p. 515 ff.). The yearly temple-gifts, too, were on that account
for the most part sent not to Leontopolis, but to Jerusalem

Meyerr.—HEs. D


50 THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.
(comp. Frankel, Histor.-krit. Studien zu der Septuaginta, Bd. I.
Abth. 1, Leipz. 1841, p. 186, note d); and pilgrimages of
Alexandrian Jews to Jerusalem, to offer prayers and sacrifices
in the temple there, did not cease so fong as this temple con-
tinued to exist. Even Philo vouches for this. (Comp. Opp.,
ed. Mangey, t. 11. p. 646: καθ᾽ ὃν χρόνον εἰς τὸ πατρῷον
ἱερὸν ἐστελλόμην εὐξόμενός τε καὶ θύσων.)

(3) In favour of the supposition of Alexandrian readers is
the fact further thought to plead, that the epistle is not com-
posed in Aramaic; a Greek epistle to Palestinian Jews would
at any rate, it is argued, be less probable than an Aramaic
letter. But as it is absolutely certain, on the one hand, that
the Palestinians understood not only Aramaic, but also Greek ;
so, on the other hand, it is altogether doubtful whether the
author, who by his whole epistle proclaims himself to be a
non-Palestinian, was in an equal degree qualified for writing
not only a Greek, but also an Aramaic epistle.
(4) “The whole manner of conducting the argument and
the spiritual exposition of the ideas employed,” is said to
accord best with the supposition of Alexandrian readers. But
that this mode of argumentation is thought of “at once as
familiar to the readers,” cannot be maintained. There can
thus be found therein only an indication as to the author, and
not as to his readers.
