Full text of "Luke the physician and other studies in the history of religion"

See other formats

LUKE THE PHYSICIAN

AND OTHER STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF RELIGION

WORKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR.

The Church in the Roman Empire, before A.D. 170.

With Maps and Illustrations. 8vo, 125.

St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. 8vo,
los. 6d.

The Cities of St. Paul. Illustrated. 8vo, i2s.
Pauline and other Studies. 8vo, 125.

A Historical Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to
the Galatians. With Maps. 8vo, 125.

Letters to the Seven Churches and their Place in the
Plan of the Apocalypse. Illustrated. 8vo, 125.

Was Christ Born at Bethlehem? A Study in the
Credibility of St. Luke. Crown 8vo, 55.

The Education of Christ: Hill-side Reveries. Crown
8vo, 25. 6d.

Impressions of Turkey. Crown 8vo, 65.

Studies in the History and Art of the Eastern Pro-
vinces of the Roman Empire. Written for the
Quatercentenary of the University of Aberdeen, by
Seven of its Graduates. Edited by Sir W. M.
RAMSAY, D.C.L. 205. net.

WORKS BY LADY RAMSAY.
Everyday Life in Turkey. Crown 8vo, 55.
The Romance of Elisavet. Crown 8vo, 55.

LONDON: HODDER & STOUGHTON.

PLATE XXII.

Frontispiece.

Old Turkish Art : the Door of the Sirtchali Mosque in Konia.

See p. 185,

LUKE THE PHYSICIAN

AND OTHER STUDIES IN THE
HISTORY OF RELIGION

W. M. RAMSAY, KT., HON. D.C.L., ETC

WITH THIRTY-EIGHT ILLUSTRATIONS

HODDER AND STOUGHTON
LONDON MCMVIII

PREFACE

THE papers republished in this volume have appeared
in various Magazines, Contemporary Review, Exposi-
tor, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Geographical
Journal, to the editors of which my thanks are ten-
dered. Most of them have been profoundly modified
and much enlarged ; but only in the last, which is
made up of six older articles, is there any essential
change in the original opinions. Elsewhere, the
alterations which have been introduced are intended
to render more precise and emphatic the views
formerly stated. Even the first article, which has
been little changed in expression, has been greatly
enlarged. Only in the sixth article (first published in
1882) have the additions been indicated.

The last article stands in much need of help and
criticism from more experienced scholars. In writing
it I felt the depths of my ignorance ; but the first
steps had to be taken in the subject. The most
striking result was reached at the last stage, and is
stated only in a footnote and the Table of Contents
and Index. The pagan temple-grave became the
Christian church-grave or memorion ; and the pagan

252412

vi Preface

Ovpa appears as the church doorway on gravestones
in Isauria. The great Anatolian writers of the fourth
century are full of information, which yet remains to
be collected and valued. Professor Roll's Amphi-
lochius von Iconium is the one great modern study in
its department. The humble essays which conclude
this volume and my former series of Pauline and
other Studies tread in his footsteps ; but I am mindful
of the poet's advice, longe sequere et vestigia semper
adora.

I am indebted for the very interesting series of
photographs, not merely to my wife, but also to Miss
Gertrude Lowthian Bell, Mr. J. G. C. Anderson,
Senior Censor of Christ Church, Oxford, and Pro-
fessor T. Callander, Queen's University, Canada ; and
I am grateful to them for permitting me to adorn my
preface with the names of such experienced and suc-
cessful explorers, and my book with views so skil-
fully taken in spite of the ink-black shadows cast by
that pitiless sun.

The Index is largely the work of my wife.

W. M. RAMSAY.

ABERDEEN, 315* October y 1908.

CONTENTS

PAGE

LUKE THE PHYSICIAN i

THE OLDEST WRITTEN GOSPEL 69

III
ASIA MINOR : THE COUNTRY AND ITS RELIGION . .103

THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IN THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE . 141

THE PEASANT GOD : THE CREATION, DESTRUCTION AND

RESTORATION OF AGRICULTURE IN ASIA MINOR . 169

THE RELIGION OF THE HITTITE SCULPTURES AT BOGHAZ-

KEUI 199

VII

THE MORNING STAR AND THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE LIFE

OF CHRIST 217

vii

viii Contents

VIII

PAGE

A CRITICISM OF RECENT RESEARCH REGARDING THE NEW

TESTAMENT 247

THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE HOLY LAND . .267

ST. PAUL'S USE OF METAPHORS DRAWN FROM GREEK AND

ROMAN LIFE 283

THE DATE AND AUTHORSHIP OF THE EPISTLE TO THE

HEBREWS 299

XII

THE CHURCH OF LYCAONIA IN THE FOURTH CENTURY 329-410

Introduction : The District and its Ecclesiastical

Organisation. . . • 331

I. Chronological Arrangement of the Documents . 334

II. A Bishop of the Church Reorganisation after

Diocletian 339

III. The Presbyters : their Relation to Bishops and

Deacons 351

IV. Crosses and Christian Monograms as the Origin

of Ornament (also No. 42) . • . 368

V. The Church Manager or Oikonomos . .369

Contents ix

PAGE

VI. The Church in the Decoration of Tombs: the
Christian Grave in Isauria was a Miniature
Church 370

VII. Distinction of Clergy and Laity: its Early Stage 387

VIII. Deaconesses , 393

IX. Martyrs 395

X. Curses on Christian Graves . . . -395
XI. Virgins or Parthenoi in the Lycaonian Church . 397

XII. Heretic Sects 400

XIII. High-Priest of God 403

XIV. Christian Physicians 403

XV. Quotations from the New Testament 366 and 406

XVI. Slaves of God , . 407

INDEX 411

ILLUSTRATIONS

PLATES

TO FACE
PAGE

I. On the Byzantine Military Road : the Pass leading

to Dorylaion 106

II. On the Central Trade Route: the Source of the

Maeander 106

III. On the Central Trade Route : the Falls at Hiera-

polis . . . . . . . .108

IV. The City, Rock and Castle of Kara-Hissar . .112
V. The City, Rock and Castle of Sivri-Hissar . .116

VI. Roman Milestone on the Syrian Route . . .116

VII. Archaic Sepulchral Monument in Phrygia: Novem-
ber weather . . . . . . .120

VIII. The Tomb of King Midas : a Phrygian Holy Place 124

IX. The Grave of an Ancient Phrygian Chief . .128

X. The Broken Grave of an Ancient Phrygian Chief . 132

XL Phrygian Rock-tomb of the Roman Time . . 136

XII. The Site of Pisidian Antioch and the Sultan- Dagh 140

xii Illustrations

TO FACE
PAGE

XIII. The Monasteries and Churches at Deghile, on the

Mountain above Barata 140

XIV. Church and Memorial Chapel on the Summit of the

Kara-Dagh : from the west . . . .158

XV. Church on the Summit of the Kara-Dagh: from

the south-east 158

XVI. The Throne of the Anatolian God, near Barata . 160

XVII. Ruins of Double-arched West Door of Church at

at Bin-Bir-Kilisse (Barata) . . . .160

XVIII. Monastery at Deghile on the Mountain above
Barata, showing brickwork used as ornament
in a stone building 124

XIX. Church at Deghile on the Mountain above Barata :

North Arcades of the Nave . . . .164

XX. Church at Barata : South Arcades of the Nave and

Apse 164

XXI. The God and the King at Ibriz . . . . 174

XXII. Early Turkish Art : Door of the Sirtchali Mosque

in Konia Frontispiece

XXIII. Early Turkish Art : Zazadin- Khan near Konia . 192

XXIV. The Gate of the Virgin- Goddess : looking over the

Limnai 192

Illustrations xiii

FIGURES IN THE TEXT

PAGE

1. Plan of the Entrance to the Hittite Palace at Euyuk . 207

2. Relief at Euyuk. Procession of Worshippers, headed

by the Chief Priest and Priestess, approaching the
Goddess 208

3. The Warrior Goddess of the Hittites with her Favourite

and Priest 210

4. The Chief Priest of the Goddess of Ephesus . .213

5. Apollo the Pastoral God of Lystra on a Third-century

Votive Relief 216

6. The Christian Star as a Decorative Dove and Leaf on

the Grave of a Third-century Christian Virgin at
Nova Isaura . . . . . . .328

7. The Symbol of the Cross as a Decorative Element on a

Lycaonian Grave . . . . . . 330

8. Christian Architectural Decoration on the Grave of a

Physician at Nova Isaura . . . . -33°

9. The Monogram of Christ as a Decorative Element on

a Lycaonian Grave . . . . . .368

10. Architectural Decoration (the entrance of the church)
on the Grave of a Third-century Bishop at Nova
Isaura . . . . . . . 371

n. Christian Architectural Decoration and Church Screen

on the Grave of a Bishop at Nova Isaura, A.D. 300 379

xiv Illustrations

PAGE

12. Christian Architectural Decoration on the Grave of a

Fourth-century Deacon at Nova Isaura . . .383

13. Christian Architectural Decoration on the Grave of a

Fourth-century Bishop at Nova Isaura . . .384

14. Anthropomorphic Lycaonian Christian Grave-stone,

showing Cross and Rosette (Monogram) as corres -
ponding Decorative Elements . . . .410

ERRATA AND ADDENDA.

P. 109, 1. 6, for " the Frontispiece" read " Plate III ".
P. 203, note, for " Hermann " read " Humann ".
P. 273, note i, read " Quarterly Statement for 1895 ".
P. 281, note 2, for 200 read 250-5.

P. 328, fig. 6, for " symbol of the Cross " read " Christian Star ".
Pp. 340, 1. 17, 341, 1. i. This reading and interpretation will be defended in
Expositor, December, 1908.

LUKE THE PHYSICIAN,

LUKE THE PHYSICIAN.

IT has for some time been evident to all New Testament
scholars who were not hidebound in old prejudice that there
must be a new departure in Lukan criticism. The method
of dissection had failed. When a real piece of living litera-
ture has to be examined, it is false method to treat it as a
corpse, and cut it in pieces : only a mess can result. The
work is alive, and must be handled accordingly. Criticism
for a time examined the work attributed to Luke like a
corpse, and the laborious autopsy was fruitless. Nothing
in the whole history of literary criticism has been so waste
and dreary as great part of the modern critical study of
Luke. As Professor Harnack says on p. 87 of his new
book,1 " All faults that have been made in New Testament
criticism are gathered as it were to a focus in the criticism
of the Acts of the Apostles ".

The question " Shall we hear evidence or not ? " presents
itself at the threshold of every investigation into the New
Testament.2 Modern criticism for a time entered on its task
with a decided negative. Its mind was made up, and it

lLukas der Artzt der Verfasser des dritten Evangeliums und der Apostel-
geschichte, Leipzig, Hinrichs, 1906. In order to avoid frequent reiteration of
the personal name, we shall speak, as a general rule, of " the Author " simply.

2 The bearing of this question is discussed in the opening paper of the
writer's Pauline Studies, 1906.

(3)

I. Luke

would not listen to evidence on a matter that was already
decided. But the results of recent exploration made this
attitude untenable. So long as the vivid accuracy of Acts
xxvii., which no critic except the most incompetent failed
to perceive and admit, was supposed to be confined to that
one chapter, it was possible to explain this passage as an
isolated and solitary fragment in the patchwork book. But
when it was demonstrated that the same lifelike accuracy
characterised the whole of the travels, the theory became
impossible. Evidence must be admitted. All minds that
are sensitive to new impressions, all minds that are able to
learn, have become aware of this. The result is visible in
the book which we have now before us. Professor Harnack
is willing to hear evidence. The class of evidence that
chiefly appeals to him is not geographical, not external, not
even historical in the widest sense, but literary and linguistic ;
and this he finds clear enough to make him alter his former
views, and come to the decided conclusion that the Third
Gospel and the Acts are a historical work in two books,1
written, as the tradition says, by Luke, a physician, Paul's
companion in travel and associate in evangelistic work. This
conclusion he regards as a demonstrated fact (sicker nach-
gewiesene Tatsache^ p. 87). It does not, however, lead him
to consider that Luke's history is true. He argues very
ingeniously against attaching any high degree of trust-
worthiness to the work, and hardly even concedes that the
early date which he assigns to it entails the admission that it
is much more trustworthy than the champions of its later
date would or could allow. That is the only impression
which I can gather (see below, p. 32) from the Author's

1 He hints at the possibility that a third book may have been intended by
Luke, but never written. See below, p. 27.

the Physician

language in this book. On the other hand, in a notice of
his own book (Selbstanzeige)} he speaks far more favourably
about the trustworthiness and credibility of Luke, as being
generally in a position to acquire and transmit reliable infor-
mation, and as having proved himself able to take advantage
of his position. I cannot but feel that there is a certain want
of harmony here, due to the fact that the Author was
gradually working his way to a new plane of thought. His
later opinion is more favourable.

Some years ago I reviewed Professor McGifTert's argu-
ments on the Acts.2 The American professor also had felt
compelled by the geographical and historical evidence to
abandon in part the older criticism. He also admitted that
the Acts is more trustworthy than previous critics allowed ;
he also was of opinion that it was not thoroughly trustworthy,
but was a mixture of truth and error ; he also saw that it is
a living piece of literature written by one author. But from
the fact that Acts was not thoroughly trustworthy, he
inferred that it could not be the work of a companion and
friend of the Apostle Paul ; and he has no pity for the
erroneous idea that the Acts could fail to be trustworthy if it
had been written by the friend of Paul. I concluded with the
words : " Dr. McGiffert has destroyed that error, if an error
can be destroyed ". But what is to Professor McGiffert
inadmissible is the view that Professor Harnack champions.

The careful and methodical studies of the language of
Luke by Mr. Hobart3 and Mr. Hawkins4 have been thor-
oughly used by the Author. He mentions that Mr. Haw-

1 In the Theologische Liter aturzeitung (edited by himself and Professor
Schiirer), yth July, 1906, p. 404.

2 The review is republished in Pauline Studies, 1906, p. 321.

3 Medical Language of St. Luke, Dublin, 1882.
*Horae Synopticae, 1899.

I. Luke

kins seems to be almost unknown in Germany (p. 19), and
expresses the opinion (p. 10) that Mr. Hobart's book would
have produced more effect, if he had confined himself to
the essential and had not overloaded his book with collec-
tions and comparisons that often prove nothing. I doubt
if that is the reason that Mr. Hobart's admirable and con-
clusive demonstration has produced so little effect in Ger-
many. The real reason is that the German scholars, with a
few exceptions, have not read it. That many of his ex-
aminations of words prove nothing, Mr. Hobart was quite
aware ; but he intentionally, and, as I venture to think,
rightly, gave a full statement of his comparison of Luke's
language with that of the medical Greek writers. It is the
completeness with which he has performed his task that
produces such effect on those who read his book. He has
pursued to the end almost every line of investigation, and
shown what words do not afford any evidence as well as
what words may be relied upon for evidence. The Author
says that those who merely glance through the pages of Mr.
Hobart's book are almost driven over to the opposite
opinion (as they find so many investigations that prove
nothing). This description of the common German " critical "
way of glancing at or entirely neglecting works which are the
most progressive and conclusive investigations of modern
times suggests much. These so-called " critics " do not read
a book whose results they disapprove. The method of
studying facts is not to their taste, when they see that it
leads to a conclusion which they have definitely rejected
beforehand.

The importance of this book lies in its convincing demon-
stration of the perfect unity of authorship throughout the
whole of the Third Gospel and the Acts. These are a history

the Physician

in two books. All difference between parts like Luke i. 5-
ii. 52 on the one hand, and the ll We "-sections of Acts
on the other hand — to take the most divergent parts — is a
mere trifle in comparison with the complete identity in
language, vocabulary, intentions, interests and method of
narration. The writer is the same throughout. He was, of
course, dependent on information gained from others : the
Author is disposed to allow considerable scope to oral
information in addition to the various certain or probable
written sources ; but Luke treated his written authorities with
considerable freedom as regards style and even choice of
details, and impressed his own personality distinctly even on
those parts in which he most closely follows a written source.

This alone carries Lukan criticism a long step forwards,
and sets it on a new and higher plane. Never has the unity
and character of the book been demonstrated so convincingly
and conclusively. The step is made and the plane is reached
by the method which is practised in other departments of
literary criticism, viz., by dispassionate investigation of the
work, and by discarding fashionable a priori theories.

Especially weighty, in the Author's judgment, is the evi-
dence afforded by the medical interest and knowledge, which
mark almost every part of the work alike. The writer of
this history was a physician, and that fact is apparent through-
out. The investigations of Mr. Hobart supply all the evi-
dence— I think the word "all," without "almost," may be
used in this case — on which the Author relies. Never was a
case in which one book so completely exhausts the subject
and presents itself as final, to be used and not to be supple-
mented even by Professor Harnack. It is doubtless only by
a slip, but certainly a regrettable slip, that the Author, in his
notice of his own book published in the Theologische Litera-

8 I. Luke

turzeitung, makes no reference to Mr. Hobart, though he
mentions other scholars from whose work he has profited.

The Author has up to a certain point employed the plain,
simple method of straightforward unprejudiced investigation
into the historical work which forms the subject of his study,
a method which has not been favoured much by the so-
called critical scholars of recent time. So far as he follows
this simple method, which we who study principally other
departments of literature are in the habit of employing, his
study is most instructive and complete. But he does not
follow it all through ; multa tamen suberunt priscae vestigia
fraudis. If we read his book, we shall find several examples
of the fashionable critical method of a priori rules and pre-
possessions as to what must be or must not be permitted.
These examples are almost all of the one kind. Wherever
anything occurs that savours of the marvellous in the estima-
tion of the polished and courteous scholar, sitting in his well-
ordered library and contemplating the world through its
windows, it must be forthwith set aside as unworthy of
attention and as mere delusion. That method of studying
the first century was the method of the later nineteenth
century. I venture to think that it will not be the method
of the twentieth century. If you have ever lived in Asia you
know that a great religion does not establish itself without
some unusual accompaniments. The marvellous result is not
achieved without some marvellous preliminaries.

Professor Harnack stands on the border between the nine-
teenth and the twentieth century. His book shows that he
is to a certain degree sensitive of and obedient to the new
spirit ; but he is only partially so. The nineteenth century
critical method was false, and is already antiquated. A fine
old crusty, musty, dusty specimen of it is appended to the

the Physician

Author's Selbstanzeige by Professor Schurer, who fills more
than three columns of the Theologische Literaturzeitung^ 7th
July, 1906, with a protest against the results of new methods
and a declaration of his firm resolution to see nothing, and
allow no other to see anything, that he has not been ac-
customed to see : " These be thy gods, O Israel ".

The first century could find nothing real and true that was
not accompanied by the marvellous and the ''supernatural".
The nineteenth century could find nothing real and true that
was. Which view was right, and which wrong ? Was either
complete ? Of these two questions, the second alone is pro-
fitable at the present. Both views were right — in a certain
way of contemplating ; both views were wrong — in a certain
way. Neither was complete. At present, as we are strug-
gling to throw off the fetters which impeded thought in the
nineteenth century, it is most important to free ourselves
from its prejudices and narrowness. The age and the people,
of whatever nationality they be, whose most perfect expression
and greatest hero was Bismarck, are a dangerous guide for
the twentieth century. In no age has brute force and mere
power to kill been so exclusively regarded as the one great
aim of a nation, and the one justification to a place in the
Parliament of Man, as in Europe during the latter part of the
nineteenth century ; and in no age and country has the out-
look upon the world been so narrow and so rigid among the
students of history and ancient letters. Those who study
religion owe it to the progress of science that they can begin
now to understand how hard and lifeless their old outlook was.
But we who were brought up in the nineteenth century can
hardly shake off our prejudices or go out into the light. We
can only get a distant view of the new hope. The Author
is one of the first to force his way out into the light of day :

io I. Luke

but his eyes are still dazzled, and his vision not quite perfect.
He sees that Luke always found the marvellous quite as
much in his own immediate surroundings, where he was a
witness and an actor, as in the earliest period of his history ;
but he only infers, to put it in coarse language, " how blind
Luke was ".

What was the truth? How far was Luke right? I
cannot say. Consult the men of the twentieth century. I
was trained in the nineteenth, and cannot see clearly. But
of one thing I am certain : in so far as Professor Harnack
condemns Luke's point of view and rules it out in this
unheeding way, he is wrong. In so far as he is willing
to hear evidence, he comes near being right.

Practically all the argument, in the sense of facts affording
evidence, stated by the Author has long been familiar to
us in England and Scotland. What is new and interesting
and valuable is the ratiocination, the theorising, and the
personal point of view in the book under review. We study
it to understand Professor Harnack quite as much as to
understand Luke : and the study is well worth the time and
work. Personally, I feel specially interested in the question
of Luke's nationality. On this the Author has some admirable
and suggestive pages.

That Luke was a Hellene is quite clear to the Author.
He repeats this often ; and if once or twice his expression is
a little uncertain, as if he were leaving another possibility
open, that is only from the scientific desire to keep well
within the limits of what the evidence permits. He has no
real doubt. The reasons on which he lays stress are utterly
different from those which have been mentioned by myself
in support of the same conclusion, but certainly quite as
strong if not stronger ; it is a mere difference of idiosyncrasy

the Physician 1 1

which makes him lay stress on those that spring from the
thought and the inner temperament of Luke, while I have
spoken most of those which indicate Luke's outlook on the
world and his attitude towards external nature. But just
as I was quite conscious of the other class and merely
emphasised those which seemed to have been omitted from
previous discussions of the subject,1 so the Author's silence
about the class which I have mentioned need not be taken
as proof that he is insensible to such reasons. But those
reasons appeal most to the mind of one who has lived long
in the country and has felt the sense impressions from whose
sphere they are taken. Perhaps they are apt to seem
fanciful to the scholar who has spent his life in the library
and the study.

The sentimental tone and the frequent allusion to weeping,
which is characteristic of Luke, is characteristic also of the
Hellene: dort und hier sind die Trdnen hellenische (p. 25).
Mark and Matthew have hardly any weeping : there is more
in John; but Luke far surpasses John. Such ideas and
words as "injury" (an inadequate translation of the Greek
v/Spis, Acts xxvii. 10, 21), "the barbarians,"2 are char-
acteristically Greek. " Justice did not suffer him to live " (Acts
xxviii. 4) is exactly the word of a Hellenic poet : the words
are put in the mouth of the Maltese barbarians, but they are
only the expression in Greek by Luke of their remarks in
barbaric speech and their attitude to Paul ; and they are the
Hellenised thought of a Hellene. To Pindar or Aeschylus
Justice and Zeus are almost equivalent ideas.

In an extremely interesting passage, p. 100 f., the Author
sketches the character of Luke's religion. He recognises

1St. Paul the Traveller, pp. 21, 205 ff.

2 Both are confined to Paul and Luke in the New Testament.

12 I. Luke

with correct insight the fundamental Hellenism of Luke's
Christianity. To put the matter from a different point of
view, Luke had been a Hellenic pagan, and could not fully
comprehend either Judaism or Christianity. As in Ignatius,
so in Luke, we see the clear traces of his original pagan
thought,1 and we detect the early stage of the process which
was destined to work itself out in the paganisation of the
Church. The world was not able to comprehend Paulinism,
and the result of this inability to understand the spiritual
power was the degrading of spiritual ideas into pagan personal
deities conceived as saints. It was not possible for even
Luke to spring at once to the level of Paulinism ; that would
need at the best more than a single life, even supposing that
there had been unbroken progress. As it happened, there
supervened a degeneration in the level of thought and com-
prehension, after the first impulse communicated by Jesus
had apparently exhausted itself, until the Christian idea had
time slowly to mould the world's mind and impart to it the
power of comprehending Paulinism better. After the first
generation of Pauline contemporaries and pupils had died,
we see little proof that Paulinism was a living power until
we come down to Augustine, and then it appeared only for
a moment.

I confess, however, that the Author, while he catches this
undeniable characteristic of Luke's religious comprehension,
seems to miss the elements in his thought that were capable
of higher development. These were only germs, and the

I 1 do not mean to imply that the Author expresses exactly this opinion in
this form about Luke ; he pictures Luke's idea as a definite hard fact ; to me
it always comes natural to regard a man's ideas as a process of growth, and
to look before and after the moment. The Author isolates the moment. On
Ignatius see Letters to the Seven Churches, p. 159 ff.

the Physician 13

weakness of the Author's view seems to be that he recog-
nises only the fully articulated opinion and is sometimes blind
to ideas which were merely inchoate. Hence I cannot but
regard the estimate (on p. 101) of Luke's Paulinism, z>., of
his failure to grasp Paulinism, as too hard and too thin.

I may give an example to illustrate what I think was the
case. Like the Author, I think that the story in Luke i., ii., is
dependent on an oral not a written report ; but unlike him,
I think that this report comes from Mary herself.1 Like
Professor Sanday, I should conjecture that it came through
one of the women named by Luke elsewhere. Here we
have a narrative which comes from a Hebrew source, from a
woman thinking in Hebraic fashion, one whose language was
saturated with Hebraic imagery. This narrative Luke has
transmitted to us in a form which clearly shows its Hebrew
origin, and equally clearly shows that it had been re-expressed
in Lukan language (as the Author has proved) and trans-
formed by Luke. But also, I venture to believe, it has been
re-thought out of the Hebraic into the Greek fashion. The
messenger of God, who revealed to Mary the Divine will and
purpose, becomes to Luke the winged personal being who,
like Iris or Hermes, communicates the will and purpose of
God. Exactly what is the difference between the original
narrative and the Greek translation, I am not able to say or
to speculate; but that there was a more anthropomorphic
picture of the messenger in Luke's mind than there was in
Mary's I feel no doubt. Yet I believe that Luke was trans-
lating as exactly as he could into Greek the account which
he had heard. He expresses and thinks as a Greek that
which was thought and expressed by a Hebrew.

1 Christ Born in Bethlehem, p. 74 if.

14 I. Luke

But, with this qualification, the passage on p. 100 f. appears
to me to be most illuminative and remunerative. As regards
the Hellenism of Luke the difference between us is one
merely of degree. We are really trying to say the same
thing, but expressing it through the colouring and transform-
ing medium of our different personalities, and I too imper-
fectly. The really important matter is this. In the first
place, the Author sees clearly and perfectly and finally the
first century character of Luke's thought : " He has come
into personal relations with the first Christians, with Paul "
(p. 103). In the second place, the Author's view that Luke
was so incapable of comprehending the spirit of Christianity
—for that is inevitably implied in his exposition, pp. 100-
IO2 — only brings out into clearer light Luke's inability to
evolve from his inner consciousness the picture of Jesus
which looks out in such exquisite outline from his historical
work. The picture was given to, and not made by, Luke ; and
the Author himself shows plainly how it was given him. He
had intimate relations with some of those who had known
Jesus, and from that, more than from the early written ac-
counts to which he also had access, he derived his conception.
Where he altered this conception, it could only be to introduce
his own poorer, less lofty ideas, and to betray his want of real
comprehension. I do not at all deny that there are in his
Gospel (as there are in the other Gospels) traces of the age
and the thoughts amid which they were respectively com-
posed ; but these are recognised because they are inharmon-
ious with the picture as a whole. They are stains, and not
parts of the original picture.

Accordingly, in spite of certain differences, so close does
this part of the task bring us, starting from our widely
opposed points of contemplation, that the conclusion of

the Physician 15

this brilliant passage is an expression of Paul's general
position in the Jewish and Hellenic world, as Harnack con-
ceives it, which I am able to adopt and to use as my own :
" Paul and Luke are counterparts.1 As the former is only
intelligible as a Jew, but a Jew who has come into the closest
contact with Hellenism, so the latter is only intelligible as a
Hellene, but a Hellene who has personally had touch with
the original Jewish Christianity." Usually, in his characteri-
sation of Paul, the Author sees the Jew so clearly, that he
sees nothing else ; and, as a rule, 1 1 find myself in strenuous
opposition to his conception of the great Apostle. Here he
recognises the very close contact of Paul with Hellenism.
We must, then, ask whether that contact had been so utterly
devoid of effect on Paul's sensitive and sympathetic mind,
as the Author often represents it to have been ? To me it
seems that, while Luke was the Hellene, who could never
fully understand or sympathise with the Jew 2 (though his
whole life and thought had been changed by contact with
the religion taught by Jews), Paul was the Jew who had
sympathised with much that lay in Hellenism and had been
powerfully modified and developed thereby, remaining, how-
ever, a Jew, but a developed Jew, " who had come into the
closest contact with Hellenism ".

In the familiar argument about the " We "-passages of
Acts, the Author puts one point in a striking and impressive
way. In these " We "-passages, as he points out and
as is universally recognised, Luke distinguishes carefully
between "We" and Paul. Wherever it is reasonably
possible, in view of historic and literary truth, he empha-
sises Paul and keeps the " We " modestly in the background.

1 Gegenbilder, companion and contrasted pictures.

2 St. Paul the Traveller, p. 207.

1 6 I. Luke

Now, take into account the narrative in Acts xxviii. 8-10:
" And it was so that the father of Publius lay sick of fever
and dysentery : unto whom Paul entered in and prayed,
and laying his hands on him healed him. And when this
was done, the rest also which had diseases in the island
came and were cured [more correctly, * received medical
treatment']: who also honoured us with many honours."

In this passage attention is concentrated on Paul, so
long as historic truth allowed ; but Paul's healing power
by prayer and faith could not be always exercised. Such
power is efficacious only occasionally in suitable circum-
stances and on suitable persons. As soon as it begins
to be exercised on all and sundry, it begins to fail, and
a career of pretence deepening into imposture begins.
Accordingly, when the invalids came in numbers, medical
advice was employed to supplement the faith-cure, and the
physician Luke became prominent. Hence the people
honoured not " Paul," but " us ".

Here the Author recognises a probable objection, but con-
siders it has not any serious weight, viz., that Luke, like
Paul, may have cured by prayer and not by medical treat-
ment. Against this he points to the precise definition of
Publius's illness, which is paralleled often in Greek medical
works, but never in Greek literature proper; and argues
that faith-healers do not trouble themselves, as a rule, about
the precise nature of the disease which is submitted to
them. He acknowledges that this is not a complete and
conclusive answer. He has strangely missed the real
answer, which is complete and conclusive. Paul healed
Publius (Idcraro), but Luke is not said to have healed the
invalids who came afterwards. They received medical
treatment (eOepairevovTo). The latter verb is translated

the Physician 17

" cured " in the English Version ; and Professor Harnack
agrees. Now in the strict sense eOepairevovro, as a medical
term, means " received medical treatment " ; and in the
present case the context and the whole situation de-
mand this translation (though Luke uses the word else-
where sometimes in the sense of "cure"): the contrast
to laa-aro, the careful use of medical terms in the passage,
and above all the implied contrast of Paul's healing power
and Luke's modest description of his medical attention to
his numerous patients from all parts of the island, all demand
the latter sense. Professor Knowling is here right.

The Author states a careful argument that, since Luke
and Aristarchus are twice mentioned together in the Epistles
of Paul, and Aristarchus is thrice mentioned in the Acts,
the silence of Acts about Luke is to be explained by his
having written the book ; and that there is no other explana-
tion possible. Aristarchus, an unimportant person, is men-
tioned in Acts solely because he was in relation with Luke.
Luke did not name himself, though he frequently indicates his
presence by using the first person. Luke and Aristarchus
were Paul's two sole Christian companions on his voyage to
Rome. These facts, the triple reference in Acts to a person
so unimportant in history as Aristarchus, and the silence
about Luke except in the editorial " we," point to Luke as
the author.

This argument occurs or appeals to every one who ap-
proaches the book with a desire to understand it ; it carries
weight ; but the weight is lessened by the enigmatic silence
of Acts about Titus, a person of such importance and so
closely alike in influence to Luke. He who solves that
enigma will throw a flood of light on the early history of
Christianity in the Aegean lands. A conjecture that Titus

1 8 I. Luke

was a relative of Luke (brother or cousin) l is advanced in
vSV. Paul the Traveller, p. 390 ; and as yet I see no other
way out of the difficulty, since the only other supposition
that suggests itself — viz., that Titus Lucanus was the full
name of the author, and that he was sometimes spoken of
as Titus simply, sometimes as Lukas (an abbreviated form)
— introduces apparently far greater difficulties than it solves.
The attempt on pp. 15-17 to demonstrate that the writer
of Acts was closely connected with Syrian Antioch, seems
to me a distinct failure. That Luke had some family con-
nection with Syrian Antioch 2 is in perfect harmony with the
evidence of his writings, and must be accepted on the evidence
of Eusebius and others ; but the Author's argument that this
influenced his selection and statement of details is anything
but convincing. A false inference seems to be drawn in
some cases. For example, it is pointed out on p. 16, note I,
that Syrian Antioch is only once alluded to in the Pauline
letters (Gal. ii. n), whereas it is often mentioned in a pecu-
liar and emphatic way in Acts ; and the inference is drawn
that the emphasis laid on Antioch in Acts cannot be ex-
plained purely from the facts and must be due to some
special interest which Luke felt in it. This reasoning implies
that the importance of different places in the early history
of Christianity can be estimated according to the frequency
with which they are mentioned in Paul's letters. Without
that premise the Author's reasoning in the note just quoted
has no validity ; but the premise needs only to be formally
stated, and its falsity is at once evident.

aln the Expository Times, 1907, p. 285, Professor A. Souter argues that in
2 Cor. viii. 18 Luke is called " the brother " of Titus. This always seemed to
me highly probable; but a8e\<j>6s might signify "cousin," and it might
indicate close friendship and intimacy (S*. Paul the Traveller, p. 390).

2 On the character of this connection, see Note at the end of this article.

the Physician 19

In the view which I have tried to support, the reason
why Syrian Antioch is often mentioned in Acts is not that
Luke loved to speak of his own city, but simply and solely
its critical and immense importance in the development of
the early Church. In Antioch were taken the first important
steps in the adaptation of the Church to the pagan world ; for
the episode of Cornelius does not imply such a serious step,
and would have been quite compatible with the maintenance
of a really Judaic Church.

The reason why Antioch is rarely mentioned by Paul is
that his letters are not intended to give a history of the de-
velopment of the Church, but to warn or to encourage his
correspondents. Only in Galatians i., ii., does Paul diverge
into history, and there Antioch plays an extremely important
part. It is the scene of action from Galatians i. 21 (where
Syria means Antioch) down to ii. i, and again ii. 11-14;
and in these two references how much historical weight is
implied !

The Author's further suggestion that Mnason the Cy-
priote, whom Paul and his companions found living at a
town between Caesareia and Jerusalem,1 may have been
the missionary from Cyprus that helped to found the Church
in Antioch (p. 16, n. 2), has absolutely nothing in its favour,
and is an example of the sort of vague " might have been "
which annoys and irritates the plain matter-of-fact English
scholar, but which is extremely popular among the so-called
" Higher Critics " abroad and at home. Those suggestions
of utterly unproved and improbable possibilities lead to
nothing, and should never be made, as here, buttresses for an

xAt Jerusalem, as the Author thinks, assigning no value to Western
readings. My own view is that even the Accepted Text bears the same sense
as the Western (Expositor, March, 1895, p. 213 f.).

20 I. Luke

argument, founded on the Author's observation that among
the Antiochian leaders mentioned in xiii. i, no Cypriote
occurs.1 But we must remember that the first of the list,
the outstanding leader of the Antiochian Church, Barnabas,
was a Cypriote ; and, though he was not one of the mission-
aries who helped in the original foundation, he came to
Antioch immediately after the foundation ; and there is no
reason to assume that the five leaders mentioned in xiii. I
must include all the original founders.

The imagined contrast between the importance attached
in Acts to Syrian Antioch and Paul's comparative silence
about it, is strengthened by the quotation of Acts xiv. 19
as a reference — a confusion of Syrian with Pisidian Antioch,
evidently a mere slip, but a slip into which the Author
has been betrayed by eagerness to find arguments in favour
of a theory.

Not much better seems to me the inference drawn from
the first speech of Jesus (Luke iv. 21-27), which begins
with " this parable, Physician, heal thyself," and ends with
a reference to Naaman, the Syrian. In this the Author
finds conclusive proof that Luke was a physician, and that
he was keenly interested in Antioch. What connection
has Damascus with Antioch ? True, we now speak of
them both as in Syria. But Syria was not a country.
There was no political connection between Damascus and
Antioch when that speech was delivered, and as little when
Luke composed his history. The two cities were in different
countries, under different rule, far distant from one another,
and having so far as we know nothing in common. One
was the capital of a Roman Province, the other was subject

1 Bin Cyprier wird nicht genannt.

the Physician 21

to the barbarian King of Arabia. It is only on the map
that they look close to one another.

The cases in which I find myself obliged to disagree with
the Author are generally of one class, and are due to the
fact that he frequently regards as indicative of Luke's in-
dividual character details which are forced on the historian
by his subject. We have found some examples in the
Author's attempted proof that Antioch had a special interest
for Luke as his birthplace. On p. 106 he attempts similarly
to show that Ephesus had a special interest for him, and
is specially marked out among the Churches by him ; this
supposed interest he explains by the further supposition that
Luke settled and wrote either at Ephesus or in a district for
which Ephesus had a central significance, and he adds that
this country may have been Achaia. Why Ephesus should
have a central significance for one who resided in Achaia is
not easy to see, except in the sense that it had a central
significance for the Gentile Church in general : in other
words, that Ephesus was a leading and specially important
Church. But, if it was so, does not its importance sufficiently
explain the attention and space which the historian Luke
devotes to it, without supposing that he had some private
and personal love for speaking about the city ? Moreover*
this assumed residence of Luke in Achaia is not in harmony
with the Author's footnote on the same page, in which he
says that, while Acts clearly shows the foundation of the
Church at Corinth to have been the principal achievement
of Paul's second journey, yet Luke himself had no relation
to the Corinthian Church.1 How it could have been possible

1 For my own part I think that Luke had relations with the Corinthian
Church (St. Paul the Traveller, pp. 284, 390). But this is, as yet, merely
matter of opinion.

22 I. Luke

for Luke to settle in Achaia, and yet not come into any re-
lation to Corinth, but regard Ephesus as the point of central
significance for his district, I cannot in the circumstances of
the Roman period understand, nor does the Author try to
explain. The rest of Achaia communicated with Ephesus
only through Corinth; and it is simply incredible that
residents in Achaia should disregard Corinth and look to
Ephesus.

The Author seeks to prove that Luke felt a special
interest in Ephesus mainly from the character of the
Ephesian address (Acts xx. 1 8 ff.) ; and he mentions (i) the
heartfelt tone of affection in which Paul addresses the elders
of Ephesus ; (2) the way in which Paul's address on that
occasion is turned into a general farewell to the congrega-
tions of the Aegean district ; (3) that he knows and takes
notice of the later history of the Ephesian Church.

(i) The facts seem to me only to illuminate Paul's feeling
towards Ephesus and to mark out Luke's report as being a
trustworthy account of an address which was really de-
livered ; Luke sinks and Paul alone emerges in the report.
The words spoken by Paul prove nothing as to Luke's
feelings unless the speech is either a fabrication of Luke's,
or an unnecessary part of a history of the time, unim-
portant in itself and not characteristic enough to deserve
insertion. Now, if true, the speech throws much light on
the character of Paul : it is uttered on a great and unique
occasion : it is the one episode in Acts which brings out into
clear, strong relief the intense interest which Paul felt in his
Churches. In short, it is eminently required in order to
complete the picture of Paul's work in the Aegean world,
and it was spoken at the moment when Paul was taking
farewell of that world in order to enter on the new world of

the Physician 23

the West (after consecrating the results of his work in the
Aegean world by an offering at Jerusalem intended to
cement the unity of all the Churches of the East). The
speech is introduced with eminent dramatic propriety. It
is historic in its scope and weighty in its matter. He who
argues that the words reveal Luke's feelings, not Paul's, is
therefore driven back on the other alternative, that the
speech was a fabrication of Luke's ; but we remember that,
on the Author's view, Luke was present and heard the speech.
How can we reconcile the contradiction ? Luke, a com-
panion and admirer of Paul, listened to the address
delivered on such a remarkable occasion ; but, in place of
reporting the speech which he heard, he presents his readers
with a fabricated one.

