay hold of-nay, like one who should purposely look about for the filthiest things he can bring out, and who in so doing disgraces himself more than the owner.
21 Here again wsper an eipoi tij, B. for wsper an ei tij, C.-The sentence ouxi ta ofaireqenta hsxune tosouton is incomplete; viz. "the owner, by the exposure of the noisomeness, as the stealer himself who produces it."
1 Two points are much disputed in reference to the vow mentioned in v. 18: (1) What kind of a vow it was, whether the Nazarite vow or some other. (2) Whether it had been taken and whether the shaving of the head was done by Paul or by Aquila. The majority of interpreters maintain that this shaving of the head represented the termination of a Nazarite vow which had been taken by Paul. The view encounters two great difficulties: (1) How can we suppose that the champion of liberty from Jewish ceremonies and observances should himself be given to their observance? (2) Luke here places the name of the wife Priscilla first and then Aquila, and keiramenoj stands next to this name. It is most naturally construed with the name to which it stands nearest, especially when this unexpected arrangement of the names of the husband and wife is taken into account. It is true that the same arrangement is found in the salutation of Paul (Rom. xvi. 3; 1 Tim. iv. 19), but this may be due to the predominant Christian activity of the wife; so also in v. 26, which may have been conformed to this passage. The former consideration is the one of chief importance. On the other side it must be acknowledged that there would be less motive for mentioning a vow of Aquila than of Paul. The vow taken was probably akin to that of the Nazarites. It is referred to Paul by the older interpreters by Bengel, Olshausen, Zeller, De Wette, Lange, Hackett, Gloag, Lechler, Bleek, Ewald; to Aquila, by the Vulgate, Grotius, Kuinoel. Wieseler, Meyer, Conybeare and Howson.-G. B. S.
3 'Idou kai gunh: transposed from after the sentence, "For having been-custom as Jews." Mod. text adds, to ison andrasi poiousa kai didaskousa. But perhaps the comment was, "and mentioned before her husband." See Serm. in illud Salutate Prise. et Aquil. tom. iii. p. 176. B. where he comments on this position of the names, and adds that "she having taken Apollos, an eloquent man, etc. taught him the way of God and made him a perfect teacher."
4 Something is wanting here, for in ekwlueto eij thn 'Asian elqein there seems to be a reference to xvi. 6. kwluqentej lalhsai ton logon en tn 'Asia, and again in ou mhn autouj aplwj eiasen to ibid. 7. ouk eiasen autouj to pneuma. He may have spoken to this effect: This was his first visit to Ephesus, for he was forbidden before to come into Asia. ...Not however that the Spirit aplwj ouk eiasen, but he says, with promise, I will come to you, etc. The prohibition was not absolute, but he was not permitted on the former occasion to preach in Asia (Procons.), because he was impelled to more urgent duties (in Macedonia and Greece); accordingly here also he has other immediate objects in view, and therefore cannot stay. So in Hom. xli. on xix. 10, 11. "For this reason also (the Lord) suffered him not to come into Asia, waiting (or reserving Himself) for this conjuncture."
5 What St. Chrysostom said has been misconceived by the reporter or the copyists. He meant to remark two things concerning Apollos: 1. That having only the baptism of John he nevertheless had the Spirit, nay, was "fervent in the Spirit." How so? He had it, as Cornelius had it; the baptism of the Spirit without the baptism of water. (See Recapitulation fin.) 2. That there is no mention of his receiving baptism, as the twelve did in the following narrative. St. Luke, he says, evidently had a meaning in this juxtaposition of the two incidents. Apollos had the baptism of the Spirit "therefore did not need the water." (Hence whether he received it or not, the writer does not think need to mention it.) Those twelve had no accurate knowledge even of the facts relating to Jesus: nor so much as know whether there were a Holy Ghost.-The scribes did not comprehend this view of the case. Hence A. C. omit all' ou baptizetai, retained by B. mod. text and Cat. Oec. (all' oude b.)-They take oi meta touton (i.e. the twelve of the following incident) to mean the Apostles, and therefore make it pollw mallon kai outoj edehqh an, "if Christ's own disciples after John's baptism needed the baptism of Christ, a fortiori this man would need it."-They find the baptism in the akrib. autw eceqento, "this was one of the points they taught him-that he must be baptized."-St. Chrys. probably spoke of the case of the hundred and twenty who were baptized with the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost: i.e. "Those having" the greater, the baptism of the Spirit, did not need the less, the baptism of water. The scribes absurdly make him suggest that Apollos may have been one of the hundred and twenty.
