^{page 78 note †} Συμβάλλω is found only in Luke and Acts in the New Testament. Of the five instances of the verb in the active, three have the meaning, “to meet, to be thrown together,” while the remaining two bear the sense “to throw together in thought, to consider, to deliberate.” Of the former instances one is used in the hostile sense (Luke xiv. 31), while another is used of a friendly meeting (Acts xx. 14). But in both these cases the more definite idea is given by the context, and is not contained in the word itself.

^{page 79 note *} Σπερμολόγος: (I) a bird that picked up seed; (2) a street-loafer who picked up whatever feU from loads of goods; (3) applied to speakers, one who picked up words at random without knowing very well what they meant. This last is the meaning here. The same meaning seems to be required in Plut. Alcib. 36, Philost. 203, Dio Chrysos. xxxii., p. 363 C. An Onomasticon gives Loquax. λάλος, σπερμολόγος. Hesychius and A. Gellius i., 15, interpret σπερμολόγος in the same way. Professor W. M. Ramsay considers (Expositor, September, 1895) this interpretation quite inadmissible here, and argues for the sense of “plagiarist.” But the words τί ἃν θέλοι ὁ σπερμολόγος οὗτος λἑγειν; plainly indicate that the philosophers did not catch the apostle's drift; in such a case a charge of babbling, of picking up words at random, of speaking incoherently, was more natural than one of plagiarism.

^{page 81 note *} ηὐκαίρουν expresses the habitual practice of the populace at the time when the incident being described happened. The tense, however, does not necessarily imply that the habit has, at the time of writing, been abandoned. A somewhat similar use of the imperfect is found in John xi. 18, ἦν δὲ Βηθανία ἐγγὺς τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων, where a fact, true at the time of writing, is woven into the history of past time. That the tense does not here describe an act in progress at the time of the main incident is plain from the comprehensive nature of the statement. The action is predicated of all Athenians (Ἀθηναῖοι δὲ πάντες) and resident strangers; this is fatal to the idea of interpreting the passage as referring to a corona adstantium, who are supposed to have gathered to hear the apostle when they saw him being led along by the philosophers.

^{page 83 note *} Standing on the spot I had it from the lips of a young Athenian philologist that this would be a perfectly possible expression.

^{page 83 note †} On this point Curtius differs from other authorities on the subject. He himself remarks: “the locality of the Προδικασία is nowhere stated. According to Schömann Alterth. I³ S. 496, and Philippi, Areopag. S. 85f, it took place on the Areopagus. In my opinion the sacred place of assembly was not suited for such judicial preliminary investigations” (Gesamm. Abhandl. II., 529, n). So far as I am aware, there is only one passage which lends support to Curtius' view. In Demosthenes in Aristog. 776, we are told that when the Areopagus sat in the King's Hall it was surrounded by a rope to keep off all intruders (τὴν ἐξ Ἀρείου βουλὴν ὅταν ἐν τῇ βασιλείῳ στοᾷ καθεζομένη περισχοινίσηται . . . ). If we bear this fact in mind, and consider the tediousness of the preliminary investigations in the higher Athenian law-courts, it may be regarded as not improbable that the προδικασία, in cases falling to the Areopagus, was carried out in the King's Hall.

^{page 84 note *} This is an error which we find in Chrysostom and other Fathers. Chrysostom writes: “ἧγον αὐτὸν ἑπὶ τὸν Ἄρειον Πάγον, οὐχ ὥστε μαθεῖν, ἀλλ᾿ ὥστε κολάσαι, ἔνθα αἱ φονικαὶ δίκαι.”

^{page 84 note †} Οὕτως ὁ Παῦλος ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν. “So,” i.e., after having provoked mockery in some and a cold interest in others (τοὺς μἐν πείσας, ὑπὸ ὅὲ τῶν γελώμενος, says Chrysostom), “Paul went out from their midst.” There is no suggestion in these words of the apostle's being in any danger, and the idea of judicial proceedings, which must have ended either in a definite acceptance or rejection of the charge, is likewise excluded.

^{page 86 note *} “Atheniensium rempublicam Consilio regi Areopagi” (De nat. deor. 2, 29, 74). Philippi regards this as a highly exaggerated statement, but in any case there can be no doubt that the Areopagus was, in Roman times, the most powerful and dignified court in Athens. It retained its dignity even after the devastation of Athens by Sulla.