This contradiction can be reconciled only by declaring
Luke to have been a singularly bad historian ; and such is
the Author's view : Luke was incapable of being accurate,
and was untrustworthy as a historian. But is this view
natural ? Is it reconcilable with the literary skill and the
sympathetic insight of the work ? Could the man who tells
the story of the voyage and shipwreck make such a false
account of another great occasion ?

(2) The farewell to Ephesus was at some points expressed
by Paul as a general farewell, because his audience included
representatives of all the Churches, in Achaia, Macedonia,
Asia and Galatia; and though these representatives were
accompanying him to Jerusalem, yet, when he was explain-
ing that he intended to come no more into those regions
(having, as we know, Rome and the West now in view),
he naturally began to speak more generally : " Ye all, among
whom I went about preaching, shall see my face no more ".
This is said to all the congregations, Corinth, etc., which,

24 I. Luke

though absent, were represented by delegates, who would
report his farewell.

(3) Considering Paul's past experience elsewhere, it is
not strange that he should be able to foresee what dangers
from without and from within awaited Ephesus. Further,
the Author has just pointed out that the address had
already become general; why, then, does he assume that
this sentence 29-30 applies only to Ephesus, and shows
such a knowledge of later Ephesian history as proves the
subsequent acquaintance with, perhaps actual residence in,
Ephesus of the historian who composed the address and put
it into the mouth of Paul ? It might equally plausibly be
argued, on the contrary, that this sentence shows ignorance
of subsequent Ephesian history, for both John and Ignatius
agree that Ephesus was long the champion of truth and
the rejecter of error.1

In general, one feels that, where the Author is at his best,
he is studying Luke in a straightforward way and drawing
inferences from observed facts ; where he is less satisfactory,
he has got a theory in his head, and is straining the facts
to support the theory.

He lays much stress on the fact that inconsistencies and
inexactnesses occur all through Acts. Some of these are
undeniable ; and I have argued that they are to be regarded
in the same light as similar phenomena in the poem of Lucre-
tius and in other ancient classical writers, viz., as proofs
that the work never received the final form which Luke
intended to give it, but was still incomplete when he died.
The evident need for a third book to complete the work,
together with those blemishes in expression, form the proof:
see below, p. 27.

1 Letters to the Seven Churches, p. 240 f.

the Physician 25

But the Author finds inconsistencies and faults in Luke
where I see none. He complains, e.g., that Luke is not dis-
turbed by the fact that Paul was driven on by the Spirit
to Jerusalem, and yet the disciples in Tyre through this
same Spirit seek to detain him from going to Jerusalem.
I cannot feel disturbed any more than Luke ; such were the
facts ; and I can only marvel that the great German scholar
thinks we ought to be disturbed. Nor can I blame Luke
(as the Author does, p. 81) because Agabus's prophecy,
xxi. n, is not fulfilled exactly as it is uttered. Luke is
merely the reporter of what he heard Agabus say ; and we
can only feel profoundly grateful that he recorded the
simple facts, and did not suppress the prophecy or adapt it
to the event.

The tendency to regard historical details which Luke
narrates as indicative of his personal character often takes
the form of blaming the historian for being inconsistent,
where the inconsistency (if it be such) was the fault of
the facts, not of the narrator. I quote just one example.
In xvi. 37 Paul appeals to his Roman rights as a citizen :
"one asks in astonishment why he does so only now".
One may certainly be quite justified in asking the question,
but one is not justified in blaming Luke because Paul did
not claim his rights sooner. This is an interesting question.
Paul had already several times submitted to punishment
from Roman or municipal magistrates without claiming his
immunity from such treatment as a Roman. At this point
he began to take advantage of his privileged position. Is
not this a step in his realisation of the relation of the Church
to the Empire ?

We take it that Luke is right, and that Paul did not at
first reveal his Roman citizenship to the Philippian magis-

26 I. Luke

trates. If that is so, it is absurd to blame the historian for
telling the truth. The Author, presumably, must hold that
Luke is wrong, that Paul did claim his rights earlier, and
that Luke either suppressed or was ignorant of the Apostle's
earlier appeal. Now the Author's view is that Luke was in
Philippi as Paul's companion ; the facts therefore must have
been known to the historian, but he did not record the
first claim. Such conduct would justify the very severe
strictures which the Author makes on Luke's inability to tell
a story clearly and correctly. But how difficult it is to work
out that theory in a reasonable way ! If Paul claimed his
rights on the preceding day, how did it come that he was
beaten in defiance of the privilege of a Roman citizen?
And, if the magistrates were convinced by his claim on the
morrow, how came they to disregard it on the first day?
Or are we to suppose that the beating was an invention of
Luke's ?

In short, here and generally, we come back to Professor
McGiffert's view (as stated above) that, if Luke was a friend
and companion of Paul, his history must be accepted as
thoroughly trustworthy. The qualities of intellect and
heart which are revealed in his work show that he was an
exceptionally well-qualified witness and narrator. The
Author's theory that Luke was Paul's contemporary and
personal friend, and often an eye-witness of the events which
he records, but yet was untrustworthy as a recorder even of
what he had seen, leads into many hopeless inconsistencies,
of which the above is only one slight specimen.

There are clear signs of the unfinished state in which this
chapter was left by Luke ; but some of the German scholar's
criticisms show that he has not a right idea of the simplicity
of life and equipment that evidently characterised the jailer's

the Physician 27

house and the prison.1 The details which he blames as
inexact and inconsistent are sometimes most instructive about
the circumstances of this provincial town and Roman
colonia.

But it is never safe to lay much stress on small points of
inexactness or inconsistency in any author. One finds such
faults even in the works of modern scholarship, if one ex-
amines them in the microscopic fashion in which Luke is
studied here. I think I can find them in the Author him-
self. His point of view sometimes varies in a puzzling way.
On p. 92 the paragraph Acts xxviii. 17-31 is said to be
clearly modelled to make it the conclusion of the whole work.
On p. 96 the Author confesses his inability to solve the
serious problem presented by the last two verses, and suggests
the possibility that Luke intended to write a third book.
Again, on p. 20 he numerates xx. 5, 6 as part of the " We "-
sections, but on p. 105 f. he declares that Luke first met
Paul at Troas, accompanied him to Philippi, and there
parted from him, to rejoin him after some years, and in fact
the meeting took place once more at Troas. But if the re-
union only took place at Troas, then xx. 5, 6 cannot be a
genuine part of the " We "-sections.

I suspect that inexactness on the Author's part forms the
foundation for a charge which he brings against me. He
speaks of my theory that Luke was employed by Paul as a
physician during his severe illness in Galatia. If I have so
spoken it would be a clear example of inexactitude and
inconsistency on my own part. I entirely agree with Pro-
fessor Harnack that Paul first met Luke in Troas, and that
Luke never travelled with Paul in Galatia ; and I think this
is put quite clearly and strongly in my book, St. Paul the

1 S*. Paul the Traveller, p. 220 ff.

28 I. Luke

Traveller. I may elsewhere have been guilty of this in-
exactitude and inconsistency; but I cannot remember to
have made such a statement. I have doubtless spoken of
Luke as being useful as a medical adviser to Paul in travel-
ling, as, e.g., I have said that Luke would have discouraged
any proposal to walk sixty miles in two days (Acts xxi. I6),1
more especially since Paul was liable to attacks of fever ; but
his fever was not confined to Galatia or to any one journey.
Moreover, a traveller may be guided by his physician's advice,
even though the physician does not accompany him.

The Author has an object in thus dwelling on the incon-
sistencies and inexactitudes of which Luke is guilty. He is
here preparing to cope with the supreme difficulty in Acts,
viz., the disagreement between the narrative of Acts xv. and
that of Galatians ii. i-n, if these are taken (as the Author
takes them) to be accounts of the same event, or series of
events. These are so plainly inconsistent with one another
— for the attempts to represent them as consistent are among
the strange things in the history of learning — that, if they
depict the same incident, one must be fatally inaccurate.
Now, as Paul was present and took part in the incident, his
evidence must rank higher, unless he be condemned as in-
tentionally misrepresenting facts, a theory which few adopt
and which need not be considered. Luke then must be
wrong, where he is in disagreement with Paul. The dis-
agreement can be readily explained by those who regard
Acts as the work of a later period : history, as they may
reasonably say, had become dimmed by lapse of time, by the
growth of prejudice, and by various other causes. But how
can those explain it, who maintain (as the Author does) that
Acts was written by the friend, coadjutor and personal

1 In a paper now reprinted in Pauline and other Studies (1906), p. 267.

the Physician 29

attendant of Paul, the friend of many other persons closely
concerned and certain to possess good information? The
inconsistency is not in unimportant details, easily caught
up differently by different persons : the inconsistency is
fundamental and thorough.

To that question the Author has to prepare his answer ;
and his answer is that Luke was habitually inaccurate and
inconsistent with himself. This answer is always a difficulty,
against which the Author is struggling with extraordinary
dialectic skill throughout his book, but the struggle is vain
and success impossible. Luke is not, in the Author's exposi-
tion, a single character. He is a double personality, good
and bad.

The truth is, as has frequently been pointed out, that the
whole problem which governs so completely and so disas-
trously this and most modern books about Acts is a mere
phantom, the creation of geographical ignorance, the result
of the irrational North Galatian view. Acts xv. describes a
different scene from Galatians ii. 2-11.

On p. 1 06 f. the Author discusses the relation between
Luke and the Gospel of John, and points out that of all
the Apostles Luke shows interest in none but Peter and
John. The idea that this greater frequency of reference to
these two Apostles might be due to their greater importance
in the development of Christianity as the religion of the
Empire (which I hold to be the truth) is set aside without
even a passing glance by the Author. The reason must lie
in some accidental meeting of Luke with, or personal relation
to, John. It is quietly assumed from first to last that the
determining motive of Luke in his choice of events for
record or omission lies in personal idiosyncrasy or caprice,
never in the importance or insignificance of the events. The

30 I. Luke

Author says that, considering his predilection for John, it is
remarkable that Luke does not mention him in Acts xv.,
when Paul shows in Galatians ii. that John was one of the
three prominent figures in the incident; and the only in-
ference which he draws is that Luke had not read the letter
to the Galatians. But, even if that inference were true, it
would not be a sufficient explanation, for Luke had abundant
opportunity of learning the facts and the comparative au-
thority of the various Apostles from other informants ; and
the Author fully grants that he made considerable use of oral
information. The only justifiable inference which the mere
commonplace historian would permit himself to draw is that,
according to the information at Luke's disposal, John did
not play a prominent part in the incident described in Acts
xv., whereas he was prominent in the scene described by Paul
(Gal. ii. 2-10).

The view which at present commends itself to me (but
which might, of course, be altered by more systematic con-
sideration) is that the writer of the Fourth Gospel knew the
Third, but that the writer of the Third did not know the
Fourth and had little direct personal acquaintance with its
author. The analogies which Dr. Harnack points out are
analogies of subject, forced on both by external facts, and
not caused by the character of the two writers.

It sounds, at first hearing, strange to us that the Author
feels himself as the first to observe that the female element is
so much emphasised in Luke, whereas Mark and Matthew
give women very small place in the history.1 This seems
such a commonplace in English study, that I felt obliged to

1 Worauft soviel ich mich erinnere, bisher nock nie aufmerksdm gemacht
warden ist. . . . Erst Lukas hat sie [i.e., Frauen] so stark in die evangelische
Geschichte eingefuhrt.

the Physician 31

be almost apologetic and very brief in referring to the subject
in Was Christ Born at Bethlehem ? (pp. 83-90). Yet when
one's attention is called to the fact, it is not easy to refer to
any formal and serious discussion of this extremely important
side of the evidence about Luke's personality ; and it may be
that the Author is the first, at least in modern German
scholarship, to treat the topic in a scholarly way. The truth
seems to be that German scholars have been so entirely
taken up with the preliminary questions, such as " Was there
a Luke at all ? " that they have never tried to discover what
sort of man he was. Even those who championed his reality
were so occupied in proving it by what are considered more
weighty arguments, that they forgot the mode of proof which
seems in my humble judgment to be far the strongest, viz.,
to hold up to the admiration of all thinking men this man
Luke in his humanity and reality. Do his works reveal to
us a real man ? If so, they must be the genuine composition
of a true person ; no pseudonymous work ever succeeded or
could succeed in exhibiting the supposititious writer as a
real personality. Professor Harnack has only half essayed
the task. He has entered on it, but never heartily, for he is
too much cumbered by prepossessions, by old theories only
half discarded, and above all by the hopeless fetters of the
North-Galatian prejudice, which inevitably distorts the whole
history.

I have pointed out, in the passage just quoted (p. 90),
that this attitude of Luke's mind is characteristic of Mace-
donia (implying thereby that it is not characteristic of Greece
proper) : I might and should have added that it is character-
istic also of Asia Minor. But there is much to say on this
subject, and here I can only refer to the discussion of the
effect on subsequent Christian development produced by the

32 I. Luke

Anatolian craving for some recognition of the female element
in the Divine nature (Pauline and other Studies, 1906, p.

135 ff>.

. " The traditions of Jesus, which lie before us in the works
of Mark and Luke, are older than is commonly supposed.
That does not make them more trustworthy, but yet is not
a matter of indifference for their criticism." J So says the
Author on p. 113. These are not the words of a dispassionate
historian ; they are the words of one whose mind is made up
a priori, and who strains the facts to suit his preconceived
opinion. In no department of historical criticism except
Biblical would any scholar dream of saying, or dare to say,
that accounts are not more trustworthy if they can be
traced back to authors who were children at the time the
events which form this subject occurred, and who were in
year-long, confidential and intimate relations with actors in
those events, than they would be if they were composed by
writers one or two generations younger, who had personal
acquaintance with few or none of the actors and contem-
poraries.2 But compare above, p. 4.

There is room, and great need, for a dispassionate and
serious examination of the question how far there exist in the
Gospels traces of the age in which they were composed, and
of the thought characteristic of that time. Such an ex-
amination cannot now be conducted to a useful end by one
who begins with his mind made up as to what must be later
and what cannot be real, for this prejudice must inevitably
be of nineteenth century character and hostile to any true

1 Die Ueberlieferungen von Jesus, die bei Markus und Lukas vorliegen,
sind alter als man gewohnlich annimmt. Das macht sie nicht glaubwiirdiger,
ist aber dock fur ihre Kritik nicht gleichgultig.

2 The Author dates Luke's History A.D. 80. For a different reason I argued
that Luke iii. n was written under Titus, 79-81 (St. Paul the Traveller, p. 387).

the Physician 33

comprehension of first century realities. I cannot but think
and maintain that there are later elements in the Gospels,
showing the influence of popular legend, and reminding us
that after all the picture of Jesus which stands before us in
the New Testament has always to be contemplated through
glass that is not perfect and flawless, through a human and
imperfect medium.1 The flaws can be distinguished, but the
marvel is that they are so few and so unimportant. The
picture is so strong, so simple in outline, and so unique, that it
shines with hardly diminished clearness through the medium.

After stating in a general way the position which Professor
Harnack takes up in this remarkable book, it is only fair to
give some specimens in detail of the arguments on which he
relies. As we are in almost entire agreement with the main
position of his book, it will conduce to clearness to say that
most of the quotations which will be made at the outset are
of points which seem to show his method at its best. In the
concluding pages some remarks will be made on the method
of proof which is employed in the book.

The Author's argument and inferences about the passages
in which the first personal pronoun " We " is used are stated
most definitely on p. 37 f. After minutely examining Acts
xvi. 10-17, and observing the identity in words, construction,
tone and thought, with the style of the rest of the Acts and
the Third Gospel, he argues that, if the writer of the Acts
took this passage from a " Source," he has left nothing in it
unchanged except the first personal pronoun : everything
else he has recast into his own characteristic vocabulary,

1 Legend gathers quickly in the East. It is, for example, an interesting
study to observe how the historic figure of Ibrahim Pasha has been hidden
beneath a crust of legend in the districts of Asia Minor which he held from
1832-40. The name is famous, but the legends gather round it,

34 I. Luke

syntax and style. Such a procedure is simply inconceivable,
and therefore there remains only the position that the writer
of the whole book is himself the original composer of these
" We "-passages : he is the man whose personal presence in
Troas and Philippi with Paul obliges him to speak as a wit-
ness of and sharer in the action.

It is possible, the Author argues on p. 38, to go one step
farther. The writer did not take this passage, xvi. 10-17,
from his own old notebook or diary, and insert it in his
history. When he wrote the history twenty to thirty years
after the events, he could not possibly have retained in all
respects exactly the same style as he used in his old note-
book. This passage was written when the Book of the Acts
was written ; it was composed as part of the whole work,
though this does not preclude the view that he had notes
written down at the time, with which he could refresh his
memory. This argument is absolutely conclusive to every
person that has the power of comprehending and appreciat-
ing style and literary art ; unfortunately many of the so-
called " Higher Critics " seem to have become devoid of any
such comprehension through fixing persistently their atten-
tion on words and details.

Luke was not merely a witness, he took part in the action :
" Straightway we sought to go forth into Macedonia, con-
cluding that God had called us for to preach the Gospel
unto them," and " we sat down and spake unto the women "
(xvi. 10, 13): here the narrator makes himself one of the
missionaries to Macedonia. He was not a mere companion,
he was an enthusiastic missionary to that country ; and on
my view (though not on the Author's view) he continued to
be specially devoted to that country, except in so far as the
still closer personal devotion to Paul called him away.

the Physician 35

The Author, on the contrary, is disposed to connect Luke
with Ephesus, with Asia and with Achaia (as has been stated
above, p. 21). He finds a sufficient proof that Luke was
not a Macedonian1 in Acts xxvii. 2 — "we put to sea, Aris-
tarchus, a Macedonian of Thessalonica, being with us " (p. 31).

I cannot see any force in this reasoning. On the same
principle it might be argued that Luke was not an Asian
(which the Author is inclined to believe that he was), because
in xx. 4, 5, he speaks of " Asians, Tychicus and Trophimus,"
who " were waiting for us at Troas ".

The remarkable passage, Acts xvi. 9, must detain our
attention for a moment, while we apply to it a principle
which the Author lays down on p. u, though he does not
apply it to xvi. 9, and would deny the inferences which we
shall draw. He points out that, throughout the "We"-
passages, Luke distinguishes carefully between "We" and
Paul : wherever it is reasonably possible in view of historic
and literary truth, he emphasises Paul and keeps the " We "
modestly in the background.2 Now observe in xvi. 10 how
the " We " is put forward. The vision was seen by Paul
alone, the message was given to Paul alone, "Come over
into Macedonia and help us ". Yet the narrative continues,

II And when he had seen the vision, straightway we sought
to go forth into Macedonia, concluding that God had called
us for to preach the Gospel unto them ". Without any ap-
parent necessity, even without any apparent justification,
the writer assumes that, because Paul has been called into
Macedonia, Luke shares in the call. There is no other
passage in which the "We" is forced in without obvious

1 In this paragraph I am using the words Macedonian and Asian of Luke
in the sense of residing in Macedonia or in Asia, which is not strictly accurate,
but is convenient.

2 See above, p. 15 f.

36 I. Luke

justification ; and on the view stated in St. Paul the Traveller,
pp. 200-3, there is a justification hidden beneath the surface
in this case also, for Luke had played a part in the vision,
and was therefore forced to conclude that he as well as Paul
was called to Macedonia. Several reasons (which need not
be repeated here) are there stated, which point to the idea
that the man of Macedonia, whom Paul saw in the vision
and recognised at sight as a Macedonian, was Luke; and
these are confirmed by the observation now stated.

Every time I read this remarkable passage, xvi. 6-10,
I am more and more struck with the intense personal feeling
that lies under the words, the hurry and rush of the narrative,
and the quiet satisfaction of the conclusion, " God had called
us ". Luke is here introducing himself, in the moment when
he played so important a part in determining the course of
Paul's work. The large space which is given to the Mace-
donian work in the Acts is out of proportion to its importance,
and can only be explained by Luke's strong personal interest
in it.

The Author gives as an example of the style of the " We "-
passages a similar analysis of xxviii. 1-16, a specimen of
continuous sea-narrative ; his treatment cannot be shortened,
but must be studied in full. Only one criticism has to be
made on this excellent piece of investigation. It is strange
that on p. 44 the Author quotes, as if there were any prob-
ability in it, Professor Blass's unjustifiable objection to, and
conjectural alteration of, the reading Trapao-rjfjLto dioor/covpois,
" whose sign was the Twin Brothers," given by MSS. and
all other editions in Acts xxviii. 1 1. Neither of them has
observed that this dative absolute is the correct technical
form, guaranteed by many examples in inscriptions. This
has been pointed out, and some examples quoted in an

the Physician 37

article published long ago in the Expositor! There is no
detail in which the exact technical accuracy of Luke's ex-
pression is more clearly made out than this, and yet Professor
Blass would change it into a commonplace relative clause,
cj> r)v Trapdcnj/jiov Aioo-tcovpwv, which is Greek so unidiomadc
as to be hardly Greek at all.

The author devotes considerable space to statistics about
the occurrence of the same words in the " We "-passages
and in Luke generally, as contrasted with the rarity or
total absence of many of those words in Matthew, Mark
and John. It is impossible to abbreviate this argument:
the reasoning must be taken as a whole, and seems con-
clusive, though opinion will always differ a good deal as to
the value of such verbal arguments in proving identity of
authorship. Personally, I have not as a rule much belief
in such arguments, but it must be confessed that the statis-
tics in this case are impressive.

The single sign of difference between the language of
the " We "-passages and the rest of Luke lies in the
unusually large number of words in the former, which
are used nowhere else by Luke. Words which an author
uses only once and no more occur throughout the writings
of Luke as well as in all the other books of the New
Testament ; they are distributed in a fairly even way, and
in proportion to the amount of the " We "-passages there
should be in them about thirty-eight words which occur
nowhere else in the Acts and the Third Gospel ; whereas

1 Room for it fails in the present volume. In St.' Paul the Traveller, p. 346,
it did not occur to me even to defend this common technical usage (dates by a
consul's name, e.g., being always tacked on loosely by this absolute dative in
Greek, ablative in Latin) : I had not realised how little known the technical
and the colloquial Greek of the later Hellenistic and the Roman period was
known even to such masters of Greek as the late Professor Blass.

38 I. Luke

there actually occur 1 1 1 of that class. But this is due to
the subject-matter. Navigation and voyages play a large
part in the " We "-passages, because it was to a large extent
on voyages that Luke accompanied Paul in the earlier years
of their friendship ; and he was by nature interested as a
Greek in seamanship. Three-fifths of the words which are
peculiar to the " We "-passages are technical terms relating
to ships, parts of a ship, naval officers, sea-winds, manage-
ment of a ship, and matters of navigation generally, and
almost all of them are nouns, while the few verbs without
exception denote actions required in seamanship. Such words
are forced on the writer by his subject ; and, as the Author
rightly remarks, it is a striking fact that in spite of the
novelty of subject in chapter xxvii., describing the ship-
wreck, the ordinary style and vocabulary of Luke are
traceable with perfect clearness even in that long passage
(p. 60).

It is, of course, acknowledged by practically all scholars
that Luke employed written Sources. These written
Sources he has modified and recast so that they assume
much of his own style. Now, if any one still continues, in
spite of the above-stated proofs from style and vocabulary,
to urge that Luke found the " We "-passages in a written
Source, and took them over into his book, transforming
them into his own style and language, the Author replies
by a careful study of the way in which Luke elsewhere uses
his written Sources, from which he demonstrates that in
spite of the freedom with which Luke handled and touched
up his written Source, the original style, syntax and vocabu-
lary still are clearly traceable in the transformed narrative.
This is one of the most important and striking parts in the
Author's work, and will reward the closest attention.

the Physician 39

While every one admits freely as a starting-point that
Luke had access to written narratives about many events
of which he had not been an eye-witness — for he himself
mentions in the opening of his Gospel that there were many
such written Sources, founded on information given by eye-
witnesses, to which he could have recourse — there is not
much agreement as to the extent to which, and the parts of
his two books in which, he was indebted to these Sources.
But there is at any rate one Source, the character of which
is indubitable: for we possess the Source in practically
its original form (or a form so near the original as to be
equally useful for the immediate purpose of this investiga-
tion), and can thus tell exactly how far and in what way
Luke used it. Some Sources are more or less a matter of
conjecture and inference, as they are lost in the original
form and are merely supposed as the foundation of Luke's
narrative. But it is practically universally admitted now
that Luke employed the Second Gospel : he took a copy of
Mark in much the same text and extent as we now possess,
and he wrote out three-fourths of it in his own Gospel in
much the same order as Mark wrote it. He improved the
Greek, he touched it up with explanatory additions and
"improvements" or "corrections," and he added greatly
to it from other sources of information, oral or written ;
but the style, syntax and vocabulary of Mark are clearly
discernible in the borrowed passages.

The Author exemplifies this in two passages, Mark i.
21-28 (i.e., Luke iv. 30-37) and Mark ii. i-n (i.e., Luke
v. 17-24). A few verses may be quoted from the first as a
specimen of this most luminous and instructive investigation,
which ought to be studied by every one in the Author's own
words.

40 I. Luke

Mark i. 21. And they go into Luke iv. 31. And He came down

Capernaum, and straightway on the to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and

Sabbath day He entered into the He was teaching them on the Sabbath

synagogue and taught. day.

Mark has used the plural " they went after him " in the
previous verse, and continues his narrative accordingly. But
Luke had the singular in iv. 30 (which belongs to a passage
derived from a non-Markan source), " He passing through the
midst of them went His way" ; and was therefore obliged to
change Mark's plural to the singular. Further, in the pre-
ceding verses Mark's scene was the shore of the Sea of
Galilee, and therefore the simple verb "go" was suitable.
But Luke's scene in the preceding passage was at Nazareth,
and he marks the change of scene from the hill-country of
Nazareth to the lower coast of the lake, "He came down ".
And, as the readers for whom he wrote did not know the
topography of Palestine, he adds to the name Capernaum
the explanation " a city of Galilee "-1 Again, Mark was fond
of the word "straightway," and often employed it (as in
verse 23) ; but Luke disliked the usage, and often omits
the word. Mark allowed the verb " teach " without an ob-
ject ; but this also was not a usage that Luke approved, and
he inserted " them " (not very lucidly). The process " was
teaching " seemed to Luke to express the facts better than
the simple " taught ". He found the expression " was teach-
ing " in the following sentence of Mark, and brought it over
to this place.

22. And they were astonished at 32. And they were astonished at

His teaching ; for He was teaching His teaching, for His word was with

them as having authority and not as authority,
the scribes.2

1 Luke has already mentioned Capernaum in iv. 23 ; but there it occurs
incidentally in a speech of Jesus, and explanation is unnecessary and would
be out of place. Here the topographical explanation is useful and suitable.

2 The quotations here follow the Authorised Version almost exactly, but

the Physician 41

In the second half of the verse the thought is entirely
remodelled and transformed into Lukan Greek and Lukan
language ; the verb had been transferred to the preceding
sentence, and change was therefore imperatively required.1

23. And straightway there was 33. And in the synagogue there

in their synagogue a man in an un- was a man which had a spirit of an

clean spirit ; and he cried out, say- unclean demon, and he cried out with

ing — a loud voice —

Luke here cuts out the possessive "their," and replaces
the preposition " in " (perhaps a literal rendering by Mark
from the original Semitic, not very satisfactory in Greek) by
" which had " ; he defines " unclean " more precisely ; he
substitutes the more vivid " with a loud voice " for the simple
"saying"; and omits "straightway" (compare verse 21).

Verses 24 and 25 are taken over unchanged, except that
in 25 Luke changes " out of" into "from ".

A comparison like this might be carried out over the
whole of the matter common to Mark and Luke. In some
places there is distinctly more change than here. But even
where there is most change, enough remains to show the
character of the Source. Slight alterations to improve the
Greek are frequent. Complete refashioning of the thought
and expression is rare. Words and phraseology which Luke
rarely employs where he is writing freely are retained from
the Source. Luke recognised that a certain type of narra-
tive style had been established for the Gospel, and he
allowed this to remain. Especially in the beginning of a
borrowed paragraph he altered more freely to suit the pre-

occasional slight changes are made to follow the Greek more literally, as here
"was teaching," where both Authorised and Revised Versions give " taught "
(which is better English in this case).

1 Similarly, when the Bezan Reviser transferred the idea, " he neglected a
region," from Acts xvi. 8 to xvii. 14, he remodelled the former passage.

42 I. Luke

ceding narrative. From some places it is clear that he did
not translate verse by verse, but considered a paragraph or
incident as a whole, and transferred touches from one point
to another, where they seemed more effective. He studied
effect more, or rather, perhaps, he pictured the scene to him-
self more vividly than Mark did, and lit it up with more
vivid forms of language, e.g. —

Mark ii. 3. And they came carry- Luke v. 18. And behold! men
ing unto Him. carrying.

It will be best to give one continuous example from the
Author, showing the net result over a short paragraph, of
Luke's way of treating the Markan original ; the capitals
indicate non-Markan matter, and the italics matter which
is gathered from Mark but occupies a different place in his
narrative. The reader observes how Luke in his opening
words places the picture before the reader's eye.

MARK n. i-io. LUKE v. 17-24.

1. And when He entered again into 17. And it came to pass on one of
Capernaum after some days, it was those days that He was teaching ; and
noised that He was in the house. there were PHARISEES AND DOCTORS

OF THE LAW sitting by, WHICH WERE
COME OUT OF EVERY VILLAGE OF
GALILEE AND JUDAEA AND JERU-
SALEM : and the power of the Lord
was with Him to heal.

2. And many were gathered to- Nil.
gether, etc.

3. And they come, bringing, etc. 18. And behold, men bring, etc.

4. And when they could not come 19. And not rinding by what way
nigh . . . they uncovered the roof, and they might bring him in, they ... let
when they had broken it up, they let him down THROUGH THE TILES.
down the bed.

5. And Jesus seeing their faith, etc. 20. And seeing their faith, He, etc.

6. But there were certain of the 21. And the scribes and the Phari-
scribes sitting there, and reasoning in sees began to reason, saying, Who
their hearts.

the Physician 43

7. Why does this man thus speak ? is this that speaketh blasphemies ?
He blasphemeth ; who can forgive Who can forgive sins, but God
sins but one, God ? alone ?

8. And straightway Jesus, per- 22. But Jesus perceiving their
ceiving in His spirit that they so reasonings, etc.

reasoned within themselves, etc.

9. Whether is easier, etc. 23. Whether is easier, etc.

10. But that ye may know that the 24. But that ye may know, etc.
Son of man hath power on earth, etc.

Mark ii. I — Luke v. 17. Luke prefixes an introductory
sentence in which he describes the general situation and lays
stress on the fact that it was for Jesus a day of power (per-
haps implying an idea, natural to a physician, that His power
was not always equally strong in Him). This sentence is
non-Markan, yet most of it actually lies in Mark's account of
the incident, and merely needs to be gathered out of what
he relates. The last statement regarding the power of
Jesus might perhaps be inferred by a physician from Mark ii.
10 f. ; but it goes beyond what Mark says.

Moreover, in the first sentence Luke describes the com-
pany, Pharisees and doctors of the law, and their origin from
numerous distant villages of almost all Palestine. Mark only
incidentally mentions in verse 6 that there were scribes
present. Luke gives the picture of a large assemblage of
learned and distinguished persons. Mark in verse 2 (not
reproduced by Luke) tells us of the crowd, but leads us to
understand that the crowd was of the ordinary kind, and we
should naturally infer (though Mark does not exactly say so)
that it mainly consisted of the people of the district and was
rather uneducated as a whole, though there was a sprinkling
of scribes among them (verse 6).

The two pictures are markedly different. If Mark was
the sole authority upon whom Luke here could draw, this
passage would certainly suggest that Luke made additions

44 I- Luke

from his own imagination without actual testimony, and that
he went at least to the verge, if not beyond the verge, of what
is allowable in thus reconstructing a picture from the words
of an earlier authority.

The question, then, arises : Had Luke no other authority ?
The Author seems tacitly to assume that he was dependent
solely on Mark ; and, if so, one can only say that Luke goes
beyond his authority and his picture is less trustworthy.
Hence — on the Author's assumption — the general impres-
sion that results would be unfavourable to Luke's historical
trustworthiness in comparison with Mark.

But is the assumption correct ? I cannot think so. Luke
claims to have had several authorities (i. 2). The certainty
and the detail in which he describes the character of the
crowd and its origin from all Palestine seem to me to imply
the use of other testimony besides Mark.

One Markan detail is omitted. Luke nowhere states the
exact locality ; but leaves us to gather from v. I, 12, 16, that it
was near the lake of Gennesaret.

In the sequence of the narrative the frequent use of the
simple " and " to connect the sentences is not Luke's own
style, but is taken by him from his authority. Various
changes are made in the words of Mark to improve the style.
Some of these changes are in the direction of a " Biblical
style," which Luke seems to have regarded as suitable, and
which he did not employ except where he thought the
occasion and subject to be suitable ; e.g., he does not use it
in i. i-4,^but begins at once to employ it in i. 5 ff. ; examples
here are the introduction of " they began to reason " instead
of" they were reasoning " (ii. 6 — v. 21), and the form " it came
to pass" (17). Other changes are made to avoid words or
usages which he disliked : he avoided the phrase " and

the Physician 45

straightway," he changed the adjective " a man sick of the
palsy " (Tra/oaXim/eo?) into the participle " a man that was
palsied " (TrapaXeXu/u^o?), and so on. He substituted the
better Greek word K\IV&IQV for the vulgar Kpd/3arTov. He
altered Mark's words, "perceiving that they so reasoned
within themselves " into " perceiving their reasonings ".

The Author rightly remarks that the change from " thy
sins are forgiven " to "thy sins are forgiven thee" (twice, ii.
5,9; v. 20, 23) is difficult to explain. There may be more in
this slight addition than meets the eye.

It is also noteworthy that in Mark the scribes " were
reasoning in their hearts," and that Jesus perceived "in His
spirit that they so reasoned within themselves," whereas
in Luke they simply reasoned and Jesus perceived their
reasonings. Yet Luke's report of Jesus' words, " What reason
ye in your hearts ? " shows that the words were not spoken,
but only thought. Here the picture given by Mark with
such repeated emphasis is exactly the picture that we
gather from Luke, when we read his narrative to the end ;
and it becomes clear that his omission of " in the hearts " was
due to stylistic reasons alone, as was his omission of " in His
spirit " in v. 22 (which he evidently considered otiose).

The changes from ii. 4 which are introduced in Luke v.
19 are of a more serious kind, and give a radically different
picture of the event. It might fairly be said that they have
almost the effect of misrepresenting the facts. The same
effect is produced in a few other cases ; but this is either for
the sake of making the situation more intelligible to his
readers, who were Western, not Oriental, or possibly because
he doubted the accuracy of some detail in the Source. The
present case may be taken as a good example. It is briefly
noted by the Author, who, however, does not discuss it, but

46 I. Luke

refers in a word to Wellhausen's explanation. The words
are fully discussed in my Essay on the Credibility of Luke
(Was Christ Born at Bethlehem? pp. 58-64); but I may
epitomise here what is stated at length there. Mark ii. 4
describes how the bearers of the paralytic stripped off the
covering of clay and soil from the (flat) roof of the house,
broke a hole in the ceiling, and let down the bed through it.
This description was true of the simple Palestinian hut, but
was unintelligible to a person who knew only the houses of a
Greek or a Roman city. Luke adapts his account of the
incident (not to a Greek house, but) to a Roman house, and
tells how the bearers of the man who was paralysed went
up on the tiled roof,1 and let the sick man down through
the hole (impluvium) which was in the roof of the public
room (atrium] of every Roman house. There was not a hole
of this kind in the roof of Greek houses, and Luke therefore
wrote for an audience or a single reader (viz., Theophilus, a
Roman official 2) familiar with Roman houses, i.e., living either
in Italy or in some Roman colony like Philippi. Perhaps
we may assume that the Roman style of house was common
in this Roman colony. We could hardly make such an
assumption about the Colony Corinth, where probably Greek
fashion was dominant ; but at Philippi the Roman soldiers
were numerous.

There is no question here that Mark states the actual
facts, and Luke misrepresents what occurred. The ques-
tion is whether Luke, familiar only with Greek or Roman
houses, misunderstood the description of the incident on the
roof of a rustic hut in Palestine, or intentionally stated the

1He imitates even the Latin usage, which used the term "the tiles"
(tegulce) to indicate the roof.

2S*. Paul the Traveller, p. 388.

the Physician 47

facts in this changed way in order to make the scene more
easily intelligible to his readers (or his reader, Theophilus),
preserving indeed the general character of the scene, but
altering the details and the surroundings from Palestinian
to Italian. But, after all, how small even in this case is the
change ! — for though a good many sentences are needed to
explain it to the modern reader, it is completed in two or
three words in the Greek.

What is most striking as the result of the Author's in-
vestigation is (i) the slightness of the changes as a whole
that Luke makes in his authority, and the faithfulness with
which on the whole he reports his authority, even preserving
largely Mark's very simple method of connecting sentences
by " and " (KCU) — a kind of connection which is much rarer
in the parts where Luke composes freely.

(2) His almost invariable practice of touching up descrip-
tions of medical matters : on this there will be more to say
in the latter part of the present paper.

(3) The way in which, even where he most freely alters,
he preserves a certain style of expression, which he evi-
dently considered to be an established and suitable form for
the Gospel. We recognise in Luke a marked sense of style
and great dramatic propriety in varying the style to suit
difference of scene and action. This has been the quality
of Luke as a stylist that most impressed me during years
of study. There is a certain modulation and freedom in
his expression, which varies in obedience to the feeling
of the moment and to the changes of scene ; and the
Author is sensitive to this beyond any other of the German
scholars whom I have read. Even Professor Blass, greatest
of Lukan editors, has been so taken up with explanation,
and attention to readings, and questions of verbal har-

48 I. Luke

mony, that he has not been sufficiently (if I may venture to
say so) alive to this highest quality of style. In the Author's
hands this observation leads to very important results
regarding the first two chapters of Luke's Gospel. But,
before passing to this much controverted topic, I should
like briefly to call attention once more to the paragraph
Acts xvi. 6- 1 1 as a specimen of this quality in Luke. It
has long appeared to me that this is the most remarkable
paragraph, from a certain point of view, in the whole of
Luke's writings : it is most full of himself and his whole
view of history and life and his Pauline comprehension,
most instinct with vibrating emotion (St. Paul the Traveller,
p. 200) : " the sweep and rush of the narrative is unique
in Acts: point after point, province after province, are
hurried over " : Paul is driven on from country to country,
Galatic Phrygia, Asian Phrygia, the Bithynian frontier,
Mysia, the Troad, and he must have been in despair as to
what was to be the outcome of this dark and perplexing
journey, until ^at last the vision and the invitation ex-
plained the overruling purpose of all those wanderings.
We cannot wonder that the commentators have been so
perplexed and nonplussed by this paragraph, and that they
have had recourse to such shifts to make their way through
it ; perplexity is the fact or emotion which underlies
the whole passage, and that is what the style brings out.
The writer felt that breathless, panting eagerness, so to say ;
and his style is modelled to suit the emotion. The style
here and always is almost out of the writer's control : the
subject and the emotion compel the style, or, rather,
clothe themselves naturally in the suitable words. That
is the perfection of style. But it puzzles the commen-
tator. We must here and everywhere in Acts follow truth

the Physician 49

and life; we must regard the surroundings and the geo-
graphy.