6 Perhaps it should be, kai ei oi meta touton. <\=85_tou X., pwj oux outoj edehqh an\ 'All' oude bapizetai. Ti oun estin eipein\ oude gar aplwj efechj eqhken amfotera. (By amf. perhaps the scribes understood. the "knowing only the baptism of John," and, the being "fervent in Spirit") 'Emoi dokei oper epi twn ekaton eikosi twn meta twn 'Ap. baptisqentwn, oper epi tou Kornhliou gegone, gegenhtai kai epi toutou.
7 Here Oecumenius perceived that Chrys. was misrepresented. Accordingly, he reads. Toutou oun akrtbwj ecetasqentoj (Cat. to oun akribwj ecetasqen to, a confusion of the two readings), dokei touto mh einai oti ..."This point being closely examined, it does not seem to mean this, that he also needed to be baptized." But the scribes took it as above, and the innovator (with whom A. partly agrees) enlarges it thus: "But he is not baptized, but when "they expounded to him more perfectly." But this seems to me to be true, that he did also need to be baptized: since the other twelve," etc. On this the Paris Editor, supposing the twelve Apostles to be meant, strangely remarks, Itane? duodecim quoe Jesum spectabant nihil noverunt Imo oi kr, i. e. oi ekaton eikost. As if it were likely that those hundred and twenty could be so ignorant.
8 Eikoj de auton kai baptisqhnai. If Chrys. said this (see note 7, p. 247), the meaning may be: "It is likely however that he did receive baptism," viz. though the writer does not mention it. For this is the point-the writer mentions it in the case of those twelve, for it was the means by which they, ignorant hitherto of the existence of a Holy Ghost, received the Spirit; not so in the case of Apollos, for as he had already the baptism of the Spirit, the water was quite a subordinate consideration. See above, Hom, xxiv. p. 157, on the case of Cornelius.
9 Still overlooking the reference to the following narrative, b.c. read Ei de autoi oi 'Iwannou-. "But if even John's disciples," etc.: mod. text and A., Plhn ei kai autoi-, reading the next clause affirmatively, Cat. and Oec., ei de outoi oi 'Iwannou-, which we adopt. The scribes have further darkened the sense by inserting here v. 27 to the end, and xix. 1-7.
10 The utter confusion of the text makes it uncertain what Chrys. said concerning Apollos. The probability is that he still stood upon the plane of John's baptism and teaching, a zealous and able man, but not yet instructed in the Christian doctrine of the Spirit, nor understanding the significance of Christian baptism. It is probable that after receiving instruction he was re-baptized with the twelve at Ephesus (xix. 5-7).-G. B. S.
15 From this point to the end of the Exposition, all is confused, viz. in the old text the order is as here marked by the letters a, a, a. . b. b. . i.e. it gives two expositions, severally imperfect, but completing each other. In mod. text the parts are rearranged, but so that the first of the portions marked b is placed after the second of those marked a. It also assigns some of the comments to wrong texts, and in many places alters the sense.
16 Mod. text "From the baptism itself (i.e. immediately after it) they prophesy: but this the baptism of John had not; wherefore it was imperfect. But that they may be made worthy of such gifts, he more prepared them first."
