record; in conjunction with Luke, as distinguished from the rest, he has still less; but in concord with Matthew, he has a very large number of passages. Much, too, he narrates in words almost numerically and identically the same as those used by Matthew, where the agreement is either with that evangelist alone, or with him in connection with the rest. On the other hand, Luke appears to have occupied himself rather with the priestly lineage and character503 of the Lord. For although in his own way he carries the descent back to David, what he has followed is not the royal pedigree, but the line of those who were not kings. That genealogy, too, he has brought to a point in Nathan the son of David,504 which person likewise was no king. It is not thus, however, with Matthew. For in tracing the lineage along through Solomon the king,505 he has pursued with strict regularity the succession of the 79 other kings; and in enumerating these, he has also conserved that mystical number of which we shall speak hereafter. 503 Personam. 504 Luke iii. 31. 505 Matt. i. 6. 166 On the Order of the Evangelists, and the Principles on Which They Wrote