And, if Paul is here driven on from country to country,
if the historian has to hurry over the lands to keep pace
with his subject, is not that the whole life of Paul the
Christian ? Paul thinks imperially : " he talks of Pro-
vinces, and, as he marches on in his victorious course, he
plants his footsteps in their capitals".1 It is hardly too
much to say that all the rest of right Lukan study is an
exposition of the meaning and spirit of that one paragraph
where the mind of Luke and the influence of Paul are most
perfectly expressed.

Regarding Luke i. and ii., the Author is of the opinion
that the historian is dependent entirely on oral tradition,
and used no written Source; he regards those chapters as
purely legendary. He allows the possibility that the narra-
tive part may depend on an Aramaic written Source
translated by Luke himself; but he is not favourably dis-
posed to this view, and he is absolutely convinced that the
hymns of Mary, i. 46-55, and Zacharias, i, 68-79, are tne
free composition of Luke himself, that they were originated
in the Greek form, and never had an Aramaic form. The
proof lies in the fact that the language and style are so
thoroughly Lukan, adapted with extraordinary skill from
fragments of the Old Testament (the Septuagint).

Considerable part of this view seems to me highly prob-
able. I have always felt and maintained that Luke regarded
this part of his history as being a pure addition made by
him to the Gospel as recorded by his predecessors : he had
obtained it from oral, not literary sources.2 He believed,

1 Pauline and other Studies, p. 198.

2 Christ Born at Bethlehem, Chap. IV.

5O 1. Luke

however, that those sources were good, and he would not
have been satisfied with popular tradition. The man who
wrote i. 1-4 could never have gone on to repeat in i. 5 ff. a
mere popular tale, or have invented without authority such
hymns as those of Mary and Zacharias. Exaggeration and
overdoing of a view fundamentally correct is here the char-
acter of the Author's opinions.

The Author does not draw the following inferences, but
they seem to follow from what he does say. The style of
Luke's history is governed according to the gradual evolu-
tion of the Christian Church out of its Jewish cradle. It
is most strongly Biblical (i.e., taken from the Septuagint
Greek) and Hebraistic in describing the birth and early
years of Jesus. In describing the life and death and words
of Christ it is less Biblical, but still is deeply tinged with
Hebraism, while in many parts it shows strong traces of
non-Lukan style due to the use of written Sources. In
describing the earliest stage of the Palestinian Church after
the death of the Lord, it continued to be distinctly Hebrais-
tic, and parts of the Acts even go beyond the later parts
of the Gospel in the intensity of the Hebraistic tinge, as if
marking the narrowed spirit of the early Church, which had
hardly yet begun to understand the universality of Christ's
message. In the second half of Acts (except in chap. xv.
and in some of the scenes at Jerusalem, where the earlier
Hebraistic tone is perceptible) it is most thoroughly Greek
and Lukan. The preface to the whole history, Luke i. 1-4,
is on the same level as the second half of Acts, in excellent
and markedly individual Greek — here we have the true and
natural Luke. As the Author says, the problem of the
language and style of the Third Gospel taken by itself
would be insoluble, but by the aid of comparison with the

the Physician 51

Acts, everything is clear. It may be doubted, however,
whether the Sources in the Third Gospel could be disen-
tangled, were it not that we can recover the originals inde-
pendently of Luke, through their survival in the Gospels of
Mark and Matthew.

I do not mean that Luke was unconscious of the variation
in style: such an assertion would be ridiculous. But he
did not originate the variation — his subject originated it;
and he did not employ it for mere literary and artistic
effect, as the Author definitely maintains, but for historical
reasons, as a means of conveying more clearly and effec-
tively his meaning.

Study of the two forms, Hierosolyma and Jerusalem,
which appear side by side in Luke's Gospel and Acts, shows
both that Luke was conscious of the difference between them,
and that he learned from Paul how to employ it for effec-
tive presentation of his subject. There is no trace of atten-
tion to this difference in the other Gospels ; l but it is clearly
present in the writings of Paul, who probably originated it.
The form Jerusalem occurs twice in Galatians, Hierosolyma
three times : the latter is in that Epistle clearly a geo-
graphical term, the former is hieratic and Judaistic, as it is
in Revelation and Hebrews. A similar distinction can on
the whole be traced in Luke though it is partly obscured by
various causes (notably by uncertainty, and sometimes
perhaps by corruption, in the text).

I. Hierosolyma occurs only four times in the Third Gos-
pel,2 always very definitely in a geographical sense, while

1 They all use only the form Hierosolyma, except that Matthew once has
Jerusalem. The latter form is almost confined to Paul and Luke in the New
Testament ; exceptions are noted above.

2 Always in passages that have no parallel in the Gospels of Mark or
Matthew.

52 I. Luke

Jerusalem occurs twenty-six times : some of the latter cases
are mainly geographical in sense, but the atmosphere of the
passage, the spirit of the context, may be regarded as deter-
mining the form to be employed. Some of these cases are
in passages common either to Mark or to Matthew; and
Luke has deliberately altered the form used. But most are
in passages or in clauses peculiar to Luke. The following
list, taken from the Concordance by Moulton and Geden, tells
its own tale.

II. Passages peculiar to Luke : name Jerusalem occurs in
Luke ii. five times; Luke x. 30; in xiii. three times; xvii.
ii ; xix. n ; xxiii. 28 ; xxiv., five times.

III. Passages common to Luke with Matthew or Mark,
or both : —

Luke iv. 9. Jerusalem. Mt. The holy city.

,, v. 17. ,, Mt., Mk. omit.

„ vi. 17. „ „ „ Hierosolyma.

„ ix. 31. „ „ „ omit.

»> ix. 5 •*• • » » » »

» ix. 53' j> » " »

,, xviii. 31. „ „ ,, Hierosolyma.

„ xxi. 20,24.,, » » omit

Thus, while Luke has frequently the form Jerusalem, he
uses it only twice in places where Matthew or Mark actually
employ the other form. It is a principle of verbal suitability
which is peculiar to himself among the Evangelists, one
which he almost certainly learned from Paul.1

IV. In Acts i.-xii., xv., Jerusalem occurs twenty-five times,
Hierosolyma six times.

JThe idea that Paul adopted it from Luke may be dismissed without
hesitation. Their usage cannot be independent of one another, if they were
friends and companions. Paul is not likely to have taken it from a prede-
cessor.

the Physician 53

V. In Acts xiii., xiv., xvi. ff., Jerusalem occurs fourteen
times, Hierosolyma nineteen times (but according to the
text of WH., the numbers are twelve and twenty-one).
Many of the places where the form Jerusalem is used are
markedly hieratic and Hebraising.

While details in some cases are uncertain, the general
result of these statistics is clear. Luke did, beyond doubt
or question, attach some meaning to the distinction of form.
He deliberately and intentionally chose sometimes one,
sometimes the other. He was not guided by his Source, for
in some few cases he changes the name used in his Source,
and in other cases inserts the name where the Source did
not use it. The distinction is clearest where he depends on
eye-witness, and had no written Source. The distinction has
no literary value, but only a historical and real value. It was
used as a device to express meaning, not to give external and
formal beauty. Professor Harnack, who maintains that Luke
aimed at the latter kind of effect alone, without any thought
of the former, cannot explain such a fact as this. Finally,
Luke took the distinction from Paul, in whose case it would
be ridiculous to think of a conscious striving after formal
and artistic or rhetorical effect.

A similar case is found in the distinction between the names
Saul and Paul. Luke consciously and deliberately uses the
former to indicate the Apostle in his character as a Hebrew,
the latter in his character as a citizen of the Graeco-Roman
world. I have little to add to, and nothing to retract from,
the exposition of this subject in St. Paul the Traveller, pp.
8 1 -8. Here again we have a distinction used by Luke, in
regard to which no one can dream of any striving on his part
for artistic or literary effect : it originates entirely in the
delicate perception of real fact and historic truth. It is,

54 I. Luke

probably, not necessary nowadays to waste time on the
old-fashioned idea that Luke depended on two written
authorities, in one of which the Apostle was called Saul,
while in the other he bore the name Paul.

In respect of Luke's style, I regret to find myself in one
important respect holding a view diametrically opposed to
that of the Author. The style appears to me natural, un-
forced, determined by the subject in hand. The Author,
on the contrary, takes the view that Luke's style is ex-
tremely artificial and elaborated (pp. 80 f, 152), that he
paid the most minute and careful attention to form and the
external qualities of style, but was careless to the last degree
of fact and truth and consistency. It has been pointed
out in an earlier part of this article what is the fixed idea
and motive that induces the Author unconsciously to exag-
gerate (as I venture to think) the inconsistencies and the
artificiality, the contempt for facts and the devotion to verbal
art, that he discovers in Luke. He seems to me to have
often been misled by that fixed idea so as to misunderstand
Luke's method of narration. For example, he thinks that
Luke in Acts xvi. 27 describes the jailer as not having
observed the earthquake, but only its consequence, the
opened doors. It is quite evident that Professor Harnack
has never had the misfortune (or, shall I say, the good for-
tune ? for it is a good preparation for appreciating this pas-
sage) to live in a country subject to earthquakes. If he had,
he would never think it necessary for the historian to record
that a person, who was wakened from sleep by an earthquake
(as the jailer was wakened), was cognisant of the fact that
an earthquake had occurred, for no person is roused by an
earthquake without perceiving it. Luke and his readers
knew better about earthquakes ; and when he described the

the Physician 55

earthquake and its consequences, and added that the jailer
was wakened, he could reckon on every one of his readers
understanding without formal mention that the jailer per-
ceived the earthquake. He who reads Luke without apply-
ing practical sense and mother- wit and experience will always
misunderstand him ; and one of the chief purposes of my
St. Paul the Traveller was to illustrate the fact that these
qualities must be constantly applied in studying Luke.
When you think you find an " inconsistency " in Luke, you
should look carefully whether you have been sufficiently
applying these qualities, before you condemn the supposed
fault.

The Author is not disposed to admit that any written
Source was used by Luke in the first half of Acts. He
rejects with contempt all the numerous speculations about
Sources used in the Acts i.-xii. as empty, unmethodical and
valueless, excepting only the attempt of Bernhard Weiss to
prove that one such written Source can be traced here and
there in Acts i.-xv. : Weiss detects numerous inconsis-
tencies, and explains these by the hypothesis that Luke
was here only a Redactor, who failed to harmonise his
material thoroughly. But, so far as language and style go,
the Author finds no part of Acts i.-xv. that can be separated
from the rest as showing signs of a different hand and
expression, whereas in the Third Gospel the parts common
to Luke and Mark, and those common to Luke and Matthew,
show such signs distinctly. On the ground of difficulties
regarding facts and the treatment of facts, the Author is
disposed to consider that Luke used a written Source for
the episodes in which Peter plays the chief part; but the
Source was Aramaic and Luke translated it himself, so that

56 I. Luke

his own style appears alone in the Greek form.1 Even in
this case, however, the hypothesis that oral information
alone was used by Luke cannot (in his opinion) be con-
vincingly disproved.

The Author rightly attaches great importance to the
proof that the writer of the Third Gospel and the Acts was
a physician. The same personality is felt throughout.
The proofs are found in all parts of the work, both those
written by Luke as an eye-witness and those which he has
borrowed from Sources that are known to us. The Author
enumerates six classes of proofs : —

1. The presentation of the subject as a whole to the
reader is determined to a certain degree by point of view,
aims and ideals of a medical character.

2. Acts of healing are recorded in abundance and with
especial interest.

3. The language of the history is coloured by the speech
of physicians (in the way of technical medical terms, etc.).

These three proofs, however, are not sufficient. Jesus
did much as the great physician and healer ; and it must
be the case that the four Gospels should vary in the atten-
tion which they pay to this side of His work and character,
and that one must go beyond the others in this respect.
It would not follow that the one which goes beyond the
others was written by a physician. But these proofs are
raised to a demonstration by the following reasons : —

4. The description of the several cases of sickness men-
tioned shows the observation and knowledge that mark a
physician.

1 In the Third Gospel the parts common to Luke and Matthew rest
ultimately on an Aramaic Source, but the Author considers that Luke
used a Greek translation from the original Aramaic, and did not himself
translate. See below, p. 74.

the Physician 57

5. The language of Luke, even when he is not treating
of medical matters and acts of healing, has a medical colour.

6. Where Luke is speaking as an eye-witness, the medical
element is specially clearly visible.

The proof of these six propositions lies in the cumulative
effect of a great number of small details scattered over the
whole of Acts and the Gospel. It is, of course, impossible
to give any analysis of such a demonstration. There are
few striking cases to quote even as specimens ; and one or
two samples would give no conception of the strength of
the cumulative proof. One of the most effective instances
has been quoted above, p. 16.

This topic leads up to a question which I do not remem-
ber to have seen adequately discussed. Even in the passages
that have been taken over by Luke from the Source which
we still possess almost in its original form in the Gospel of
Mark, wherever there occurs any reference to illness or
medical treatment of sick persons, Luke almost invariably
alters the expression more or less, as in v. 18 he changes
the term " a paralytic " 1 of Mark ii. 3 to " a man who was
paralysed". He could hardly ever rest satisfied with the
popular untrained language used about medical matters by
Mark.2

In some cases the change does not imply really more
than is contained in the original Source, and amounts only
to a more scientific and medically accurate description of
the fact related in the Source. But in other cases a real
addition to knowledge is involved, as appears, e.g., from the
following examples : —

1 " A man sick of the palsy " in the Authorised Version.

2 This is the second class of alterations, systematically introduced by
Luke into the parts which he takes from Mark, as mentioned on p. 47.

58 I. Luke

1. Mark iii. I speaks of a man with a withered hand ;
Luke vi. 6 adds that it was the right hand : the medical
mind demands such specification.

2. Luke viii. 27 adds to Mark v. 2 that the possessed man
had for a long time worn no clothes : this was a symptom of
the insanity that a physician would not willingly omit.

3. In Luke viii. 55 the physician mentions that Jairus'
daughter called for food (cf. Mark v. 42). Various other
examples occur.

In such cases are we to suppose that Luke simply made
these additions without any authority, inventing them as
natural and probable ? That is the Author's decided opinion
(p. 130, n. 4) ; according to him, these are examples of Luke's
carelessness about fact and truth. But why must we suppose
that Luke, who in the Author's opinion had access to so
many oral sources of information, and who so often used
sources of this kind in both books of his history, never had
access to any oral authority for any event narrated by Mark ? l
Is it not more natural to suppose that the authorities with
whom he had conversed told him sometimes about incidents
which Mark records; and that, while he preferred to use
Mark's account as his basis, he made additions in some cases
from other authorities ? Those who reject wholly the pos-
sibility that Luke could have had access to any good oral au-
thority possessed of first-hand knowledge of the facts, are
justified in regarding those additions as pure invention ; but
it seems inconsistent in the Author to maintain that Luke's
witnesses (whom he admits to be first-rate) confined their
statements strictly to matters that Mark omitted. Moreover,
Luke is known to have used at least one written Source, apart
from Mark ; we can trace it where it was employed by both
1 See above, p. 44.

the Physician 59

Luke and Matthew. There were perhaps cases in which Luke
gathered information from it, though Matthew did not use
it (see below, p. 77).

The question inevitably arises, What effect will this book
have on general opinion ? The interest and value of the book,
as has been already said,1 seems to lie even more in the evolu-
tion of the thought of a striking modern personality, viz.> the
distinguished Author, than in the study of Luke. It shows
the Author on the threshold of the twentieth century thought,
yet not able completely to shake off the fetters and emerge
out of the narrow methods of the nineteenth century.

It may be doubted whether Professor Harnack's book,
highly as we must estimate the ability and the clever ratio-
cination displayed in it, will change any one's opinion or
convince any one who was not already convinced of the truth
that Luke the companion of Paul wrote the Third Gospel
and the Acts. Its method is too deeply infected with the
vice of most modern investigations into questions of the kind :
it is too purely verbal ; it has too little hold on realities and
facts. The history of literary criticism of ancient documents
during the last fifty years has demonstrated that by such
purely verbal criticism one can prove anything and nothing.
Almost all the real progress that has been made comes from
the discovery of new evidence, and not from verbal criticism
of the old books. It is only by bringing the old books into
comparison with facts and life that they can be profitably
studied.

It is difficult to think that the Author himself can attach
much value to the verbal proofs which he gathers together in
his third Appendix, with the intention of showing that the
1 See above p. 10.

60 I. Luke

letter of the Council in Jerusalem (Acts xv. 23-29) is the free
composition of Luke without any written authority. I can-
not imagine that the Author arrived at his opinion on the
strength of the verbal evidence, which is singularly weak and
conflicting; and, in fact, he confesses on p. 154 that the
verbal arguments are perhaps less important than the reasons
of fact and history. One feels that his opinion was reached
first on the latter ground, and the verbal reasons are mere
buttresses added afterwards in the attempt to support the
tottering pile. One notes with real regret the special plead-
ing in the comments on xv. 23, where Kara in ol Kara rrjv
1 Avrio^eiav /cal 2vpiav is proved to be a Lukan usage (as if
any one could doubt this) by comparison with the totally
different sense of /card in Acts ii. 10, Aiftvrjs rfjs Kara Kvpr)vr)v.
It needs no demonstration that Luke could use the preposi-
tion with an accusative ; so could any other Greek speaker
from the Danube to the Nile, and from the Atlantic Ocean
to the Persian Gulf. And the attempt to make out, in
defiance of the plain sense and linguistic usage, that ol Trpev-
fivrepoi, a$e\<l>ol is the easy reading and ol Trpea^vrepoi KCL\
ol d$€\<t>oi the more difficult reading, and therefore more
liable to alteration, mixes up argument and meaning in the
style of a lawyer pleading a bad case.

The same character attaches to much of the commentary
on the following verses. What bearing has it on the ques-
tion whether the Council or Luke composed the letter that
d7rayye\\ew (which is found in verse 27) is used by Luke
twenty-five times, by Mark only twice, and John twice ? 1
What reason does this give for thinking that the Apostles
could not use the word? Paul uses it twice, the Epistle

1 There are some textual differences on this point. Moulton and Geden
give it five times in Mark, three times in John.

the Physician 61

to the Hebrews has it, the Septuagint has it, Matthew uses
it eight times.

Why point out that Matthew and Mark do not use the
perfect of a7roare\\co ; as if that had any, even the remotest,
bearing on the question ? Both use the verb very frequently,
and as a matter of fact Matthew has the perfect passive in
xxiii. 37. John uses the verb and its perfect freely. Paul,
Peter and Hebrews have it (the first using even the perfect
active). Similar remarks rise to one's lips in a good many
other parts of this short commentary : many of the notes
are absolutely irrelevant, and prove nothing, do not even
point towards anything. Why heap them up? They
merely weaken the Author's argument, for they show that
he has tried every way and found nothing to buttress his case.

But, while the Author spends several pages in this dis-
cussion, he does not explain his position on the really im-
portant questions that arise about this letter. His position
is far more difficult in this instance than that of the more
thorough-going " critics," who maintain that Acts was com-
posed by a late writer : they find it quite natural that this
late writer should have to make up this document from his
own resources. But the Author considers that the his-
torical Luke, the companion of Paul, wrote the Acts, and
that Luke was in the closest relations with Paul during the
latter part of the very journey in which (he tells us) Paul
delivered this letter to all his non-Jewish converts in the
Galatian cities as an authoritative guide for their conduct in
life. Luke certainly makes it clear and inevitable that this
Decree of the Council at Jerusalem was the solution of the
difficulty for himself and for all in his position. Now what
every one asks from the Author, and what he is bound to
furnish, is some explanation of the matter. How does it

62 I. Luke

come that Luke was so entirely ignorant of the words of a
Decree which he describes as of such immense importance,
and which Paul had in his hands when he met Luke at Troas ?
Or if Luke knew the words of the Decree, does the Author
seriously believe, and wish to make us believe, that the his-
torian threw aside the real Decree and composed a sham one
in its place ? Finally, the Author must explain what he con-
siders to be the relation between the sham Decree and the
real one. Do they state the same thing, or different things ?
If the same, why does Luke in this case rewrite a document
entirely, whereas in other cases (as the Author proves so
carefully and so conclusively) he retains so much of his
original Source? Or does the Author consider that the
Council was a pure fiction, the Decree a mere invention,
and the story that Paul carried it to Antioch and delivered
it to his Galatian converts an elaborate lie? If that be
so, how does he reconcile this with Lukan authorship?
He declares that Luke is to the last degree careless of truth
and consistency; but such elaborate falsification goes far
beyond mere carelessness ; it implies wilful intention to mis-
lead.

These are not questions that can be evaded. They must
be answered, in order to make Professor Harnack's view
intelligible and rational to us, who desire to understand
him. It is not sufficient to waive them aside (as the
Author does) on the plea that they have been discussed by
others ; for these others think differently about essential
points.

On this question the Author's argument is mainly of
words ; yet one does not feel that it was through these
studies of words that he attained his present opinions.
Where the verbal argument of this book possesses demon-

the Physician 63

strati ve value, it has more than words to rest on. Thus, in
the study of the parts common to Mark and Luke, the
reasoning rests on the firm foundation of the original written
Source, and investigates the process by which Luke trans-
formed this original into the words of the Third Gospel.
In the study of the " We "-passages it has a large extent of
varied narrative to deal with, and it cannot wholly neglect
the facts. But, when the Author takes small pieces like the
song of Mary or the Decree of the Council of Jerusalem,
and analyses the language and rests purely on verbal statistics,
we fail to find strength in the reasoning.

Take as a specimen with which to finish off this paper,
the passage Acts xxviii. 9 f., which is very fully discussed
by the Author twice (pp. II f. and 123 f.). He argues that
the true meaning of the passage was not understood until
medical language was compared, when it was shown that the
word /caOfityev, by which the act of the viper to Paul's
hand is described, implies " bit," and not merely " fastened
upon". But it is a well-assured fact that the viper, a
poisonous snake, only strikes, fixes the poison-fangs in the
flesh for a moment, and withdraws its head instantly. Its
action could never be what is attributed by Luke the eye-
witness to this Maltese viper ; that it hung from Paul's hand,
and was shaken off into the fire by him. On the other
hand, constrictors, which have no poison-fangs, cling in the
way described, but as a rule do not bite. Are we then to
understand, in spite of the medical style and the authority
of Professor Blass (who translates " momordit " in his edition),
that the viper " fastened upon " the Apostle's hand (KaOrj^ev) ?
Then, the very name " viper " is a difficulty. Was Luke
mistaken about the kind of snake which he saw ? A
trained medical man in ancient times was usually a good

64 I. Luke

authority about serpents, to which great respect was paid in
ancient medicine and custom.

Mere verbal study is here utterly at fault. We can make
no progress without turning to the realities and facts
of Maltese natural history. A correspondent1 obligingly
informed me years ago that Mr. Bryan Hook, of Farnham,
Surrey (who, my correspondent assures me, is a thoroughly
good naturalist), had found in Malta a small snake, Coronella
Austriaca, which is rare in England, but common in many
parts of Europe. It is a constrictor, without poison-fangs,
which would cling to the hand or arm as Luke describes.
It is similar in size to the viper, and so like in markings
and general appearance that Mr. Hook, when he caught
his specimen, thought he was killing a viper.

My friend, Professor J. W. H. Trail, of Aberdeen, whom
I consulted, replied that Coronella l&vis, or Austriaca, is
known in Sicily and the adjoining islands; but he can
find no evidence of its existence in Malta. It is known to
be rather irritable, and to fix its small teeth so firmly into
the human skin as to hang on and need a little force to
pull it off, though the teeth are too short to do any real
injury to the skin. Coronella is at a glance very much like
a viper ; and in the flames it would not be closely ex-
amined. While it is not reported as found in Malta except
by Mr. Hook, two species are known there belonging to the
same family and having similar habits, leopardinus and
zamenis (or coluber] gemonensis. The colouring of C. leopar-
dinus would be the most likely to suggest a viper.

These observations justify Luke entirely. We have here
a snake so closely resembling a viper as to be taken for one
by a good naturalist until he had caught and examined a

1 Mr. A. Sloman, Kingslee, Farndon, Chester.

the Physician 65

specimen. It clings, and yet it also bites without doing
harm. That the Maltese rustics should mistake this harmless
snake for a venomous one is not strange. Many uneducated
people have the idea that all snakes are poisonous in varying
degrees, just as the vulgar often firmly believe that toads are
poisonous. Every detail as related by Luke is natural, and
in accordance with the facts of the country.

The Author quite fairly quotes this passage as an example
of Luke's love for the marvellous. One cannot doubt that
the reason for its appearance in Luke's history is that it
seemed to the writer a proof of Paul's marvellous powers.
We see now that, while it was bound to appear marvellous
to Luke, the event was quite simple and natural. No one
can doubt, probably hardly any scholar has ever doubted,
that the incident is narrated by an eye-witness : it is so vivid
and so direct, so evidently a transcript from life, that its
character is self-evident. But of what value would mere
verbal examination be in this case without investigation of
the real facts and surroundings in which the incident
occurred ? It is the same throughout Luke's history from
beginning to end. One may refer to the incidents of the
stoning and reviving of Paul at Lystra, and the recovery
of Eutychus at Troas, which are not necessarily marvellous,
but which both Luke and the public assuredly considered to
be so; yet (as is shown in St. Paul the Traveller) Luke,
while revealing what was the general belief and his own,
describes the events simply and accurately, without intruding
anything that forces on the reader his own marvellous inter-
pretation.

NOTE. — A word must be added about the meaning of
Eusebius's statements as to Luke's origin, TO pev yevos &v
T&V aw' 'Avrioxeias. In St. Paul the Traveller > p. 389, I

66 I. Luke

expressed the opinion that this peculiar phrase, used in pre-
ference to one of the simple ways of saying that he was an
Antiochian or resided at Antioch, amounted to an assertion
that he did not live in Antioch, but belonged to an Antiochian
family. Professor Harnack does not say anything that con-
flicts with my statement (so far as I have observed), though
he does not formally agree with it, and, on the whole, rather
neglects it; quite probably he may never have observed it.
But several others have disputed it, and asserted that
Eusebius describes Luke as an Antiochian. Some parallel
passages will show that I was right ; had Luke been known
to Eusebius as an Antiochian himself, the historian would
not have said that " by family he was of those from Antioch ".
Arrian, Ind. 18, mentions Nearchos, son of Androtimos,
TO 761/09 fiev Kpr)<; 6 Nea/?%o?, o>/cee 8e zv M/^tTroXet 777 eVt
^Tpvfjuovt (compare Bull. Corr. Hell., 1896, p. 471). Nearchos
was by family a Cretan, but he resided in Amphipolis, where
probably his father settled, and where the son could only be
a resident stranger, not a citizen : * hence he continued to be
"Cretan by family, settled in Amphipolis". Similarly we
find in an epitaph of Olympos in Lycia Telesphoros, son of
Trophimos, ^kvei Upu/^creoO?,2 a resident in Olympos and
married to an Olympian woman (Bull. Corr. Hell., 1892, p.
224). As resident strangers acquired no citizenship, it was

1 Unless an act of the Macedonian king forced the conferring of citizen-
ship.

2 Though I have no right to decide on such a point, I should be disposed to
regard Upv/nvrjareovs as the better accentuation : the form is due to rough and
coarse local pronunciation of Greek, often exemplified in inscriptions of Asia
Minor: many examples of this are quoted in writings on Asia Minor of
recent date, e.g., KareffKeovaa-av for KareffKetaffav, where ov must be regarded
as a representation of the sound of W. In npv(j.i>i]ffeovs it represents either W or
the modern pronunciation F. See, e.g., Histor. Geogr. of As. Min., p. 281;
Studies in Eastern Provinces (1906), p. 360.

the Physician 67

necessary to have some method of designating them in
the second or third generation : had Telesphorus himself
migrated from Phrygian Prymnessios, he would have been
called npufAvrja-a-evs oltc&v eV JO\v^7T(o (Cities and Bisk, of
Phr., ii., p. 471), or more formally after the analogy of C.I.G.
2686 (ol/ctfa-ei /j,€v MeL\r)cnos, fyva-ei Se 'lacrLvs). Josephus,
Ant., xx., 7, 2, speaks of Simon resident in Caesareia Stratonis
as 'lovbalov, Kvirpiov Se 76^09.

The form awb JO^vpvy^ea)^, etc., is used in the Egyptian
Papyri apparently in the sense of " belonging to Oxyryn-
chos, etc.," without any implication that the person was not
resident there ; but in this expression the critical word 761/09
is omitted : examples are numerous, e.g., 'A\oivr]<s, KCOJAOVOS,
Aiovvcriov, TWV CLTTO 'Ot-vpvyxcov 7roAe&>9, Grenfell and Hunt,
Oxyr. No. 48, 49.

The form ra>v airo is also used in a way different from
the last example, equivalent to e/c TWV, e.g., VTTO Necfrepiros
rcov OLTTO Me/-t0e«9, Greek Papyri Br. Mus. p. 32 (Nepheris
was resident in Memphis) ; compare also Kacrro/909 . . .
rcov airb Kto/jbrjs JA/c(*)pea)S KaTa<y€(,vojj,6v[ovY eV Kco/jirj Mvd%€(,,
Amherst Papyri, 88. In the second case Castor was not a
resident in his proper village : in the former case it is possible
that the formula is used in a papyrus of the Serapeum,
because Nepheris was at the moment at the Serapeum outside
of Memphis. But I do not venture to make any statement
about Egyptian usage. Literary usage certainly has a dis-
tinguishing sense for TWV airo, e.g., JZejBripos ra>i> CLTTO T?J9
avwdev $pv>yia$, Aristides, i., p. 505 (Dindorf) : this Roman
officer of high rank belonged to a Jewish family of Upper
Phrygia and also of Ancyra, but he was not a resident in

1 OH in pap., corrected to [ou] by the editors : the writer made a gram-
matical blunder, which ought not to be improved by editors.

68 I. Luke the Physician

Upper Phrygia, for we know his career of Roman service
(Waddington, Pastes, p. 218) ; in fact, considering the customs
that ruled at the period in question, he was probably not
even educated in Upper Phrygia, but in Italy, as he was
able to enter the senatorial career when a youth.

The expression T&V OLTTO is also used in the sense of
" descended from a person," e.g., ra>v a?r' "ApSvos (Hparc\6t,§wv
(Bull. Corr. Hell., 1892, p. 218), "of the Heracleids descended
from Ardys," the Lydian king.

Frankel, Inschr. Perg., L, p. 170, takes the phrase appended
to a royal letter, 'AOrjvayopas GK Ilepyd/jLov, as meaning
that Athenagoras the scribe was not a Pergamenian citizen,
but a resident only. But the meaning is, "Athenagoras
(was the scribe: the letter was written) from Pergamos".

II.

THE OLDEST WRITTEN GOSPEL.

II.

THE OLDEST WRITTEN GOSPEL.

IN reviewing Professor Harnack's study of Luke the Physician
we found that the best part of a very notable book was the
comparison of the sections which are common to Luke and
Mark, and the analysis of the relation between those two
writers. In this detailed comparison \ the Author could not
confine himself to considerations of words (that vice of the
nineteenth century) ; he was obliged constantly to take into
consideration the things of real life; and we observed in
this case, as often before, that Lukan criticism keeps right
only when the study of words is constantly controlled and
directed by the observation of facts and realities.

The problem before the Author was to determine the
principles on which Luke had dealt with the narrative of his
authority, Mark. This task, which would have been im-
possible if the authority had perished, was facilitated by the
fact that the same original document which Luke employed
in those sections lies now before us as the Gospel of Mark ;
and it is possible to see exactly what changes Luke in-
troduced, and to determine what reasons and principles
guided him in making certain modifications in the narrative
of Mark. As a whole, the result of the Author's examination
was that Luke reproduces the facts accurately, that he to a
certain degree changes the words in the interests of literary
style, but that even these verbal changes are generally
confined to single words or short phrases ; and that there is

(70

72 II. The Oldest

a notable absence of all attempt to introduce new meaning
into Mark's narrative or to intrude into the record ideas
belonging to the age when Luke was writing. Luke im-
proves the language of Mark, where he follows him ; but re-
presents his meaning with impartial and remarkable fidelity.
Where he desires in his Gospel to give more information than
Mark gives, he generally does it in distinct sections, based
evidently on other authorities, written or oral.1 And the fair
presumption is that he represents those other authorities with
the same perfect fidelity as he shows in the case of Mark.

We found ourselves compelled to differ from the Author
chiefly in two respects. In the first place, there were other
parts of his work in which he seemed to be too much under
the influence of purely verbal methods, a kind of reasoning
of which we entertain a profound distrust, and one which
has led to many errors in many departments of literature;
purely literary considerations of language and style often
afford valuable suggestions and start new trains of thought,
but they have never produced any results that can be relied
on permanently, except when they are constantly guided and
tested and controlled by more objective and real methods.
The plan of the Author's new book, which forms the subject
of the present article, leaves little or no room for this
fault.2

In the second place, the Author seemed to us occasionally
to have not quite freed himself from certain prepossessions

1 We were, however, disposed to believe (differing herein from the Author)
that occasionally Luke modified or completed a statement of Mark by know-
ledge gained from some other source (see p. 58) ; though these modifications
do not amount to changes of essential facts.

zSpruche und Reden Jesu, die zweite Quelle des Matthaeus und des
Lukas : Leipzig, Hinrichs, 1907. Beitrdge zur Einleitung in das Neue
Testament, II. Heft. Since the present article was first published, a transla-
tion by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, M.A., has appeared (Williams & Norgate, 1908).

Written Gospel 73

and assumptions which ruled the hard and unilluminative
criticism of the later nineteenth century. That that criticism
was needed as a protest against older dogmatism and previous
assumptions, I should be the last to deny, and have always
freely admitted ; but it was only on the destructive side that
it was sound ; its attempts at reconstruction were valueless
and misleading, because the negative presumptions from
which it started vitiated all its positive inferences.

In the Author's new book, Sayings and Speeches of Jesus,
forming the second part of his Contributions to the Intro-
duction to the New Testament, the method of detailed com-
parison, which ruled in the best portion of his Luke the
Physician, is carried out even more completely, and forms
the basis of the whole study. Hence I find myself in cordial
agreement with the method and the results to a much
greater degree than in the previous case. The main result,
that the lost Common Source of Luke and Matthew was
a work earlier than Mark, appears to me to be firmly estab-
lished, and to lead straight to conclusions of the highest im-
portance. Although those conclusions are not in harmony
with the Author's opinions, they seem to me to spring in-
evitably from his main line of argument.

That the first, and in many respects the most important,
authority on which Matthew as well as Luke relied was the
Gospel of Mark, practically in the form in which we possess it,
is now generally admitted. In studying the relation of Luke
to this Source, the Author did not require to take into account
Matthew's version of the same Source, because Luke was
wholly independent of Matthew, and the Source still lies
before us. But in the case of the second Common Source of
Luke and Matthew, the problem is a far more complicated
and difficult one. The Source has been lost, and it is only

74 II. The Oldest

through the comparison of Luke and Matthew that we can
recover an outline of its contents and character, and to a
certain extent reconstruct the lost original document. This
original is for brevity's sake referred to as Q; and on pp.
88-102 the Author prints all of it that he believes to be
recoverable with certainty or high probability. As he says
himself, it is necessary to fall back occasionally on conjecture
and hypothesis, as the evidence does not justify perfect
confidence.

In the course of this article we shall diverge slightly from
the Author's custom, and shall use the symbol Q to denote
the restored form of the lost Source, as given by him, pp.
88-102, while we shall refer to the Source in its complete and
original form (which was indubitably longer, perhaps much
longer, than the Author's restoration), by some circumlocution,
such as " the lost Common Source " or " the Collection of Say-
ings " (a name used by the Author, but not in our view an
adequate name, though it perhaps rests on ancient authority).

The original of Q was written in Aramaic; but both
Luke and Matthew used the same Greek translation, and
therefore throughout the Author's work Q denotes a certain
Greek book, and not the older Aramaic original. The
question is mentioned whether Luke or Matthew may
occasionally have gone behind the Greek form Q and con-
sulted the Aramaic original for some details; but the
Author is confident that such a procedure, if it ever hap-
pened, was extremely rare, and that generally Q alone may
safely be assumed as the single and final source of a certain
portion of Luke and Matthew, about one-sixth of the former
and two-elevenths of the latter. Perhaps Aramaic scholars
might differ from the Author on this question : it is under-
stood that one well-known English scholar, who has always

Written Gospel 75

taken a very different view, still adheres to his own opinion.
But at least there can hardly be any doubt that a Greek
translation did exist, and was used by both Luke and
Matthew, whether or not they controlled it by consulting
the Aramaic in addition. And the Author seems also to
have established his theory of Q to the extent that his
restoration can be relied on as giving a fair amount of the
original document in a trustworthy form and as permitting
certain positive inferences, but not negative inferences
founded on the failure of any particular incident in his
restoration of Q. There is much probability that in some
cases the lost Common Source was much longer than the
restored Q.

Incidentally, in this study of the two largest Sources
which Luke and Matthew made use of, one must be strongly
impressed with the utter impossibility of recovering from
any single author alone the authorities which he tran-
scribed. Let any one take Luke's Gospel by itself, or
Matthew's Gospel by itself, and examine verse by verse the
parts that come from Q and from Mark respectively. He
must conclude that the problem of analysing either the
Third or the First Gospel separately and distinguishing the
Q-parts, the Mark-parts, and the parts taken neither from
Q nor from Mark, would have been quite insoluble without
extraneous help.

And, more than this, if Mark were lost, while both
Luke and Matthew were preserved, it would of course be
easy to distinguish the common Matthaeo-Lukan parts
from the parts peculiar to each ; but it would be utterly
impossible to analyse that common Matthaeo-Lukan Gospel
into its two parts, the Markan and the non-Markan. Only
the existence of Mark makes it possible to tell what is

76 II. The Oldest

Markan and what is non-Markan. Yet take Q by itself,
and read it apart from Mark, and the least observant
scholar must be struck by the difference of character, style,
language, and point of view.

Further, if one took Luke's Gospel by itself, and pro-
ceeded according to some definite peculiarity, such as, for
example, the name of the Holy City, starting from the
principle that the passages in which the Hebrew form
Jerusalem was used were founded on a different original
Source from those parts in which the Greek form Hiero-
solyma was used, how misleading and absurd would be
the results of such an hypothesis ! So in the Acts, the old
"critical" (or rather uncritical) idea that the use of the
names Paul and Saul indicated two different Sources has
probably been abandoned by even the most unenlightened
and unprogressive of modern scholars. It has long been
proved conclusively that Luke had a definite purpose in
distinguishing the names Paul and Saul, and employed
sometimes the one, sometimes the other, for the sake of
historical effect. So, also, he had a clear purpose of his
own in distinguishing the names Jerusalem and Hierosolyma,
and he actually alters Mark's Hierosolyma into Jerusalem,
in order to carry out his own peculiar purpose (see above,

P. 51 ffj.

The futility of various other similar criteria might be
easily shown, if it were worth while; but we pass on,
only pausing for a moment to ask whether in the analysis
of the Pentateuch too much has not been made of the
distinction between the two names of God, Elohim and
Jehovah or Yahwe. Even admitting (as we do fully) that
different older Sources lie behind the extant form of the
Pentateuch, is it not possible that there may be some

Written Gospel 77

purpose guiding the choice of the final compiler or author
in his use of the two names ? I always bear in mind the
warning words which Robertson Smith often emphatically
used in conversation, that, while the diverse Sources of the
Pentateuch could on the whole and in the rough be dis-
tinguished, it must always be utterly impossible to attain
certainty about the precise points and lines of cleavage in
the existing text (a warning which has been wholly forgotten
by some scholars, who since his death claim to speak fur him
and to present his views on current questions to the public).