20 Mod. text besides other alterations: "that communicating in the other things one with another, in the essentials (en toij anagkaioij) we do not communicate, and being in peace with all men are at variance one with another."
21 Ouk apo toutwn umaj enagomen, all' apo twn allwn. But the scope seems to require, Ouk apo t. u. apagomen, i. e. "as these are things not even to be supposed to exist among Christians, we do not make it our business to lead you away from these;"-and for the other clause, "But would lead you on to those other things" which Sirach has not mentioned.
22 A. substitutes kai gar polla esti ta sunwqounta hmaj kai sundesmounta proj filiaj: "For indeed there are many things which perforce impel us to become and bind us to continue friends," viz. independently of our own choice: which is good in point of sense; but the original reading of the passage implies this meaning: "Even the men of the world acknowledge the necessity of friendship, and look out pleas, inducements, and justifications for friendship: ora posa oi ecwqen epenohsan filika"-i. e. which are far-fetched, and therefore need epinoeisqai, compared with the near and constraining motives which bring and keep us Christians together. For sunteknian which appears in all our mss. and is retained without suspicion by the Edd. we confidently restore suntexnian, comp. xviii. 2. dia to omotexnon einai. There is a gradation from lower to higher, suntexnian, geitonian (or geitosunhn C. A.) suggeneiaj.
23 In the old text both sense and syntax are confused by the transpositions of the parts marked (c) and (b)-occasioned perhaps by the homoeteleuton, viz., sumfwnian at the end of (a) and (c): hence (d) ouden aphxej adousa meloj has nothing to agree with, unless it were the mia yuxh of (c); accordingly C. omits adousa. Mod. text reforms the whole passage thus: "Just as in an harp, the sounds are diverse, but one the harmony, and one the musician who touches the harp: so here, the harp is Charity itself, and the ringing sounds are the loving words brought forth by Charity, all of them giving out one and the same harmony and symphony: but the musician is the might of Charity: this strikes out the sweet strain. I could wish to lead you into such a city, were it possible, wherein were one soul, and thou shouldest see how than all harp and flute more harmonious is the symphony there, singing no dissonant strain,"-Instead of ouden aphxej adousa meloj. Touto ..., we place the full stop after adousa, so that the next sentence begins Meloj touto kai aggelouj k. t. l. and at the end of it, instead of Qeon eufrainei to meloj. #Olon ..., we read eufrainei. Touto meloj olon k. t. l.
24 The omission in b.c. of this clause and the following which A. and Mod. text retain, may be explained by the like ending upoqesin sxein. Mod. text has also after qumhdia: the clause en gelwti aei esti kai trufh.
1 mss. and Edd. IIantaxou gar par autwn ebouleto labein aformhn, oper efhn. Ta te gar eqnh parezhlou loipon kai padiwj k. t. l.. In parezhlon there is an allusion to Rom. xi. 14, "if by any means I may provoke them to jealousy:" its subject therefore should be "the Apostle" (nam et gentes exstimulabat jam, Erasm.) "he was henceforth provoking to jealousy, being what he said to the Romans, "If by any means I may provoke," etc., not "the Gentiles," as Ben. makes it, nam gentes jam zelo fervebant. Besides transposing the parts b, c, we read, IIarezhlon loipon. Ta. re gar equh radiwj. ...But perhaps it should be IIarezhlou loipon, oper efh <\dq_Ei pwj parazhlwsw k. t. l."
2 Dia touto enoxlei (hnwxlei Sav.) autoij sunexwj metapeiqwn, old text, retained by Saville. He is explaining why St. Paul still resorted to the synagogues, though an unwelcome visitant. He wished to separate the Church from the Synagogue: but he would not himself take the first step towards this. It must he the act of the Jews. Therefore until they by their outrageous conduct obliged him to depart, he kept on troubling them with his presence (eiswqounta, hnwxlei). Not that his discourse was harsh: that word, eparrhj., does not mean this, but that he spoke freely and without reserve. (Recapitulation)-The unusual word metapeiqwn is probably a corruption of the abbreviation of the text-words, epi mhnaj treij dialeg. kai peiqwn, which the reporter may have written thus, m. t. peiqwn.-Mod. text substitutes Dia touto dielegeto autoij sunexwj oti epeiqe.
