Millions miss a meal or two each day.
Help us change that! Click to donate today!
Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary
Strong's #848 - αὑτοῦ
- of himself, themself, them
Att. contr. for ἑαυτοῦ G1438.
αὑτοῦ , -ῆς , -οῦ ,
= ἑαυτοῦ G1438 (q.v.), Matthew 6:34, Luke 12:17, al. (MM, s.v.).
Copyright © 1922 by G. Abbott-Smith, D.D., D.C.L.. T & T Clarke, London.
How far this form is to be recognized in the sense of ἑαυτοῦ has been much debated : see the older literature in Grimm-Thayer. It is not a priori likely to be common. Meisterhans, Gr. p. 154, estimates that between B.C. 300 and 30 ἑαυτοῦ outnumbers αὑτοῦ in Attica by 100 : 7. But Mayser, Gr. p. 305, makes αὑτοῦ three times as common as ἑαυτοῦ in iii/B.C. papyri (that is, those published before 1906, therefore excluding P Hib and many other Ptolemaic documents) : in ii/B.C. the proportion is reversed, and in i/B.C. ἑαυτοῦ stands alone. Mayser’s analysis of the documents—official, private letters, inscriptions, etc.—may also be noted. The fact emerges very clearly that both σαυτοῦ and αὑτοῦ have a certain place during the earlier Ptolemaic period, αὑτοῦ being certified by syntactical necessity or by ἀφ᾽ , μεθ᾽ etc., preceding. That in Egypt αὑτοῦ passed out of use is seen from later papyri : Moulton Einleitung, p. 139, mentions P Tebt II. 303.7 (A.D. 176–80) τῶν ϛ ̄ δι᾽ αὑτῶν ἱερέων (";independent";—Edd.) as the only quotable instance up to date (1910). ";Outside Egypt, however, instances are not altogether wanting. Thus Syll 371.15 (Magnesia, i/A.D.) ὑφ᾽ αὑτοῦ (see however Nachmanson, p. 84), 567.6 (Lindos, ii/A.D.) μηδὲν αὑτοῖς δεινὸν συνειδότας . Dieterich, Untersuch. p. 46, gives some inscriptional exx. of the vulgar ἁτοῦ (see op. cit. p. 78, and above p. 69 [= Proleg. p. 47], which show the occasional survival of forms without ε ."; It may be added that some nine exx. of αὑτοῦ appear in the index of Priene, against about three times as many of ἑαυτοῦ . A good instance may be cited from Kaibel 716.5, the epitaph of a young man (Rome), φίλονς ὑπὲρ ἁτὸν ἐτίμα . The progressive weakening of h would make the clearer form preferable. It is further suggested that the existence of αὑτοῦ in LXX (Thackeray Gr. p. 190), though far less common than ἑαυτοῦ , might help to produce occasional revivals of the obsolete form. We certainly cannot do violence to the sense by forcing αὐτοῦ into places where a reflexive is needed : it would be less objectionable to read ἑαυτοῦ , assuming αὑτοῦ due to some would-be Atticist scribe. See further Kennedy’s note, EGT III. p. 464, which sums up in favour of a minimum admittance of αὑτοῦ .
Copyright © 1914, 1929, 1930 by James Hope Moulton and George Milligan. Hodder and Stoughton, London.
Derivative Copyright © 2015 by Allan Loder.
the Week of Proper 14 / Ordinary 19