And it was known to all the dwellers at Jerusalem; so as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.
Jump to: Alford • Barnes • Bengel • Benson • BI • Calvin • Cambridge • Chrysostom • Clarke • Darby • Ellicott • Expositor's • Exp Dct • Exp Grk • Gaebelein • GSB • Gill • Gray • Haydock • Hastings • Homiletics • ICC • JFB • Kelly • KJT • Lange • MacLaren • MHC • MHCW • Meyer • Parker • PNT • Poole • Pulpit • Sermon • SCO • TTB • VWS • WES • TSK
EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)In their proper tongue.—Literally, in their own dialect. The word is used frequently in the Acts (Acts 2:6; Acts 2:8; Acts 21:40), but not elsewhere in the New Testament.Matthew 27:8. The scene in the temple; the acts of the priests in purchasing the field, etc., would make it known; and the name of the field would preserve the memory of the guilt of Judas.
Their proper tongue - The language spoken by the Jews the Syro-Chaldaic.Their proper tongue; the Syriac language then in use after the Babylonish captivity.
The field of blood; as bought with the price of Christ’s blood, and sprinkled with his own blood.
insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue; or "in their own dialect", the "Jerusalem dialect", Which was now Chaldee, or Syriac; and such is the word that follows, "Aceldama; that is to say, the field of blood": because it was bought with the price of Christ's blood: and if, as some say, Judas hanged him self here, or was thrown headlong here by Satan, and that this was the place where his bowels gushed out; then it may be likewise so called, because it was sprinkled with his blood. It is called in the Alexandrian copy "Acheldamach"; and often by Jerom (p) "Acheldemach", but very wrongly; for not "Demach", but "Dema", in the Syriac and Chaldee dialect, signifies "blood"; which Peter calls the dialect of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, being now spoken by them, in distinction from the Galilean dialect used by him; which, it is plain, was different from the Jerusalem dialect by what is said, Mark 14:70. This field, as it is reported by some, was by the appointment of the Empress Helena compassed about with four walls, in the manner of a tower, upon the top of which are seven distinct doors, like windows, by which the dead bodies of Christians are let down into it; and that it is fifty feet wide, and seventy two long: it stands not far from the valley of Himom, and is upon the south side of Mount Zion, where, as Jerom says (q), it was showed in his time. Masius (r) affirms, there was a very high mountain near Jerusalem, called Mount Aceldema, from the adjacent field, which was bought with the price of Christ's blood, to bury strangers in,And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.
EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)Acts 1:19. Not even these words are to be considered, with the above-mentioned expositors (also Schleierm. Einl. p. 372), as an inserted remark of Luke, but as part of the speech of Peter. For all that they contain belongs essentially to the complete description of the curse of the action of Judas: ἐγένετο forms with ἐλάκησε and ἐξεχύθη, Acts 1:18, one continuously flowing representation, and γνωστὸν … Ἱερουσ. is more suitable to rhetorical language than to that of simple narration. But τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλέκτῳ αὐτῶν and τοῦτ ̓ ἔστι χωρ. αἵμ. are two explanations inserted by Luke, the distinction between which and Peter’s own words might be trusted to the reader; for it is self-evident (in opposition to Lange and older commentators) that Peter spoke not Greek but Aramaic.
γνωστὸν ἐγέν.] namely, what is stated in Acts 1:18.
ὥστε] so that, in consequence of the acquisition of that field and of this bloody death of Judas becoming thus generally known. According to our passage, the name “field of blood” (חֲקַל דְּמָא, comp. Matthew 27:8) was occasioned by the fact that Judas, with whose wages of iniquity the field was acquired, perished in a manner so bloody (according to others: on the field itself; see on Acts 1:18). The passage in Matthew, l.c., gives another and more probable reason for the name. But it is by no means improbable that the name soon after the death of Judas became assigned, first of all, in popular use, to the field purchased for the public destination of being a ΧΩΡΊΟΝ ἘΝΤΑΦῆΝΑΙ (Aeschin. i. 99; Matthew 28:7); hence Peter might even now quote this name in accordance with the design of his speech.
ΔΙΆΛΕΚΤΟς] (in the N. T. only in Acts), a mode of speaking, may express as well the more general idea of language, as the narrower one of dialect. In both senses it is often used by Polybius, Plutarch, etc. In the older Greek it is colloquium (Plat. Symp. p. 203 A, Theaet. p. 146 B), pronuntiatio (Dem. 982. 18), sermo (Arist. Poet. 22). In all the passages of Acts it is dialect, and that, excepting at Acts 2:6; Acts 2:8, the Aramaic, although it has this meaning not in itself, but from its more precise definition by the context.
 αὐτῶν: of the dwellers of Jerusalem (who spoke the Aramaic dialect), spoken from the standpoint of Luke and Theophilus, “quorum alter Graece scriberet alter legeret,” Erasmus.