3 poson hnusen h epistasia. Cat., apostasia, with reference to apostaj in v. 9.-The letters marking the order in which the parts are given in the mss. will show the extreme confusion into which the notes of this Homily have fallen.
4 Ouxi forountej hptonto monon. Edd. i.e. "The process was not only this, that persons bearing these things, by touching the sick healed them, but the things themselves simply laid upon the sick were effectual for their healing." But A. C. Cat. forountoj, which is much better: "It was not only that they touched him (the Apostle) wearing these things"-viz. as the woman was healed by touching the hem of Christ's garment-"but receiving them, they laid them upon the sick," etc.-In the next sentence (g), for touto kai to twn skiwn estin oper elegen, (which Sav. gives in marg.), Edd. have touto to twn skiwn ainittomenoj, which Ben. renders has umbras insinuans. St. Chrys. elsewhere alleges the miraculous efficacy of St. Paul's garments and of St. Peter's shadow, in illustration of our Lord's saying, t. i. 537. A. t. ii. 53. C.
5 Ephesus was famous for its sorcerers and magicians. Plutarch and Eustathius speak of Ephesian letters ('Efesia grammata) which, written on slips, were carried about as charms and had power to assure success and avert disaster. The perierga were arts connected with this sorcery and the books burned contained, no doubt, mysterious sentences and symbols which gave to them an extravagant worth in the eyes of the superstitious. In this way the large price set upon them may be accounted for.-G. B. S.
8 wj mhte tonj maqhtaj eij qumon egeirai, mhte ekeinouj anaxwrhsai. Mod. text. transposes eij q. egeirai and anaxwr. We read anexwrhse. The verb either to ekeinouj or to touj maqhtaj is probably lost.
9 Some have supposed Tyrannus to have been a Jewish teacher, who conducted a school in a private synagogue-a Beth Midrash (so Meyer). In this view, Paul and his companions, on account of the opposition which they encountered, separated themselves from the public synagogue, and betook them to this private Jewish school. But Tyrannus is a Greek name and the more common and preferable opinion is that he was a teacher of philosophy or rhetoric who had become a Christian and in whose apartments both Jews and Gentiles could meet without molestation.-G. B. S.
10 thn konin tauta ergazomenhn, pistenetw, b.c. Cat. But A. substitutes korhn, Mod. text skian. He seems to allude here to the miracles effected by the very ashes of the martyrs: see e.g. t. ii, 494, A.: and perhaps with reference to these he says, Babai, posh twn pisteusantwn h dunamij: unless this be meant as an exclamation of the persons who "took upon them," etc. i.e. Like Simon, they saw the wonders wrought in the name of Jesus; "Wonderful (said they). Why, what power is exercised by these men who have believed!" namely, by those who by laying the handkerchiefs, etc., upon the sick restored them to health.-Mod. text adds, "that to others also there comes (the power) of doing the same things: and how great the hardness of those who even after the demonstrations of power yet continue in unbelief."
11 From this point to the end of the Exposition, having in vain attempted to restore the true order, we take it as it lies in the mss. and Edd.-Below, "and after this;" i.e. "yet after this," then these itinerant Jewish exorcists took upon them, etc. and not until after their punishment, when "fear fell upon them all," did those of the professed believers (pwn pepisteukotwn) who still practiced magic come forward confessing their sins.
