| 29. Linguistic Exegesis The verse begins with eutheos {εὐθέως | eu-théōs} ‘immediately,’ fronted for emphasis to highlight the rapid response, followed by the inferential particle oun {οὖν | ôun} ‘therefore,’ which connects this reaction to the prior revelation of status. The main verb apestesan {ἀπέστησαν | apé-stē-san} ‘they withdrew’ governs the first clause, with the prepositional phrase apʼ autou {ἀπʼ αὐτοῦ | apʼ au-toû} ‘from him’ indicating separation. The subject appears as the participial phrase hoi mellontes auton anetazein {οἱ μέλλοντες αὐτὸν ἀνετάζειν | hoi mél-lon-tes au-tón a-ne-tá-zein} ‘the ones about to examine him,’ functioning substantively to identify the officials ready for interrogation. The conjunction kai {καὶ | kaí} introduces a second, closely related clause focusing on ho chiliarchos {ὁ χιλίαρχος | ho khi-lí-ar-khos} ‘the commander.’ The particle de {δὲ | de} adds a contrastive nuance: not only did the men withdraw, but the commander himself ephobethe {ἐφοβήθη | e-pho-bḗ-thē} ‘became afraid.’ The attendant circumstance participle epignous {ἐπιγνούς | e-pig-noûs} ‘having realized’ precedes the hoti-clause that explains the cause of his alarm: hoti Rhōmaios estin {ὅτι Ῥωμαῖός ἐστιν | hó-ti Rhō-maî-os é-stin} ‘that he is a Roman.’ A second coordinated hoti-clause, kai hó-ti auton ên dedekos {καὶ ὅτι αὐτὸν ἦν δεδεκώς | kaí hó-ti au-tón ên de-de-kṓs} adds that ‘he had already bound him,’ with the periphrastic imperfect (ên + perfect participle dedekos) marking an ongoing state. In translation, the two hoti-clauses appear as parallel ‘that’ clauses, and the periphrastic construction is rendered as ‘had bound him’ or ‘had already put him in bonds’ to convey prior action and its continuing legal implication. |