A general outline of this pre-Lukan and pre-Matthaean
Common Source, then, can be recovered from the agreement
of the non-Markan parts of Luke and Matthew ; but, of
course, there remain two important questions to be deter-
mined before we can regard the resultant group of literary
fragments as a full and trustworthy representative of that
old book.

In the first place, did Luke and Matthew take the whole
of the lost Common Source and incorporate it in their re-
spective Gospels ? Were there not parts of that book which
Luke alone or Matthew alone extracted, and for which
therefore we have only one authority ? It seems to us
probable,1 and even practically certain, that there was a good
deal which only one of them incorporated in his Gospel :
Luke treats the book with great freedom, and puts in
different parts of his Gospel scraps of it which Matthew
places side by side as continuous exposition. Such freedom
seems quite irreconcilable with the idea that they agreed in
utilising the entire book. This part of the Common Source
(which we believe to have been considerable) is for the most
part hopelessly lost to us. We may conjecture that certain

1 The Author holds the same opinion.

;8 II. The Oldest

paragraphs or sentences of Matthew alone or of Luke alone
were taken from the lost Source ; and in such cases argu-
ments from language or style or thought might be fairly
brought in to support the conjecture. But such conjectures
can never be ranked on the same level as the agreement
of Matthew and Luke ; and they do not apply to any large
continuous part of the book. Yet the attempt ought to be
made, and will certainly be often made, to specify and
collect those parts of the lost Sources that were used only
by one Evangelist. The Author expressly recognises that
this is a work which awaits and will reward patient investiga-
tion (pp. 2, 121).

Further, are there not passages in which the Source coin-
cided in subject with Mark, and the latter seemed to Luke
and Matthew to be preferable — not necessarily as divergent,
but as more complete or better expressed? Was it the
case — as it would be if the Author's restoration of Q were
even approximately complete — that the lost Source never,
or hardly ever, covered a part of the same ground as Mark ?
There seems an overwhelming probability that two such
books must have agreed oftener than appears in the Author's
restoration. It is clear that they covered the same ground
as regards the relations of Jesus with John the Baptist and
as regards the Temptation, but covered it in very different
ways. In the case of the Temptation, for example, Mark
restricts himself to a brief sentence; and both Luke and
Matthew here neglect Mark and follow Q. Now suppose it
had happened that the lost Common Source had been pre-
served, but that Mark had perished and we were attempting
to restore his Gospel from the agreement of Luke and
Matthew, some critics would certainl maintainy that Mark
had never heard of the Temptation. As it is, we can see

Written Gospel 79

that there is no inconsistency or disagreement on this point
between Mark and Q ; but the latter is far more detailed and
complete. Were there not many cases in which the sharp
and clear narrative of Mark was preferred by the two later
Synoptics to a brief allusion in the lost Common Source ?
This seems to us inevitably to have been the case ; and all
these parts of Q, which were distinctly inferior to Mark in
historical import and weight, are now hopelessly lost.

The consequence of this loss has been that Q has the
appearance of being almost wholly confined to Sayings and
Speeches of Jesus. This appearance we must consider to
be untrue to the real character of the original lost Source.
It is clear even from the agreement of Luke and Matthew
that Q was not quite free from narrative : the parts relating
to John the Baptist and the Temptation and the Centurion
of Capernaum contain some narrative ; several sections in
the Author's Q, 3, 18, 22, 29, 30, 54, and others, must
obviously have been accompanied by some narrative, how-
ever brief. In many others it is inconceivable that a first-
hand authority (as the Author considers the writer of Q to
have been) could have sent down to posterity, or published
for his contemporaries, such a disjointed and disconnected
scrap as that which can be got from the agreement of
Matthew and Luke.

We must, therefore, conclude that there was more narrative
in the lost original document than appears now in Q, and
that sections i, 2, 13, 14 * of the Author's restoration give a
truer conception of its character than most of the other
sections. It was not a mere collection of sayings, but a
narrative, noted down by a person whose interest lay mainly
in the sayings and the teaching of Jesus, and who made the
1 The Baptist, the Temptation, the Centurion.

8o II. The Oldest

narrative subsidiary to the speeches. This person wrote,
not with the purpose of composing a biography, but from
interest in the character and the teaching of a remarkable
personality, recording what He said, and employing narrative
mainly in order to make the recorded words more significant
and more instructive. In the account of the Temptation
it is evident that the circumstances and the situation must be
described in order to make the words intelligible to the
reader.

These conclusions, to which we seem to be involuntarily
driven by the facts, are quite consistent with the Author's
views, though they perhaps modify in some degree the
general impression which he gives of the lost Common
Source. The opinion which on the whole he is disposed to
hold is that this Source was the work of the Apostle Matthew,
being the collection of Logia which Matthew (as Papias says)
composed. The Author fully concedes that Papias under-
stood this collection of Logia to be simply the First Gospel
(p. 172) ; but he tends to the view that Papias in this
matter misunderstood his authority, that Matthew merely
gathered together a collection of sayings, and that both Luke
and the writer of the First Gospel made use of the collec-
tion.

The question here rises, how do the two extant Gospels
stand related to the original Source ? Do they represent it
fairly, and which of them reproduces it most accurately ?

The Author shows repeatedly, both as regards the Markan
portions and as regards Q, that while Luke sometimes gave
more emphatic expression to the ideas of his Sources, he
did not add anything of consequence to them on his own
authority. In fact, as has been previously pointed out,1 the
1 See above, pp. 47, 4, 32,

Written Gospel 81

Author's results from his detailed examination of Luke,
sentence by sentence and paragraph by paragraph, stand
in the most marked contrast with his general reflections
upon Luke's character as a historian. In both the Author's
volumes Luke bears the detailed test even better than
Matthew; the Author declares that while Matthew on the
whole preserves the actual words of the Sources more
exactly than Luke, he in certain rare cases adds something
of his own to them, whereas he finds no case where Luke
adds to the Source any expression betraying the spirit and
ideas of the later time when he was composing his Gospel.
But while the Author's detailed test gives this result, he
strongly condemns in general Luke's incapacity, inaccuracy
and untrustworthiness as a historian.

As to the date when this collection of Sayings was
gathered together, the Author expresses a definite opinion.
He considers that the book of Sayings and Speeches was
composed before the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70,
and before the Gospel of Mark. Otherwise he leaves
the question of date an open one, except that he will not
allow it to be much earlier than Mark. This he infers from
the fact that the Gospel of Mark is wholly independent of
and unconnected with the collection of Sayings ; he argues
that if this collection had been long in circulation before
Mark wrote, it would be impossible that Mark should
not have known it and used it (p. 172).

But, while the Author rightly perceives that this lost
Source is older than Mark, his train of reasoning seems
inconclusive and unconvincing. It involves one big assump-
tion, viz., that Mark desired to make his work supersede
that older book. Now, if we follow the authority of Papias
that Mark wrote the "Gospel according to Peter," there

82 II. The Oldest

seems not the slightest reason to think that he would desire
to supersede the older narrative, or to intermingle with
Peter's narrative the account given by another (whether
Matthew or any one else), or that he would feel himself
bound to introduce speeches and sayings from another
Source into the narrative as he gathered it from Peter. It
is perfectly natural and probable that he may have known
the old book of " Sayings and Speeches," and yet composed
a narrative according to Peter, wishing not to supersede but
to complete the older work. Still we are not eager to
maintain that Mark was acquainted with the collection of
Sayings. That lies in the region of possibilities, not of
scientific investigation.

At this point we meet one of the Author's prepossessions,
which we cannot sympathise with. He holds that the type
of a Gospel — viz., the principle that its central topic and
guiding motive must be the death and resurrection of the
Lord — was fixed by Mark ; " being required by the needs
of a catechetical apologetic " (p. 174). We must differ toto
caelo from this assumption and from the vast consequences
that follow from it. The type of the Gospel was fixed by
the facts, and not by the accident of Mark's composing a
Gospel. This type dominated the whole situation, and
guided the thought and word of the Apostles from the
moment when they began to understand the facts, i.e.,
from the first Pentecost. In this type of the Gospel, as it
quickly formed itself out of the actual events, the death of
Christ was the essential and critical factor ; and on this
factor the whole narrative turns. That was the case with
the speeches of Peter and of Stephen at the very beginning
— and, as we take it, with every exposition of Christian
truth thereafter, except when from time to time a " new

Written Gospel 83

theology " arose and lingered for a short time, only to pass
away, often finding its grave in the mind in which it origi-
nated.

But the Author, on the contrary, is obliged, by his assump-
tion that Mark fixed the type of the Gospel, to hold that the
picture of the first Church, as given in the Acts, is unhistorical,
and that the speeches of Peter and Stephen are merely the
free compositions of Luke, expressing his own ideas of what
they ought to have said, an incipient Paulinism. So he is in
consistency bound to maintain, and so he does maintain, even
in his latest expression in Lukas der Artzt.1 And, on the
same principle, he holds (p. 171) that the same cause,
Paulinism, exerted a strong influence in moulding the form
of Mark's Gospel. In a word, this view practically implies that
Paul originated the recognised type of Gospel, that pre-
Pauline Christianity was of an essentially different character,
and that in that earliest period any so-called germs of Paulin-
ism, /.*., any stress laid on the efficacy and power of the
Saviour's death, must be regarded as an anachronism and an
impossibility. The nature and origin of Paul's teaching is
here involved ; and I find myself absolutely at variance with
the Author. To me it appears that the facts, which deter-
mined the type of the Gospel, imposed it on the minds of the
Apostles, generally, and that Luke's report of those early
speeches is historical and trustworthy ; and I am utterly
sceptical as to the possibility that Mark, or any other man,
could have fixed immutably and permanently (as the Author
maintains, p. 174) the type of all subsequent Gospels.

But, it will be objected, here in Q is a Gospel which is
utterly different from the established type, which never
mentions the death of Christ or bases the efficacy of Christ's
1 He often tacitly assumes it. See above, p. 22.

84 II. The Oldest

teaching on His death — a Gospel which the Author, mainly
on the ground of this character, holds to be earlier than
Mark's Gospel, but not very much earlier.

This is an important argument, which needs and will
reward careful consideration. It involves two points, (i)
Is it true that, as the Author maintains, the lost Common
Source took no notice of the death of Christ ? (2) If that
was the case, when was that Common Source written ?

It is, of course, correct procedure on the Author's part
to restrict the scope of Q in the first instance to the parts
which can be restored with approximate certainty from
the agreement of Matthew and Luke, and to set aside
rigorously all that does not rest on this assured basis —
though even thus there are some places where, as he says,
it is impossible entirely to avoid conjectural work. But
in deducing from this restoration the character of the lost
Source, one must remember that this restored Q is incom-
plete, and one must draw no inferences of a purely negative
character, t.e.t one must never infer that there was in the lost
Source no mention of any particular event or group of events
merely on the negative evidence that in the restored Q no
mention occurs of the event or group of events. To justify
such an inference it is necessary to show that Q is positively
inconsistent with the supposition that the event or group of
events was known to the writer of the lost Source.

Accordingly, to find that there is in Q (as determined by
the agreement of Matthew and Luke) no mention of Christ's
death, does not afford sufficient proof that His death was
not mentioned in the lost Common Source. It would, as far
as this reason goes, be quite possible that this Source (which
on the narrative side is scanty and confessedly poorer than
Mark) was in the conclusion so distinctly inferior to Mark

Written Gospel 85

that the latter (combined to some extent with other Sources)
was preferred by both Matthew and Luke ; and it might
even be possible to speculate whether this Source was not
used by one of the two alone in some parts.

But there is stronger ground for the Author's view : the
teaching of Q is inconsistent with the idea that the writer
of the lost Source regarded the death of Jesus as the funda-
mental fact in the Gospel. One acquires the impression
throughout that Jesus was to him the great Teacher, not
that He was the Redeemer by His death : Jesus was to
him the Son of God, the King who reveals the Kingdom
of Heaven. In the Teaching of Jesus, the Kingdom of
God stood out prominently, and its nature, with the con-
ditions of entering it, were emphatically stated : the sons of
the Kingdom, who had the right of birth, i.e., the Jews,
were to be rejected, and the Gentiles from all the world were
to find a home with Abraham and Isaac in the Kingdom of
God (sections 42, 13, 30); it was not a Kingdom of this
world, it was a process of development and growth in the
mind of the individual (section 40) : hence, to speak against
the Holy Spirit (which works this process in the mind of
man) is the fatal and unpardonable sin (section 34^, 29) : in
this it is already implied, as is said in Luke xvii. 21, that
c< the Kingdom of God is within you ". The way of salva-
tion, i.e., the Kingdom of God, does not lie outside of, or
apart from, common life, but in the ordinary life of man (i.e.,
it is the spirit in which that life is lived) ; and every man
has the opportunity of being justified by the spirit of wisdom
(section 15, 12). The revelation by the Son is the only and
necessary way by which man can attain to the knowledge of
God (section 25) ; this way of salvation is a difficult path
with a single narrow entrance (section 41); it was unknown

86 II. The Oldest

to many prophets, though now shown publicly to those who
saw and heard Him (section 26) ; it is hidden from the wise
and the educated, but revealed to infants (section 2 5); the
Kingdom of God has come near those cities whither the
true teachers and Apostles go (section 22, 16) ; there is need
for many workers in this harvesting of the world (section 18).

In this Teaching there lies implicit the Gospel of Christ,
but the foundation on which alone (according to the univer-
sal Christian Gospel from Peter and Stephen onwards) the
Kingdom of Heaven can be built up, is wanting, for there
is no allusion to the death of Christ, which gives the needed
driving force and the power. The central and determining
factor which makes the Christian religion is wanting, and
the want of it was not felt by the writer. Jesus meant to
him something markedly different from what He is in all
the Gospels and in the whole New Testament outside of Q.

The question then is, When could such Teaching as this
be written down in a book ? The Author replies that it was
written down shortly before Mark's Gospel, but after Peter
and Stephen and Paul had been preaching the Gospel of
the death of Christ. The type of the Christian Gospel had
not then been fixed by Mark ; and, in the Author's view,
apparently, the Gospel might be anything that any writer
pleased until Mark had shown what a Gospel ought to be,
after which no writer could do anything except follow the
type as fixed once for all by Mark. He apparently believes
that the other Twelve Apostles preached anything they
found good in the way of teaching from the beginning down
till Mark's publication; no one perceived what was the
meaning and power of Christ's death until Mark's Gospel,
in accordance with apologetic needs, fixed the type.

The Author's theory mistakes literature for life, and

Written Gospel 87

regards the chance of Mark's publication as determining
the course of subsequent Christianity. He ignores the facts
(as we hold) that Mark was only an accidental agent, who
wrote what the development of Christian teaching forced
him to write ; that it was not apologetic needs, but the force
of inner life and growth, which gave form to the Gospel ;
and that the Gospel existed before Mark and independent
of Mark. He even thinks that Mark, if he had known Q,
would have given a different character to his own Gospel.

It is impossible that any of the disciples could about thirty
years after the Crucifixion picture Jesus simply as the great
living Teacher, or could set forth the way of salvation as
being through the true knowledge which is revealed only by
the Son of God, and yet never in any way allude to His
death as being an essential factor in the process of salvation.
The disciples realised immediately after the Crucifixion
that they had never rightly understood the teaching of Jesus
in His lifetime, because they had missed that cardinal fact of
His death. Here we have an account which sets before us
Jesus as the Saviour without alluding to the cardinal fact.
The writer did not know that fact, which so radically
changed the minds of all. Had he known it, he could not
have been silent about it.

The Author lends plausibility to his view by denying all
credibility to those parts of the Gospels and the Acts which
throw light on the feelings and thoughts of the disciples
during the period between the Resurrection and the writing
of Mark's Gospel. In his view the course of early Christian
history was quite different from what it is described to us ;
a false Pauline-Markan colour has been painted over it all,
and the disciples understood everything quite differently
until Paul through Mark taught them otherwise.

88 II. The Oldest

This is the only way to give a reasonable character to the
Author's dating of Q. Only those who are prepared to go
so far can accept his view. But it seems inconsistent and
incredible that the period of Christ's life and the post-
Markan period should have been pictured to us in such
a fairly trustworthy form as the Author allows, while
the intervening thirty or forty years is so totally misrepre-
sented. This is not a reasonable or natural view ; and no
attempt is made to put it on a reasonable basis. The as-
sumption is made that the first half of the second book of
Luke's history is utterly untrustworthy ; and an unattested
and unsupported historical sketch is founded on the assump-
tion. Here and everywhere in the study of the New Tes-
tament we see the evil consequences of depreciating the
trustworthiness of Luke.

One other explanation can be suggested which would make
the Author's date for Q conceivable ; and that is that the
writer of the lost Source in the first part of his work described
the mind and belief of the disciples as they were while Christ
was still living, and then in the last part described the change
that was produced in them after the death of Christ had re-
vealed to them the real truth. But such an artificial explana-
tion cannot for a moment be entertained. The Author does
not even think it worthy of notice, but tacitly rejects it and
insists on the simplicity of the lost Source. This explanation
is utterly inconsistent with the possibilities of the situation.
It supposes a straining after dramatic effect which cannot be
reconciled either with the character of early Christianity or
with the habits and established canons of ancient literature.

We conclude, then, that the date assigned by the Author
is impossible in itself and inconsistent with his own views.
The lost Source cannot be placed either between Mark and

Written Gospel 89

Luke, or a little before Mark. It cannot be placed later
than the time when the disciples began, at the first Pente-
cost, to understand the true nature of the Gospel, and
Peter began to declare it publicly, establishing it on the firm
foundation of the sacrifice of Christ's death.

A date between the death of Christ and the first Pente-
cost is equally impossible; and is not likely even to be
suggested by any one. In that period of gloom and despair,
who would sit down to compose a Gospel in the tone of

There is only one possibility. The lost Common Source
of Luke and Matthew (to which, as the Author says, Luke
attached even higher value than he did to Mark) was
written while Christ was still living. It gives us the view
which one of His disciples entertained of Him and His
teaching during His lifetime, and may be regarded as
authoritative for the view of the disciples generally. This
extremely early date was what gave the lost Source the
high value that it had in the estimation of Matthew and
Luke, and yet justified the freedom with which they handled
it and modified it by addition and explanation (for the
Author's comparison of the passages as they appear in
Luke and Matthew shows that the lost Common Source
was very freely treated by them). On the one hand, it
was a document practically contemporary with the facts,
and it registered the impression made on eye-witnesses by
the words and acts of Christ. On the other hand, it was
written before those words and acts had begun to be pro-
perly understood by even the most intelligent eye-witnesses.
So, for example, John says (ii. 22) that "when He was
risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He
had said this unto them," and they then comprehended

90 II. The Oldest

the reference to His death which at the time they had not
understood.

The same tone is observable frequently in the Synoptic
Gospels ; so, for example, in Matthew xvi. 2 1 f. : " From
that time began Jesus to show unto His disciples how that
He must . . . suffer many things . . . and be killed and
the third day be raised up. And Peter . . . began to
rebuke Him, saying, Be it far from Thee, Lord ; this shall
never be unto Thee. But He turned and said unto Peter,
Get thee behind Me, Satan; thou art a stumbling-block
unto Me : for thou mindest not the things of God, but the
things of men."

This is found also in Mark ; but Luke omitted the re-
ference to Peter, apparently disliking the harshness of the
language.

Then there immediately follows in Matthew a passage
strongly reminiscent of Q as restored by the Author : com-
pare xvi. 24 with Q section 46, and xvi. 25 with Q section
5/.1 In fact, xvi. 24, 25, are almost a repetition of x. 38,
39, but the former belongs to the Markan portion of Luke
and Matthew, the latter belongs to Q.

Luke ix. 44 f. : " While all were marvelling at all the
things which He did, He said unto His disciples, Let these
words sink into your ears ; for the Son of Man shall be
delivered up into the hands of men. But they understood
not this saying, and it was concealed from them, that they
should not perceive it : and they were afraid to ask Him
about this saying." This also is common to Mark ix. 31,
32, and Matthew xvii. 23, but the latter gives only the words
of Jesus, without remarking on the ignorance of the disciples.

1 Q 46 is Matthew x. 38, Luke xiv. 27 ; Q 57 is Matthew x. 39, Luke xvii.
33-

Written Gospel 91

Luke ix. 54-56 mentions the rebuke to James and John
on the way towards Jerusalem for their suggestion, which
was so incongruous with the spirit of Christ and the occasion.
This is Lukan only.

Luke xviii. 31-34: "He took unto Him the twelve and
said unto them, Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and all the
things that are written by the prophets shall be accom-
plished unto the Son of Man. For He shall be delivered
up ... and the third day He shall rise again. And they
understood none of these things ; and this saying was hid
from them, and they perceived not the things that were
said." Matthew xx. 17-19 and Mark x. 32-34 mention
that Jesus revealed the coming facts to the twelve disciples,
but do not remark on their failure to understand.

The Author, if we do not misunderstand him, takes a
different view of these and similar passages : he regards
them apparently as being of distinctly later origin, barely
of apostolic period, but rather representing the reflections
and moralising of a later generation with regard to the
simpler ideas entertained by ruder minds in an earlier
time, before the later views about the death of Christ
and its meaning had established themselves : see especially
below, pp. 240-2.

We would not affirm that the writers of the canonical
Gospels never added such reflections ; but that tone and
attitude of mind seems to us to have originated in the
period immediately following the Crucifixion, and to be the
inevitable accompaniment or expression of the gradual
realisation by the disciples of their new knowledge that the
death of Christ was a necessary and fundamental part of
His Gospel. In our view, the utmost that can be attri-
buted to any of the evangelists is that he gave more sharp

92 II. The Oldest

and emphatic form to those reflections; we cannot allow
that he created them.

There seems no other supposition but this which would
satisfactorily explain the character of Q. On this view
everything in it becomes clear. According to this view
Jesus stood forth in His lifetime as the great Teacher,
because in that way alone He had as yet become known
even to the most faithful and devoted of His followers.
The way of salvation was the way of right wisdom : know-
ledge was what Jesus revealed, viz.> the knowledge of God
the Father. But Jesus alone could impart this knowledge.
As He said, " I thank Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and
earth, that Thou didst hide these things from the wise and
understanding, and didst reveal them unto babes. . . .
All things have been delivered unto Me of My Father ; and
no one knoweth the Father save the Son and he to whom-
soever the Son willeth to reveal Him." Such is the original
form (Q), which the Author specifies as lying behind
Matthew xi. 25-27 and Luke x. 21-22. He regards the
omitted part of the last sentence as an interpolation (see
especially pp. 204-6).

The two sentences which immediately follow this passage
in Matthew xi. 28-30 are regarded by the Author as prob-
ably truly words of Jesus, taken, however, not from Q but
rather from some other trustworthy Source and placed
wrongly in this situation by Matthew. The passage is the
familiar and frequently quoted one : " Come unto Me, all ye
that labour and are heavily laden, and I will give you rest.
Take My yoke upon you and learn of Me ; for I am meek
and lowly in heart ; and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
For My yoke is easy, and My burden is light." The Author
sees and explains admirably the close relationship of thought

Written Gospel 93

and meaning between these two passages. The knowledge
of God in the one case is the intellectual aspect of that which
in the other case is called in its moral aspect the yoke or
burden of duty ; and Jesus describes Himself as at once the
conveyer of the instruction and the imposer of the yoke,
" take My yoke upon you and learn of Me ". This is merely
an enforcement in the imperative mood of the truth stated
as a fact in the preceding verses. Thus the whole passage
runs continuously in perfect sequence.

But the failure in Luke of any parallel to Matthew xi.
28-30 constitutes an argument so serious as to convince the
Author that Luke did not find those last three verses in the
lost Common Source, for it is not easy to understand how
he should have omitted an expression which is so harmonious
with the tone and spirit of his Gospel. It is, of course,
always an uncertain argument to found any inference on
the fact that some saying or event was omitted by Luke out
of the vast number from which he had to select : he certainly
omitted much that we should have been glad to have. But
selection was necessary, and no two persons will select in
exactly the same way: one will mourn the omission of
something which the other suffered to be crowded out. Yet
there is probably no other case where a deliberate omission
by Luke seems so strange as this ; and hence many will
agree with the Author that Matthew took these three verses
from some other Source and placed them here on account
of their intrinsic suitability.

We cannot, however, agree with him when he seeks to
strengthen this argument by the consideration that the
verses common to Luke and Matthew are a statement in
the indicative, while the addition peculiar to Matthew is
an invitation in the imperative, and that there is too much

94 II- The Oldest

change between the situation in the two parts. This reason-
ing is founded on the assumption, which the Author makes
throughout, that what is early in the Gospels is necessarily
simpler and more single in tone than what is later. Jesus
was a complex character, and His Teaching had many sides ;
and we ought to find traces of this complexity in the very
earliest faithful presentation of Him. But this is a point
which is too important for us to enter upon at present. At
present I would only point out the really close philosophic
connection of the two parts in Matthew. The first part, xi.
25-27 (Luke x. 21-22), is the statement that right i knowledge
of the Divine nature can be acquired by man only through
direct revelation from Jesus. The second part invites man
to come to Jesus and acquire this knowledge, declares His
readiness to reveal the knowledge, mentions that man in
coming must co-operate by "taking on him the yoke of
Jesus," and adds that the yoke is easy. In the two parts of
Matthew's saying we have in embryo the whole philosophy
of history and the history of religious development as Paul
understood it.1

The Author rightly finds a corroboration of his opinion
that Matthew xi. 28-30 is truly a word of Jesus in 2 Corin-
thians x. i : " I entreat you by the meekness and gentleness
of Christ, I who in your presence am lowly among you ".2
We should also be disposed to think that the expressions
used in Acts xv. 10-11, 28, rose to the mind of Peter and the
Apostles from recollection of the Saying contained in this

1 Cities of St. Paul, pp. 10-15.

2 In the writer's Cities of St. Paul, p. 38 f., it is argued from this passage,
together with Ephesians iv. i, 2, and Colossians iii. 12 (juxtaposition of
Ttpavs and ra.ireiv6s, or irpavrrjs and ra.Treivotypoff'bv'rj), that Paul knew this Saying
(whether from the Collection of Sayings or from oral information).

Written Gospel 95

passage of Matthew.1 Peter in his speech to the Council
said, " Why tempt ye God that ye should put a yoke upon
the neck of the disciples, which neither we nor our fathers
were able to bear ? But we believe that we should be saved
through the grace of the Lord Jesus in like manner as they."
And the Decree of the Council ordained, " it seemed good
... to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary
things ". Here the yoke and burden of the Jewish Law is
contrasted with the saving grace of Jesus ; and the Author
points out that the yoke and burden which is meant in the
passage of Q just quoted is that which the Pharisees imposed.2
That the Author is right becomes evident where this passage
is combined with Matthew xxiii. 4 (identical in force with
Luke xi. 46), which is part of Q section 33, "the Pharisees
bind heavy burdens . . . and lay them on men's shoulders ".
The heavy burden was the teaching of the Pharisees and of
the Law ; but the Teaching of Jesus imposed a light burden
and an easy yoke.

But it is hardly necessary to go searching with the Author
for arguments and external proofs that the words of Matthew
xi. 28-30 were in real truth spoken by Jesus, and not in-
vented by a later fancy. The practically universal consent
of all subsequent thought has recognised those verses as
among the most characteristic, the most exquisite, and the
most perfectly adapted to the needs of mankind, that have
been preserved to us in the Gospels. No proof can be so
strong as that consent, Securus iudicat orbis terrarum. There
was no second Christ to speak those words.

1 Whether from their own recollection of the words which they had heard
or from their knowledge of the book of the Sayings, or from both.

2 The Author does not mention this analogy ; and on his view of the late
date and spurious character of the Decree, he would explain it in a very dif-
ferent way.

96 II. The Oldest

Nor need we restrict their intention so narrowly as the
Author seems to do. They are far wider in application
than he allows — as wide as the burden of every trial and
every sorrow that men know ; but they certainly include,
as he says, the contrast between the burden of Pharisaic law
and the freedom of Christ's teaching; they anticipate the
controversy between Paul and the Judaising party ; and
they lead up to the Epistle to the Galatians. And what
a difference in temper and spirit is there between the
Saying of Jesus and the Epistle of Paul, great as the
latter is: all the difference between the Divine and the
human.

It is clearly apparent that Luke treated the text of Q with
considerable freedom, and that the agreement of Matthew
and Luke is in many places confined to small sayings, which
might possibly have come to them from independent sources.
In this respect there is a decided contrast with the triple
agreement (of Matthew and Luke with Mark), where the
likeness generally extends over considerable passages, some-
times over long continuous stretches of narrative. This
difference has led some scholars J to doubt the existence of
any real single written authority Q behind this double agree-
ment (of Matthew and Luke, independent of Mark). They
would rather incline either to a verdict of " Not Proven," or
to a definite opinion that the double agreement rests on
strong general likeness in a widespread oral tradition or in
several different documents.

The Author's answer to this is given in one of the most
striking passages in the whole work, a passage conceived in
a singularly lofty spirit of sympathetic insight and of the

1 Notably my friend, Rev. Willoughby C. Allen, in his edition of the first
Gospel.

Written Gospel

highest kind of " Higher Criticism," on p. 162 ff. (though in
it there are passages which do not convince me) : —

" The proof that Q is essentially a homogeneous and an
ancient source is ultimately based upon the nature of its
description of the personality of our Lord."1 We see that
there was an ancient written Common Source, because Q
presents to us so remarkable, individual and unique a con-
ception of Jesus. This conception is of inestimable value.
Throughout all subsequent time the value has been acknow-
ledged in every attempt made to sum up His personality.
" The portrait of Jesus as given in the sayings of Q has re-
mained in the foreground." 1

The reason why Luke treats with greater freedom that
old Common Source is complex. Two causes can be
specified forthwith; and there probably are more. In the
first place, a book in which the narrative was slight and the
writer's interest was directed almost entirely to recording
the sayings and teaching of his hero could not be adapted
to a narrative form without some freedom. Secondly, in
the teaching of Christ the same subjects and topics were,
beyond all doubt, insisted on repeatedly. John gives in
different situations a fuller discussion of topics which are
briefly mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels. This is a sub-
ject which would require and reward full treatment.

The individualised conception of the Saviour's personality,
which the Author rightly emphasises so strongly, proves also
that it is impossible to regard Q or the original Common
Source as a practical catechetic manual, drawn up about A.D.
60-70 for the use of teachers and pupils in the Christian doc-

1 The translation is Mr. Wilkinson's, which I purposely adopt, partly to
exemplify its excellence, partly to avoid any risk of colouring the Author's
words to suit my point.

98 II. The Oldest

trine — which is the view taken by esteemed friends, especi-
ally by Dr. Sanday. In such a manual or handbook how
can we expect to find a human being, portrayed in such
markedly original traits, so unlike the conception that was
current in all other early Christian documents ? The com-
pilation of a catechetical manual at any period must not be
assumed without definite proof that the character of that
period is clearly marked in the compilation. Now the
Author rightly emphasises repeatedly as characteristic of Q
that it has no Christological-apologetic interest, that it was
not compiled in the interest of Christological apologetics, and
that it follows no apologetic-Christological aims.1 In the
assumed period, A.D. 60-70, when Christianity was a mission-
ary religion, already for a long time subject to attack and
supported by defensive statements and teaching, such a
document as this is wholly out of place and inconceivable.
We have in it the contemporary notes of a person in im-
mediate personal contact with Jesus, fascinated by His per-
sonality as a living man and as a great Teacher and Prophet,
not thinking of His death and of what was to ensue thereon.
When we desire to realise the character of the living man
Jesus, we must go to contemporary record. It would be
vain to seek for Him in the grave of a catechetical manual.

In conclusion, it is perhaps right to refer to an argument
which will weigh with many minds against the date which
we assign for the composition of the lost Common Source
of Luke and Matthew. It is a widespread assumption that
the earliest Christians did not commit to writing any record
of the life or the words of the Saviour ; and that it was only
at a later date, after at least the first Epistles of Paul had
been written, and when the disciples had ceased to expect

1 See pp. 163 and 167.

Written Gospel 99

the immediate Coming of the Lord and the end of the world,
that they began to think of composing accounts of the events
and teaching in which their faith originated. If you ask for
reasons to support this assumption, there are none that seem
to have even the slightest value. It is a pure prepossession,
which has lasted from the time when everybody believed that
the art of writing was a late invention ; that the custom of
writing spread gradually and slowly, and was in ancient times
(as in mediaeval) rare and unusual ; and that the composition
of every document ought always to be assigned on principle
to the latest possible date. This is a prejudice which has
been decisively disproved by recent discovery. The art of
writing is very old. The knowledge of writing was far more
generally diffused in the east Mediterranean lands in ancient
times than it was in mediaeval Europe ; and the strong pre-
sumption is that every important event in the early Imperial
period was described in informal or even formal documents,
often by several persons, at the time that it occurred.

Protestantism first supplied the driving force to popularise
reading and writing among the mass of the people in modern
times, and from the Protestant countries the custom spread ;
but still it is only in a few countries that the familiar use
of writing in everyday life is so widely diffused as it was in
the most civilised regions of the Mediterranean world about
the time of Christ. The whole burden of proof lies with
those who maintain that the earliest Christians committed
no record to writing, for that view is quite out of harmony
with the facts and tone of society in that period and
region.1

1 The reasons for this opinion are stated more fully in the first chapter of
the Letters to the Seven Churches, though even there they are merely given
in outline.

ioo II. The Oldest

There is one word which the Author sometimes uses in a
way which does not convince me — the word " legend ".
Wherever it occurs it is a sign of the same old evil which
has long been blocking progress — the hard, unsympathetic,
self-satisfied, unresponsive and contemptuous attitude in
cases where the East perplexes the West, where the first
century eludes the comprehension of the nineteenth. In all
such cases the nineteenth century way of thought, its refuge
from the duty of learning to understand what lay outside of
it and beyond its narrow view, was to condemn as " legend "
what it could not understand. The word " legend " was
used in an unintelligent and irrational way. The typical
nineteenth century scholar did not begin by properly con-
ceiving what is the nature of " legend ". He started with a
certain fixed standard of instinctive and unreasoning dislike :
whatever he could not comprehend, he condemned as
" legend ". The honest and scientific method in such cases
would have been to say simply, " this I do not understand " ;
it would have been human and pardonable to add, " since I
do not understand it, I am suspicious of it ". That the four
Gospels, of which even the earliest is long posterior to the
events it records and was not written by an eye-witness, are
free from " legend " I personally do not maintain ; but that
much which has been called legend is of an altogether
different character and has nothing about it of the nature
of legend, 1 feel firmly convinced. That the domain ascribed
to "legend" in the Gospels by modern scholars has been
much diminished in recent years is patent to all. It is much
to be desired that those who use the term "legend" in this
connection should begin by understanding clearly what
legend is. Even admitting that some statement or narrative
in a Gospel is not trustworthy, it does not follow that this

Written Gospel 101

statement is legend : it may have originated in some other
way. The Author is not free even now from this loose
and unscientific way of labelling what he dislikes as " legend ".
But this topic is too big to discuss at the end of an
article.

III.

ASIA MINOR: THE COUNTRY AND
ITS RELIGION.

III.

ASIA MINOR: THE COUNTRY AND ITS
RELIGION.

IF geography be regarded as the study of the influence which
the physical features and situation of a country exert on the
people who live in it, then in no country can geography be
studied better than in Asia Minor. The physical features of
the country are strongly marked ; its situation is peculiar and
unique ; its history can be observed over a long series of cen-
turies, and amid its infinite variety there is always a strongly
marked unity, with certain clear principles of evolution,
standing in obvious relation to the geographical surroundings.

In the first place, the Anatolian peninsula stretches like a
bridge between Asia and Europe. Owing to the great barrier
of the Caspian, the Caucasus and the Black Sea, all migra-
tions between Asia and Europe must either keep the northern
side, through Siberia and Russia, or the southern, along the
Anatolian road. A few of the invasions of Europe by Asiatic
peoples have taken the northern path ; but, generally, west-
ward moving migration and invasion have followed the
southern road through Anatolia, and all westward movement
of civilisation which did not travel on shipboard took the
same path.

Of the many invasions in which Europe has retaliated and
sent her armies eastward over Asia, only one of any import-
ance has passed north of the Caspian, and that is the great
movement now going on, whereby Russia is throwing her

(105)

io6 III. Asia Minor:

armies, her railways and her peoples over Asia to the shores of
the Pacific. Otherwise, all movements eastward from Europe
in so far as they did not go by sea — the movements of armies,
of pilgrims and Crusaders, of state messengers, of merchants
and trade — have followed the lines that lead eastwards over
Anatolia.

In the second place, Anatolia is a bridge with lofty parapets.
The roads traverse the high, hollow, central plateau, closed
in by loftier mountain ridges which separate that open plateau
from the sea. The parapet on the south is the vast ridge of
Taurus, stretching back from the western sea into the main
central mass of the great Asiatic continent, only at a few
points traversable by migrations or by armies, or by the
rivers that drain the plateau and flow south in deep chasms
cut through the heart of the mountains. I do not mean that
Taurus was ever absolutely untraversable. Men can traverse
any mountains, and there are ridges far more difficult than
Taurus. But (except for hardy and resolute travellers) it is
practically impassable in unfavourable weather, and during
the months when it is liable to be covered with snow ; T and
at all times elaborate preparation and provision must be
made for the crossing of a body of men, for Taurus is
not a single narrow ridge, but a broad, lofty and much
broken plateau, and the passes that traverse it are seventy or
more miles long. Thus in practice the roadways were few,
and migrations were confined to known lines.

The mountains which form the parapet on the north,
though not so strikingly continuous, and at no period in
history called by one single name, are really almost as serious

1 Of the feeling of the ancients that not merely the mountain-passes, but the
roads across the open plateau, were closed to travellers during the long winter,
examples are quoted in Pauline and other Studies, p. 385 f. See Plate VII.,
P- 139-

The Pass leading to Dorylaion (from the window of a Railway Carriage).
PLATE II.

To face p. 106. The Central Trade Route : Sources of the Maeander.

The Country and its Religion 107

a barrier confining the tides of movement to the main
Anatolian east and west roadway.

You enter the roadway at one or other of a few points,
where alone entrance is easy, and you are driven on, east-
wards or westwards, according to the temporary direction of
the tide. If you come from the west, you enter with Godfrey
and the Crusaders at Dorylaion, or with Alexander the Great
at Celaenae.1 Until a few years ago you entered the bridge
on horseback or on foot ; now you enter in a railway carriage.

Plate I. illustrates the way from the coast to Dorylaion,
the great military road of the Byzantine Empire. The spot
chosen is where this road passes through a narrow gorge
between two walls of rock, which leave room only for the
little Black-Water (Kara-Su), a tributary of the Sangarius.
The road has been in great part cut or tunnelled in the rock.
The view is taken from a window of the German railway
train passing through the gorge.

Plate II. shows a scene on the other chief line of approach
to the Plateau, the great Central Trade Route, which led
up the Maeander and the Lycus, past the salt lake Anava
(or Sanaos) and Apameia- Celaenae. This view, with its
open quiet scenery and gently sloping hills, when compared
with Plate I., shows well the contrast between the easy
character of the one great approach which nature has made
to the Plateau and the difficulties that encumber all other
approaches.

The scene is the single head-source of the Maeander river
in all its Apamean branches, Marsyas, Maeander, Obrimas

1 Dorylaion, the modern Eski-Sheher, junction of the German railway
lines to Angora and to Konia (ultimately to Syria, Mecca and Bagdad).
Celaenae, the Seleucid and Roman Apameia, present terminus of the Otto-
man Railway from Smyrna : it was one of the most important points on the
great Eastern Trade Route in Hellenistic and Roman times.

io8 III. Asia Minor:

and Therma. It lies in the high valley of Aurokra above
Celaenae on the east. The Ottoman railway has not yet
reached it, but will soon do so.