12 IIwj de etrexoj goipon khruttontej di wn epasxon. The subject to epasxon seems to be "these exorcists" the sons of Sceva: but to etrexon it seems to be "the Apostles." "This made the Apostles wonderful in men's eyes:" they had wrought miracles, and preached two years, "so that all in Asia heard the word of the Lord," yet still these practices continued: but (see) how they ran (what success they had) now, preaching by the things these men were suffering: "and this became known to all the Jews and Greeks also dwelling in Asia, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified."-Mod. text, seemingly referring etrexon to the exorcists, reads kalwj de etr. And in place of v. 10, gives, "Whence, showing this, it saith, `And this became known to all,0' "etc. v. 17.
13 Ben. assigns this to the year 399, and cites the first of the "Eleven Homilies" t. xii. as having been delivered according to St. Chrys. thirty days after that great earthquake, viz., in the year of the fall of Eutropius, therefore a.d. 399. But Ed. Par. justly corrects this mistake: in fact, the seismoj of which St. Chrys. there speaks (t. xii. p. 324. A.) is only a metaphor, meaning the catastrophe of Eutropius.
16 The miracles at Antioch, when at the instigation of the demon (Apollo) the remains of the martyr Babylas were removed by order of Julian. See the Hom. de S. Babyla, t. ii. p. 567.-The Theodorus mentioned below cannot be the lapsed person of that name to whom St. Chrys. addressed the first of the two Paroeneses, t. i. init. But probably perusi is corrupt, and the allusion may be to the troubles at Antioch in connection with Theodorus the Sicilian; see p. 238, note 4.
17 an mh fusij etera proselqh. To complete the sense we must supply, "because this also (the being blinded by fear) is a natural affection: but what I have said is true, viz. that twn kata fusin kai anagkhn ou dunameqa meqistasqai, an mh k. t. l.
18 ti oun an kai h swfrosunh. This is corrupt or mutilated. The sense requires, "What if in some cases `an evil mind0' be a natural necessity-as much as seeing or any other natural property or affection, but when there seems to be a change, it is only that fear casts out the evil mind for a while?"
20 Mod. text, "For look now at some one who has been abusive and has not been punished: not for this only is it a subject for weeping, that he does not suffer the punishment for his abusiveness, but also for another reason it is a subject for mourning. What may this be? That his soul is now become more shameless." But Chrys, is speaking of the immediate evil-here the act of ubrij for which the man suffers, or will have to give account hereafter-and the permanent effect, the ecij which every evil act fixes on the soul.-#Eteron here and above we render in its pregnant sense, "other and worse," or, "what is quite another and a more serious thing."
21 Old text. Ei de tinej mhd' olwj nhfoien, oude ekeinoi didoasi dikhn. Say. and Ben. outw and dwsousi. But Par. has resumed the unintelligible reading of mod. text, ei de tinej mhd' outw n., all' oun ekeinoi didoasi dikhn.
23 4 For ti kataskeuazeij ektikon sautw noshma; B. has, ti k. ekthkon sauton :tw noshmati, quoe lectio non spermanda, te morbo tabefaciens, Ben. The reading ekthkon is explained by the etacism; the ti in noshmati is derived from the following ti boulomenon; hence it was necessary to alter sautw into sauton tw. In the following sentence, B. has ti boulomenoj, "Why when thou wouldest be quit of it, dost thou keep thine anger?"
26 Mod. text followed by Edd. perverts the whole story, making the parties contend, not for the relinquishing of the treasure, but for the possession of it, so making the conclusion (the willing cession of it by both to the third party) unintelligible, and the application irrelevant. The innovator was perhaps induced to make this alteration, by an unseasonable recollection of the Parable of the Treasure hid in a field.-"The seller having learnt this, came and wanted to compel the purchaser apolabein ton qhsauron," (retaining apol., in the unsuitable sense "that he, the seller, should receive hack the treasure.") "On the other hand, the other (the purchaser) repulsed him, saying, that he had bought the piece of ground along with the treasure, and that he made no account of this (kai oudena logon potein uper toutou.) So they fell to contention, both of them, the one wishing to receive, the other not to give," etc.