shows that we must not read ΑΘΗΝΟΥ as one word, but must divide it as above. I think MR. TAYLOR will find his specimen to read as the last-mentioned coin, the ΕΡ (properly ϵΡ) being ϹΡ, and the ΑΥ in like manner ΑϹ. My coin gives the whole legend distinctly, and I can vouch for the exactitude of the above legend. I believe there appeared some years ago, in the _Revue de Numismatique_, an article on the coins of the Zenobian family, but I do not remember when it was published, nor the conclusions to which the writer came. That is, however, the most recent investigation of the subject, and to it I must refer MR. TAYLOR, as I have not access to that periodical here. Sir Gardner Wilkinson has published in the _Numismatic Chronicle_, vol. vii. or viii., an inscription containing the names of Zenobia and Vabalathus. After the name of Vabalathus, who has the title of Autocrator, is the word ΑΘΗΝΟΔΩΡΟΥ, which justifies the reading Αθηνοδωρου Υιος on the coins. Vabalathus is thus probably the son of Zenobia by a former husband, Athenodorus, while bearing himself the same name, as Vabalathus (better Vaballathus, as on the Alexandrian coins) is said to be equivalent to Athenodorus, Gift of Pallas. W. H. S. Edinburgh. MARRIAGE OF ECCLESIASTICS. (Vol. iv., pp. 57, 125, 193, 196, 298.) I entirely agree with you that your pages are not a fit battle-ground for theological controversy. Still, since the question of the translation of Heb. xiii. 4. has been mooted, I beg with much deference to suggest that it will not be quite right to let it fall to the ground unsettled, especially since CEPHAS has thought fit to charge those of our Reformers who translated the Scriptures with mistranslating advisedly, and with propagating new doctrines.