The fountain gushes out from the rocks on the east side
of the valley of Aurokra, and runs down a mile or two to
the west side of the plain, where its waters collect in a
marshy lake against the hills that divide the Aurokra valley
from Celaenae. The water of the lake runs off under the
hills through two holes (which can be clearly seen when the
light falls in the proper direction by any one standing on
the hills above), and emerges on the other side of the
hills at a much lower level in the fountains of the four
streams of Celaenae, which combine to form the river
Maeander.1

The head-source, in Plate II., was called the fountain
Aurokrene or Aulokrene ; and the latter name, which seemed
in Greek to give the meaning Flute-Fountain, affected the
form of the legends, which connected themselves with this
magnificent spring.2 Hardly even in Greece itself is there
a spot more sacred in folk-lore and religion. Here Athena
threw aside her flute, and Marsyas picked it up. Here
Marsyas contended with Apollo in music, and on one of the
plane-trees beside the spring he was hung up to be flayed.
In the plain below Lityerses was slain by the sickles of the
reapers. The physical features of the plain are so striking
that we need not wonder to find so many legends attached
to it. The myth implies as its scene a place where there

1 There is a fifth stream, Orgas, which rises some miles south-west of
Celaenae in a different range of hills. The whole series of fountains and
names is described in Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, chap. xi.

2 The name/onto Rocreni occurs in Livy, xxxviii., and marks the line of the
robber-raid of the Consul Manlius from Pisidia to Galatia. The initial vowel
has been lost in this form.

The Country and its Religion 109

abounded the reeds, from which the earliest and simplest
kind of flute was made. The lake of Aurokra is in great
part a reedy marsh, though the water lies deep against the
western hills.

On this same road, the white cliffs of Hierapolis (shown
in the Frontispiece) strike the traveller's eye for many miles
of his way through the Maeander and the Lycus valleys.
They are almost literally petrified water, being the white
deposit which the water of the hot springs has left as it
tumbles down over the steep cliffs to the level plain of the
Lycus. In the photograph it is quite impossible to dis-
tinguish the flowing water from the petrified incrustation.
The form and colour are so exactly the same that even the
traveller's eye, if he stands a little back from the falls, is
deceived.

After reaching the Plateau by one of the few entrances,
you move on eastwards, and pass off the bridge by one or
other of a few well-marked exits.1 If you come from Asia,
you follow the same inevitable paths ; nothing differs except
the direction of your motion and the tides or the motives
that impel you.

Thus the history of Anatolia has been one of startling
vicissitudes, of constant variety, of rapid changes in population,
in government, in the trend of development; and yet the
unity amid the variety is so easy to comprehend that it may
fairly be called unmistakable. The development has always
lain in the action and collision of forces moving eastwards or
westwards ; it has rarely been complicated by side influences

XA series of views on the principal exit towards the East through the
Cilician Gates is given in Pauline and other Studies, Plates V.-XXXI. See
also Cities of St. Paul, Plates III.-V.

no III. Asia Minor:

coming in from the sea on the north or on the south ; l it has
been simply the series of phases in the immemorial conflict
between Europe and Asia. The central point of that never-
ending battle varies from age to age. At one time the
Greeks gather to a siege of Troy ; at another the Arabs or
the Egyptian Memluks storm the walls of Tarsus, defended
by Greek fire or by Crusaders' axes and lances, or by that
small fraction of the Armenian kingdom of Cilicia who could
be induced to forget their mutual quarrels about points of
ritual and unite to save their own families against the
slaughterers from the East ; at another the Arabs are being
beaten back repeatedly from the ramparts of Constantinople,
or the Turks are pouring in through a breach. As you cast
your eyes back over the past, you see Croesus crossing the
Halys to destroy a great kingdom, or you watch the younger
Cyrus the Persian leading 10,000 Greeks from Sardis to
Mesopotamia, to show them how easily a vast Persian army
might be scattered by a few trained and disciplined troops.
You may see, on New Year's Day in A.D. 1148, Louis VII.
with his French Crusaders, fording hand-in-hand the unford-
able Maeander, and scattering before their first charge the
Turkish army drawn up on the further bank to prevent their
crossing;2 or Manuel with his splendid army of mail-clad
warriors, European and Byzantine, jammed against their bag-
gage train in that open pass west of Pisidian Antioch, and
slaughtered at will by the Turks charging down from the

1 The influence of the old Ionian colony of Sinope (cp. Strab, p. 540) and
probably also of the old Ionian colony of Tarsus (cp. Cities of St. Paul, p. 113 ff.)
may be quoted as to some degree exceptions.

2 This brilliant feat of arms is wrongly attributed by Gibbon to Conrad,
the German Emperor, who also took part in the second crusade. On the
scene, see Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, vol. i., p. 162.

The Country and its Religion 1 1 1

higher ground on the north.1 If you want to see what
happened when an army abandoned the few recognised paths,
cast your eyes on the soldiers of the First Crusade, wandering
and perishing amid the mountains of Anti-Taurus, or Frederick
Barbarossa's German Crusaders struggling over the central
Taurus, fed by an Armenian prince in his stronghold among
the mountains, and Barbarossa himself disappearing under
the waters of the Calycadnus so suddenly that his people
could not believe he was dead, and long imagined that he
was only waiting the proper moment to reappear in his
German home. All are but small skirmishes in the great
battle of East and West

To illustrate this principle fully would be to write the
history of the Anatolian peninsula. In every age, in every
war, in every crisis, the opposing forces may be recognised
as respectively Eastern and Western. Often, where two
rivals contend for the succession to a throne or a tent, one
may be recognised as champion of the East, and the other,
as his opponent, attracts the support of the West; and
probably that was the general rule in such contests, though
we are not always well enough informed of the facts. But
the writer's Historical Geography of Asia Minor, which
has had the honour of being published by the Royal Geo-
graphical Society, illustrates on page after page the infinitely
varied forms in which the principle has worked itself out in
history (though, from its extreme brevity, it gives only the
dry bones of history, into which the reader must breathe
life for himself) ; and we pass from it. I may only be
permitted to say, in passing, that the .experience and study
of twelve years since that book was written have amply

1 Studies in the History and Art of the Eastern Roman Provinces, p. 235 ff.

ii2 III. Asia Minor:

confirmed the general scheme of topographical history con-
tained in it, and also furnished both many corroborations of
details in the application of the general rules and many
improvements or corrections in other details. I do not know
which have given me personally greater pleasure ; it is
pleasant to find that one's instinct or reasoning has been
right, but it is almost more pleasant to find that a mistake
has been put right and a stumbling-block cleared away.
The corroboration gives one confidence to go on in the path
of investigation ; but the correction opens a door, and often
reveals a new chapter in the political or historical geography
of the country. Moreover, most of the corrections have
come from investigators whom I might almost venture to
call pupils of my own, because they made their first essays
in my company or with my advice; and it is always a
peculiar pleasure to learn from men whose early steps one
has helped in some small degree to direct.

One of the omissions in that book was that the importance
of the mountain barriers on the north and south was not
sufficiently worked out, and thus several chapters of history
passed unobserved. To this subject my studies have recently
been directed, and they have been illuminated by explora-
tions which, after a long interval of ten years, I was enabled
to resume by a concurrence of favourable circumstances.
One point in this wide subject may detain us for a few
moments.

The great mountain wall of Taurus, on the southern side
of the plateau, has always been the most effectual boundary-
line in the Anatolian peninsula ; and this in spite of the fact
that the plateau has rarely been the seat of a capital, but
has generally been subject to one of the great empires of
the East or the West. Many causes of course contributed to

The Country and its Religion 113

give Taurus this importance as a dividing-line ; but we here
simply assume the fact without analysing the contributory
causes.1

The ancient records often express the bounds of nations
or of spheres of influence by the phrases " within " or " beyond
the Taurus ". Taurus was the dividing-line between east and
west. Even at the present day, when the whole of Anatolia
outside the walls of Smyrna and the railway-lines is in a
sense distinctly Oriental, one feels that, after crossing
Taurus by the pass of the Cilician Gates and descending
south and east into Cilicia, one has passed a line of demarca-
tion and is surrounded by a more Oriental spirit. Cilicia,
as the Romans long arranged it, is more a part of Syria than
of Asia Minor. In it you detect at once the impression of
the Arab and the Ansarieh ; you hear yourself addressed no
longer as Tchelebi, which was practically universal as a title
of respect before you crossed Taurus : the people now style
you Hawaja, as in Syria or Egypt. That single detail is
significant of the changed atmosphere that rules beyond the
Taurus.

In my Historical Geography the contrast between the
^Egean coastlands and the rest of the great peninsula is
described, the former being, as it were, a part of Greece, full
of the light and the variety and the joyous brightness of the
Greek lands ; the rest, including the whole plateau, being,
alike in geographical character and in spirit, part of Asia,
impressive in its immobility, monotony and subdued tone.

1 For example, one may mention the difference of climate between the
plateau north of Taurus (with its long hard winter) and the hot coast-
lands of Cilicia. My friend Mr. Hogarth emphasised this very rightly in the
discussion which ensued after the paper was read. Taurus was a boundary,
not simply because it was Taurus, but because of all the many physical facts
that combined to give it importance. (See p. 139 and Plate VII.)

H4 HI- Asia Minor:

But one feels inclined to draw a further distinction, and to
describe the west coast as Greek, the plateau within Taurus
as the Debatable Land, and the country beyond Taurus as
Eastern and Asiatic. Yet the moment that one has uttered
the words one feels that they are inaccurate. More than any
other city, Tarsus impresses one as the meeting-place of East
and West. And in history what variety is there in the lot
of Cilicia and in the kind of division which Taurus marks !

In the long wars between the Byzantine (or rather the
Roman) Empire and the Saracens, Taurus with Anti-Taurus
divided the Romans from the Arabs for centuries, Tarsus on
the south-west and Melitene on the north-east being the
frontier fortresses on the Arab side. The Arabs twice at-
tempted to advance their frontier from Tarsus over Taurus
and to hold Tyana ; but both the Caliphs Harun-al-Rashid
and Al-Mamun, each of whom built a mosque and stationed
a garrison in Tyana, found it necessary to draw back to
Tarsus before two years had elapsed.

For a longer period the Arabs held Caesareia, in their ad-
vance from Melitene ; but that also they failed to hold per-
manently. They could never establish themselves beyond
Taurus. They crossed that mountain barrier in their annual
raids, often in two raids per annum ; they captured almost
every city in the whole land ; they thrice besieged Constanti-
nople; and yet through three long centuries of such war
they never held a foot of land beyond Taurus outside the
range of their weapons at the moment. They conquered
and they passed, and the people of the land recovered from
every blow with marvellous rapidity. In all history there
is probably no other proof so striking of the elasticity and
recuperative power that belongs to the well-knit society of
an organised people, welded together by a long-established

The Country and its Religion 115

system of reasoned law and by a common religion. Roman
society was too compact for the Arabs to conquer — a hundred
battles and a hundred defeats had no serious effect on it.
The lower civilisation of a loosely knit Oriental despotism
could make no permanent impression on the fabric that
Roman. organising genius had created.

But, if the Roman social fabric survived the sufferings of
those terrible centuries, when Arab raids were to be dreaded
every year, the suffering was terrible. The Roman civilisa-
tion had weakened the stamina of the nation, and a long
continuance of peace had made the general population feeble,
unwarlike, perfectly content to be defended by a professional
army, which had become almost a caste. When a civilised
people has lost the fighting strength, which must in the last
resort be its defence against the attack of barbarism, it is
always in danger. A large population of traders and artisans,
clergy and schoolmasters, and other peaceful persons, was
powerless before a small force of hardy barbarians, accustomed
to weapons from infancy, regarding war as the one business
of life and the chief duty of religion. Hence the Arab
raiders could go where they pleased, ravage almost any city
they chose, and easily avoid the slower regular armies of
Roman trained soldiers ; but they could hold nothing per-
manently beyond the line of Taurus.

The professional army might have found it an easier task
to defend the line of Mount Taurus and keep the Moham-
medan wolves from the Roman sheepfold, if the great pass
of the Cilician Gates had been the only way of crossing
Taurus from Cilicia. That pass, an easy road for the most
part to traverse, is also a very easy one to defend at many
points by even a small force. In Byzantine time it was
strongly garrisoned, and a line of beacons flashed the news

n6 III. Asia Minor:

to Constantinople as soon as the Arabs were moving against
it. But the long-continued peace and prosperity of the Roman
Empire had opened other roads. Taurus had never been
an absolutely impassable barrier, and under the Roman peace
many cities had grown and prospered in its highest grounds,
where now no dwelling is known except a few black tents
of nomads in the summer. Those cities, rich and prosperous,
had improved the roads, and made it easy for the light raid-
ing armies of the Arabs to cross the mountains.

If, at a later time, the more barbarous Turk achieved what
the more polished and fiery Arabs had failed to do, the
Turkish triumph exemplified the only way in which, apart
from practical extermination, barbarism can conquer a civi-
lised and organised society, viz., by breaking up the fabric
and constitution of society and reducing it once more to an
aggregation of disconnected atoms. The Turkish conquest
was not achieved through pitched battles and victories ; it
was gained by the nomad tribes which spread over the land,
destroyed the bonds of communication which held society
together, and reduced the country from the settled to the
nomadic stage. The Turkish conquest meant the nomadisa-
tion of the country.

But the number of questions which open on every side
when one begins to discuss that great subject of the degener-
ation from Roman organisation to the nomadic stage in
Asiatic Turkey is endless ; and we must return to our im-
mediate topic, viz., the effect of the Taurus range as a
division between races, as a defence of a settled people
against invasion, and as a limiting wall to determine the lines
of migration or of ecclesiastical organisation.

If Taurus divided Arab and Roman, Mohammedan and
Christian, in the time of the Saracen wars (641-965), it was

PLATE V.

The Rock and Castle of Sivri-Hissar.
PLATE VI.

To face p. 116. Roman Milestone on the Syrian Route.

See p. 138.

The Country and its Religion 1 1 7

again the boundary between Christian and Mohammedan in
the early Turkish period for about four centuries beginning
from 1071 A.D. The Turks came in from Central Asia over
Armenia, and held the central Anatolian plateau for centuries
before they gained possession of Cilicia ; they captured Con-
stantinople and advanced to Belgrad before they captured
Tarsus. Christian powers — Byzantines, Latin Crusaders
and Armenian princes — quarrelled with one another for
possession of Cilicia. Taurus saved the land by the sea from
Turkish armies ; but there was no such barrier on the Syrian
side,1 and the Memluk sultans of Egypt destroyed the
Christian kingdom of Cilicia. Here again the nomad Turk-
men tribes, gradually spreading across Taurus and over the-
plains, were the true conquerors, sapping and destroying the
links that held together society in the country.

Thus the effect of the Taurus as a division between nations,
as well as in directing and limiting the march of armies,
might in itself furnish a great subject.

Only in one case is there a district of any importance in
the Anatolian peninsula which lies outside of our classifica-
tion into central plateau, mountain-rim and coast valleys.
There is one secondary valley on the north, where there
intervenes between the plateau-rim and the sea a second
mountain-ridge. Between these two parallel ridges there
stretches east and west a valley of considerable importance,
forming the most fertile part of the ancient country of
Paphlagonia. That valley has a history which stands
entirely apart from the history of either the plateau on the
one hand or of the sea-coast cities on the other. Just as you
might sail and explore along the coast, and travel extensively

1 The ridge of Amanus, which bounds Cilicia on the east, is easily crossed
by passes about 2,000 ft. high or less.

Ii8 III. Asia Minor:

in the northern parts of the plateau itself, yet never enter
the great Paphlagonian valley, so you might write a minute
study of the history of the coast and of the plateau, and
hardly ever have occasion to mention the intermediate
valley. And yet the valley had a great history. It con-
tained some powerful cities. The wars of the Mithridatic
dynasty of kings against the Romans and the states of the
West, for the most part, were fought or manoeuvred along
that valley. Some of the most obscure campaigns in the
long wars between the kings of the Romans and the Saracen
invaders seem to have taken place in the valley, and those
campaigns are so obscure because the ordinary data for
interpreting the evidence by the conditions of the plateau or
the coast fail us for the intermediate Paphlagonian valley.
Its cities became even more important, in comparison to the
rest of the country, during the earlier stages of the Turkish
period, and are often mentioned.

But that long history of the Paphlagonian valley has
never been written.1 Its many ancient towns are for the
most part unknown even by name. Perhaps the task can-
not be achieved, because recorded history has kept to the
leading paths, and neglected the secondary roads ; but if the
task is attempted it demands a special historian, who is pre-
pared to explore and study it by itself and for itself.

Once you have reached the plateau it is, as a rule, possible
to make a road almost anywhere. Yet even there there are
certain gates towards which many roads must converge, and
through which they must pass. Two zones of mountains,
whose old names are unknown, and which are almost name-

1 M. Theodore Reinach has done all that is possible without long and
methodical exploration to illuminate the bearing of this valley on the Mithrid-
atic history; but want of personal knowledge of the localities makes the
geographical side of his excellent study necessarily inadequate.

The Country and its Religion 119

less in modern times, run north and south across central
Phrygia, and roads must keep either to the north or the
south of them. All travellers from Ephesus to the East
passed by the southern end of those mountains; but
travellers from Smyrna and northern Lydia generally went
by the northern end. The routes may be distinguished as
the " Central Trade Route " and the " Royal Road ".* The
two modern railways from Smyrna follow the ancient lines.

The lofty ridge which comes up from the west from
Trojan Ida, called Temnos and Dindymos in parts of its
course, approaches very close to those central Phrygian
mountains ; and a narrow glen, down which flows a tributary
of the Maeander, divides them. That glen forms a funnel, up
or down which roads and travellers going in very diverse
directions must necessarily pass. For about1 ten or twelve
miles persons going from south to north travel side by side
with others who are going from east to west. Their roads
all converge to one end of the glen, and diverge again at the
other.

Until that glen was noted on the map, and its importance
observed, the march of the Ten Thousand, which Xenophon
has described, was an insoluble riddle. In my earlier years
of exploration, having only the vague, featureless and in-
accurate old maps, I found the glen a sore trial and puzzle.
Filled with the desire to be constantly traversing new routes
and to avoid repetition, I found myself in the most annoy-
ing way doing the treadmill up and down the steep ascent.
In one year, when thoroughly on my guard against it and
resolved to avoid it, I traversed it three times.

But this repetition only gave proper emphasis to its im-
portance. Then it became obvious that the Ten Thousand,

1 On the two routes see " Roads and Travel " (Hastings' Diet. Bib., v., 390).

I2O III. Asia Minor:

who had marched from Sardis towards the southern end of
the central Phrygian mountains, as if to follow the southern
route, and had turned backwards towards the north-west,
must have traversed the glen and gone round the northern
end of the mountains. No other way was possible, and when
this observation was applied, it was easy to follow the march
of the Ten Thousand all over Phrygia, and to say at any
point that Xenophon's foot must have trod within a few
hundred yards of where we stood. At the south-western
entrance to the glen stands Keramon Agora, the Market of
Tiles, that " peopled city " ; and after leaving its north-
eastern exit, the eastward bound army soon found itself in
the broad plain of Kaystros.

Communication on the coasts, of course, took place mostly
by ship, and lies outside our present subject, except in so far
as it affected or was affected by land conditions. Since the
mountains touched the sea at various points, and the coast
road was tedious and difficult, communication was thrown
more and more completely on to shipboard, and was there-
fore for centuries entirely in the hands of the Greeks. Hence
the coast towns, as far east as Tarsus and Trapezus, were
strongly affected by Greek influence, and often even trans-
formed into cities of the Greek type, with free institutions and
constitutional government by elected magistrates according
to published law.

Moreover, the sea was dangerous and difficult. On the
north coast, the Black Sea was the most uncertain and
treacherous known to the Greeks : at no period of the year
could the weather be counted on ; in the most settled summer
weather a tempest might occur. Far back, in the beginning
of Greek history, we can dimly trace the immense influence
exerted on the Greek mind by the first experience of that

J3
I

The Country and its Religion 121

sea with its dangers and its wonders. It is not too much to
say, though here we can only make the strong statement and
pass on, that the discovery of the Black Sea played as im-
portant a part in forming and training the Greek mind, in
determining its bent, in moulding its literary expression, as
the discovery of America has played in the modern world.

But the life of a country is always mirrored and idealised
in its religion ; and the religion of the coast cities must neces-
sarily have been moulded a great deal by their dependence
on the sea. This we can observe well on the north coast.
The Ruler of the Sea, Achilles Pontarches, was the great
deity of the north coast cities ; an association of cities was
allied in his worship, and the high priest was called by the
same name as the god, the Pontarch. The god had his
chosen home in an island, opposite the mouths of the Danube,
where he dwelt with Helena, the island which occasionally
appeared before the storm-tossed sailor as a haven of quiet.
But he was reverenced also in the cities whose prosperity
depended on his favour, and whose sailors made their vows
to him before they sailed and paid them after their safe re-
turn. He was worshipped in all the cities in South Russia
and the Crimea, as well as on the Asia Minor coasts ; but
probably his chief seat was in Sinope, that great harbour of
the early time, on the promontory that juts out far into the
sea. And when a new form of religion required a new ex-
pression of the old religious fact, a Christian saint was sub-
stituted for the pagan Pontarch Achilles ; and St. Phocas of
Sinope became the sailors' god, or at least their patron and
protector.

The severance of the north coast from the plateau is thus
as strongly marked in religion as in history. It would not,
however, be true to say that the severance in religion was

122 III. Asia Minor:

absolute. The mountain-ridges which barred and hemmed
in ordinary communication offered no insuperable barrier to
the spread of religion. The strange fervid cults of the plateau
proved as impressive on the coastlands as they did in the
European lands to which they spread in wave after wave.
Any divergence in the religion of the coast from that of the
plateau took the form of additions — such as the cult of
Achilles Pontarches — to a common religious stock.

On the south coast less is known of maritime religious
foundations. The existing records show little except gods
of the common Anatolian type. Yet there must have been
others. Especially at Myra in Lycia we may look for some
special sailors' cult. Myra was the harbour for the direct
over-sea communication with Syria and with Egypt.1 This
communication was not old — the early ships never ventured
to desert the coast and strike boldly out to sea. But at least
as early as the first century of our era vessels sailed from
Myra straight across to the Syrian and Egyptian coasts ;
and the large ships which carried the Egyptian corn to the
Roman granaries habitually tried to run straight across from
Alexandria to Myra. Westerly winds blow with wonderful
uniformity in the Levant, and those ships could commonly
trust to a good run due north to the Lycian coast. But if
the west wind blew too strong, the ship would make too much
leeway, and find itself unable to clear the western end of
Cyprus ; and then it was obliged to run to the Syrian coast
and keep round the east and the north of Cyprus. In such
circumstances the blessing of the god of Myra would be sought
with special devotion ; and, though this cult is not proven in
its pagan form, which as we have seen was only of quite late

1 St. Paul the Traveller, p. 298 f. ; " Roads and Travel in N.T. Times " in
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible> v., p. 381.

The Country and its Religion 123

origin, the Christian cult which took its place is well known.
St. Nicholas of Myra played the same part among the sailors
of the Levant as St. Phocas of Sinope did among those of
the Black Sea.

Phocas was a martyr of the reign of Trajan. Nicholas was
Bishop of Myra more than three centuries later. The
Christian form evidently established itself earlier on the north
coast than on the south, and this is in strict accord with other
evidence, which shows that the new religion had taken deep
root in the northern coastlands by the time of Trajan, where-
as on the south it was very much later in attaining such
strength.

But it is not merely armies, or migrations of peoples,
which have swept eastwards or westwards across Anatolia.
Art and knowledge, new thoughts and new religions have
trod the same path in either direction ; they, too, move
westwards or eastwards across the bridge, rarely northwards
or southwards. Such movements, though less imposing
and romantic than the march of armies and the combat of
heroes, may justifiably detain our attention longer, precisely
because they are less striking and more easily escape
notice.

There are some apparent exceptions, which, however,
vanish under more careful scrutiny, and therefore only help
to emphasise the general principle. One example may
here be given. The present writer is responsible for the
theory (published in 1882) that the Greek alphabet, after
travelling by ship with the Ionian merchants to Sinope,
penetrated thence southwards across the mountains into the
central plateau, where we find it in use east of the Halys
about the seventh century B.C. But after further study he
retracted this theory, and argued that the Greek alphabet

124 III. Asia Minor:

was carried up eastwards from the west coast, in the ordinary
course of trade and political relations ; and dated that
communication by the recorded fact that a king of Phrygia
was married to a daughter of Agamemnon, King of ^Eolic
Cyme, about 700 B.C.1 Historic tradition remembered that
dynastic fact — a striking example of the way in which a
royal family embodies and represents the history of its
nation ; and the union of the two royal families stands to
us for the intercommunication between the active Greek
cities of the west coast and the peoples of the plateau, in
the course of which the alphabet and many other ideas
passed eastwards or westwards. That second theory may
now be regarded as the accepted view. Even those English
scholars who accept no historical theory, unless it is printed
in German, may accept this view with easy minds, because
it has been rediscovered independently by a learned and
able young German professor, A. Koerte, who, travelling in
Anatolia about five years after the second view had been
published and republished in the Journal of Hellenic Studies,
soon found out and made known the truth, gently rebuking
the error of the English scholar who had advanced the first
theory.

Such movements of thought and religion are complicated
by another factor, the influence of the land. Those move-
ments did not merely sweep across the country like armies
from one side or the other ; sometimes they originated in
the country ; sometimes they were modified, profoundly or
slightly, as the case might be, in their passage. An army
may march across the country, gaining no material strength,
but merely losing part of its force, and exercising no influence
on the population except to impoverish it — although some-

1 Journal of Hell. Stud., 1889, p. 186 f.

PLATE VIII.

The Tomb of Midas the King: a Phrygian Holy Place. See p. 139.

PLATE XVIII.

Part of a Monastery above Bin-Bir-Kilisse, showing short zones of brick used as

ornament in a stone building.
To face p. 124. See p. 161.

The Country and its Religion 125

times even an army may learn something in its long travels,
and those who return to their own land may, like the remnant
of the Crusaders, come back wiser and better able to under-
stand the world than when they started. On the other hand,
an idea moves over the land by passing from mind to mind ;
it is sensitive and living as it moves.

This geographical influence, the power of the country on
the minds of men, may take one of two forms. In the first
place, it may arise out of the situation of Anatolia as a bridge
and meeting-place between Eastern and Western ideas.
When the thoughts and knowledge of two diverse peoples
meet, either in alliance or in hostility, the result is not to be
represented as a simple addition. Ideas are not like dead
matter to be placed side by side : they unite and are pro-
ductive, or they die ; but they cannot remain inert and
unvarying. The result of their meeting may be, and
commonly is, more like a process of multiplication ; occasion-
ally, it is a process of division or destruction. For example,
the invention of the art of coinage is attributed to Asia Minor
by Herodotus; and modern opinion agrees unanimously
with him.1 In the great highway of commerce and inter-
course it was natural that this idea of a common measure of
value, guaranteed by a trustworthy authority, should be struck
out. Along with this invention we may refer to the specula-
tion of M. Radet 2 — in one of the most brilliant pages of his
striking work on Lydia — that the organisation of trade and
caravans and bazaars, the typical Oriental method of com-
merce, belongs to the same country.

xlt is generally attributed to Lydia; Professor P. Gardner has recently
maintained that it should be attributed to the Ionian Greek cities.

2 Criticised and accepted with some modification in the writer's Cities and
Bishoprics of Phrygia, vol. ii., p. 416.

126 III. Asia Minor:

Similarly, the development and improvement in practical
working of many ideas springs from the intercourse and
jostling of many men and many minds along the great
bridge. The simplification of chronological reckoning by
the use of a definite era, so that a date can be expressed by
a single number, may belong to Asia Minor ; it became
common, and probably it originated, in the adapting of
Greek ideas to a wider sphere of practical life, which occurred
after Greece went forth under Alexander the Great to con-
quer the East, when it settled down under his successors to
the great practical problem of how to rule the conquered
world. The cumbrous method of dating by the annual magis-
trates of the city, which commended itself to the patriotism
and pride of the Greek citizen in Greece, became too obviously
unworkable in the wider sphere of the Hellenised East. In
no part of the ancient world is the custom of expressing dates
by counting from a fixed era more firmly established in
common everyday use than in one district of Asia Minor,
embracing the eastern part of Lydia and the western half
of Phrygia.

But, in the second place, there is a growing opinion among
the most recent investigators — an opinion strongly held by
the present writer — that Anatolia was not merely an inter-
mediary, developing foreign ideas in a practical way, but
also played a not unimportant part as an originator. We
are inevitably forced back to a time when Anatolia was not
merely a bridge between opposite lands and great peoples,
but was itself the centre of a great empire exerting an in-
fluence on the outer world. The empire is closely connected
with the most fascinating and the most obscure historical
problems which are at the present time under discussion.
Every step that is being made in the rediscovery of the early

The Country and its Religion 127

Greek world, and the history of early intercourse in the
Eastern Mediterranean lands, constitutes at the same time
indirectly an advance in the history of the ancient Anatolian
world, even though the discoverer is not conscious of the side
light which he is throwing on that subject. Twenty years
ago that Anatolian Empire was not even dreamed about by
any one ; even yet it is almost an unknown quantity, which
is to be estimated from its effects more than from direct
evidence about its actual nature. But the direct evidence is
slowly being discovered — very slowly, because there is no
organised effort being made to discover it, but mere sporadic
experiments by occasional travellers, generally inexperienced,
who, as soon as they acquire experience and become skilled
and interested in the investigation, are drafted off to other
spheres of life. But still discovery, though slow, does pro-
gress ; and what ten years ago was reckoned by many only
a dream, is now admittedly a real factor in history, which
has an acknowledged place in every modern discussion of the
early Mediterranean world, and which, after ten or twenty
years, will occupy far greater space than it does now.1

An ancient system of writing in hieroglyphics, different
from any other known system of expressing thought by
visible and permanent symbols, is known in Asia Minor
through a long process of development, and is dimly trace-
able as an influence on other countries.2 Characteristic

1 Five years after the forecast in the text was printed, it was justified by
Dr. Winckler's excavations at Boghaz-Keui, which within a few weeks after
their inception demonstrated the existence of this ancient Anatolian Empire.
The excavations were made in the city which already in 1882 the writer de-
scribed in the following terms: "There can be no doubt that this was the
capital, or at least one of the strongest cities, of a genuinely oriental power
which ruled over a wide country " (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,
1882, p. 4).

2 See below, p. 159.

128 III. Asia Minor:

Anatolian artistic forms have been studied and specified by
several investigators, though still they are chiefly traceable
as the unknown factor needed to explain the development of
the East Mediterranean world.

Most certain and most typical of Anatolia is its religion,
the influence of which on the Greek and Roman world is the
one form in which Anatolian influence has been long recog-
nised by modern scholars. This they could hardly fail to do,
seeing that the ancients themselves acknowledge it, describe
it, and inveigh against it ; but still it was left to compara-
tively recent scholars to show how far-reaching and long-
continued that influence was ; and among those scholars the
most acute and able has probably been Mr. P. Foucart,
formerly Director of the French School of Athens,1 who writes
of Anatolian religion entirely from the Greek point of view
as being an outrage on the Greek spirit, saved from being
abominable only by becoming sometimes ridiculous in its
fervour. But at least he established the fact that this influence
spread in wave after wave of a sort of religious revivalism
over the classical world, mostly among the uneducated classes,
but still often affecting the population so profoundly as to
receive State recognition or require State regulation and even
coercion. For good or for evil, it was at least enormously
powerful.

In all these departments, writing, art, religion (and doubt-
less others might be added), there is perceptible a connection
with the geographical character of the country. Elsewhere
I have argued 2 that the hieroglyphics must have been origin-
ated on the great central plains ; and I believe that an impor-
tant part in the domestication of certain animals must be as-

1 Foucart, Les Associations Religieuses chez les Grecs, 1873.

2 Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, vol. i,, p. xv.

PLATE IX.

To face p. 128. The Grave of a Phrygian Chief. See p. 139.

The Country and its Religion

129

signed to the same localities. The soil of those now desert
plains is generally highly fertile. Only the application of
water and skill is needed to make them very fruitful ; and
the ruins of large and rich cities are found where now the
country is absolutely barren, and where it is barely possible
for a few families to support life owing to the scarcity of
water. In the most arid parts of the plateau one observes
the remains of great engineering works designed to store
water. On the edge of the mountains, where the torrents at
the present day carry down a great mass of water during
rain and are dry again an hour after the rain has ceased, the
beds were formerly blocked by a series of embankments each
)f which held up a body of water and the soil borne down by
the water ; but all are now broken and useless. I have seen
numberless cisterns, some small, some very large, most of
them now always dry ; and I have traced for part of its course
a very large artificial stream winding round the edges of the
Taurus and carrying its water to form a marsh many miles
away from its source, because no one now cultivates the land.
I made a cutting across the top of a large broad embankment,
fully fifty feet high in the middle, and about a quarter of
a mile in length, which crosses a depression in the plain
near Khadyn-Khan : it is evidently a dam intended to store
up water ; but, though it is still as perfect apparently as ever,
t holds up none, because the means of conducting the water
to it from the hills are ruined. Villagers have brought to
me lengths of large terra-cotta channels, which they dug up
on the side of a gentle elevation in the centre of the Axylon,
many miles away from any source. One who is on the out-
look will find everywhere numberless examples of skilful
works like these ; and I have been told by engineers of far more
wonderful feats of engineering which I hesitate to describe

130 III. Asia Minor:

in the terms of my informants, until I can vouch for them by
personal examination.

All such works have a religious side, because they were not
carried out through the initiative of the ignorant peasantry.
The arts that were needed to make those wide plains pro-
ductive and useful to man were all embodied and taught in
the religion of the country. The domesticated animals were
all sacred, and the treatment of them was prescribed as part
of religious ritual.1

As might be expected, therefore, it is in religion that the
direct influence of geographical features is most obvious.
Ancient religion was far more intimately and universally
associated with social and family life than is the case with
modern European nations. Religion had made and ordered
all social relationships. The individual was bound in the
ties of religion from his cradle to his grave. Every act of
his life, good or bad, joyous or mournful, moral (to our con-
ceptions) or immoral, was equally presided over by a divinity,
and, as it were, done under the divine sanction. The early
religion of Anatolia was therefore the outcome of the whole
circumstances and environment that acted on the people.

One feature in the Anatolian religion rises before us pro-
minent and impressive at the first glance. The ordinary
and familiar idea is that God is the Father of all mankind
and all life. Such is the almost universal European and
Semitic conception. But it was the motherhood of the
divine nature that was the great feature in the Anatolian
worship.2 The male element in the divine nature was recog-

1 The Religion of Greece and Asia Minor, p. 114 f., in Hastings' Dictionary of
the Bible, vol. v.

2 The same idea is widely spread, and found in many primitive forms of
religion ; but on this subject it is not within the scope of this paper to enter.

The Country and its Religion 131

nised only as an occasional and subsidiary actor in the drama
of nature and of life. The life of man came from the Great
Mother ; the heroes of the land were the sons of the goddess,
and at death they returned to the mother who bore them.

In the social customs of Anatolia, even after it was over-
spread by Greek manners and Greek ideas, many traces re-
main of that primitive idea. Descent was sometimes reckoned
through the mother; women magistrates are frequently
found even in the Hellenised cities of the land. And in its
history the same impression remains : it is everywhere the
most pathetic of histories. Not vigour and initiative, but
receptivity and impressibility, swayed the spirit of the people,
marked their fate, and breathed through the atmosphere that
surrounded them — a continuous, barely perceptible force
acting on every new people, and subtly influencing every new
religion, that came into the land. For example, the earliest
known trace of the veneration of the Virgin Mary in the
Christian religion is in a Phrygian inscription of the second
century ; and the earliest example of a holy place consecrated
to the Mother of God as already an almost divine personality
is at Ephesus early in the fifth century.1

On the great level plains of the central plateau the spirit of
man seems separated from the world by the mountains, and
thrown back on its own nature ; but it is not confined, for the
idea of confinement is absolutely alien to that wide expanse,
where the sole limit to the range of the human eye seems to
be its own weakness of vision, where a remote mountain-peak
only emphasises the sense of vastness because it furnishes a
standard by which to estimate distance. The great eye of
heaven, unwearying, unpitying, inexorable, watches you from
its rising over the level horizon till it sinks below the same

1 This subject is treated more fully in Pauline and other Studies, p. 125-159,

132 III. Asia Minor:

level again. There is a sense of rest, of inevitable acquies-
cence in the Infinite, all-pervasive and compelling Power
which surrounds you. The sense of individuality and per-
sonal power grows weak and shrinks away, not daring to show
itself in the human consciousness. The phases of the year
co-operate in this effect, with a long severe winter and a shorter
but hot summer. Where water pours forth in one of the
many great springs which give birth to strong-flowing rivers,
the country is a garden ; but otherwise the fertile soil is de-
pendent entirely on the chances of an uncertain rainfall. The
north wind tempers the heat, and the harvester trusts to it
entirely to winnow his grain on the threshing-floor. Every-
thing impresses on the mind the utter insignificance of man
and his absolute dependence on the Divine power. The
peasant of the present day still — as doubtless his remote
ancestors did 2,000 years before Christ — calls almost every
great life-giving spring Huda-verdi, " God hath given ".

But the Divine power that was so evident was not the
stern, inexorable power of the hard desert The people saw
the nature of the land, rich and full of good things to those
who accepted the divinely revealed method, and cared for
the holy soil and the sacred animals, as the goddess, their
mother and patron, required. St. Paul, with his usual un-
erring insight into the character of his audience, spoke to the
rude Lycaonian peasants about the God " who did good, and
gave rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling the heart
with food and gladness ".

For the student of that country and history, it is always
and everywhere necessary to go back to that religion, to re-
cognise it as the originator of all national life and of all social
forms, and as a continuous force acting throughout the later
development of the country.

The Country and its Religion 133

In the exploration of the city of Ephesus an example may
be found of the use that might be made of this principle. Mr.
Wood spent six years searching for the site of the Temple
of Artemis, and at last he found it exactly where it ought to
be, beside the little hill on the top of which was built the
great church of St. John Theologos, and on the lowest slope
of which is the splendid mosque of Isa Bey. The church was
the largest built by the Emperor Justinian,1 that greatest of
builders with the single exception of the Emperor Hadrian.

The historical process is obvious, since Mr. Wood's dis-
covery disclosed it. The Christian religion when it became
dominant had to claim for itself the sanctity attaching to the
ancient site. It did so by building that great church overlook-
ing the temple. But Christianity in its turn gave place to
Mohammedanism, and again this new religion made itself
heir to the religious associations and holiness of the locality
by constructing between the two older religious sites one of
the largest and most splendid mosques in the whole country.

The history of Ephesus is an extraordinary series of
vicissitudes, but the religious centre is always the same.
The Greek city was at a distance from the religious centre ;
it aimed at commercial or military advantages, and its site
was changed more than once as the sea-coast receded. The
holy place was the governing centre of the plain before the
Greeks came ; its priests watched the Greek cities grow and
change and decay. The outward form of the religion was
altered, but the old belief was not extirpated, and it took new
root in the heart of the conquering religion, so that in the
fifth century we find the legend of the Virgin Mother of God
firmly established among the Christians of Ephesus, though

1St. Sophia in Constantinople was larger; but it was not founded by
Justinian.

134 III. Asia Minor:

it was not strong enough to obliterate the historical fact that
the Holy Theologian had lived many years and died in the
city. But the belief in the old holy place was a force always
attracting the population thither, and growing stronger as the
standard of education in the Eastern Church degenerated,
and at last proving irresistible. Thus the centre of popula-
tion was moved back to the old centre of religion. The old
Asiatic paganism had proved too strong alike for the Greek
trade and education and for the Christian teaching. The
Greek spirit had come, and lived for twelve hundred years,
and died of weakness, but the old beliefs continued as strong as
ever. The old goddess had not merely her home in the open
plain among the haunts of men ; she was the goddess of wild
nature and nursing mother of all wild animals, and she had her
other home among the mountains on the south of the plain.
And so among the Christians the home of the Virgin
Mother of God was discovered and made a centre of worship
and pilgrimage near the old mountain house of the Goddess-
Mother.

