Mt. 78 (21 of which are derived from Mk.: in addition there are 15 Presents in Parables); Mk. 151; Lk. only 4 [or 6]; Acts 13. It thus appears that Jn. closely resembles Mk. in fondness for this usage. If Mk. were as long as Jn., the former would show proportionately 195 occurrences. The higher proportionate figure in Mk. is explained by the higher proportion of narrative to discourse in this Gospel. There are comparatively few cases of the Historic Present in Jn. 5-10 and 14-17.*

The use of the Historic Present in Mk. and Jn. strongly resembles a common Aramaic idiom in which in a description of past events the Participle is employed to represent the action described as in process of taking place. The following instances of this participial usage are found in the Aramaic chapters of the Book of Daniel. Theodotion sometimes renders it by an Historic Present or (more frequently) by an Imperfect; and when this is the case his rendering is added. In other cases he employs an Aorist.

ny (was) answering' (always followed by 'and (was) saying '), 25.8.15.20.26.27.47, 314.19.24.26.28, 416b.8.27, 57.13.17, 613.17.21, 72 (this verb is frequently omitted in Theodotion's rendering).+ (were) answering', 324.

'(was) saying', 25.8.15.20.26.27.47, 314.19.24.26.29, 44.11.16 bis 20.27, 57.13.17, 613.17.21, 72. 1 (were) saying', 27.10, 39.16.24, 66.7.13.14.16, 75. Theodotion, Aéyeɩ in 227, Xéyovow in 210, 613.14.16, čλeyov in 75.

en '(were) gathering together', 33; PNP '(were) standing ', 33 ; (was) crying' (Bóa), 3'; ''(were) hearing' (~kovov), 3′; (were) falling down . . . and (were) worshipping πроσεKÚνOVν), 3; P (were) coming forth', 36; en (were) gathering together' (ovváyovтa) 37;

(πίπτοντες

* Cf. HS.2 pp. 143 f.

: IT

(were)

+ It is remarkable that, though we constantly find my (participle) coupled with N! (participle) in the singular—‘he (was) answering and (was) saying', we do not (with the single exception 324) find the participle plural coupled with the participle plural. In the plural the regular usage is the coupling of the perfect by with the participle they answered and (were) saying'. This fact suggests the possibility that the singular form should be vocalized, not 'ānē (Participle), but пy 'ănā (Persect).

דן:

seeing' (povv), 327; n (was) descending', 410; (was crying', 4;nny (was) drinking', 5'; 'and (were) writing' (kai ypasov), 5'; '(was) seeing' (ébeúpet), 5; 1 (were) being loosed' (SLEXUOVTO), 56; 1 (were) knocking' (σUVEKρOTOÛνтO), 5; '(was) crying', 57; tbby, Ķeré by ‘(were) entering' (eiσeπopeúovto), 58; (were) not being able' (ou dúvavтo), 5; b

(was) being terrified', 5'; '(were) being changed ', 5o; ¡any ‘(were) being perplexed' (σvverapáσσovтo), 5o; 1(were) not being able', 515; (were) drinking' (èmívete), 52; niby me in The (was) kneeling on his knees and (was) praying and (was) giving thanks' (ἦν κάμπτων ἐπὶ τὰ γόνατα αὐτοῦ, καὶ προσευχόμενος kai ¿έoμoλoyoúμevos), 611; ¡1?? ‘(were) bursting forth' (πpoσéßaλλov), 72;

eating and (was) breaking in pieces . . . (was) trampling' (ẻσ¤íov καὶ λεπτῦνον . ovvettátel), 77.19; P (was) issuing and (was) coming forth' (eîλkev), 710; No ‘(was) speaking' (éλáda), 711; 2770

(was) prevailing', 7a1.

T: IT

'(was) making' (¿oía), 721; ? The fact that in the 1991 Aramaic vv. of Dan. we thus find no less than 99 instances of this participial usage describing a past action shows how highly characteristic of the language the idiom is. That the usage naturally lends itself to representation in Greek by the Historic Present or Imperfect is obvious to an Aramaic scholar. If those who are unacquainted with Aramaic will read a passage of the book in English, substituting the literal renderings given above for those of R.V., and remembering that the time-determination (was or is) is absent from the original and can only be inferred from the context, they can hardly fail to come to the same conclusion.

It will be noticed that, out of the 99 examples, 23 are found with the verb ‘answer', and no less than 36 with the verb 'say', leaving 40 (or considerably less than half the total) to verbs bearing other meanings. In Syriac the use of the Participle under discussion is practically confined to the verb 'say'.* In the 151 instances of the Historic Present in Mk., 72 are cases of λéye, Aéyovoriv. In the 164 instances in Jn. the proportion borne by λéye, λéyovow to

* See, however, Burkitt, Evangelion da-Mepharreshe, ii, pp. 63 ff., for instances of its use with other verbs in Sin.

the whole number is considerably higher, viz. 120, or nearly threefourths.

