JOANNA occurs in the A. V. both as the name of a man and as the name of a woman. r. ('Iwavav T. R. 'Iwappar.) The son of Rhesa, and one of the ancestors of our Lord. Lord A. C. Hervey would identify him yvith Hananiah, the son of Zerub babel (1 Chron. 19). As the two names ri,n11 and have the same meaning, and are com pounded of substantially the same elements, it is possible that these may have been transposed in reference to the same person. But what is gained by this ? There is still the difficulty in Luke's genealogy from Rhesa's appearing as the father of Joanna, and Judah's appearing as his son, neither of whom is named in the list of Zerubbabel's descend ants in Chronicles. The former of these difficulties his Lordship gets over by supposing that Rhesa is not a proper name at all, but the Chaldee a title of the princes of the captivity in the zd or 3d century after Christ, which some Chris tian Jew, deeming it appropriate to Zerubbabel, inserted in the form `Pno-a, over against his name LlIke'S list, whence it crept into the text. This is undoubtedly ingenious, but a reading sustained by all the authorities cannot be invalidated on con jectural grounds such as this. The other difficulty is disposed of more violently. The Judah of Luke is identified with the Hodaiab of Chron. 24 ;
Hodaiah is made the son of Shemaiah (ver. 22) ; and Shemaiah is identified with Shimei of ver. 19. For such extensive amputation of the text no authority is pleaded ; it is simply proposed as get ting rid of a difficulty. But after all, this difficulty is not thus got rid of ; it is only shifted ; for this scheme fails to connect Judah with Zerubbabel, who was the mother, and not the father, of Shimei (ver. 19). Is it not better to acknowledge at once that we cannot reconcile the genealogy of Luke with that in Chronicles than attempt to do it by such vio lent expedients ? [GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.] 2. efteclvva.) The wife of Chuza, Herod's steward (Luke viii. 3). She was one of the pious women who contributed to the support of Christ during his personal ministry ; and of those who went to the sepulchre to embalm his body, but found him risen from the dead (Luke xxiv. to). That it was in consequence of her relation to Chuza that Herod said to his selvants, This is John the Baptist' (Matt. xiv. 2), as Mr. Blunt, in his Coin cidences (p. 270, ed. 1847), remarks, is a supposition on which nothing can be built.—W. L. A.