An apparent exception to the principle that the great
movements of history and thought must either keep to the
coast-lines or to the central bridge, and that no great move-
ment on the central plateau ever springs from the northern or
the southern coast, is presented by the enterprise which
carried the first Christian mission from Perga on the
Pamphylian coast to Pisidian Antioch and the neighbouring
towns on the central bridge. The theologians have disputed,
and will doubtless dispute to the end of time, about that
sudden transition ; but the geographer and the historian who
study facts instead of starting from theories can never hesitate
as to this great fact. The first mission movement began to
work its way westward along the sea-route by Cyprus and the

The Country and its Religion 135

Pamphylian coast; but at this point it deserted the coast-
route and transferred itself to the far more fruitful and
important land-route over the central bridge. The impor-
tant movements of thought had almost always taken the land-
route, for the coast-route affords only narrow and limited
opportunities along its course. It was easy for the pioneers
of new ideas to carry them by sea from the Syrian shore to
Athens or to Rome ; but by the way they as a rule made no
impression and left no seed. On the other hand, along the
land-route new religious movements worked their way by
conquering the cities and the peoples through which they
passed : they planted themselves firmly at each stage, and
each step was the preparation and the basis for a further
step.

Of the many movements of thought that have occurred
along the great bridge, the only one which can be traced in
any detail is that by which Christianity was diffused over the
country and into Europe; and it would be an instructive
example of the principles which have just been laid down to
study the geographical lines of that important movement.
But it would need a separate article to do so even in the
briefest outline. One may only say here that the current
conception, which indicates the spread of that movement by a
series of lines radiating from Syria across Asia Minor to the
north, north-west, and west, is entirely incorrect. The
movement of thought was along the great bridge, by the
road on the southern side of the plateau, direct west from
Syria to Ephesus, and then back again in return waves along
the north coast by sea, and along the northern roads over the
plateau by land. And probably the older movements, about
whose diffusion we have no information, exemplified equally
the same geographical laws.

136 III. Asia Minor:

In conclusion, two noteworthy features of the old religion
may be noticed and illustrated.

In the first place, the Divine power that resided in, or
brooded over, or sat in state upon J prominent peaks and
lofty mountains was everywhere an object of popular vener-
ation. Elsewhere the writer has repeatedly alluded to this
subject,2 and described how certain striking peaks, which
seem to dominate the landscape, and to watch over and
guide and measure the traveller's course, became objects of
worship — partly in the higher view as abodes or seats of
the Divine might (which was distinct from the mountain, a
formless guiding power, present anywhere and everywhere
to its worshippers), partly in the lower view as themselves
Divine things, Gods to be worshipped. The two views were
both potentially present in the primitive conception, which
had not yet been fully thought out ; and the future was to
determine whether the early conception should be developed
to the higher stage or degraded to the lower.

Besides the evident value of peaks to the traveller's and
the trader's eye, there are many other considerations which
must have given importance to them. Some of these we can
trace practically in the Byzantine time, and can apply with
suitable modifications to the earliest ages. In the rude war-
fare of the Byzantine period it must be observed that it was
no longer possible or safe to trust to the kind of military
strength that depended on artificial fortifications, on well-
trained officers, on a disciplined and obedient soldiery, and
on constant watchfulness and forethought in the highest
ranks of the service. The Byzantine service had degenerated,
and was not kept in a state of preparedness and good discip-

1 See below, p. 160, and Plate XV.

2 See especially the Cities of St. Paul, p. 389, and Plates XI., XV.

PLATE XI.

Rock-tomb in Phrygia : Roman period : Christian Arcosolia of later period in the

rock beneath.
To face p. 136. Seep. 139.

The Country and its Religion 137

line. The Oriental invaders were always ill-organised, and
relied mainly on sudden, unexpected attacks on a peaceful
country. In those circumstances it was inevitable that the
old Hellenistic and Roman style of fortified cities, close to
the roads and convenient for trade and administration, should
give place to fortresses perched high on peaks as nearly in-
accessible as possible. These were safe refuges against sud-
den attack, and the population could retreat to them when
beacons on peaks beside the Eastern roads gave warning
that a raiding army was crossing the Taurus. They could
not have been defended against a long regular siege owing
to deficiency in the water-supply, but a regular siege was
not to be feared from the raiders of the East.

Thus the circumstances of the great war against Sassanian
and Arab power tended inevitably to make the minds of the
Anatolian population dwell upon the importance and the sav-
ing power of lofty peaks ; while their religion prompted them
to plant churches and monasteries as well as castles on
them, and led them first to wish, thereafter to believe, that
the saints who championed and marshalled the local defence
dwelt permanently on these high hills.1 The same applies
in some degree to the earliest times.

As examples of those lofty, fortified rocks, which are so
numerous in Asia Minor, take Plates IV. and V. In the
former is shown the rock of Kara-Hissar, the Black For-
tress,2 the ancient Akro3nos, where was won in A.D. 739 the
first great victory in a pitched battle that cheered the
Byzantine Empire in the task of repelling the Arab con-

1 On this subject see the following paper, " The Orthodox Church in the
Byzantine Empire".

2 Kara here means " black " rather in the moral sense of terrible, grim,
strong, than as the colour.

138 III. Asia Minor:

querors.1 It seems to have been known afterwards as
Nikopolis, the City of Victory, and became a bishopric in the
eighth century. It is now one of the chief cities of the
Plateau, and is distinguished from many other towns of the
same name by the epithet Afion, from the opium which is
extensively cultivated in the plain adjoining.

Here is the meeting (not allowed at present to be prac-
tically utilised as a junction) between the German Railway
from the Bosphorus to Konia, and perhaps ultimately to
Bagdad, and the French Railway from Smyrna to Phila-
delphia, Ushak and Kara-Hissar.

Plate V. shows the city now called Sivri-Hissar, Pointed
Fortress, one of the centres of the angora-wool trade, the
ancient Justinianopolis, one of the great fortresses on the
Byzantine Military Road by which Justinian tried to protect
the land of Anatolia. Its double peak is one of the most
noteworthy points for surveyors : I have taken readings to it
from very distant points in the Phrygian mountains (one
being the highest point of the Midas-city).

In the second place, almost every seat of ancient life
carries veneration and often religious awe with it : frequently
it is regarded as the seat of Divine power, and a sacred
place. To illustrate this in detail is the work of a large
book. It has been referred to briefly in a paper on the " Per-
manence of Religious Awe in Asia Minor".2 Some of the
annexed Plates may serve to illustrate it.

Plate VI. shows a Roman milestone standing in its ori-
ginal position on the great Central Trade Route, about a mile
west of the important Roman station of Psebila or Pegella
(afterwards renamed Verinopolis from the Empress Verina

1 Studies in the History of the Eastern Provinces, p. 288.

2 Pauline and other Studies, p. 163 ff.

The Country and its Religion 139

in the end of the fifth century), where was a knot of five
great roads, (i) the road from Constantinople, Dorylaion and
Amorion, (2) the Trade Route from the West, (3) the road
connecting the two great Galatian provincial centres Ancyra
and Iconium, (4) the Trade Route from Csesarea and the
East, (5) the Syrian road through the Cilician Gates.

Plates VII. -XI. show a few of the most noteworthy monu-
ments of Phrygia. In VII. an archaic sheep, once used as
a sepulchral monument, is seen : a pair of hunters on horse-
back are sculptured on the side of the unformed mass, and
on the other side three ibexes of a species still common in
Anatolia. The custom of representing animals on the sides
of the statues of other animals was common in the early
Anatolian or "Hittite" period. The human figure who
stands by, dressed in early November as for the Arctic regions,
affords a practical proof of the severity of the climate on
the Plateau.1

The Tomb of Midas the King appears in Plate VIII., the
type and best example of a large class of Phrygian sepulchral
monuments (which were at the same time shrines of the
deified dead). The quaint delicate work and the romantic
surroundings make this one of the most beautiful monuments
known to modern times ; and its historical interest even sur-
passes its beauty. The two inscriptions, in letters of gigantic
size and archaic Greek form, make the nature of the monu-
ment certain ; though some scholars dispute it.

Plate IX. gives another grave-monument of an ancient
Phrygian chief, without inscription and probably older than
the introduction of Greek writing into Phrygia. The
analogy to the famous Lion-Gate at Mycenae lends special
interest to this great tomb. Over the little door leading

1 See above, p. 106, and Pauline and other Studies, p. 385 f.

140 III. Asia Minor: The Country and its Religion

into the plain and small grave-chamber, where the dead was
simply laid on a low couch of rock, stands a column sup-
porting a very heavy architrave at the top of the rock. Two
lionesses with a cub beneath each rest their forepaws on the
top of the door.

In Plate X. the broken remains of an even greater monu-
ment, close to the last, are seen. The head of the lion on
the left measures seven feet and a half across. It is exe-
ecuted in singularly life-like vigorous style, and the com-
plete monument, with three great heads of lions like this,
must have been wonderfully effective. The town or village
beside it was in the fifth century and later called from this
monument Leontoskephalai. It is about six hours north of
Afion - Kara - Hissar and five hours south of the Midas
Tomb.

Plate XI. shows a sepulchral monument of the Roman
period, in quite Greek style. The family tomb is here con-
ceived as the temple of the deified dead, who lay in chambers
cut in the rock. Before the doors is the portico, supported
by two Doric columns, closely imitating the front of a Greek
temple.

Plate XII. shows the site of the ancient Antioch of
Pisidia, the southern capital of the Province Galatia, with
the snowy Sultan Dagh behind. The site lies in the middle
distance, on the left-hand side of a break in the ridge of front
hills. Through that break the river Anthios flows in a deep
narrow gorge, close under the city walls. The ridge con-
tinues to the right of the gorge, rising much higher than on
the Antiochian side. The faint, hardly distinguishable re-
mains contrast with the numerous buildings of Deghile
(Plate XIII. ).

IV.

THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IN THE
BYZANTINE EMPIRE.

ADDRESS ON BEHALF OF SECTION VI. (CHURCH HISTORY)

DELIVERED TO THE FINAL GENERAL MEETING

OF THE CONGRESS OF HISTORICAL

SCIENCES, BERLIN, 1908.

IV.

THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IN THE
BYZANTINE EMPIRE.1

I WILL not fill up the last minutes of the Congress with
minute details of the subject about which I have to speak.
Rather, I shall attempt to show it amid its surroundings as
one aspect of the immemorial struggle between the East
and the West. In the electric contact between Asia and
Europe has been generated the greatest motive power
throughout history ; the impulse is constantly varying in
character from age to age, yet the principle is fundamentally
the same.

In the lands of the Aegean and the Levant the cardinal
fact of history has always been and is now the struggle of
Hellenism to make itself dominant. On the coasts and
islands it rules almost by right of nature ; and it is constantly
striving to force its way inland. As a motive force in the
Levant world it gained strength and direction by being
moulded into the Roman organisation ; and the Roman
Empire was in the East the Hellenic Empire, an invigorated
Hellenism, which lost the charm, the delicacy, the purity
and the aloofness of the unalloyed Greek spirit, but gained
practical and penetrating power.

In one of his most remarkable papers, written in later life,

1 Address on behalf of Section VI. (Church History) delivered to the final
general meeting of the Congress of Historical Sciences, Berlin, i2th August,
1908. It was shortened in delivery by the omission of many sentences
or clauses.

(143)

144 IV. The Orthodox Church

when his genius and historic insight were brightest and most
piercing, because they were guided by longer experience and
by a width of knowledge almost beyond the right of man-
kind, Mommsen has described how the Roman Empire, at
the moment when it seemed no longer capable of maintaining
itself, was restored to vigour by the incorporation of a new
idea into its constitution, and became the Christian Empire.
This was only one out of many cases in which by a single
article Mommsen either permanently changed thought re-
garding an old branch of study or created an entirely new
one. He has made it impossible for any scholar ever
again to say much of what used to be repeated parrot-like
by generation after generation of writers about the relation
of the Church to the Roman State,1 and he has made it
urgently necessary that the history of the Roman Empire
should be rewritten from a new point of view.

The new Christian Empire lasted as a power patent to the
eyes of all the world for more than eleven hundred years.
What was the idea, what the new factor in organisation
that recreated and rejuvenated the dying Roman Empire?
It was the Church, the Church as an organised unity, the
Church as a belief, and the Church as a body of ritual.

In this connection we are struck with a certain difference
between the Latin Church and the Greek. The Latin
Church has often been able to maintain its hold on discor-
dant nations : many peoples have remained faithful to the
belief and the authority of the Roman Church, while pre-
serving their independence, their separation, and their

1 Der Religionsfrevel nach rom. Recht. The legal aspect is restated in his
Strafrecht from a different point of view, and in some details perhaps more
correctly ; but the older paper takes a far wider outlook and a more illumina-
tive view than the legal book, which, though published later, stands nearer
the ordinary point of survey, because it is narrower in its range of interest.

in the Byzantine Empire 145

mutual hostility. But the Latin Church could not hold to-
gether the Western Empire. It never identified itself with
the Empire. It represented a higher unity than the Roman
Empire: so far as it lowered itself to stand on the same
level as the Empire, it was a rival and an enemy rather than
an ally of the Empire.

But the Orthodox Church in the East cast in its lot with
the Roman Empire; it was conterminous with, and never
permanently wider than the Empire. It did not long at-
tempt to stand on a higher level than the State and the
people. It has not been an educating and elevating and
purifying power. It has been content, on the whole, in spite
of some notable and honourable exceptions, to accept the
world as it was ; and it has been too easily satisfied with
mere allegiance and apparent loyalty to the State among all
its adherents. It was the faithful ally of the emperors. In
the controversies of the fifth century it elected to side with
the uneducated masses against the higher thought ; and in
an QEcumenical Council, at which the law of the whole Chris-
tian world should be determined, it admitted to its delibera-
tions a bishop who could not sign his name because he did
not know letters. But on this lower level it stood closer to
the mass of the people. It lived among them. It moved
the common average man with more penetrating power
than a loftier religion could have done. Accordingly the
Orthodox Church was fitted to be the soul and life of the
Empire, to maintain the Imperial unity, to give form and
direction to every manifestation of national vigour.

Practically the whole of Byzantine art that has lived is
ecclesiastical, being concerned with the building and the
adornment of churches, and of the residences of officials in

Church and State. The subjects of its painting became

146 IV. The Orthodox Church

more and more exclusively sacred. Art itself was frowned
upon; and the controversy between Iconodouloi and Icono-
clastai was to a certain extent a contest as to whether Art
should not be expelled even from churches. Of Byzantine
literature, if you take away what is directly or indirectly
concerned with or originating out of the Church, how little
remains ! To letters the Orthodox Greek Church aas never
been very favourable. It has never played the part in pre-
serving the ancient classical literature that the L atin Church
has played.

Yet it has always clung to the Hellenic language as
tenaciously as it has allied itself with the Hellenised Empire,
to which it had given new life ; but it did so rather on poli-
tical and social and religious grounds than from literary
sympathy. Greek was necessarily the language of Hellenic
civilisation and order ; and it was the language of the sacred
books. Accordingly the Church destroyed the native lan-
guages of Asia Minor,1 and imposed the Greek speech on the
entire population, though it could not do this completely in
Syria or in Egypt. As it identified itself with the Imperial
rule in the State, so it identified itself with Hellenism as a
force in society ; but its Hellenism was a degenerate repre-
sentative of the old classical Hellenism, hardened and nar-
rowed in its interests, but intense, powerful, strongly alive,
resolute to make the single language, the Hellenic speech,
dominant throughout the Church, yet able in the last resort,
to abandon for the moment, under the pressure of necessity,
or of overpowering national feeling, even the Hellenic speech,
and to leave only the cultus and the hierarchy and the ritual

1 That Christianity, and not the older Greek or Roman civilisation, destroyed
the native languages and imposed Greek on the peoples of Asia Minor, has
often been maintained by the writer. Professor Roll has published a con-
vincing argument to this effect in Hermes, 1908, p. 240 if.

in the Byzantine Empire 147

of the One true Church as the sole living unity in the
Empire.

The rise of every national movement that sought to
develop itself within the Empire was consecrated and vital-
ised by the formation of a new Church. In some cases, as
in the Armenian schism, or in the severance between the
two great sections of the original Catholic and Imperial
Church, viz.) the Latin and the Greek, there was some dif-
ference of dogma, of creed, or of ritual. But these differ-
ences were, in the historian's view, not the essential features
in the quarrels that ensued between the opposing sections
of the Church. Those differences of creed were only the
insignia emblazoned on the standards of forces which were
already arrayed against one another by national and other
deep-lying causes of hostility. Accordingly in the severance
between Slavic and Hellenic nationalities, in the bitter hatred
that has often raged between Slav and Hellene, there is
practically no difference of creed or ritual ; there is only a
difference of ecclesiastical organisation. The separate na-
tionality formed for itself a separate ecclesiastical system,
and the two powers, which in truth represented two hostile
races and two different systems of civilisation and thought
and ideals, regarded one another as rival Churches. Where
the historian sees Hellenism in conflict with Slavic society,
the combatants hate each other as ecclesiastical foes, orthodox
on the one hand, schismatic on the other.

Before our eyes, in this present generation, there has oc-
curred one of these great national and social struggles, a
struggle still undetermined, between the Bulgarian and the
Hellenic nationality. When the Bulgarian national feeling
was growing sufficiently definite to take separate form and
to disengage itself from the vague formless mass of the

148 IV. The Orthodox Church

Christian subjects of Turkey, it expressed itself first by de-
manding and in the year 1870 attaining separate ecclesiastical
standing as the Church of the Exarchate. Since that time
the war to determine the bounds between the spheres of
Hellenism and of Bulgarian nationality has been waged
under the form of a struggle between the adherents of the
Patriarchate and of the Exarchate. We at a distance hardly
comprehend how completely the ecclesiastical question over-
powers all else in the popular estimation. It is not blood,
not language, that determines the mind of the masses ; it is
religion and the Church. The Bulgarian born and bred,
who is Mohammedan by religion, sides with the Turks ; the
Bulgarian who is of the Patriarchate chooses Hellenism, and
in ordinary course (if the natural tendency of history is not
forcibly disturbed) his descendants will ultimately become
Hellenes in language also; only in the Exarchate is the
Bulgarian nationality supreme and lasting. Religion and
the Church is the determining principle for the individual.

In the islands and in Asia Minor you find the same con-
dition. The Church is the one bond to hold together in
feeling, aspirations and patriotism the scattered Hellenes.
When we began to travel in the country thirty years ago,
there were many cities and villages where the Orthodox
Church claimed the adherence of considerable bodies of
population, yet where the Greek language was neither
spoken nor understood. These people had no common
blood : they were Isaurians, or Cappadocians, or Lycaonians,
men of Pontus or Bithynia or Phrygia. But they were one
people in virtue of their one Church ; they knew themselves
to be Hellenes, because they belonged to the Church of the
Hellenes. The memory of their past lived among these
Hellenes, and as that memory grew stronger it awoke their

in the Byzantine Empire 149

ancient tongue to life ; and now their children all speak the
language of the Eastern Roman Empire, and look forward
to the reawakening of the Christian1 unity as a practical
factor in the development of the country. That old Roman
Empire is not dead, but sleeping. It will die only when
Hellenism ceases in the Aegean lands, and when the Church
is no longer a living force among their population.

We see, then, what a power among men this Orthodox
Church has been and still is — not a lovable power, not a
beneficent power, but stern, unchanging, not exactly hostile
to, but certainly careless of, literature and art and civilisation,
sufficient for itself, self-contained and self-centred. The
historian must regard with interest this marvellous pheno-
menon, and he must try to understand it as it appears in the
centuries.

I set before you a problem and a question. I do not at-
tempt to answer it. It is not my province or my work to
propose theories ; but to ask questions, to state problems,
and to observe and register facts, looking at them in the
light of these questions. And during the last seven years,
it has fallen to my lot to study closely the monuments, the
hieratic architecture and the epitaphs which reveal some-
thing of the development of the Orthodox Church in the
region of Lycaonia. I have had to copy many hundreds of
Christian inscriptions ranging from the gravestone of a
bishop of the third century to an epitaph dated under the
Seljuk Turks in the years 1160-1169. It would be pedantic
and impossible on this occasion to attempt even an outline

1 It is the only " Christian " Empire to the Hellenes, who call no man
Christian unless he is a member of the Orthodox Church. The old distinction
between Hellenes and Barbaroi is now expressed as a classification into
" Christians " or Orthodox and all others.

150 IV. The Orthodox Church

of the results which follow from the study of these epitaphs,
and of the " thousand-and-one churches " l in which the piety
of the inhabitants found expression. I shall restrict myself
to a few general statements, taking first the inscriptions as
beginning earlier than the oldest surviving church-building.

The inscriptions are almost all engraved upon the tomb-
stones of the ordinary population of a provincial district.
Even the bishops who are mentioned must, as a rule, be re-
garded as mere village-bishops (^o)/)e7rtWo7rot). Similarly,
the ecclesiastical buildings belong not to capitals of pro-
vinces or to great cities, but to villages and unimportant
towns, where there was little education but a high standard
of material comfort. Those of which I to-day speak lie in
and around the humble and almost unknown town of Barata.
But in the humbleness of its range lies the real value of this
evidence. Itjreveals to us the lower and the middle class of
society ; it sets before us the commonplace individuals who
composed the Imperial State.

The epitaphs help to fill up a gap in the information
which literary authorities furnish about the Christian Empire.
Those authorities give their attention to emperors and
courtiers and generals, to the capital of the Empire with its
mob and its splendours, to bishops and church leaders, to
CEcumenical Councils and the rise of heresies. But the world
is made up of ordinary, commonplace men. The leaders
cannot exist, unless there is a people to be led. There are
indeed scattered about in the literary authorities certain
pieces of evidence about the common world ; and there are
more in the private correspondence of writers and great men.

1 This name (Bin-Bir-Kilisse) is the descriptive appellation given by out-
siders to the modern village which occupies part of the site of the ancient
Barata, but not used by the villagers themselves (who call their home Maden-
Sheher).

in the Byzantine Empire 151

But this evidence has never been collected.1 It is to the
humbler epitaphs that we must look for aid in attempting
to estimate the influence which the Church exerted on the
mass of the people, and to appreciate the standard of edu-
cation and life which it produced among the general popula-
tion, especially in small towns and villages.

The Lycaonian gravestones will give at least the begin-
ning of the material for answering the questions which are
thus raised. Though a few of the epitaphs are earlier and a
moderate number are later, yet the great mass of them belong
to the fourth and fifth centuries (especially the period A.D.
330-450). They set before us, on the whole, the Church as
it was in Asia Minor from the time of Constantine to that
of Theodosius, the Church of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of
Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa, and Amphilochius of Iconium
— a great period in ecclesiastical history. I am convinced
that some passages in the literature and many in the letters
written by the contemporary leaders of the Church will
acquire a new and fuller meaning and more living realism
through comparison with these memorials of their humble
followers.

To take just one example. When Gregory of Nyssa
wished about A.D. 380-390 to build a memorial chapel, he
wrote to Amphilochius at Iconium begging him to furnish
workmen capable of executing the work, and he wrote after-
wards a very full description of the cruciform church which
he hoped to build. We have now abundant evidence that
the cruciform was in those regions the accepted type for
memorial churches. We find in the country subject to the

1 In a paper printed in Pauline and other Studies, pp. 369-406, a beginning
is made in a small way to exemplify the value of the material for social history
in the letters of Basil. See also Holl, Hermes, 1908, p. 240.

152 IV. The Orthodox Church

metropolitan bishop of Iconium a quite unexpected number
of churches in almost every form known to Byzantine archi-
tecture. And we see in the graves throughout the country
north and north-east from Iconium a marked inferiority in
the technique of sculptor and architect, and an equally marked
superiority throughout the hill-country that lies near Iconium
on the south and south-west. The fashionable type of orna-
ment on the gravestones of this latter region is architectural,
as if architecture were the dominant art in the district.1 It
was, therefore, natural that the Bishop of Nyssa should have
recourse to Iconium for artisans able to build and to adorn
the church which he had in mind.

The picture of the Lycaonian Church that we put to-
gether from these humble memorials is, on the whole, a very
favourable one. The Church was still the educator of the
people. The Presbyteros is set before us in simple, striking
terms as the helper of the orphan, the widow, the poor and
the stranger.2 We have little or no trace of alliance with the
State : we have the Church of the people, creator of charit-
able and hospitable institutions, the Church as it was in the
mind and the aspirations of Basil.

We find Lycaonia a Christian land in the fourth century.3
It is the one province of Asia Minor whose ecclesiastical
organisation can be traced already perfect and complete in
the councils of the fourth century. This organisation, there-
fore, must be in great part older than the persecution of
Diocletian. From the writings of Basil of Csesarea we learn
that as early as A.D. 370 a city church in Cappadocia was

JOn the Isaurian masons see an important paper by Professor Holl in
Hermes, 1908, p. 242, and in this volume XII., No. 10-12.

2 See below, p. 352.

3 The few pagan inscriptions of the period belong, some certainly, some
probably, to the engineered anti-Christian movement under Diocletian and
Maximin, on which see Pauline and other Studies, p. 106 ff.

in the Byzantine Empire 153

already regarded as only one part of a great surrounding
complex of buildings for public utility, which formed a centre
for social and public convenience. The church was already
fully marked as the focus of city life.

This conception of the church building in its relation to
the life of the city is much older than Basil's time. It is the
original idea of the early Christian world, when the Universal
Church, in competition with the Emperor and Father of the
State, raised its claim to be the parent and guide of the
people. Such a Christian ecclesiastical establishment took
the place of the ancient Anatolian hieron as the centre of
social and municipal life. The Greek conception of a free
people governing itself without priestly interference was
dying out, and the Asiatic conception of a religion govern-
ing in theocratic fashion the entire life and conduct of men
was reviving. The early Christian inscriptions of Lycaonia
show this old idea as it affected the people before Basil.

I will mention here only one inscription, the epitaph of a
bishop who administered the see of Laodicea about A.D. 315
to 340, a Roman soldier, with the Roman triple name, a
man of good family and wealth and position (like so many
of those who played a prominent part x in the history of
Christianity in Asia Minor). In his epitaph he tells how he
rebuilt the church of the city, which evidently had been
destroyed during the persecution of Diocletian. The bishop
enumerates the whole architectural equipment which he had
built,2 and which he evidently considered as indispensable in
a proper ecclesiastical establishment — " rebuilding the whole
church from its foundations and all the equipment around it,

1 Studies in the History and Art of the Eastern Provinces, p. 372 f. ; Pauline
and other Studies, p. 375.

2 The inscription is published by the discoverer, Mr. Calder, Christ Church,
Oxford, in the Expositor, November, 1908. See below, p. 339.

154 IV. The Orthodox Church

viz.) stoai and tetrastoa and paintings and screens of wood-
work and a water-tank and an entrance gateway, together
with all the mason-work, and, in a word, putting everything
in place ". While we cannot suppose that the old church,
which had evidently been destroyed to the ground under
Diocletian, was as magnificent in its equipment as the new
one, we can safely infer from this document that the same
idea of a social as well as a religious centre had been em-
bodied in it originally, and that the whole establishment was
restored. This idea is apparently presumed in the inscrip-
tion, as natural and self-evident.

Some years later the same idea was embodied in Basil's
great foundation at Caesarea of Cappadocia — which included
an almshouse, a place of entertainment for strangers, both
those who were on a journey and those who required medical
treatment on account of sickness, and so established a means
of giving these men the comfort they wanted — doctors,
means of conveyance and escort.1 The church, which
formed part of this establishment, was the indispensable
centre for the whole series of constructions.

Even the cistern or water- tank at Laodicea was intended,
not as a baptistery for hieratic purposes, but simply to afford
a supply of water for public convenience : this is proved by
the cisterns at many establishments similar in character but
smaller in scale, which we have found elsewhere in Lycaonia.
In that waterless region a permanent water-supply was in-
dispensable for comfort ; and as running water can very
rarely be supplied, a tank or cistern for storage was used in-
stead of the fountain, which would have been employed in a
district where flowing sources were abundant. But at
Laodicea, under the hills, the tank held running water.

1 Pauline and other Studies, p, 385 ; Basil, Epist. xcvi.

in the Byzantine Empire 155

Those who are interested to trace the continuity of
religious custom will not fail to observe that the " Brother-
hoods " of the early Turkish time,1 and the Bektash Dervish
establishments (which have lasted down to the present day),
fulfil under Mohammedan forms many of the purposes which
Basil aimed at in his great foundation. And the fountains
in the courtyard of every mosque and Dervish tekke, though
primarily intended for the religious ablution before prayer,
are used for general purposes of public utility. If we could
trace the character of the ancient Anatolian hiera, we should
probably find in them the type of Basil's establishment.

As to the surviving church-buildings, the most important
among many remarkable groups is a series which we had
the advantage of studying and excavating in company with
Miss Bell in 1907, and by ourselves in 1908 in some small
supplementary work — about seventy churches in and around
the Lycaonian city of Barata, fifty miles south-east of
Ikonion, and subject from A.D. 372 onwards to the metro-
politan of that city. These churches form a definite group,
possessing a certain unity, revealing to us the history of a
small Lycaonian city from the fifth to the twelfth century.
The memorials of city life were no longer recorded in in-
scriptions and the other monuments of the old Greek cities :
they stand before us in the churches built by the piety or the
sense of public duty of the people, often by the piety of
individuals similar to the bishop of Laodicea.

Churches have to be studied by historians as the one
form in which the public spirit and patriotism of the Byzan-
tine cities sought expression. The Church was the focus of
the national life, and the ecclesiastical buildings mirrored the

JOn these Brotherhoods see the Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, vol. i.,
p. 96.

156 IV. The Orthodox Church

fortunes and the sufferings of the people. Such buildings
were generally constructed as the payment of a vow ; and in
the inscriptions which often recorded the name of the
builder the opening formula was gradually established,
" through the vow of ..."

To take one example : the outstanding fact with regard
to the Byzantine Empire as a whole and with regard especi-
ally to Asia Minor, is that they were exposed to the full
force of the attack which the barbarism of Asia was con-
stantly making on the Roman Empire and the Hellenic
civilisation.1 The Church of Anatolia, if we rightly estimate
its character, could not remain insensible to the great national
struggle against the Sassanian and Arab invaders, that dread,
ever-present danger. Accordingly, we find that one of the
churches at Barata was the memorion of a citizen who " died
in the war," another of one who " endured many wounds," and
a third was built as the memorial of a general who had led
the Byzantine armies : his name is not given, but only his
position in the Empire, for he was doubtless the only native
of this obscure town that ever attained that high rank in
the army, and hence he is called simply " the Domestikos ".
The largest and probably the most magnificent church in
the town was decorated with paintings executed by certain
artists, who are named, under the direction of Indakos, monk,
presbyter and eponymous tribune ; and a fifth church was
dedicated according to the vow of Mammas the tribune.
When we see that churches form the angle of the fortifica-
tions of the city, that monasteries make part of the walls,
that a small church crowns many a little hill near the line of
the walls as well as every high peak of the mountains
farther away, we realise that the Byzantine Church mar-

1 Studies in the History of the Eastern Provinces, p. 287.

in the Byzantine Empire 157

shalled and inspired the Hellenes of the later Empire to
defend Hellenism against barbarism, and that the tribunes
who built those churches were at once ecclesiastical, muni-
cipal and, after a fashion, military officers.

That this Church militant was an effective military leader
cannot for a moment be supposed. There was a vast differ-
ence between the military orders of European chivalry, the
Templars or the Knights of St. John, and these monks and
tribunes of places like Barata. But, in the temporary decay
of the Eastern Empire, the Church did undertake the
guidance of local efforts at defence, which the Emperors
had abandoned ; and thus the life of the nation came to be
more and more completely summed up in the Church. And
when the Empire revived in the ninth century, it could not
recover the hold which it had formerly possessed on the
national loyalty. The Church had entirely supplanted it in
the minds of the people.

Hitherto we have been too much disposed to think that,
because the regular army of the Empire was professional
and the soldiers of the later Roman period were almost a
caste and not a truly national army, no power of resistance
and self-defence was developed in the districts that were
most exposed to Arab attack. But the churches of Barata
tell a different tale, and their evidence is confirmed at a
later period by the example of Philadelphia,1 which main-
tained itself by the energy of its own citizens, unaided and
even disowned by the Empire, against the victorious Turks
for a century. Where the people had the army to depend
on, they trusted to it ; but where, as in Barata and Philadel-
phia, they were left open to the constant attacks of the
enemy without military protection, they trusted to them-

1 Letters to the Seven Churches, pp. 400, 412.

158 IV. The Orthodox Church

selves and the Saints, but chiefly the Saints. It was Michael,
commander of the hosts of heaven, and the other Saints on
every prominent point of the city and every peak of the
mountain, who marshalled and stimulated the defensive
efforts of the people of Barata.1

Here, again, we see how close the Imperial Church stood
to the life of the people. But this nearness was bought at
a heavy price, and much of the character of the Orthodox
Church was sacrificed to attain it. If we take the succession
of the ecclesiastical buildings at Barata, ranging from the
fifth to the tenth or the eleventh century, we can trace in
them, especially through their dedications, the change of
feeling: we see the degeneration of the Imperial Church to
the popular level of thought and religion, the revival of the
old pagan religion of Asia Minor, and the resuscitation of
the ancient gods under Christian names.

An example, the most striking out of many, occurs on the
summit of the mountain that overhangs Barata on the south.
Standing on that lofty peak, an island in the Lycaonian
plain, 7,000 feet above sea level, one remembers the ancient
idea, nowhere stronger than in Anatolia, that all lofty peaks
were the chosen home of Divine power, and feels certain that
this was a " High Place " of the old paganism. The proof
is at hand. Although in the change of religion the old
sanctuary has been destroyed, and a monastery, a church and
a memorial chapel (which bears the name of Leo) cover
almost the entire summit, and conceal the earlier features of
the place, yet the traces of the original " High Place " are
not entirely obliterated.

1 On the circumstances and needs of local defence which tended to encourage
among the people this belief in the saving power of high peaks and the abode
of their Saints and champions on high hills, see above, p. 136.

PLATE XIV.

Church and Memorial Chapel of Leo on the Summit ot the Kara-Dagh.
PLATE XV.

Church on the Summit ol the Kara-Dagh : Apse and South-east Corner.
To face p. 158.

in the Byzantine Empire 159

In the rocks that support the church on the north side is a
passage, partly natural, partly artificial, now to some extent
narrowed by walls of the Byzantine period. On the rock
walls of this passage, perhaps formerly hidden by Byzantine
building, are two inscriptions in the ancient hieroglyphics,
which are now generally called Hittite, but which were pro-
bably Anatolian in origin. These put the ancient holy
character of the locality beyond all question. We have here
the first known example of a Hittite " High Place " not en-
tirely destroyed ; and we see that its ancient sanctity was
preserved in a Christianised form by the Byzantine Church.

This group of monuments, discovered by Miss Gertrude
Bell in May, 1907, after so many travellers had visited this
ancient city, is one of the best known examples of the general
principle which has often been stated — that religious awe in
Anatolia clung permanently to the same localities.1 There
can be no doubt that the church and monastery were placed
here because of the old sacred character. The new religion
was obliged to satisfy the religious instincts of the popula-
tion, which reverenced this ancient seat of worship. The
church and monastery have every appearance of being com-
paratively early : at latest the sixth century is the date to
which they should be assigned. The Byzantine type of
architecture with dome standing within a square tower was
already fully developed when the church was built ; hence
one would not be able to date the foundation too early.

The series of monuments on the highest summit of the
mountain would, even if they stood alone, furnish a complete
proof of the very early origin of civilisation at this site.
But it was our good fortune to find a second almost more
striking confirmation of the Hittite occupation. On the

1 See especially Pauline and other Studies, p. 163 ff.

i6o IV. The Orthodox Church

north-west side an outlying hill, called Kizil Dagh, about
eight miles from the city, was made into a fortress to defend
the approach to the central city. The early Anatolian or
Hittite character of this fortress is shown by its style, and by
three hieroglyphic inscriptions, one on a sort of altar at a
gate in the west wall, and two on a " Holy Place," a pinnacle
of rock forty feet high, roughly carved into the shape of a
seat or throne with high back, below the west wall of the
fort. On the throne is incised a figure of the god, sitting,
holding a sceptre in the left hand and a cup in the right.1
He wears magnificent robes and rests his feet on a footstool.
He is the god who presides over and guards the city of the
mountain, with its bounteous vineyards, its fruit trees, its
riches, and its cool, delightful climate in summer. The dis-
covery of this throne would have gladdened the heart of a
scholar, who died too young (the late Dr. Reichel), who wrote
from very slender materials a most suggestive paper on the
importance of the throne in early Anatolian religion. Since
his death his views have been confirmed by the discovery of
several monuments which prove that a throne played a very
important part in the equipment of the primitive cultus in
Anatolia. This " High Place " remains unharmed by any
destroying hand, except that of time and weather. Its
ancient sanctity was forgotten by the Orthodox Church;
and the features of the locality are unchanged since it was
the place of worship for the garrison of the old fortress.

The name of the same priest-king, Tarkuattes, appears in
the inscriptions on both these Hittite sites, as Professor
Sayce informs me. This priest-king must have been the

1 Professor Sayce tells me that he interprets differently the symbol which
I took for a cup ; but this is immaterial for our present purpose. He regards
the seated figure as that of the priest-king ; but in that case, according to the
usual practice, the priest wears the dress and plays the part of the god.

PLATE XVI.

The Throne of the Anatolian God : with Two Hieroglyphic Inscriptions and a Relief.

PLATE XVII.

Church No. 29 at Bin-Bir-Kilisse : Double-arched West Doorway seen trom the inside ;

on the left is the Wall of the South Chamber of Narthex.
To face p. 160.

in the Byzantine Empire 161

dynast either of Barata or of some remoter city to which
Barata was subject, and the former seems far the more pro-
bable supposition.

We observe three periods in the development of the
churches of Barata and the vicinity. During the fifth to the
seventh century, we have churches in the lower city, and a
group of monasteries high on the hills above the city. From
A.D. 700-850 we trace the destruction of the lower city by
the Arabs, and the formation of the principal group of
monasteries into a fortified town. Between 850 and 1070
occurred the revival of the lower city, as the Arabs were
repelled and the danger which had driven the people of
Barata into the safe obscurity of the mountains diminished
and came to an end. Then the people began to rebuild in
the lower ground the ancient city, which now lies a ruined
town of the period 850-1070. Several of the largest churches
which had fallen into ruins were then restored and remodelled ;
and it is still possible to trace the changes which were made
in order to repair as quickly as possible the shell of the old
buildings. Some of the smaller churches perhaps remained
standing, having survived the destruction wrought by the
Arabs and perhaps by earthquakes. But the majority of the
churches which the traveller surveys were probably built
from the foundations in the ninth or tenth century. The
city was now of smaller extent, and at least one church
seems to have been left unrepaired on the western side of
the town.

A deterioration in the builder's art is now manifest. The
churches were built on good old plans ; but the work was
carried out rudely and probably in great haste ; yet the haste
is rather that of carelessness than of urgent need. There
are no signs of loving desire to make the work as good and

1 62 IV. The Orthodox Church

rich as possible. We cannot, indeed, say how far colour may
have been employed to supplement the strictly architectural
work ; but the style is indisputably rather mean in character.
The late churches produce the general impression of a de-
generating people, a dying civilisation, an epoch of ignorance,
and an Empire going to ruin.