That the frequent use of the Historic Present in Mk. is due to Aramaic influence is maintained by Allen (Expositor, 1900, pp. 436 ff.; Expository Times, xiii, p. 329; Oxford Studies in the Synoptic Problem, p. 295) and by Wellhausen (Einleitung in die drei ersten Evangelien2, p. 17). It can hardly be doubted that in Jn. also the same theory offers an adequate explanation of the same phenomenon.

The Imperfect = Aramaic use of the Participle coupled with the Substantive verb.

Instances of the Imperfect in Jn. (excluding the Substantive verb) are as follows:

διεγείρετο, 618.

διέτριβεν, 32.

διηκόνει, 123.

ἐβάπτιζεν, 3, 4; ἐβαπτίζοντο, 3.

ἐβάσταζεν, 12.

ἔβλεπον, 13.

ἐγίνωσκεν, 23.

ἐγόγγυζον, 64.

ἔδει, 4'.

ἐδίδασκεν, 7.

ἐδίδοσαν, Ι9.

ἐδίωκον, 51.

ἐδόκουν, 13.

ἐζήτει, 19"; ἐζήτουν, 518, 7:11.30, ΙΟ, 118.56

ἐζώννυες, 211.

ἐθαύμαζον, 4, 7.

ἐθερμαίνοντο, 188.

ἐθεώρουν, 62.

eixov, 175; eixes, 1911; eixev, 225, 1329; eixeтe, 911; eixoσav, 1522.24.

ἐκαθέζετο, 4, 11.

ἐκάθητο, 63.

ἔκειτο, 19, 2012.

ἔκλαιεν, 2011.

ἐκραύγαζον, 121.

ἐλάλει, 4, 7, ΙΟ.

λeyev, 221.22, 518.19, 66.65.71, 823.27.31, 99, 1229.33; Xeyov, 433.42, 510, 614.42,

711.12bis.25.31.40.41 bis 819.22.25, 98.9.10.bis 16 bis, 1020.21.24.41, 1136.47.56, 12, 1618,

193.21, 2025.

ἔλυε, 518.

ἐμάχοντο, 652.

ἐμαρτύρει, 121.

ἔμελεν, 12.

čμedλev (ňμ.), 4a7, 66.71, 1151, 1233, 1832; čμedλov, 739. ἔμενεν (v. Ι. ἔμεινεν), ΙΟ.

ἐπίστευεν, 2; ἐπιστεύετε, 56bie; ἐπίστευον, 75, 1211.37

περιεπάτεις, 211; περιεπάτει, 5, 7, 10, 11, περιεπάτουν, 6.

ὑπῆγον, 6, 121.

ὡμολόγουν, 12.

The total is 167. In Mt. the Imperfect occurs 94 times; in Mk. 228 times; in Lk. 259 times; in Acts 329 times.* If Jn. were as long as Mt., there would be proportionately 212 occurrences; if as long as Lk., 225; if as short as Mk., 133. Thus Jn's use of the tense, though more than twice as frequent as that of Mt., is considerably less than Lk.'s, and very much less than Mk.'s. The large amount of discourse in Jn. affords little opportunity for the use of the Imperfect. The last discourses, chs. 14-17, offer only 8 cases; while the bulk of the examples occur in chs. 4-12, where there are 118 cases.

Among Jn.'s Imperfects, the great frequency of eλeyev, eλeyov attracts notice, and forms a bond of connexion with Mk.'s usage. Jn. has 46 occurrences, and Mk. 50; while in Mt. there are only 10, in Lk. 23, and in Acts 11. It may be remarked that ἔλεγεν, ἔλεγον are very rare in LXX, Sir John Hawkins enumerating but 40 cases.

A frequent Aramaic usage, closely akin to the single use of the Participle above noticed, is the coupling of a Participle with the Substantive verb in description of past events. Thus, in place of saying 'he did' some action, Aramaic frequently says 'he was doing' it, thus pictorially representing the action as in process. The instances of this usage in the Aramaic of Dan. are commonly rendered both by LXX and Theodotion by a Greek Imperfect; though occasionally the rendering exactly copies the Aramaic by employing the Participle and Substantive verb. The following are the instances of the usage in description of past events:

* Cf. HS.2 p. 51, where the figure 163 for Jn. requires correction, as also the printer's error 12 for the occurrences of eon, which should be 2.

+ Cf. HS.2 p. 12.