Akel’dama. Revised Version of Act 1:19 for Aceldama.
AKELDAMA.—The name given in Act 1:19 to the field purchased with the price of Judas’ treachery. The true reading seems to be
The only point common to the two accounts is that the name by which the field was known in the next generation after Judas’ death was an Aramaic word which was variously rendered
The evidence, then, points to the following conclusions. The field which was purchased with the wages of Judas was originally a ‘potter’s field,’ or pit, in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. It may have been (as Christian tradition had it afterwards) the place in the Valley of Hinnom where the potter of Jeremiah’s day pursued his craft (Jer 18:2; Jer 19:2); but of this there is no hint in the NT, for the reference to Jeremiah in the text of Mat 27:9 is an inadvertence, the passage quoted by the Evangelist being Zec 11:13. This ‘potter’s field’ was used as a burial-ground for strangers, and so was called
There is no good reason to doubt the identity of the modern Hakk ed-Dumm, on the south bank of the Valley of Hinnom, with the ‘Akeldamach’ of Lk. and the
The best description of Hakk ed-Dumm, and of the buildings which remain of the old charnel house, will be found in an article by Sehick (PEFSt [Note: EFSt Quarterly Statement of the same.] , 1892, p. 283 ff.). It is quite possible, as he says, that this was once the site of a potter’s cave; and clay used to be taken, up to quite recent times, from a place a little higher up the Hill of Evil Counsel. This burial-place was much used in Crusading times; indeed, it came to be regarded as an honour to be buried in Akeldama, so completely were the old associations of horror forgotten or ignored.
J. H. Bernard.
AKELDAMA (AV
R. A. S. Macalister.
Tradition, which appears to go back to the 4th century, points to a level platform on, and some distance up, the southern slope of the
(ἉêåëäáìÜ÷ Westcott-Hort’s Greek Testament , ἈêåëäáìÜ TR [Note: Textus Receptus, Received Text.] )
Akeldama is said to be equivalent to ÷ùñßïí áἵìáôïò in Act_1:19, and to ἀãñὸò áἵìáôïò in Mat_27:8 : in that case the word represents Aram. äֲ÷ֵì êְּîָà and the final ÷ (which is retained also in the best Vulgate text, acheldemach) transliterates à (which is only rarely so found). It has, therefore, been suggested as possible that the second part of the word represents Aram. ãְּîַêְ = êïéìçôÞñéïí, ‘cemetery,’ which accords better with St. Matthew’s explanation, though not with St. Luke’s. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that we have here an instance of the occasional discrepancies and inaccuracies which have from an early period crept into the text of the NT. It would certainly seem as if the explanation of the title ‘field of blood’ given in Mat_27:8 is radically different from that suggested in Act_1:19, and that the former is more in accordance with the facts, though still an incorrect translation of the Aram. title, while it is probable that the whole section Act_1:18-19 (with or without Act_1:20) of the latter passage is not part of St. Peter’s speech, but a comment or gloss either by the author of the book (St. Luke) himself or even by some later editor or transcriber, who has incorporated a less trustworthy tradition in the text.
The site of Akeldama is the modern Ḥakk ed-Dumm, on the south side of the Valley of Hinnom. See, further, article s.v. in Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) and Dict. of Christ and the Gospels .
C. L. Feltoe.