Yet, with all their faults, even these late buildings retain
for the most part a certain dignity and an effective simplicity.
The tradition of the old Byzantine architecture was preserved
in this sequestered nook, so long as the Imperial government
maintained itself. It was only when the Empire shrank to
narrower limits, and Lycaonia was left to the Turks, that
the dignity of the Imperial Church was lost, and its places
of worship show themselves plainly to be the meeting-
places of a servile population.

What was good in the late architecture was traditional,
surviving from an older time. What was bad in it was
contributed by the age when the work was executed. The
decay of true architectural feeling corresponded to decay in
the civilisation of the period. The people were dominated
by ecclesiastical interests. Monasteries multiplied all over
the mountain ; and much of the land must have belonged
to these foundations, and so been withdrawn from the service
of the State. Patriotism could not survive in such an atmo-
sphere ; and there is no reason to think that the Imperial
government either tried or deserved to rouse a national and
loyal spirit, for it was becoming steadily more oriental, more
despotic and more rigid. But the major part of the blame
for the national decay must be laid on the Orthodox Church.
The nation had been delivered over to its care. It had
long been supreme and its authority unquestioned. The
result was that art and learning and education were dead,

in the Byzantine Empire 163

and the monasteries were left. The Orthodox Church had
allied itself with autocracy against the people, and with the
superstitious mob against the heretics and the thinkers. Its
triumph meant the ruin of the nation and the degradation
of higher morality and intellect and Christianity and art.
In our excavations, never deep, we never found any article
worth picking up off the ground.

The city lived on its past. All that was good in it was
inherited. The mountains of Barata, now called Kara-Dagh,
the Black-Mountain, must have been in ancient time the
summer sanatorium of the Lycaonian plain. Owing to their
height the climate is delightful. The soil is very fertile,
and, being volcanic, is specially suited for vines. Many
kinds of fruit trees also were cultivated. Water is not
plentiful, but there are several springs of remarkably good
water. The needs of agriculture and viticulture were met
by a wonderfully elaborate system of storing the rain and
the melted snows of winter. The mountain had been won
for the use of man by long labour and by great skill.1 The
inheritance from past civilisation, the traditional agriculture
and industry, was preserved just so far as to maintain the
works of former time ; and a high standard of material
comfort still reigned in the mountain. The delightful air
could not be ruined. The water supply, bountifully provided
in early time, was cared for and maintained in good order.
The vines grew generously on the volcanic soil of the hill-
sides. Whatever else failed, the wine-presses, which we
found in numbers, were still trodden, the harvests were still
reaped, and the fruit still gathered from the trees.

The site of this ancient city is now the most inhospitable
to travellers in the whole of Lycaonia. There is no water
1 On this subject see the following paper.

164 IV. The Orthodox Church

except filthy half-poisonous puddles stored in the ancient
cisterns, and he who drinks runs the risk of death. The
vines have almost entirely disappeared, the orchards remain
only in a few trees run wild. There is hardly any cultiva-
tion. The water runs rapidly off the steep slopes of the
mountain, and is of no benefit to agriculture except in the
lowest part of the little sheltered valley where the city was
built. The wealth, the abundance of crops, the fertility of
the soil, the vines that grew rich on the sides of these vol-
canic hills, the water stored up by a series of dams in every
ravine and channel, the drinking water brought to the city
from fountains at a distance — all these were produced by the
labour of men, guided and ordered by the wisdom of the
Divine power. It was not through the high education of the
individual that those great results in engineering and agri-
culture and the use of the earth generally were gained. It
was through the guiding power of their religion. The
Goddess herself, the Mother Earth, taught her children ; as
she gave them birth and life and nourishment, so she showed
them how to use the things that she tendered to the use of
man. The religion was agricultural and economic ; and its
rules and practices were the annual cycle of events in the
industrial year.1

In this way that ancient religion acquired an extraordinarily
strong hold on the simple minds of a little-educated popula-
tion. In their religion lay their sole education ; but it pre-
scribed to them all the wisdom and the conduct that they
needed for a prosperous agricultural life. The hold which it
possessed on their minds lasted through the centuries that
followed, when new rulers and strange religions became
dominant in the land. The old holy places, perhaps also
1 On this see the following paper.

PLATE XIX.

Church No. 32 at Deghile, looking from S.E. : North Arcades of the Nave : Chamber,
South Extension of Narthex, on the left: Monastery Halls behind on left.

PLATE XX.

Church No. 5 at Bin-Bir-Kilisse, Apse and South Arcades of the Nave.
To face p. 164. See pp. 155-161.

in the Byzantine Empire 165

the old religious customs to some extent, imposed themselves
on the Christians of the Byzantine time ; and it is not easy
to see any great or deep difference between the Byzantine
saints and the Divine figures who surrounded the principal
deity in the early religion.

Such was the heritage which fell to the lot of the Chris-
tian population of Barata. They were heirs to a prosperity
gained by industry and knowledge and science. They were
heirs also to a religious belief deep engrained in their hearts
through generations, a reverence for the religion to whose
teaching they owed the beginning and the foundations of
their prosperity : they owed to it also the conservation of
their prosperity, for those numerous engineering works had
to be kept in good repair, and we must suppose that this
duty also was part of the ritual of the early religion. The
deity who taught them became an inalienable part of the
national mind and temperament ; and the Christians could
not get free from their heritage of belief and reverence,1 nor
would it have been right to force them to throw off all their
inherited ideas, fixed in their nature through countless
generations.

When the churches and the epitaphs engraved on many of
them are regarded in chronological order, it is apparent that
they show a reversion to the simplest ancient belief about
the grave. Just as the ancient grave was a temple, the home
of the dead, who is a god identified with and partly merged
in the supreme deity, so in this late Christian period the
church is, so to say, the sepulchral monument. The one
great religious duty, alike in this late time and in the oldest
period, was to prepare a grave, and the grave was a sanctuary.
No trace remained, so far as we can observe, of the idea that

1 See Pauline and other Studies, p. 136 ff.

1 66 IV. The Orthodox Church

the church was a place of instruction in moral duty and re-
ligious thought ; the church was in itself holy, and it was a
duty supreme above every other — so far as remains show —
to build a grave-church.

The history of this city thus seems to end where it began ;
and yet through all the degradation the Orthodox Church is
not dead. It still maintains the Hellenic unity.

The Imperial Church lives, and while it lives the Imperial
unity is not dead, but only asleep. It is like the old German
Kaiser Barbarossa, who led his army of the great Crusade
from the Hellespont to Cilicia, triumphing over every diffi-
culty with marvellous skill and tenacity of purpose, to disap-
pear from the eyes of men in the waters of the Calycadnos :
but the creative imagination of popular belief knew that he
is not dead, that he waits the moment and the signal to re-
appear among men. So it is with Hellenism as a world-
power. It may revive : the Church has always to be
reckoned with as a possibility in the future. Asia has in
store as great issues and as great surprises for the western
world in the future as she has often produced in the past.

And since I have mentioned the Kaiser of romance and
the Crusade that he led across Asia Minor, I may venture,
in the last words addressed to the Historical Congress in the
German Capital, to recall the new German Crusade which is
conducting another march across the same land. It is no
more an army of mail-clad warriors. It is an army of en-
gineers and workmen. At Dorylaion, where the first
Crusade fought its first great battle, at Ikonion, where Bar-
barossa gained his greatest victory, you find now large German
workshops and German hotels. This new Crusade moves
more slowly than the army of Barbarossa ; but it moves more
surely. It has surmounted difficulties as great as those which

in the Byzantine Empire 167

Kaiser Friederich met. It has yet other even greater diffi-
culties to encounter. It has to accommodate its organisation
to the people of the land, and give form to itself as part of
the national resources.

The historian must regard with the keenest attention this
great historical development. He must admire the fore-
thought and the patient tenacity with which every obstacle is
provided for and overcome, and he watches with interest how
the arrangement with the Orthodox Church and the power
of the new Hellenism will be concluded. For myself, as I
have loved on many journeys to trace step by step the vic-
torious march of the old German Kaiser, and as I have with
keenest interest and growing admiration watched every stage
from the beginning of this new Crusade, so I look forward
to observing on what terms and in what spirit the new Cru-
saders will meet — as they must inevitably at some time meet
—the force of the old Imperial Church.

NOTE. — I take this opportunity of supplying an omis-
sion in my Cities of St. Paul, due to lapse of memory in
finishing the book amid the many pressing duties in the
opening month of University classes, October, 1907.

On the native religion of Lystra the published monuments
throw no light. They refer only to the religion of the
Roman Colonia, mentioning the worship of Ares and of the
Emperor. Fig. 5, p. 216, sets before us one aspect of the
native religion. It is a very small relief, about eighteen
inches high ; the surface is much broken, and the work, even
if it had been well preserved, is of the rudest character.
Photographs of the worn flat surface taken in 1901 and
1907 are too faint for reproduction. The stone sets before
us the local god, protector of the flocks, which must have
been a chief source of the city's prosperity. The river

1 68 IV. The Orthodox Church

valleys beside the city are rich arable land, but most of the
territory consists of low undulating hilly ground suited for
pasturage. There is therefore a sheep beside the platform
on which the god stands. He is marked by the lustral
branch in his right hand as the god of purification — an im-
portant and constant feature of the Anatolian god. His
left hand reaches down towards an altar in the shape of a
table (compare the shape of the Hittite Lycaonian altar,
frontispiece to my Studies in the History of the Eastern
Provinces)-, but this part is so broken that the action is
uncertain. The nature of the Anatolian god, as revealer to
men of the ritual that should be observed on his own altar,
is described in the Letters to the Seven Churches, p. 64.

The inscription states the name of the god and the oc-
casion of the dedication. It began with the word "con-
secrated," now lost. " [Aur. ?] Neon C . . . . onianos, son of
Dionysius, [consecrated] the (statue of) Apollo to the Tribe
(called) Holy Thiasos, a vow ".

The Thiasos was the company of worshippers of the god ;
and the fact that it was one of the city Tribes is highly im-
portant. It was, doubtless, a Tribe large in numbers, in-
cluding most of the native population. The dedicator bears
a Hellenic (perhaps also a Roman) name, and he applies a
Hellenic name to the god. He therefore belonged to the
Hellenes, who were a part of the Lystran population (as, e.g.^
Timothy's father). The god is here assimilated to Apollo
as the sheep god, and the god of purification ; but the
identification with Zeus as the supreme god was equally
suitable. A similar conception of the divine nature on the
plateau of Asia Minor is elsewhere called Zeus Galaktinos,
the milk-god. He is the Zeus-before-the-city of Lystra.

THE PEASANT GOD :

THE CREATION, DESTRUCTION AND RESTORATION OF
AGRICULTURE IN ASIA MINOR.

V.
THE PEASANT GOD:

THE CREATION, DESTRUCTION AND RESTORATION OF
AGRICULTURE IN ASIA MINOR.1

[The following words, published a year after this article appeared in the
Contemporary Review, express the central thought of my article so exactly
from a totally different point of view, that I may be permitted to quote them
as a motto : —

THUS THE MEN OF INSPIRATION OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY, THE
CHAUCERS AND THE LANGLANDS, SAW IN THE TYPICAL AGRICULTURAL

LABOURER THE GREAT MORAL FIGURE OF THEIR WORLD. — Rd. Heath in Con-

temp. Rev., Jan., 1907, p. 84.]

WHERE the mountains of Taurus rise sharp and high from
the southern edge of the level plains of the great central
plateau of Asia Minor, and near the point — vague and never
strictly defined on that flat, featureless land — where Lycaonia
and Cappadocia meet, there is a narrow well-wooded glen
which runs up two or three miles southwards into the
mountains. It ends in a theatre-shaped hollow, at the back
of which the rocky sides of Taurus tower almost perpendicu-
larly for some thousands of feet. At the foot of the cliffs is
the source of a stream which gushes forth in many springs
from the rock with a loud noise that almost drowns the
human voice. Strangers find it difficult there to converse
with one another, and the speaker has to put his mouth near
the ear of his auditor. The people of the tiny village of
Ibriz, near the head of the glen, when they come to the

1 This paper is the enlargement of a lecture delivered before the Geographical
Section of the British Association at York, August, 1906.

(171)

172 V. The Peasant God

springs, talk in a high-pitched voice, which is heard across
the continuous, monotonous roar of the tumbling water.

A river flows rapidly down the steep glen from the source,
and out into the plain, where it transforms this tract of the
arid, bare, burnt-up plateau into a garden, as rills of its water
are diverted into hundreds of little irrigation channels. It
turns north-west and west, watched over by a great ruined
castle perched high on a hill two miles north of the mouth
of the glen, a hill at the western end of a long spur of Taurus.
This is the "strong Castle of Hirakla," as the Arabs called
it, Herakleia of the Greeks, which is described by an Arab
poet, detained or imprisoned in the Byzantine country, as one
of the obstacles that intervene between him and his lady ; " O
thou who art separated from me by the Roman mountains
and their steeps, by the twin fords of the Sarus, by the Pass
(i.e., the Cilician Gates) which interrupts the way, by Tyana
of the frontier, and by Hirakla". Past this great castle
(which, lying off the ordinary road, was never noticed by any
traveller, until in 1891 my wife and I crossed the hills late
one evening and passed close under its walls) the river flows
on five miles, traverses the wretched town of mud-hovels
called Eregli,1 which has replaced the old city and bishopric
— at last about 1060-64 glorified into an archbishopric — of
Kybistra, then turns south of west, and after a few miles
more flows into the White Lake, Ak-Giol, a considerable

1 Eregli is now reviving, as it is practically the terminus (for the time) of
the Bagdad Railway: the actual rail-head is out in the plain at Bulgurlar, a
Turkmen hamlet, five kilometres beyond Eregli, and is likely to remain so for
some time [1906: it remains to be seen whether the agreement concluded in
1908 between the Porte and the association of German Banks which is pushing
the Bagdad Railway will soon begin to be carried into effect. Advance beyond
Bulgurlar implies an energetic effort to carry the railway over or through the
Taurus. Bulgurlar is the point where the connection with Tyana, Nigde,
Kaisari and the north-east generally, is most convenient.]

Agriculture in Asia Minor 173

body of water in some seasons, in others dwindling to a large
pond bordered by great marshes. The lake at its south-
western end approaches the Taurus mountains, and when
the water is high empties itself through a short channel into
a great circular hole under the rock wall of Taurus, and thus
is received back into the divine mountain from which it
came.

The river shadows forth in its course the life of man, as
the old Anatolian religion conceived it ; from God it comes,
and to God it returns in the end. Nature, as that religion
understood it, was in all its various phenomena expressing
over and over again the one great truth — the life of God is
the life of nature and the life of man.

The source of this river is still called, like others of the
most strikingly beneficent springs of Asia Minor, by the
expressive name " God has given," Huda-verdi. Never was
a case in which the gift of God was more clearly declared, or
the immediate presence and permanent beneficence of God
more manifest. The river is given to transform this corner
of the dry land into a fertile garden, and as soon as its work
is done, it is received back into the rich bosom of the Great
Mother Earth.

It has never been my good fortune to see the phenomenon
of the disappearance of the river beneath the mountains at
its end. The lake has been too low on the two occasions
when I have passed that way. The main road from the
west by Iconium to the Cilician Gates and Syria crosses the
last part of the river channel by a rickety wooden bridge.1
The great hole in the ground at the foot of the mountains
gaped close beside us. Tombs cut in the rock walls attested
the desire of the ancient population to lie in death at this
1 The bridge may have been improved since we last saw it in 1891.

174 V. The Peasant God

holy place. But the stream was dry, the graves were empty,
and the country here was uninhabited and desert.

On the rock near the sources of Huda-verdi, on a large
space prepared to receive it,1 the ancient religion expressed
by the most striking monument in all Anatolia the truth of
life, as it was shown manifestly in this holy place. There on
the rock stands the king of the land, as the representative of
the whole people. He is dressed in magnificent embroidered
robes ; he is wealthy, great and tall (about nine feet in height),
fit representative of a rich and prosperous population ; and he
stands with hands raised in front of his face, adoring the
present god. The god is a gigantic figure, nearly twice as
large as the king. He holds in his hands the gifts which he
offers to men, the corn and the grapes. At his feet is an
implement, which seems to represent a small rude plough.
He is dressed in a short tunic, simple and unadorned, girt
with a broad girdle, with bare knees, his feet covered with
thick-soled boots which reach up the leg far enough to
protect the ankles and the lower part of the calves. The
upper part of the boots consists of two flaps at back and
front, and the fastening is by a string which is twisted a good
many times round to hold the flaps together and keep the
boots in place. Everything is of the plainest kind. The
god wears the minimum of clothing, and that of the simplest.
The belt is worked in zones of simple line-pattern, chiefly
zig-zag ; in that country some simple kind of ornamentation
is and was almost universally used ; even " the coarsest sacks
bear ornamental patterns, and the very paper in which

1 A second monument of the same character and showing the same subject,
in poorer preservation, was discovered by Mrs. Doughty Wylie in 1906. It is
about 300 feet higher up the mountain side, and on a shelf of the steep hillside
close to it stands a Byzantine church, an interesting proof that the pre-
Christianity sanctity lasted through the Christian times : see p. 158.

PLATE XXI.

To face p. 174.

The Peasant-God at Ibriz.

Agriculture in Asia Minor 175

shopkeepers wrap their parcels is often adorned with
coloured patterns ".*

The peasant from the neighbouring village who conducts
the travellers to the Huda-verdi source wears clothing almost
exactly the same in style as the god's, the tunic, the boots
and the belt. Little has changed here. Your guide proves
to you the nature of the god. He is the peasant-god, the
toiling, simple agriculturist, living by the work of his hands,
and making wealth and prosperity for the country and its
kings and great men. The kings have come and gone,
nothing remains of them and their work. The peasant is
eternal and unchangeable. You feel that there was a large
foundation of truth and wisdom in the religion which so
correctly gauged the relative importance of the king and the
peasant, and anticipated Carlyle in his philosophy of clothes,
giving the outward distinction of show and dress to the king,
an ephemeral personage, and assigning to the peasant the
real distinction of work and of service to mankind and of the
gifts which he bestows on the world, the corn and the wine.

One part of the clothing differs. The head-dress marks
the god. He wears authority on his head, just as St. Paul,
in his first letter to the Corinthians xi. 10, says that the veil
on her head is the authority of the woman ; with the veil on
she is in an Oriental land supreme wherever she goes ; with-
out the veil she is a thing of nought, whom any one may
insult with impunity.2 The god shown in the sculpture at

1 Miss Ramsay in Studies in the Art and History of the Eastern Roman
Provinces (Hodder & Stoughton, 1906), p. 21.

2 1 speak of the typical Oriental feeling, where it has not been affected by
knowledge of European customs. Where European ladies have been known,
they are treated respectfully (in some cases with very marked respect in
Turkey); but the earlier missionaries in Turkey found the situation often
very difficult.

176 V. The Peasant God

Ibriz has a high pointed tiara with two horns projecting in
front, the mystic sense and power of which we cannot now
interpret in their full import.

But why is the divine power described on the rock beside
Huda-verdi as the toiling peasant, and not as the joyous river-
god, or as the Goddess-Mother of all life, the Earth herself,
who from her bosom gives forth this bounteous gift to the
world in its need ? The mind of Greece, at such a spot as
this, would have been rilled with the gladness of the loud-
laughing water and the promise of fertility and growth and
prosperous husbandry. The Anatolian mind was generally
rilled with the thought of the divine Mother, the giver of all
things, the ultimate source of all life ; and surely here, if any-
where, her bounty and graciousness are conspicuous. In
her life the god is a mere accidental and secondary personage.
Yet here on the rock the dominant thought is about the
work of men, symbolised by the toiling god, subduer of the
waste and unprofitable places. Not the free gift of the
divine nature, but the labour that must be applied by man
to make that gift profitable, stands graven on that great
monument. The primary personage of the divine nature,
the goddess, is away in the background, and the secondary
personage, the god, monopolises the scene.

Now it is the law of the world that, while the divine power
gives rain and fruitful seasons, there is an annual cycle of
work by the hands of man which must be applied to plough,
to sow and to reap. But that work is always understood as
the ordinary course of life ; it is not a toil, but a pleasure ; it
is the mere effort of raising to the lips the food which the
god has bestowed ; it constitutes the permanent enjoyment
of the bounty of God, extending over the year and the whole
life. The man who regards the regular .operations of

Agriculture in Asia Minor 177

husbandry as toil and labour, undertaken solely with a view
to the distant harvest, is not a true agriculturist. The
true agriculturist is he who takes the work of the year as
the cycle of a happy life, and does each part of the year's
duties with a heart full of gratitude to the God who has
permitted him to do this duty. So far as this aspect of
labour is concerned, the rock-sculpture of Ibriz might be
expected to portray the pure bounty of the beneficent god,
who pours forth the life-giving and wealth-producing water
for the happiness of man. A deeper thought lay in the mind
of the sculptor who portrayed that scene on the rock at
Ibriz. This is the religious problem of the sculpture; and
the answer to this problem lays open a far deeper view into
the heart of the old Anatolian religion than the writer
ever before was able to attain.

The early religion of Anatolia, often called the Phrygian
religion — a name which is historically incorrect, for the
Phrygians were a mere body of intruders from Europe, who
adopted the religion of the land into which they had come
as strangers somewhere about a thousand years before Christ,
that ancient religion which was supreme in the country in
the second and third millenniums B.C., and the date of whose
origin cannot even be guessed at x — embodied in a series of
rules and ceremonial practices the past experience and ac-
cumulated wisdom of the race. In regard to agriculture, the
domestication and breeding of animals, the cultivation of
valuable trees like the olive and the vine, sanitation, the
rights of society as against the individual, the law of property
and boundaries, the right of free intercourse and markets,
in short, the whole life of society, the customs which had
been approved as salutary by the collective and growing

1 " Religion of Asia Minor" in Hastings' Diet. Bib., V., p. no ff.
12

178 V. The Peasant God

wisdom of the race, were taught as obligatory rules and
enforced by religious authority : the offender who trespassed
against any of those rules was chastised by the god. The
divine power tenders to the use of man all its gifts ; but
they must be won by knowledge and by work. The know-
ledge, learned slowly by the experience of generations, was
regarded in the religion as revealed by the goddess, the
Great Mother of all life, who bore and nourished, warned
and taught, directed and chastised, all her people, and in the
end receives them all back to her kindly bosom. Her
religion set forth in a body of wise rules and precepts all
the knowledge which was needed in ordinary circumstances.
Her people had only to obey and to be faithful. In excep-
tional circumstances the Great Mother was ready to give
special advice through her prophets and in dreams. She
punished inexorably all infractions of her law, by misfortune,
by sickness, and above all by fever, that strange malady
which burns up the strength and the life by direct effort of
the divine power without any definite or visible affection of
any part of the body. Such was the penalty inflicted on
every individual transgressor of the law ; and confessions of
guilt, with warnings as to the penalties that followed guilt,
were inscribed on tablets and put up publicly at the temples
of the goddess,1 where the traveller of the present day may
read them and publish them to a wider public than was
dreamed of by the first authors. Not merely was the
individual punished. The community as a whole was
punished by the loss of prosperity, of security and ulti-
mately of its very existence, if the law was persistently
broken ; and to safeguard it the religious sanction was strict
and inexorable.

1 Many examples in Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, i., pp. 134 ff., 147 ff.

Agriculture in Asia Minor 179

Now in the beginning it was the labour of generations of
the working peasants that redeemed the soil from its original
unproductiveness ; and this god on the rock at Ibriz stands
for the work that had given the soil to agriculture. There
is no question in Anatolia of a natural soil which has simply
to be cultivated in order to produce. The soil originally
was waste and valueless. A vast amount of toil and skill
had to be applied before the land could begin to be cultivated.
The rock-sculpture bears witness to one of those great
engineering works that lie away back at the beginning of
agriculture and history. All over the Eastern Mediterranean
lands — probably round the Central and Western Mediter-
ranean also, if we had any records — the reclamation of the
soil from waste to fertility was regarded as the work of
a toiling god, bound to service under a stern master or king,
who has in some way got a hold over him and can compel
him to a labour in itself ungrateful and performed only
under compulsion. Hercules was the commonest name for
that toiling god. Hercules drained the marsh of Lerna with
its fifty heads of water, and gave to men the richest part of
the valley of Argos. Hercules cut the passage through the
mountains by which the lake imprisoned in the land-locked
vale of Stymphalos was enabled to flow away and the fertile
soil was made available for the happy husbandman.

It was the forethought and knowledge displayed in those
great engineering works that seemed to the ancient mind to
be divine. The god condescended to work as a toiling peas-
ant and won for the use of men this far-off good, which human
skill alone could not have foreseen, and thus he gave to man
in free gift the soil out of which should come the corn and
the wine. But to understand all that is implied in this, one
has to look at the country as it is at the present day, when

180 V. The Peasant God

it has to a large extent gone back to the state of nature and
of waste land. How has this come about, and what is the
cure?

Elsewhere the present writer has described the character
of the Mohammedan conquest of Asia Minor.1 The Saracens,
a congeries of various Asiatic races, led by the Arabs, at-
tempted it, and failed completely. During three centuries
of war they never permanently held any land beyond Taurus
except what their armies actually covered.2 The Turks,
first the Seljuk Turks and afterwards the Osmanli, achieved
what the Saracens could not do ; and they succeeded only
by breaking up the fabric of the superior society and reducing
it to disconnected atoms. This was not done consciously or
intentionally. The Turks did not wish to destroy the in-
dustry and wealth of the country ; the intention of the Sul-
tans was to profit by its prosperity. The ruin was the work
of the Nomads, who followed close after the irruption of the
Turkish armies.

The distinction between those Nomads — Turkmen, Yuruk,
Avshahr, etc., as the traveller still sees them — and the Turks
proper, who now call themselves Osmanli, was as evident to
the Byzantine authorities in the twelfth century as it is to-
day, or was fifty years ago. But the real nature of the
distinction and the origin of the various tribes are obscure,
and so far as I know uninvestigated. Those tribes are de-
scribed under the names of Nomads or Turkmens by Anna
Comnena, Nicetas of Khonai and Joannes Cinnamus. They
evidently followed close on the first Turkish armies of in-
vasion ; and their relation to the soldiers of those armies is

1 See especially a paper on the war of Moslem and Christian for the posses-
sion of Asia Minor, in Studies in the History and Art of the Eastern Roman
Provinces, p. 281 ff.

2 See in the present volume, p. 116.

Agriculture in Asia Minor 181

difficult to determine. That is one of the many questions
which await the historian of the Turkish conquest of Asia
Minor. Were those Nomads the offspring of the first in-
vaders in A.D. 1070, who maintained in Asia Minor their
national way of life as they had led it in Central Asia, while
the Turks of the cities were a people mixed of the old popu-
lation turned Moslem with part of the invading armies ?

The story of the Seljuk conquest has still to be written ;
for Gibbon's generalisations are brilliant and unsatisfactory,
while Sir H. Howorth's excellent essay is just sufficient to
make us long for a detailed study according to localities.
It is abundantly clear that, after their first inroads and their
first great victory at Manzikert, the loose and ill-organised
Turkish armies were not able to meet in fair fight and on
even terms a Byzantine army, if the latter was led with any
degree of prudence and skill.1 Yet the Roman civilisation,
which had resisted three centuries of constant Arab raids
and numerous Arab victories, died out before the undis-
ciplined Seljuk power. It was the Nomads who destroyed
it against the wishes and intentions of the Seljuk govern-
ment, whose enemies they very quickly became.

The Nomads remain now generally quite apart from the
Osmanli or Turks, though the Osmanli were a mere Nomad
tribe as late as A.D. 1300; and they continued practically
independent of the Turkish rule until late in the nineteenth
century, some of them till the twentieth century. I have in
my own short experience come in contact with several

1 1 speak only of the Seljuks, not of the Osmanli or Ottoman Turks, whose
Janissaries were more dangerous than the best forces in Europe ; but the
Janissaries were the tax levied in brain and muscle on the Christians. The
Seljuk victories were gained in the decay of the empire ; but John Comnenus
prepared a revival of Byzantine power, which was wasted by the rash folly of
Manuel in the Pisidian rout (Studies in the History of the Eastern Provinces,
P- 235).

1 82 V. The Peasant God

examples of the recent subjugation of tribes whom travellers
a little older describe as independent. One case only out of
several that have come under my own notice may be described.

In the Ouzoun Yaila, the long high-lying plains between
the south-eastern affluents of the Halys and the most
westerly affluents of the Euphrates (especially the Tokhma-
Su), the nomad Avshahr were supreme and free until about
1866. Then great numbers of Circassian refugees entered
Turkey, at the invitation of the Government, fleeing from
their homes which had been conquered by Russia. The first
act in the new drama was that the Turkish officials, charged
with the duty of settling the immigrants in this sparsely
populated land, plundered those wretched and poverty-
stricken refugees of everything that they had brought with
them. The next was to let them fight with the former in-
habitants for land — a fight that has been going on in a
smouldering way ever since. A large body of Circassians
was brought to the borders of the Ouzoun Yaila, and en-
couraged to take possession of the land. A regular war
ensued. The ill-armed Avshahr were defeated and driven
into the mountains of the Anti-Taurus ; and the plains of the
Ouzoun Yaila are now inhabited by Circassians.

Those Nomads, the real conquerors of the land of Ana-
tolia, are still in some respects the most interesting people
in the country, though great efforts have been made in the
last fifteen or twenty years to force them to settle down by
seizing their beasts of burden and preventing their customary
annual migrations. Much suffering has been caused to the
present generation, and much injustice has been done to in-
dividuals ; but it must be allowed that the migrations were
not compatible with order and industry. The process has
been an interesting one to watch. Every year I notice new

Agriculture in Asia Minor 183

villages, where formerly were only nomad encampments.
The Peasant-God is slowly beginning to work. It is a hard
task, unwillingly undertaken, at the command of a stern task-
master. The life of the nomad, a perpetual holiday, has to
be exchanged for this toil of reclamation ; and it will be a
slow and painful process to bring back the land into its
former state of high cultivation. These amateur agriculturists
have no agricultural tradition, no store of knowledge and
method accumulated through generations and centuries, few
implements and no practice in using them. The women
mainly do the work. If a modern artist arises to express in
sculpture or painting the history of the re-creation of agri-
culture, he will have to change the sex of the deity who stands
for the toil expended by mankind in this transformation.1
It is no longer the goddess who teaches and gives counsel
and practises the household arts, and the god who does the
field labour. The woman works in the field, and there are
no household arts. It was pathetic, when we spent some
nights in nomad Kurd encampments on the central Anatolian
plains, to see the envy and admiration with which the women
looked at and handled the few needles and simple articles
for the household and the toilet which my wife had with her.
As the nomads do not seclude their women, I was a witness
of some interesting scenes and phases of feminine nature.
We were specially struck with what one might almost call
the rage of envy with which one handsome young woman
looked on and refused to touch; never have I seen such

1 1 speak only of the Turkish and Nomad population. The Circassian
women are not so hard- worked, though Turkish custom is affecting the immi-
grants. Among the Christians the women do the house-work and practise the
household arts and go out dressed in their best clothes on Sundays and
holidays, and are free from all but the lighter field-labour. So also among the
Albanians so far as I have seen them.

184 V. The Peasant God

rebelliousness against the tyranny of fate as glittered in her
eyes. She wanted the things for herself: she would not
admire them when they belonged to another. No wonder
that the son of a Kurdish Bey in a village of the Anti-
Taurus once said to us, " all our men are thieves ". Thus
the various races of Nomads stand opposed to the settled
Mohammedan population of the towns and villages at the
present day.

The picture which the Byzantine writers set before us of
the conquest by the nomads has been briefly described else-
where by the writer ; l " the nomad Turkmens spread over the
face of the land ; the soil passed out of cultivation ; the
population decreased ; the old Christian cities (which had not
lost their former industries) were isolated from each other
by a sea of wandering tribes ; intercourse, and consequently
trade and manufactures, were to a great extent destroyed. . . .
Thus was accomplished the degeneration from civilised to
barbarian society, a process which it would be instructive to
study in detail, but which can be summed up in one word,
the nomadisation of Asia Minor." The detailed study
which is hinted at in the last sentence would be the work of
a lifetime ; ,but a sketch of the process, so far as during ten
years of further study it has become clearer to me, may here
be given.

It is almost literally the case that the flood of nomadism
drowned out the old civilised society and submerged the land.
The process was gradual. The cities were first of all isolated
from one another. They remained as islands in the sea of
nomadism, they were still inhabited by a manufacturing and

1 Impressions of Turkey, p. 103 (with some verbal changes). The progress
of the Nomads in the western regions of Asia Minor is described in Cities and
Bishoprics of Phrygia, i.,pp. 16 f., 27 ff., 299 if. ; ii., pp. 372 f., 447, 598, 695.

Agriculture in Asia Minor 185

trading population, which the Seljuk Turks allowed and even
encouraged. But trade implies communication, facilities for
travel, opportunities for exchange. In a civilised society
like that of the Roman Empire no city had been self-suffi-
cient, all had depended on one another. The life-blood of a
civilised State must circulate freely through the whole body.
If the circulation is impeded, the body languishes and dies.

That was now the case in Anatolia. The cities were
isolated from one another by the "estranging sea" of
nomadism. Across this sea, slowly and always exposed to
the attacks of the nomads, especially of course at night,
voyaged caravans, seeking to maintain the necessary circula-
tion of the life-blood, the communication between city and
city. To make these voyages safer the Seljuk Sultans built
many great khans along the principal roads that radiated
from their capital, Konia ; and those buildings, in many cases
magnificent both in scale and in architecture, rank among
the most impressive features of modern Anatolia, and
deserve notice, along with the beautiful mosques, colleges
(medresse) and tombs, as evidence of the remarkable develop-
ment of architectural art in the Seljuk period.

Some recent German travellers have described those great
khans as a proof of the high level of civilisation on which the
Seljuk State stood. One of the latest of them expresses the
opinion that the Seljuk khans have taken the place of similar
large Roman and Byzantine buildings, and conserve in their
plan, which is everywhere practically the same, the accepted
method of those older hotels on the Roman roads. There is
a large element of truth in part of this opinion, but part needs
serious modification. As those same travellers remark, the
large Seljuk khans resemble fortresses, with their massive
walls, unbroken by any opening except slits which are loop-

1 86 V. The Peasant God

holes rather than windows, and their single, well-protected
entrance. If there were similar buildings along the Roman
roads, how comes it that not a trace has ever been found of
them ? The truth is, that such buildings were not wanted
where travelling was fairly safe, as it was in the Roman
Empire. The inns and mansiones of the Empire were build-
ings of a humbler and less lasting character. Fortresses
were not needed. Private enterprise was sufficient to main-
tain hotels or inns adequate to the needs of travellers. All
that is known of them suggests that they were of a humble
character, squalid, dirty and vicious,1 and that wealthier
travellers avoided them and took their own equipment In
a few cases, on the summit of high passes across the
mountains, buildings of a more permanent kind were needed,
as, e.g., at the summit of the great Taurus pass just above
the Cilician Gates ; and it is noteworthy that at this point
was the ancient Panhormos, whose name shows it to have
been a large inn. Defensive strength would be of some im-
portance here among the mountains, and a guardhouse and
harbour of refuge, Panhormos, was established on the sum-
mit, which was often deeply covered with snow in winter.

The Seljuk khans bear witness to the high development
of art, but to a very unsound condition of society and govern-
ment, in the Seljuk State. Such great, fortress-like buildings
were not needed on the Roman roads and therefore were not
built then. In the Seljuk time they were necessary, be-
cause the caravans, by whichf alone trade and communication
were kept up between the cities, required shelter at night
and protection from the nomads. The cities were islets in
the ocean of nomadism ; and the khans were harbours of
refuge at short intervals in the dangerous voyage from city

1 Pauline and other Studies, p. 385.

Agriculture in Asia Minor 187

to city. Peace began to reign on the roads only when com-
munication ceased, when there were no travellers to rob and
no trade to plunder.

As for the model on which the khans of the Seljuks were
built, I should, like Dr. Sarre, find it in an old Anatolian
style of building ; but not in hotels of the Roman or Byzan-
tine time. The model was the old class of buildings called
Tetrapyrgia, whose very name reveals their form. They
were farmsteadings of quadrilateral shape, having at the four
corners, towers, which were connected by walls and inner
chambers, enclosing an open quadrangle. They were so
strong that regular military operations were needed to re-
duce them ; * and, given the shape just described, this implies
a construction like the Seljuk khans, with strong outer walls
and a single defensible gateway. The view of Zazadin
Khan 2 near Iconium, given in Plate XV., may serve as a
fair specimen of these buildings.

In those big fortified homesteads lived the large patriarchal
households of the landholders, representatives of the con-
quering caste in a subjugated land, a class which is just
beginning in recent investigation to appear before the view
of history. From those landed families came some of the
leading figures in early Church history, such as Basil of
Caesareia and Gregory of Nyssa. Their history may yet be
traced more completely.

The cities of Turkey, isolated from one another and thus
compelled to be each sufficient for itself, dwindled away.
The old manufactures died, some sooner, some as late as the
middle of the nineteenth century. It was my good fortune

1 As Eumenes had to do (Plutarch, Bum. 8 : Studies in the History of the
Eastern Provinces, p. 373).

2 See below, Article XII., No. 17.

1 88 V. The Peasant God

that we began, my wife and I, to travel just at the end of the
period of decay. We saw the end of the old and the begin-
ning of the new. I remember riding into Konia, once the
greatest and most splendid city of Turkey — of which the
Turkish proverb said, " See all the world, but see Konia " ; it
was as if one were riding through a city of the dead, street
after street seemed empty and solitary, like the enchanted
city in the story of the Arabian Nights. But now Konia is
rising again to be an important, though far from a splendid
city, as the terminus of the Anatolian Railway and beginning
of the Bagdad Railway. Its claims to magnificence are gone ;
the old walls were all torn down about twenty to thirty years
ago ; of the palace only the shapeless core of a tower remains ;
some of the beautiful old mosques are ruinous, some are
patched in the coarsest way, yet even thus many of them
retain enough of the past to be charming. In April, 1904,
we noticed unwonted patches of white colour along the road
from the railway station to the Government house, and on
inquiry learned that the German Ambassador had visited
the city a week before, and the mud walls had all been white-
washed along the road by which he drove to call on the Pasha.
That is the cheap magnificence of the twentieth century in
Asia Minor. One week after the gorgeous pageant there
were still a few traces left of it !

Not merely did trade and manufacture die out. The land
passed out of cultivation, except in so far as was necessary to
feed a dwindling population. Nomads do not cultivate the
ground, but live on their flocks, and only the city population
required to be supported from the tillage of the ground.
Thus a land which had been absolutely the richest in the
world became one of the poorest. I have seen, especially in
Palestine, bare hillsides where could be traced the old terraces,

Agriculture in Asia Minor 189

showing that the hills had once been cultivated to the very
summit; but the terraces were neglected and gradually
broken down, the soil was washed off the hillside, and there
remained either bare rock or a uniform slope too steep to
cultivate, if any cultivator appeared. There are many
stretches of land on the edge of the hills which are now
almost covered with stones washed down from above ; yet
round the villages some scanty cultivation exists, and corn
struggles up amid the stones from a soil which is hardly
visible under them, but which is so fertile that even thus it
can grow a wretched crop to make bread for the villagers.
There are vast plains of splendid soil where you could hardly
see a stone in an acre — pure, rich soil but absolutely sterile
because the water supply has ceased. Where the land has
become so bare and smooth, the rain runs off as soon as it has
fallen, because there is nothing to detain it. The irrigation
channels in that soft, deep soil efface themselves as soon as they
are neglected. Yet there is abundance of water near at hand,
it only needs to be distributed. Over parts of such plain we
rode once, my wife and I, for more than an hour, through
water over two feet deep : in other years I have ridden
repeatedly over the same road, and found the country hard
and dry as a bone that had lain for years in the sun.1

I have seen miles and miles — and know there are many
hundreds of miles — along the coast-land covered with a
growth of wild olive shrubs, where now not a single olive is
produced. All that country was once a great olive garden,
teeming with wealth and population, where now are only a
few black goats' -hair tents in the winter, and hardly a living

1 This refers to the road from Konia to Kara-Bunar and the East generally :
the precise part was west of Ismil. The most direct path from Konia to
Ismil is passable only in the driest season of the year : the ordinary path
keeps well to the north to avoid the inundating waters.

i go V. The Peasant God

soul in the heat of summer. The olive dies out where the
population is Mohammedan. It is the tree of civilisation,
which can flourish only where order and security of tenure
exist. Even in a disorderly land one may sow cereals and
vegetables, the fruit of which may with luck be gathered in
a few months ; but the young olive takes fifteen to eighteen
years to bring in any return, and an outlook over that
length of time is too great for any Mohammedan population.
The reason lies, not in any inherent necessity of Moham-
medanism, but in the fact that no Mohammedan Govern-
ment, except, perhaps, that of the Moors in Spain, has
ever been able to produce the assurance in the minds of
its subjects that property will be secure for so long that
it would be worth while to make an olive plantation.

