¹ Are vv. 12 b–14 an insertion between v. 12a and v. 15? See e.g. Preuschen, E., Die Apostelgeschichte (Tübingen, 1912), p. 30.Google Scholar Or does ώστε indicate the result of all the events described in vv. 12–14? See e.g. Haenchen, E., Die Apostelgeschichte (Göttingen, 1968 ¹⁵), p. 199.Google Scholar The fact that Acts xix. 11 f. would be an exact parallel to Acts v. 12a/15 (note the ώστε καί in both cases!) would seem to favour the first solution. But see Haenchen's well-balanced discussion of the problem (pp. 200 f.).

¹ Suffice it to quote the typical remark of the young Zeller, E., ‘Die Apostelgeschichte, ihre Composition und ihr Charakter’, Theologische Jahrbücher VIII (1849), 53Google Scholar: ‘Ist eine Wunderkraft, die alle Kranke ohne Unterschied, so viel ihrer mit dem Wunderthäter in Berührung kommen, gesund macht (V. 16 ⋯θεραπεúοντο άπαντες), schon an und für sich nach geläuterten Begriffen undenkbar, so steigert sich diese Undenkbarkeit zum völlig magischen und legendenhaften wenn auch schon der bloße Schatten des Wunderthäters eine solche Wirkung ausüben soll.’ And by way of contrast Grotius, in Critici Sacri VII: Annotata ad Actus Apostolorum, etc. (London, 1660), p. 2189Google Scholar: ‘Christus fimbriae tactu sanavit morbos, Petrus etiam umbrae contactu. Ita impletum est quod dixerat Christus Joh, . 14, 12Google Scholar.’

² Stählin, G., Die Apostelgeschichte (Göttingen, 1966)Google Scholar, pp. 86 f. is an exception. He gives more information than the other commentators, but the character of the commentary (in the NTD series) did not allow him to go further into the matter. The article by Bieder, W., ‘Der Petrusschatten, Apg. 5, 15’, Theol. Zeitschr. xvi (1960), 407–9Google Scholar, does not deal with the religio-historical background.

³ This I maintain in spite of the attempts of many exegetes to discharge Luke in this respect. See Haenchen, , op. cit. p. 199Google Scholar: ‘Daß der Petrusschatten nach der Meinung des Lukas heilt, sollte man nicht bestreiten’; cf. 201 f.

⁴ Not in all stages of primitive culture; according to A. E. Crawley, art. ‘Life and Death (Primitive)’, in the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics viii (1915), 10Google Scholar ‘the lore of shadow, mirror-image, and portrait becomes prominent…only in the third stage of culture, that of higher barbarism’.

⁵ Frazer, J. G., The Golden Bough, iii: Taboo and the Perils of the Soul (London, 1911 ³Google Scholar), pp. 77 ff. (in the abridged one-volume edition, London 1922 (repr. 1963), 250 ff.); cf. also Negelein, J. von, ‘Bild, Spiegel und Schatten im Volksglauben’, Archiv für Religionswissenschaft v (1902), 1–37Google Scholar; Anker-mann, B., ‘Totenkult und Seelenglaube bei afrikanischen Völkern’, Zeitschrift für Ethnologie L (1918), 89–153Google Scholar; Fischer, H., Studien über Seelenvorstellungen in Ozeanien (München, 1965Google Scholar). For the relevant material from Western Europe see the chapter ‘Ohne Schatten, ohne Seele’ in Rochholz, E. L., Deutscher Glaube und Brauch im Spiegel der heidnischen Vorzeit 1 (Berlin, 1867), 59–130.Google Scholar

¹ Frazer, , op. cit. p. 80.Google Scholar

² Cf. besides Frazer, , op. cit.Google Scholar pp. 86 f., also Mockler-Ferryman, A. F., art. ‘Negroes and W. Africa’ in the Encycl. of Religion and Ethics ix (1917), 281.Google ScholarRochholz, , op. cit. p. 84Google Scholar, quotes a Turkish greeting formula ‘Möge dein Schatten sich nie verkleinern’.

