Acts 19:40

ἐγκαλεῖσθαι στάσεως περὶ τῆς σήμερον, A.V., “to be called in question for this day's uproar,” but R.V., “to be accused concerning this day's riot,” rendering ἐγκαλ., as in Acts 19:38, and στάσεως, as in Mark 15:7. θόρυβος being rather the word for uproar or tumult, cf. Vulgate: “argui seditionis hodiernæ”. But a further question arises from the marginal rendering of R.V., “to be accused of riot concerning this day”: so Page, Meyer-Wendt, Zöckler. But Blass, Weiss, Rendall, so Ram say: “to be accused of riot concerning this day's assembly,” sc., ἐκκλησία, although Blass thinks it still better to omit περὶ τῆς altogether, and to connect σήμερον with ἐγκαλ., cf. Acts 4:9. μηδενὸς αἰτίου ὑπάρχοντος : with this punctuation R.V. renders “there being no cause for it,” taking αἰτίου as neuter, and closely connecting the phrase with the foregoing, so W. H. Overbeck (so Felten, Rendall) takes αἰτίου as masculine: “there being no man guilty by reason of whom,” etc., and Wendt considers that the rendering cannot be altogether excluded. Vulgate has “cum nullus obnoxius sit”. But αἰτίου may be strictly a noun neuter from αἴτιον = αἰτία, and not an adjective as the last-mentioned rendering demands, cf. Plummer on Luke 23:4; Luke 23:14; Luke 23:22, and nowhere else in N.T., so Moulton and Geden, who give the adjective αἴτιος only in Hebrews 5:9. περὶ οὗ δυνησόμεθα : Ramsay (so Meyer and Zöckler) follows T.R. and Bezan text in omitting the negative οὐ before δυν., but see on the other hand Wendt (1899), p. 322; and critical note. R.V. (introducing negative οὐ, so Weiss and Wendt) renders “and as touching it we shall not be able to give account of this concourse”. συστροφῆς, Polyb., iv., 34, 6, of a seditious meeting or mob. In Acts 23:12 used of a conspiracy; cf. LXX, Psalms 63:2; Amos 7:10.