 Valckenaer well observes on the distinction between these two ideas: “Habent omnes dialecti aliquid inter se commune; habent enim omnes eandem linguam matrem, sed dialectum efficit, quod habent singulae peculiare sibi.” The Greeks also employ φωνή in both senses (see also Clem. Al. Strom. i. 21, p. 404, Pott).Acts 1:19. καὶ γνωστὸν … πᾶσιν τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσ.: the words have been taken to support the view that we have here a parenthesis containing the notice of St. Luke, but if St. Peter was speaking rhetorically he might easily express himself so. But many critics, who refuse to see in the whole of the two verses any parenthetical remarks of the historian, adopt the view that τῇ διαλέκτῳ αὐτῶν and τοῦτʼ ἔστιν χωρίον αἵματος are explanations introduced by St. Luke, who could trust to his Gentile readers to distinguish between his words and those of St. Peter (Wendt, Holtzmann, Zöckler, Nösgen, Jüngst. Matthias).—τῇ διαλέκτῳ: only in Acts in the N.T., where it is used six times in all parts; it may mean dialect or language, but here it is used in the latter sense (R.V.) to distinguish Aramaic from Greek (cf. its use in Polybius).—αὐτῶν, i.e., the dwellers of Jerusalem, who spoke Aramaic—unless the whole expression is used rhetorically, it would seem that it contains the words, not of St. Peter, who himself spoke Aramaic, but of the author (see Blass, in loco).—Ἀκελδαμά: the Aramaic of the Field of Blood would be חֲקַל דְּמָא, and it is possible that the χ may be added to represent in some way the guttural , just as Σιράχ = סירא, cf. Blass, in loco, and Grammatik des N. G., p. 13. W.H (so Blass) read Ἁκελδαμάχ (and Ἀχελδαμάχ, Tisch. and Treg.); see also on the word Winer-Schmiedel, pp. 60 and 63. A new derivation has been proposed by Klostermann, Probleme in Aposteltexte, p. 6 ff., which has gained considerable attention (cf. Holtzmann, Wendt, Felten, Zöckler, in loco), viz.: דְּמַךְ=κοιμᾶσθαι, so that the word = κοιμητήριον, cf. Matthew 27:8. This is the derivation preferred by Wendt, and it is very tempting, but see also Enc. Bibl., I., 32, 1899, sub v.
 Codex Sinaiticus (sæc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.
 Westcott and Hort’s The New Testament in Greek: Critical Text and Notes.
It is true that the two accounts in St. Matthew and St. Luke give two reasons for the name Field of Blood. But why should there not be two reasons? If the traitor in the agony of his remorse rushed from the Temple into the valley of Hinnom, and across the valley to “the potter’s field” of Jeremiah, the old name of the potter’s field might easily become changed in the popular language into that of “field of blood,” whilst the reason given by St. Matthew for the name might still hold good, since the blood-money, which by a fiction of law was still considered to belong to Judas, was employed for the purchase of the accursed spot as a burial ground for strangers. See Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, ii., 574, 575. Whatever may be alleged as to the growth of popular fancy and tradition in the later account in Acts of the death of Judas, it cannot be said to contrast unfavourably with the details given by Papias, Fragment, 18, which Blass describes as “insulsissima et fœdissima”.19. And it was known] Rather, became known. The fate of Judas, if he died there, and the way in which the purchase money was obtained, caused the name to be changed from “the Potter’s Field” to “the Field of Blood,” all people recognizing the fitness of the new name.
is called] The use of expressions like this in the present tense shews that we are dealing with documents written before the destruction of Jerusalem.
in their proper tongue] i.e. in the language spoken by the Jews in Jerusalem, which was Aramaic. The addition of these words and the explanation of the name Akeldama point to this passage as an insertion made by St Luke for the information of Theophilus, who, as his name indicates, was probably of Greek origin, and, it may be, unacquainted with the vernacular speech of Palestine. There could have been no need for St Peter to make such an explanation to the one hundred and twenty who listened to his address. Nor, indeed, is it probable that the name “Field of Blood” became of such common use within the time between the Crucifixion and the election of Matthias, as to make it possible for St Peter to have used the words.
For a similar insertion of a significant name introduced into a compiled narrative before the time at which the name was actually given, cp. 1 Samuel 4:1, where Eben-ezer is spoken of, though the circumstances in which the name originated are not mentioned till 1 Samuel 7:12.Acts 1:19. Γνωστὸν ἐγένετο, it became known) namely, that which is mentioned in the beginning of Acts 1:18.—τῇ ἰδίᾳ, in their own idiom [tongue]) This and the subsequent interpretation of it, This is the field of blood, Luke has added to the speech of Peter for the information of Theophilus, and the reader who does not understand Hebrew.Verse 19. - Became known for was know,, A.V.; that in their language that field was called Akeldama for as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, A.V. and T.R.
Or, more properly, Akeldamach. The word is Aramaic, the language then spoken in Palestine.
LinksActs 1:19 Interlinear
Acts 1:19 Parallel Texts
Acts 1:19 NIV
Acts 1:19 NLT
Acts 1:19 ESV
Acts 1:19 NASB
Acts 1:19 KJV
Acts 1:19 Bible Apps
Acts 1:19 Parallel
Acts 1:19 Biblia Paralela
Acts 1:19 Chinese Bible
Acts 1:19 French Bible
Acts 1:19 German Bible