³ Frazer, , op. cit. p. 89.Google Scholar

⁴ See the examples in Negelein, van, art. cit.Google Scholar pp. 12 f. and Ankermann, , art. cit.Google Scholar pp. 95 ff. and especially Fischer, , op. cit., passim.Google Scholar

⁵ See Alexander, H. B., art. ‘Soul (Primitive)’ in Encycl. of Religion and Ethics xi (1920), 727Google Scholar; Kristensen, W. Brede, The Meaning of Religion (The Hague, 1960CrossRefGoogle Scholar), pp. 410 f. Cf. also Leeuw, G. van der, Phänomenologie der Religion (Tübingen, 1956 ²Google Scholar), pp. 324 f., 328 f.

⁶ George, B., Zu den altägyptischen Vorstellungen vom Schatten als Seele (Bonn, 1970Google Scholar); the examples in this paragraph are found on pp. 36 ff., 41 ff., 50 ff., 64 ff., 90 f., 92 ff., 108 ff. For a short survey see Bonnet, H., Reallexikon der ägyptischen Religionsgeschichte (Berlin, 1952Google Scholar), 675 f.

¹ Negelein, J. von, art. cit. p. 17.Google Scholar See also the examples of tree shadows which both cause and cure sickness in Rochholz, , op. cit.Google Scholar pp. 77 ff.

² Jähns, M., Roβ und Reiter in Leben und Sprache, Glauben und Geschichte der Deutschen 1 (Leipzig, 1872Google Scholar), 371 n. 2.

³ George, , op. cit. p. 109Google Scholar, calls the shadow the ‘Verkörperung der Lebenskraft’. Cf. Kristensen, W. Brede, The Meaning, etc. p. 410Google Scholar, and Fischer, , StudienGoogle Scholar, etc. pp. 243 ff. Further Frazer, J. G., art. ‘Indonesians’ in Encycl. of Religion and Ethics vii (1914), 235.Google Scholar

⁴ Frazer, J. G., ‘Some Popular Superstitions of the Ancients’, in Garnered Sheaves (London, 1931), p. 141.Google Scholar

⁵ Wettstein, J. J., Novum Testamentum Graecum 11 (Amsterdam, 1752Google Scholar) (repr. Graz, , 1962), 484.Google Scholar Wettstein wrongly ascribes the passage to Accius. Preuschen, E., Apostelgeschichte 30Google Scholar, is one of the very few who also refer to this text.

⁶ In the translation of Warmington, E. H., Remains of Old Latin 1, Loeb series (London, 1935), 353Google Scholar: ‘Strangers, draw you not near to me! Back there, back! Lest a tainted touch from me, lest my very shadow harm you that are sound. Oh, such a deadly violence of sin clings to my body.’ The text is also printed in Vahlen, J., Ennianae Poesis Reliquiae (Leipzig, 1903), p. 186Google Scholar, and in Jocelyn, H. D., The Tragedies of Ennius. The Fragments edited with an Introduction and Commentary (Cambridge, 1967Google Scholar), who in the commentary ad loc. (p. 421Google Scholar) refers to Acts v. 15.

¹ In the translation of Scholfield, A. F., Aelian. On the Characteristics of Animals 11, Loeb series (London, 1959), 27Google Scholar: ‘And it attacks dogs in the following manner. When the moon's disc is full, the hyena gets the rays behind it and casts its own shadow upon the dogs and at once reduces them to silence, and having bewitched them, as sorceresses do, it then carries them off tongue-tied and hereafter puts them to such use as it pleases.’

² Frazer, , Golden Bough 111Google Scholar, 82 n. 2, refers also to Geoponica xv. 1.Google Scholar

³ These texts are referred to by Frazer, , op. cit. p. 88Google Scholar n. 1. More instances are mentioned by Drexler, W., art. ‘Meridians Daemon’ in Roscher, W. H. (ed.), Ausführliches Lexikon der griech. und röm. Mythologie 11 (1897), 2832–7Google Scholar, who, however, explains this fear by the belief that midday is the time that gods and demons are specially active on earth. This may be right.

⁴ Dio Chrysostom v, Loeb series (London, 1951), 121–3.Google Scholar

¹ Op. cit. p. 87.Google Scholar

² Nilsson, M. P., Geschichte der griechischen Religion 1 (München, 1955 ²), 398Google Scholar with n. 3.

