HANDKERCHIEF, NAPKIN (0-oveciptov ; Vulg. sudarizenz), occurs in Luke XiX. 20 ; John xi. 44 ; xx. 7 ; Acts xix. 12. The Greek word is adopted from the Latin (like Kijpo-as, nEt.tpiniva, and many others), and probably, at first, had the sante meaning with it, and which, being derived from sudo, to perspire, corresponds to our word (pocket) hana'kerchief. The Greek rhetorician Pollux (A.D. 18o) remarks that the word coacipan, had supplanted not only the ancient Greek word for handkerchief, 4hurreigiov or ilaertiaptov, which he considers an Egyptian word, but even the more recent term : T6 Se ilACTI)14310V 6771 kat, Kat Tofiro AI-yaw-71ov, E.61 3' av ria-ra Aeo-n Aolgt, Kaosorwp KaXoentEpov, via, aoactpLov boacti-Erat (Onontast. vii. 16). The influence of the Romans caused the introduction of this word even among the Orientals. The rabbins have ts11-11D. In the Syriac version NTT'D answers to the Hebrew rirmun, a veil (margin, sheet or apron) ; and in Chaldee 11117 or ts71-110 is used for a veil or any linen cloth (Buxtorf, Lex. Chal. p. 1442). It is indeed but natural to expect that a foreign word, introduced into any language, should be applied by those who borrow it in a looser sense than they do from whom it is obtained. Hence, although the Latin word szedariunz is g-enerally restricted to the forementioned mear.ing, yet in the Greek and Syriac languages it signifies, chiefly, napkin, wrapper, etc. These observations prepare us for the different uses of the word in Scripture. In the first instance (Luke xix. 2D) it means a wrapper, in which the wicked servani' had laid up the pound entrusted to him by his master. For refer ences to the custom of laying up money, etc., in crov5data, both in classical and rabbinical writers, see Wetstein's N. T. on Luke xix. 20. In the second instance (John xi. 44) it appears as a ker chief, or cloth attached to the head of a corpse. It was perhaps brought round the forehead and under the chin. In many Egyptian mummies it does not cover the face. In ancient times among the Greeks it did. Nicolaus (De Grcet-or. Luctu, c. iii. sec. 6, Thiel. 1697). Maimonides, in his comparatively recent times, describes the whole fizce as being covered, and gives a reason for the custom (Tract Efel, c. 4). The next instance is that of the crovaciptov which had been about the head' of our Lord, but which, after his resurrection, was found rolled up, as if deliberately, and put in a place separately from the linen clothes, xcopis evre rtAryn€vov eva 767rov. The last instance of the
Biblical use of the word occurs in the account of the special mimcles' wrought by the hands ot Paul (Acts xix. r) ; so that govecipla (hand kerchiefs, napkins, wrappers, shawls, etc.) were brought from his body to the sick ; and the dis eases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.' The Ephesians had not un naturally inferred that the apostle's miraculous power could be communicated by such a mode of contact ; and certainly cures thus received by parties at a distance, among a people fanied for their addictedness to curious arts,' e., magical skill, etc., would serve to convince them of the truth of the gospel, by a mode well suited to interest their minds. The Apostle is not recorded to have expressed any opinion respecting the reality of this intermediate nzeans of those miracles. He had doubtless sufficiently explained that these and all the other miracles wrought by his hands,' e., by his means, were really wrought by God (ver. 11) in attestation of the mission of Jesus. If he himself did not entertain exactly the same ideas upon the subject as they did, he may be con sidered as conceding to, or rather not disturbing unnecessarily, popular notions, rendered harmless by his previous explanation, and affording a very convenient medium for achieving much higher pur poses. If the connection between the secondary cause and the effect was real, it reminds us of our Saviour's expression, I perceive that virtue is gone out of me' (Luke viii. 46); which is, however, regarded by many critics as a popular mode of say ing that he knew that a miracle had been wrought by his power and efficacy—a mode of speaking in unison at least with the belief of the woman that she should be healed if she could but touch the hem of his garment unperceived by him, and perhaps even conceded to, in accordance with the miracles wrought through the medium of contact related in the O. T. (1 Kings xvii. 2r ; 2 Kings iv. 29, etc.), and in order, by a superior display, in regard both to speed and extensiveness, to demonstrate his supremacy by a mode through which the Jews were best prepared to perceive it (Luke vi. 19 ; Schwarz, ad Olear. de Stylo N. T. p. 129 ; Soler. de Pileo, p. 17 ; Pierson, aa' Meer. p. 348 ; Lydii Ron Spars. ad Pass. y. C. p. 5 ; Drusius, Quastt. Heb. c. 2 ; Rosenmiiller and Kuinoel on the passages). —J. F. D.