³ Cf. Plutarch, , Quaestiones Graecae 39.Google Scholar 300 C .

⁴ Nilsson, Ibid., also refers to a scholion ad Callimachus, , Hymn. 1. 13.Google Scholar

⁵ Vergil, , Ecl. x.Google Scholar 75 f. surgamus, solet esse gravis cantantibus umbra, iuniperi gravis umbra, nocent et frugibus umbrae. Cf. Georg, . 1. 121, 157Google Scholar, and other passages mentioned by Hölzer, V., Umbra: Vorstellung und Symbol im Leben der Römer, unpublished dissertation Marburg, 1955Google Scholar, fols. 61 ff., whose comments are too rationalistic. In Nat. Hist. xxviii. 69Google Scholar Pliny mentions the magi's prohibition to urinate upon a person's shadow: magi vetant eius causa contra solem lunamque nudari aut umbram cuiusquam ab ipso respergi.

¹ Cf. Pythagoreorum symbola 24Google Scholar, in Mullach, F. W. A., Fragmenta Philosophorum Graecorum 1 (Paris, 1860Google Scholar, repr. Aalen, , 1968), 510Google Scholar; faciem in fluvio nec lavandam nec spectandam.

² Though Homer and other authors sometimes call the spirits of the dead σκιαί, I hesitate to draw these texts into the present investigation. See Od. x.Google Scholar 494 f. τ, . Cf. xi. 207 f. . In spite of G. van der Leeuw's discussion of these texts in this connection ( Phänomenologie 325Google Scholar: ‘Der Tote kann keinen Schatten besitzen, er kann aber ein Schatten, eine σκιά’) I am not convinced that the same belief is behind this usage. See Hundt, J., Der Traumglaube bei Homer (Greifswald, 1935Google Scholar), pp. 17 ff. That also holds for Latin texts where umbra means ‘shade of the dead’, see Hölzer, , UmbraGoogle Scholar, pp. 3 ff. Other dubious evidence and of a late date (6th century A.D.) is a text of a papyrus quoted by Moulton, J. H. and Milligan, G., The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (London, 1930), p. 578Google Scholar where σκιά seems to mean ‘evil spirit’: παραφύλαξόν με άπò παντòς πονηρο⋯ πνεύματος, úπόταξόν μου π⋯ν πνε⋯μα δαιμονίων φθειροποι⋯ν …καί π⋯σα σκιά (read π⋯σαν σκιάν, Pap. Maspero 11. 67188). This meaning probably also applies to Hippiatrica Berolinensia cxxx. 135Google Scholar (p. 426, 5 f. Oder-Hopp) βοήθημα πρòςπάθη διάφορα καί πρòς τò σκι⋯ς έκ τ⋯ν στάβλων δι⋯ξαι. For umbra as ‘evil spirit’ see Hölzer, , op. cit. p. 23.Google Scholar The meaning ‘evil spirit’ originates, of course, from the meaning ‘shade of the dead’.

³ See Danby, H., The Mishnah (Oxford, 1933), p. 441.Google Scholar Neither the Gemara in Babli, Talmud, AZGoogle Scholar 48b, nor in Yerushalmi, Talmud, AZ 111Google Scholar 43b, yields any evidence.

⁴ See Eisenstein, J. D., art. ‘Death’ in Jewish Encyclopedia iv (1903), 486Google Scholar; Negelein, J. von, art. cit. p. 19Google Scholar; Rochholz, , Glaube und Brauch p. 105.Google Scholar The rabbinic remarks are made in connection with Numbers xiv. 9 (‘their shadow is removed from them’) which is in itself an obscure text that needs further clarification (their shadow = their power?).

⁵ By this remark I do not wish to deny that this story was already in Luke's source. Notice that Luke uses any means to make his stories more impressive; he uses both popular conceptions (as in the present case) and literary devices borrowed from higher Greek poetry (see e.g. my article on Acts ix. 1 in Novum Testamentum xii (1970), 257–69).Google Scholar

¹ In my view it would not be superfluous if in the future some attention were paid to this shadow concept in encyclopedias and dictionaries of antiquity. Even Pauly-Wissowa has no article on ‘Schatten’. The literature mentioned by Pöschl, V., Bibliographie zur antiken Bildersprache (Heidelberg, 1964), 545Google Scholar (s.v. Schatten) does not deal with the concept of shadow under discussion. Even Hölzer's book Umbra is disappointing in this respect.

² To mention only the more important studies: J. Hehn, Lk. 35’, Biblische Zeitschrift XIV (1916), 147–52Google Scholar; A. Allgeier, , Lk. 135’, Ibid. pp. 338–43; idem, ‘Semasiologische Beiträge zu aus Theophylakt und Philo’, Byzantinisch-neugriechische Jahrbücher 1 (1920), 131–41Google Scholar; idem, ‘Das gräco-ägyptische Mysterium im Lukasevangelium’, Historisches Jahrbuch XLV (1925), 1–20Google Scholar; Leisegang, H., Pneuma Hagion (Leipzig, 1922)Google Scholar, pp. 24 ff.; Norden, E., Die Geburt des Kindes (Leipzig-Berlin, 1924)Google Scholar, pp. 92 ff.; Radermacher, L., ‘Zur Wortkunde des Griechischen’ in Festschrift für P. Kretschmer (Wien-Leipzig, 1926)Google Scholar, pp. 163 ff.; Baer, H. von, Der Heilige Geist in den Lukasschrfen (Stuttgart, 1926)Google Scholar, pp. 128 f.; Dibelius, M., Jung frauensohn und Krippenkind. Untersuchungen zur Geburtsgeschichte Jesu im Lukasevangelium, Sitz.-ber. der Heidelberger Akad. der Wiss., Phil.-Hist. Klasse iv. (1931–32) (Heidelberg, 1932), 20–4Google Scholar; Daube, D., The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism (London, 1956), 27–36.Google Scholar See further Bauer, W., Wörterbuch zum N.T. (Berlin, 1958 ⁵)Google Scholar, s.v. and Schulz, S. in TWNT vii (1964)Google Scholar, s.v. σκιά.

³ Hehn's remarks, art. cit. p. 148Google Scholar: ‘Aber warum gerade “überschatten”, zumal der Schatten das Wesen- und Inhaltlose symbolisiert?’ and 149: ‘daß…Lukas sagen wollte, schon ein vom Aller-höchsten auf Maria fallender Schatten werde diese Wirkung haben, wird niemand behaupten’, show to what extent a more or less platonic view of the shadow can preclude a right insight. The view that fertilization is meant here is supported by the fact that in Aeschylus' Supplices 17–18 Io is impregnated by Zeus' breath and touch (⋯ξ ⋯παφ⋯ς κ⋯ξ ⋯πιπνοίας Διός) which is a close parallel to Luke, i. 35. SeeGoogle ScholarVerdenius, W. J., ‘De adem Gods’, Meded. der Kon. Ned. Akad. van Wetensch., afd. Letterkunde, N.R. xxxvi, no. 8 (1973), 23.Google Scholar

⁴ Op. cit. p. 113.Google Scholar The text is an ‘Opfertext der in sechs Varianten vom Mittleren Reich bis zur Spätzeit überliefert ist, aber aus dem Alten Reich stammt’, Ibid. p. 112.

⁵ Op. cit. pp. 115f.Google Scholar She wrongly follows Norden (see n. 2 above) who sees here the ‘mystische Formelsprache’ of the Hellenistic-Egyptian religiosity. See the criticisms by Allgeier, (1925)Google Scholar and Radermacher.

⁶ Though Brunner-Traut, E., ‘Die Geburtsgeschichte der Evangelien im Lichte ägyptologischer Forschungen’, Zeitschrift für Religions- und Geistesgeschichte xii (1960), 97–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar, goes very far in making Luke dependent upon Egyptian motives in the story of the Nativity.

¹ Apart from Acts v. 15 and Luke, i. 35Google Scholar occurs only in the story of the Transfiguration ( Matt, . xvii. 5Google Scholar, Mark, ix. 7Google Scholar, Luke, ix. 34Google Scholar). George, , op. cit. p. 92Google Scholar, asserts that the idea that a god's shadow bestows a special power plays a role here also. But in order to make sense of the text she is forced to follow Norden in reading άυτ instead of άυτοīς in Mark ix. 7 with very little manuscript support.