One example may be given of the contrast between the
wealth of the past and the poverty of recent time. In 1882
I found a column, eleven feet high, covered on one side with
Greek writing, in an upland village near Antioch of Pisidia.
It records a list of subscriptions for patriotic and religious
purposes, made on some occasion about 250 A.D. by a society
which was righting against Christianity.1 The subscriptions
amount to several hundred thousand denarii. The denarius
had considerably depreciated in value at that date since
the time when it was worth a franc; and the exact point
of depreciation which it had reached is uncertain, but it
can hardly have been lower than a thousand to the pound
sterling in amount of metal. The total sum subscribed was
certainly considerable. Twenty years ago you could not find
in the whole village change for a coin of the value of four
shillings. That one example may be taken as a not unfair
measure of the ratio which the wealth of the country in

1 Studies in the History of the Eastern Provinces, pp. 321, 372.

Agriculture in Asia Minor 191

Roman times bears to the wealth of the present day. The
difference is that between a well-cultivated and an ill-culti-
vated country. Four thousand years ago the peasant culti-
vator made the one ; during the last millennium the soldier
and the fanatic have made the other. The peasant cultivator,
with peace and security of tenure, must be called in once
more to repair through 50 or 100 years of patient labour
the damage wrought by war and misgovernment.

Let me once more guard against a possible misunderstand-
ing of my words. There is a considerable amount of land in
Asia Minor which has never passed out of cultivation, and
where the agricultural tradition and experience have been
kept alive. A population of a good many millions had to be
fed out of the produce of the country; and, if the population
is less now, there is more exported than formerly. The best
and most favoured land has remained under cultivation, and
especially near the centres of population. Irrigation has
never ceased and is still practised in certain districts, so that
the essential principles of water-engineering have never been
wholly forgotten. The wheat of the Ushak region is of re-
markably fine quality, and I have been told by several in-
dependent authorities that it is not inferior to the finest in
the world. In 1906, for example, I travelled for an hour on
the Anatolian Railway with a Belgian gentleman of long
experience in the country, and he mentioned that the Ushak
grain commanded a higher price for certain purposes than
even the best Canadian wheat. The Ushak district may be
taken as a fair specimen of the land of the upper plateau.
The figs of the Maeander valley (commonly known as Smyrna
figs, because Smyrna is the harbour of exportation) have
always been prized in commerce. Many other examples
might be quoted to prove what may be expected from the

192 V- The Peasant God

restoration of agriculture over the vast areas where it has
almost entirely ceased.

But the revivification of this almost dead land has begun.
The cities are becoming busier. Industries are reviving.
The nomad, even, is being changed into the husbandman by
a process that will be long and painful.

The reason for the revivification of the country is not the
beginning of good government, for the government is as bad
as ever it was ; government always lags behind the people,
and is forced onward or dragged onward by the growing
education and insistent demands of the nation. The reason
lies in one phrase — the coming of the railways. Communica-
tion is now becoming possible and fairly safe ; the life-blood
is beginning to flow in the new veins ; the body that was
dead has begun to live again. Roads are improved — though
the traveller fresh from Europe would be puzzled to detect
where the improvement lay — and these help to feed the rail-
ways and restore circulation. With communication comes
trade and the revival of old industries or the introduction of
new ones. There has been an immense increase in the pro-
duction of Turkey carpets, as it has become possible to send
them to the coast at remunerative rates. Towns where not
a single carpet-loom existed fifteen years ago have now
hundreds of people engaged in the manufacture. Less than
twenty years ago a friend who was engaged in the carpet
trade, going up the Ottoman Railway as soon as it was
extended to the Lycus valley, was struck by the ornamental
possibilities of large, cheap kerchiefs made at the small town
of Bulladann. He sent home a few specimens ; about three
years later he sent home 70,000 in one year, and others were
also sending them to London and New York. The gather-
ing and export of liquorice root, begun about sixty years

PLATE XXIII.

Zazadin Khan near Konia.

Sec pp. 185-7.

PLATE XXIV.

To face p. 192.

The Gate of the Virgin-Goddess : looking over the Limnai.

Agriculture in Asia Minor 193

ago, rapidly became the largest trade in Turkey. For a
long time it has been sent exclusively to America to sweeten
tobacco ; thus the Tobacco Trust became the sole purchaser ;
and it used its position to seize the entire trade a few years
ago.

In the revivification of Asia Minor the land has to be
brought back into a state fit for cultivation by clearance, by
irrigation, by planting and growing of trees. That means
an expenditure of uncounted millions and a long lapse of
time before any return for that vast expenditure can begin.
Commercially, it is an impossibility. No one would risk his
money in schemes which can at the best only begin to pay
his children or his grandchildren when population has multi-
plied and there is a home market for produce ; and the cost
would be so tremendous that the money could not be raised.
This work cannot be done by money. It can only be done
by the labour of generations of men working and improving
their own land for the benefit of their own families.

Here again I must guard against misconstruction. I do
not make so foolish a statement as that capital cannot be
judiciously used to supplement, direct and facilitate the re-
storation of agriculture, or that capital cannot be used
remuneratively in the districts most favoured by nature,
where irrigation can be restored most easily. In 1891 I saw
a great irrigation channel on the outer sides of Taurus not
very far from Ibriz as the crow flies, but very far distant as
water flows; and we crossed it on horseback, not without
difficulty owing to its depth, at a point high on the hill
underneath the " strong castle of Hirakla ". This channel
was constructed, as I believe, several thousand years ago;
and it carried an immense supply of water many miles to be
dissipated at last in uncultivated lands. In 1902 I saw the

194 V. The Peasant God

same channel utilised in the middle of its course, but farther
away from its source than the point under Hirakla where
we saw and crossed it in 1891, by the Circassian people of a
new village. The villagers had simply broken down the
channel and turned the whole of the water (far too great a
supply) at random over the country, making it difficult for
waggons to travel on the road at the point where the water
crossed it. The waste of abundant water supply at some
points and the dearth generally constitute the problem which
has to be solved. But the elements of a solution are for the
most part present : only one element is entirely wanting, and
that is security of property. There is no guarantee that he
who labours shall profit. Without palace influence and
palace favour no one can gather the fruits of his toil.

It is known, for example, that a good deal is being done
on the soil of Mesopotamia, which has in great part passed
into the possession of the Sultan himself in quite recent
times (as have enormous estates throughout the Turkish
Empire). Here there is security of property. Here the
rapacity of the tax-gatherer does not step in to seize the
fruits of labour, for no taxes are paid on Imperial property :
all the profit belongs to the private revenue of the Sultan,
and the State grows poorer as estate after estate has been
added to his vast possessions. But many exaggerated and
inaccurate reports about the facts in Mesopotamia are current,
and have sometimes found their way into high-class journals
in Europe. The real facts can be learned only by patient
travel in that country, which is unknown to me.

This process of peasant-cultivation has recently been
carried out on a small scale in the neighbourhood of Smyrna,
where European influence is strong, and where the enlightened
administration of Kiamil Pasha has been effective. Plots of

Agriculture in Asia Minor 195

waste land on the hillsides have been given to peasants on
condition that good cultivation is applied to them, and the
result has been a great enlargement of the area of productive
land. This improvement has taken place in spite of the
notorious insecurity of the country, due to the increase of
brigandage caused by the war in Arabia. The soldiers for
that war are drawn mainly from Anatolia. Arabian service
is regarded as equivalent to a sentence of death ; the con-
scripts desert in numbers, and all deserters, as outlaws, take
to the mountains, i.e., become brigands. A brigand must go
where there is the opportunity of earning a livelihood ;
therefore they abound near Smyrna, where there is industry
and money, while the poverty-stricken inner country is fairly
safe.

Among the creators of those vineyards on the hillsides
near Smyrna there existed a knowledge of method and a
tradition of viticulture. The skill gained through the ex-
perience of generations was put into the work of reclamation.
The peasant cultivators in this case were merely the repre-
sentatives for the moment of the eternal peasant, the em-
bodiment of slowly acquired knowledge. The superhuman
power, which is above and independent of the ephemeral
mortal workman, must be brought to bear on the land.
The old artist at Ibriz tells us so in his sculpture. The
peasant-god, the divine nature, that is what reclaims the
soil for the use of mankind. It is a work of the race, not
of the individual.

To knowledge must be added labour, the toil of genera-
tions. Money is here of no avail. This work is antecedent
to money : the foundations have to be made on which
civilised life, with intercommunication, trade, and money as
the common measure of value and the instrument of exchange,

196 V. The Peasant God

may be built up. In the savage state, or to the civilised man
on a desert island, money is valueless, and much building is
needed before it can acquire value.

That truth is sometimes not appreciated in discussions
on this subject. Recently I chanced to read an article in
a popular magazine1 on the crofters in the Highlands of
Scotland, in which the writer proved that the crofter system
was more expensive than the landlord system. Draining
the croft would cost £150, building a house £300. The
crofter would have to pay the bank five per cent, for this
money : the landlord could borrow it at four per cent. The
increased annual burden was fatal to the crofter-system.
The draining and irrigation of the land of Anatolia cost no
money : it cost the work of generations : it was paid by the
lives of men, and not by coin of the realm. The restoration
of agriculture can be made and paid for only in the old way.
Unless the crofter can make personal work serve instead of
money, he and his system are certainly doomed. The
peasant-god had no bank from which to borrow at five per
cent.

Thus we have briefly described how the country of Asia
Minor was made by long hard labour suitable for agriculture,
and how the agriculture was destroyed and the land allowed
in great part to relapse into its primitive state. The restora-
tion of the Anatolian land to agriculture can take place only
in the same way as the creation of agriculture was originally
achieved, by slow patient labour directed by intelligence
through a succession of generations. The process may be
facilitated by utilising the other natural products of the
country, especially the mineral wealth : an increasing popu-
lation will need a larger supply of food. But to the writer

1 Black wood's Magazine, August, 1906.

Agriculture in Asia Minor 197

the special interest of this investigation lies in the connection
with religion. Religion led the way and fixed the rules for
the creation of agriculture ; and it has degenerated along
with the agriculture and civilisation of the land The
connection is apt to escape notice among modern scholars,
because in European countries a widening gulf separates
religion from practical life, and there has thus been induced
a habit of thinking that the history of religion proceeds
apart from and unconnected with the development or de-
terioration of civilisation. But this is a grave error. The
development of a nation's life is in the long run the history
of its religion.

Note. — As bearing on the permanent sanctity attached to
certain sites in Asia Minor through all mutations of the
external form of religion, I use this opportunity of correcting
my description of the sacred place on the Limnai (Cities of
St. Paul) p. 293). This place, still regarded as holy and
made the scene of an annual panegyris in September in
honour of the Virgin Mother of God, was, beyond all
question, once a sanctuary of the Virgin Artemis of the
Limnai. There is at this spot both a small cave high up
in the rock (which here drops steeply down to the lake), and
near it on the shore a very curious great arch of rock,
apparently natural, through which one looks out over the
lake. At the panegyris mass is celebrated in the cave,
which has a rude niche like a roughly hewn apse to the
West, not East ; this apse has been partly destroyed. But
the natural phenomenon of the arch probably originated the
sanctity of the spot.

I am indebted to Miss Gertrude Bell for the description
and for the photograph of the archway, Plate XXIX.

The question arises, whether this natural doorway is the

198 V. The Peasant God

Dipylon, which on one theory was the sacred place of Great
Artemis, the goddess of the Limnai. In the Tekmoreian
inscriptions the sacred ceremony, according to the restoration
of an inscription printed in my paper on the subject,1 took
place in the Dipylon. Now Dipylon strictly implies two
doors ; but it might indicate a temple like that of Janus, a
gateway with its two faces (as stated in Studies in the History
of the Eastern Provinces, p. 349).

1 Studies in the History of the Eastern Provinces, p. 319: e// T]$ 5i7ru]A.<p.
On p. 349, I mentioned another restoration T]£ 8nrv[pct> without eV (which
occurred to me too late to be discussed on p. 319). This restoration is ad-
vocated by Mr. A. J. Reinach (who does not observe that I suggested it) with
weighty but not quite convincing arguments. Perhaps the photograph here
given may turn the scale in favour of the old reading : though after thinking
of 8iir6p<p I long preferred it.

VI.

THE RELIGION OF THE HITTITE
SCULPTURES AT BOGHAZ-KEUI.

VI.

THE RELIGION OF THE HITTITE SCULP-
TURES AT BOGHAZ-KEUI.

[NOTE. — The following paper is left practically as it was
written in the year 1881, with only some slight verbal
changes. The writer had not the opportunity of correcting
the proofs before the paper was published in the Journal of
the Royal Asiatic Society ', 1882. The view which is here
taken of the religion of Asia Minor has not been universally
accepted ; and several scholars would reject the idea that so
important a part in the cultus belonged to the feminine ele-
ment. On the other hand, those who maintain this view
have developed it in much greater detail than'appears in this
short paper. But it seems better to reproduce the original
statement of the writer's views, partly because sentences and
paragraphs from this inaccessible paper have been quoted in
several works, partly because of a recent discovery in Ephesus.
Mr. Cecil Smith, in publishing the remarkable ivory statuettes
found by Mr. Hogarth in the foundations of the ancient temple
of Ephesian Artemis, expresses the opinion 1 that one of them
represents the Eunuch priest of the goddess ; he compares it
with the priest who so frequently appears in the rock-sculp-
tures of Boghaz-Keui, and he supports by new arguments the
interpretation of that figure which is stated in the present
article. The support accorded by so judicious and so com-

1 Archaic Artemisia of Ephesus, p. 173.
(201)

2O2 VI. The Religion of

petent an authority is a sufficient justification for reprinting
a paper written twenty-seven years ago.

This paper contains the germ of many of the writer's
subsequent speculations about early Anatolian religion. It
has been developed, improved, carried out in more detail in
those later speculations ; but it needs no change, for it simply
expresses the facts as they forced themselves once and for
ever on the writer's mind. I do not mean that I would now
maintain in every detail the opinions here expressed ; and I
doubt if I should now have courage to state so positively
the general theory which is here formulated. But at least
nothing has been discovered to make me withdraw from the
rather bold position which I then took up. The paper made
no attempt to explain the sculptures as a whole. Probably,
if it had done so, one would not have been able to reprint it.
But, as that old article was written under the first inspiration
of a visit to the site, and described what I thought I saw in
certain parts of those wonderful sculptures, it may be worth
while to place before the reader the record of the impression
produced by them.

The range of illustration is small, because the writer at
that time had seen hardly any of the Hittite sculptures, and
had had very little practice in estimating the character of
rock-sculpture. The visit to Boghaz-Keui and Euyuk
occurred on the first journey which I made in the interior
of the country, about thirteen months after first landing in
Asia Minor. With twenty-eight years' experience I should
now be much better able to profit by studying the rock-
monuments than I was then. I may recall with deepest
gratitude the debt which I owe to the late General Sir
Charles Wilson for having invited me to accompany him on
this journey. But his official duties did not permit him to

the Hittite Sculptures at Boghaz-Keui 203

remain at any place except modern centres of population
and government, hence we had only a hurried view of the
great city and the rock-sanctuary.]

M. Perrot has rightly argued that the wonderful rock-
sculptures near Boghaz-Keui are a series of religious re-
presentations.1 But, while his account is in general accurate
and sympathetic, I believe that further progress in the
interpretation of their meaning is hindered by one misconcep-
tion on his part : many of the figures which he considers
male seemed to me undoubtedly female. I came to Boghaz-
Keui fresh from the perusal at Ancyra of the only copy of
M. Perrot's Voyage Archeologique that exists in Asia Minor;
but, after two hours' examination, Sir C. Wilson and I
both came independently to the same conclusion, that the
majority of the figures were female.2 We were fortunately
able to remain a second day, and I spent about five hours
examining every figure in this regard. In many cases the
sex is quite uncertain ; but only a few are certainly male,
and a large number are certainly female. On the whole, I
came to the conclusion that the sculptures were the monu-
ment of a religion in which the female sex played a much
more important part than the male, and that in various cases
where the sex was doubtful, the probability lay on the female

1 These notes are printed solely from the wish to call attention to a remark-
able series of sculptures, which have as yet been almost completely neglected.
In our hurried visit, 1881, there was no opportunity of examining them
sufficiently. Now Herr Hermann has been charged with the duty of bringing
casts to the Berlin Museum, and there is every reason to hope that the
sculptures will soon be accessible to study. [This hope was only partly
realised.]

2 [I may add that the impression was produced on both of us, quite inde-
pendently and unexpectedly, of something characteristically feminine in the
face ; this impression is not conveyed by the photographs, where shadows
and angle of view exercise too strong influence : see also concluding note to
this article.]

204 VI. The Religion of

side. Bachofen (das Mutterrecht\ amid many untenable
opinions and crude hypotheses, has shown how great an
influence belonged to the women in Asia Minor, and this
influence is of course creative of or dependent on religious
sanction : and Gelzer has proved that the Lydian religion
attached special importance to the female (Rhein. Mus.,
xxxv., p. 516). The character of the sculptures at Pteria is
therefore in accordance with the analogy of Asia Minor.

Two facts suggest a false idea as to the sex of the figures.
In the first place, the great mass of the figures fall into two
long lines directed towards a central point. The series of
figures on the left is headed by three gods, that on the right
by a goddess ; almost all the figures on the right are clearly
female, several of those on the left are equally clearly male.
Hence the idea arose that the figures of the right are female,
of the left male. But this idea cannot be carried out com-
pletely. The goddess who leads the procession on the right
is followed immediately by a youthful god standing on a
leopard ; and in the series to the left there are'several female
figures.

In the second place, the wearing of the short tunic has been
generally regarded as proving that more than half the figures
are male. Closer examination makes this doubtful. Most
of the figures are armed, and it is obvious that if women are
going to fight they cannot wear long sweeping robes.
Female warriors were one of the most distinctive character-
istics of the religion of Asia Minor and particularly of
Cappadocia ; and I should not hesitate to consider the
twelve armed figures x in the narrow passage opposite the
most mysterious and perhaps the most sacred figures of the
whole to be Amazons.

1 Perrot, Voyage Archeologique, pi. 52.

the Hittite Sculptures at Boghaz-Keui 205

All that occurs on earth must have its prototype and its
origin in similar divine phenomena. Accordingly, the idea
of women as fighting and as warlike, finds its religious
justification in the warlike goddess who was one of the chief
manifestations of divinity ; and the masculine air, the short
dress, the flatness of the bosom, are quite in the spirit of a
religion, of which it is characteristic to raise itself above the
distinction of sex. Its essence * lies in the adoration under
various forms of the life of nature, that life subject apparently
to death, yet never dying, but reproducing itself in new forms,
different and yet the same. This perpetual self-identity
under varying forms, this annihilation of death through the
power of self-reproduction, was the object of the enthusiastic
worship of Asia Minor with all its self-abandonment, its
periods of complete immersion in the divine nature and of
superiority to all moral distinctions and human ties, its
mixture of obscene symbolism and the most sublime truths.
The mystery of self-reproduction, of self-identity amid
diversity, is the key to explain all the repulsive legends
that cluster round that worship, and all the manifold
representations or embodiments of the divine life that are
carved on the rocks of Boghaz-Keui [and Frahtin, and the
palace walls of Euyuk]. The parent is the child, the mother
is the daughter, the father the son; they seem to men
different ; religion teaches that they are the same, that death
and birth are only two aspects of one idea, and that the
birth is only the completion of the incomplete apparent
death.

1 1 must here assume unproved that theory of the character of Anatolian
religion which seems required by the facts of its history. [It is stated more
fully in the article of " The Religion of Greece and Asia Minor " in Hastings'
Dictionary of the Bible, v., p. no ff.]

206 VI. The Religion of

One of the central ideas in the religion is that the dis-
tinction of sex is not ultimate, but only an appearance, and
not a real element of the divine life. In its essence that
life is self-complete, self-sufficient, continually existent ; the
idea of death comes in with the idea of sex, of incomplete-
ness, of diversity. The goddess is the earth, the Mother ;
the god is the Heaven, the Father; the ultimate divinity
comprehends both heaven and earth, both god and goddess.
Hence arises the widespread Anatolian idea of the andro-
gynous god — an idea which appears in Greek art as the
Hermaphrodite — merely a rude symbolical expression of the
unreality of sexual distinction. Hence also arises the ten-
dency to confuse or to obliterate the distinction of sex in the
gods, to represent the goddess with the character of the
man, the god as womanly and effeminate ; while the priest
of the religion must be neither male nor female.

The wearing of bracelets and earrings is of course not pe-
culiar to women, but has been practised in many countries
by men. In the rock-sculpture at Ibriz in southern Cap-
padocia1 both the husbandman-god and the bearded king
wear earrings ; so also did Lydian men.2 But in the sculptures
of Boghaz-Keui and Euyuk I could not find them on any
figure certainly male with one exception, and this exception
furnishes a presumption that they were in northern Cap-
padocia a feminine ornament. This is a figure that occurs
three times at Boghaz-Keui, and twice at Euyuk,3 and M.
Perrot rightly comes to the conclusion that it must repre-
sent the high priest ; and we can easily recognise in it the

1 See above, p. 174.

2Xenophon, Anabasis, iii., i, 31.

3 Perrot, pi. 42, 47, 50, 51, 56. Euyuk is five hours north of Pteria. Here,
out of the side of one of the large artificial "mounds of Semiramis," appear
the doorway and front, covered with sculptures, of some great palace or temple.

the Hittite Sculptures at Boghaz-Keui 207

effeminate character, the soft outlines, the long sweeping
dress, and the ornaments of the eunuch high priest, Archi-
gallos, so well known in the cultus of Cybele.1 This view,
to which M. Perrot inclines, is made quite certain by the
subject of the following slab at Euyuk, which was not seen
by him : Sir C. Wilson got the villagers to turn over a block,
and disclosed one of the most interesting scenes of the whole
series.

The accompanying plan of the entrance to the palace at
Euyuk shows the position of this slab, which is lettered Z.

It is on the right hand as one enters the great doorway,
guarded by the two Sphinxes, 9 and 10. The two sculptured
blocks on the left side of the entrance, 7 and 8, are each
6 feet 6 inches long ; so that the length
of the entrance way is exactly 13 feet.
Now Z is 7 feet 3 inches long, and the
adjoining block, 1 1, is 5 feet 9 inches long,
so that these two exactly fill up the right 7 | | n

side of the entrance way. It is remark-

FlG. I.

able that there is no sculpture on the long
side of block 1 1 ; while on its short end, which forms the first
slab of the series on the right hand front wall, a seated
deity (Perrot, pi. 66) is carved. Both the blocks 7 and 8
on the left side of the entrance way are adorned with
reliefs ; one of those on the right side is carved, and the
other is left plain. I know no explanation of the apparent
anomaly.

At the right hand of the scene on slab Z a deity sits with
the feet resting on a footstool, one in front of the other ; the
figure is much worn, but in all that remains it is exactly the

1 On the Archigallos in Phrygian religion see Studies in the History and Art
of the Eastern Roman Provinces, pp. 246 f., 343.

208

VI. The Religion of

same as the seated goddess on pi. 66, and in the accompanying
drawing it is restored accordingly. Towards this deity a
procession of four figures advances, headed by the priest.
His dress is the same as in all the scenes where Perrot has
engraved him : in his right hand he, as usual, holds the long
curved staff (lituus\ while with the left he pours from an
oinochoe a libation, which falls on the front foot of the
seated deity. Behind him is the priestess, with her hands in
the position that seems to be characteristic of women in the
art of Cappadocia. The right hand holds out some round
object in front of her face, the left hand carries some object

FIG. 2.

to her mouth. She is dressed in the same long sweeping
dress which she wears in other scenes on these monuments,
but it is now impossible to tell whether she wore earrings.
Behind her come two other figures, which are much worn ;
they were dressed in short tunics and cloaks which hang
so as to cover one leg and leave the advanced leg bare. The
figures at the extremities of this slab have been injured by
the small stones on which it has fallen ; but fortunately the
two in the middle have not suffered so much. From the
position of these two figures it is not open to doubt that
they are the chief priest and priestess of the cultus.

the Hittite Sculptures at Boghaz-Keui 209

The same view is suggested by the scene on pi. 56
(Perrot), in which also the subject seems to be a procession
approaching the divine presence. An altar of peculiar shape
is placed in front of a small figure of a bull, evidently a
religious symbol, standing on a high pedestal.1 The same
two priestly figures, wearing the same dress, approach the
altar : the priest carries in his right hand the lituus, and the
priestess wears earrings. [Three altars of this peculiar mush-
room form have been discovered at Emir-Ghazi (seventy-five
miles east of Iconium), which is probably the Kases or Kasis
of Byzantine writers, the Khasbia of Ptolemy ; but unfortun-
ately two of them are much mutilated. An altar of similar
form appears twice in the rock -sculptures at Frahtin ; but here
the circular basis is not plain (as at Euyuk), nor surrounded
with zones of hieroglyphics (as at Emir-Ghazi), but ribbed
obliquely, like the dress of the priestess from the waist
downwards in the two annexed figures.]

At Boghaz-Keui the priest is seen three times (pis. 42, 47,
50, 51, Perrot).2 In Fig. 3 he is represented walking beside
a tall figure, whose arm is affectionately twined round his
neck. Perrot would fain make this pair a man and woman,
but is obliged to acknowledge that the little figure is clearly
male ; and he suggests that they represent the king and the
priest grouped as a pair. To our eyes the tall figure is as
clearly female as the small figure is male. It is in high
relief, and the face stands out from the rock with an ex-
quisitely delicate contour — bold, determined, and yet femi-
nine. The figure is far the finest of all the series, and looks

a[Many bronzes representing a bull standing on a raised platform or altar
have been found in other Hittite sites (Chantre, Mission en Cappadoce, and
unpublished examples elsewhere). On Frahtin see the Pre-Hellenic Monu-
ments of Cappadocia in Maspero's Recueil de Travaux, etc., vol. xiv.]

2 Perrot, pis. 50, 51.

210

VI. The Religion of

almost like the creation of a different art. In the midst of
rude work and inartistic symbolism, it recalled to me the

FIG. 3.

Amazons of the Maussolleum frieze.1 It is evidently the
Bed of an inscription of Comana (Journ. PhiloL,

JOne who looks at the plates in Perrot, 50 and 51, will at once say that I
am wrong on this point, and that the figure is certainly male. But, before

the^Hittite Sculptures at Boghaz-Keui 211

1882, p. 147), the warlike goddess who was characteristic of
the Asia Minor worship. Like the Lydian Omphale, she
bears the weapons, and her male companion is the effeminate
and unwarlike god, Heracles, sunk temporarily to be a
woman.

This companion is Atys, at once her favourite and her
priest, her son and her paramour. The god as the first
priest was the type of all succeeding priests, who at Pessinus
bore his name as an official title : each priest wore the in-
signia, and was said to imitate the self-mutilation of the god.
That priests and priestesses should wear the dress, bear the
name, and represent the personality, of the god deity whom
they served, was common in Greek religion also. The priests
of Bacchus were Bacchoi, the female celebrants Bacchai ;
the priests of Sabos or Sabazios were also called Saboi ; and
many other examples may be found.

The frequency with which the priest appears in these
religious sculptures shows how great was his importance in
the religion, and his influence among the people. He was
the embodiment of the god living always among his people
and explaining to them always through the oracle, which
was a never-failing accompaniment of the Anatolian religion,
the will of heaven. This is in complete agreement with
all that we know of political organisation and government
among the people of Asia Minor, before they were affected
by Greek influence. Either the priesthood comprehended
the kinghood in itself and exercised supreme power, or the
priest was at least second to the king in dignity and rank

judging, one should bear in mind that the photograph on pi. 51 is useless, and
that the drawing on pi. 50, being made by one who thought the figure male,
loses all the feminine character.

212 VI. The Religion of

and social powers.1 The same thought is suggested by
the scene on pi. 47 (Perrot). Here the priest is represented
as of superhuman size, standing with his feet on two large
objects, in shape like cones with rounded points ; these are
quite different in character and shape from the mountains on
which the gods stand. The priest is evidently here portrayed
as the apparent god, co-ordinated with the other manifesta-
tions of the divine nature on the rocks around, smaller in
size than the greatest of these, but larger than many of them.

In all the three cases where this figure occurs at Boghaz-
Keui, it is accompanied by a remarkable symbol : this symbol
is not always the same, but the three are only slight modi-
fications of one type. The variations are doubtless of great
importance, and will in time perhaps throw much light on
the scenes in which they occur. They are all composed of
symbols, such as occur in the hieroglyphic inscriptions that are
characteristic of the rock-sculptures of Asia Minor, so placed
together as to form something like a naiskos, bounded on
each side by two Ionic columns : the whole being crowned
by the winged solar disk.

[Fig. 4 shows an ivory statuette found under the temple
of Artemis at Ephesus, and beautifully reproduced, both
plain and in colours, in Excavations at Ephesus (Hogarth
and others, 1908), Plates XXI. 2 and XXIV. 7, n. Mr.
Cecil Smith, on p. 173 of that work, recognises in it the
Megabyzos or Eunuch chief-priest of the goddess. He
mentions that " Newton in his Essay 's, p. 230, has drawn
attention to the quasi-regal supremacy of" this priest. Of
the ten complete human figures in ivory found under the
temple, "no less than nine are undoubtedly statuettes of

1 Str., p. 557, 672 [where kinghood and priesthood were united, mutilation
of the priest could only be a fiction ; and there are some traces of such fictions,
as when the Archigallos is distinct from the priest].

the Hittite Sculptures at Boghaz-Keui 213

women ".* The tenth is this figure of the Megabyzos, which
has some male characteristics, while "the sleek, rounded
forms of the face, the arrangement of
the hair, and the long-sleeved chiton,
would naturally suggest a woman ". I
must add that, in spite of the sleek
forms, the type of the face, with its
thick features and "the broad fleshy
nose," seems to me to mark the figure
as male even more clearly than the
delicate and spiritual type of the warrior
figures at Boghaz-Keui stamp them as
female. " The chain which hangs round
his neck is probably his chain of office 2
... the curious fez-like cap, the broad
decorated belt and the mode of dress-
ing the hair, with a plait looped in
front of each ear, may be regarded as
part of the same ceremonial costume."
The slight maeander ornament on the
lower part of the dress may be com-
pared and contrasted with the elabor-
ate ornamentation on the priest's dress
at Ibriz.]

It follows from the nature of this
religion that on the rocks of Boghaz-
Keui we must expect to find in the
diversity of divine personages many
various manifestations of the one divine

FIG. 4.

J[The preponderance of the female element in hieratic representations,
alike at Ephesus and at Boghaz-Keui, is noteworthy.]

2 [Mr. Smith compares the position of the hand grasping the chain with a
statuette published by Chantre, Mission en Cappadoce, p. 151.]

214 VI. The Religion of

life. The attempt to explain them must begin by studying
the cases where the same figure is repeated with slight
variations, and must have at its disposal either the original
sculptures or satisfactory representations of them. The
photographs published by M. Perrot, welcome as they are,
cannot be made the basis of a satisfactory discussion.
In every figure I could see numberless details which are
quite invisible on the photographs : the light is very bad
among the rocks, the apparatus often can not be put at the
proper position, and nothing except either a series of careful
drawings, made with the help of photographs and studied
along with photographs, or a complete set of casts, can supply
the place of the originals.

The head of the series of figures on the right is a female
deity standing on a lion, which has its feet placed on four
mountains. On her head is the turreted crown, which was
in Greece the distinguishing mark of the Asian goddess
Cybele, but which, from its frequent occurrence at Pteria,
can hardly be more than the mark of womanhood, of the
female sex in its properly female function and not as setting
aside the distinction between male and female. She holds
her hands in the attitude which is characteristic of women
in the art of Cappadocia ; the right hand raises a symbol in
front of her, the left holds some object towards her mouth.
She is followed by a youthful god standing on a leopard,
whose feet also are planted on mountains. In this pair one
must recognise the mother and son, Cybele and Atys in one
of his manifestations, Demeter and Dionysos. The leopard
on which the god stands is the favourite animal of the Greek
Dionysos. A few other examples of the connection between
the sculptures of Pteria and the religion of Phrygia and
Lydia have been given in Journ. Hell. Stud., 1882, pp. 40-46.

the Hit tit e Sculptures at Boghaz-Keui 215

But few of the figures on these rocks have their character
so plainly expressed as these examples ; and without better
material for study, the whole set must remain unexplained.

[Note. — I have in this reprint avoided using the name
Pteria for the city at Boghaz-Keui, not because I think the
identification (accepted in the article originally and in my
Historical Geography, pp. 29, 31, etc.) wrong, but because
the form of the name is uncertain. Herodotus uses the
expressions rrjv Tlrepirjv, rrjv 'Efaairjv, in adjectival form.
Many others have suggested that Ptara, the Lycian city-
name (Patara in Greek), is the noun; and this seems highly
probable; but the further suggestion that Ptara means
" city " seems not so acceptable. Perhaps Ptara, like Ptagia
in Pisidia, is connected with the divine name Pta (in Greek
Meter Ipta), which was used in Eastern Lydia : see Studies
in the History of the Eastern Provinces ', p. 369.

That Croesus, when he crossed the Halys, would march
direct on the capital of his enemy, may be assumed as
certain. Now Boghaz-Keui is marked by its size and
remains as the capital of a great Anatolian Empire : see
Historical Geography p, p. 28, and the first part of the article
here reprinted ; also above, p. 127.]

FIG. 5. — The Apollo of Lystra : a third-century votive relief (see p. 167 f.).

VII.

THE MORNING STAR AND THE CHRON-
OLOGY OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST.

VII.

THE MORNING STAR AND THE CHRONOLOGY
OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST.

THE connection between the two parts of the above title is
not obvious at first sight. It is the merit of Colonel Mac-
kinlay, in the book which we propose to review, on The
Magi : How they Recognised Christ's Star? to have shown
that there is a very real connection. His title is, perhaps,
not very well chosen, for it does not allude to any of the
parts and topics which seem to me to be the most important
and interesting in his work, while it emphasises what is
most speculative and least convincing. Although the present
writer has written a brief preface to the book, it seems not
out of place for him to review it ; indeed it appears justifiable,
and almost obligatory, to state more fully than was possible
in the few paragraphs of his preface the reasons which make
him consider that the book deserves careful reading.

That men, when conversing familiarly with one another,
usually draw any figures of speech or any symbolic expres-
sions which they may chance to employ from the range of
their own interests and knowledge, is a principle that cannot
be denied, and will be freely admitted by every one. The
lawyer uses legal metaphors, the stockbroker the slang of the
exchange, in explaining his meaning. The contrast in this
respect between St. Paul's language and that of most of the
writers in the Bible is well known, and has often been

1 Hodder & Stoughton, 1907.

(219)

220 VII. The Morning Star

pointed out. He rarely goes to nature, but uses the
language of city life and of education, and, to some ex-
tent, of business and trade. On the contrary, the Bible
generally contains a far larger proportion of metaphors and
imagery drawn from the phenomena of nature, the wind, the
rain, the storm, the heavens, sun and stars, the growing and
dying or harvested vegetation of the earth, etc. ; except
Paul the writers whose works are contained in the Bible were
men of the country, not men of the city.

In regard to the imagery of this latter class a second
principle may be observed. Those who live and talk in the
open air tend to draw their illustrations from what is present
and visible to, or in the mind of, their hearers and themselves
at the time. Probably every expositor and preacher has
occasionally drawn his inspiration more or less unconsciously
from this principle, and every careful reader has sometimes
observed particular instances of its application. But the
formal commentators do not make sufficient use of it. It is
not obvious to the secluded scholar in his study amid the
atmosphere of books. You feel it most strongly in the
world of life. Sir Isaac Newton, however, though he was
(so far as I know) unused to life in the open air as well as
unfamiliar with the Mediterranean lands, perceived this
principle, and stated it in a very interesting passage which
is quoted by Colonel Mackinlay. It is not one of the least
of the merits of his book that it gives prominence to this
excellent observation of a great man ; if I may suppose that
the passage is as unfamiliar to the world of scholars as it was
to me. " I observe that Christ and His forerunner John in
their parabolic discourses were wont to allude to things
present. The old prophets, when they would describe things
emphatically, did not only draw parables from things which

Chronology of the Life of Christ 221

offered themselves, as from the rent of a garment (i Sam.
xv. 27, 28) . . . from the vessels of a potter (Jer. xviii. 3-
6) ... but also, when such fit objects were wanting, they
supplied them by their own actions, as by rending a garment
(i Kings xi. 30, 31); by shooting (2 Kings xiii. 17-19), etc.
By such types the prophets loved to speak. And Christ,
being endued with a nobler prophet spirit than the rest,
excelled also in this kind of speaking, yet so as not to speak
by His own actions — that were less grave and decent — but
to turn into parables such things as offered themselves. On
occasion of the harvest approaching He admonishes His
disciples once and again of the spiritual harvest (John iv. 35 ;
Matt. ix. 37). Seeing the lilies of the field, He admonishes
His disciples about gay clothing (Matt. vi. 28). In allusion
to the present season of fruits, He admonishes His disciples
about knowing men by their fruits. In the time of the
Passover, when trees put forth their leaves, He bids His
disciples ' learn a parable from the fig-tree ; when his branch
is yet tender and putteth forth leaves, ye know that the
summer is nigh '." This admirable passage is quoted from
Newton's Commentary on Daniel^ a work which is proverbial
in modern times for fanciful and strained interpretations, and
which I confess that I have never even seen ; but if there is
much more in it like this paragraph, it must be better worth
reading than some modern commentaries, for this is original
and true.

The author mentions several other examples in corro-
boration of Newton's principle. One pair of examples is
peculiarly interesting. In Matthew xx. 1-16 occurs the
parable of the householder, who went out early in the
morning to hire labourers into his vineyard. Every one
who studies ancient literature or life knows the strong

222 VII. The, Morning Star

prejudice that was entertained against hired labourers alike
in Palestine and in Italy in ancient times. The " hireling "
was despised as untrustworthy and idle, an unwilling labourer
who worked for money and not for love of the work or of
the master whom he served. He was always looking for
the reward and the pay for his labour, not aiming at doing
it well for its own sake (Job vii. 2). John x. 12 f. contrasts
the cowardly hireling with the true shepherd ; the former
neglects the sheep, and flees when the wolf approaches,
but the true shepherd defends them to the death. So in
Italy mercennarii or free hired labourers were always disliked,
and contempt is often expressed for them. A man who
wanted important or delicate work well done employed the
members of his own family, especially his household slaves.1
Every person who attempts to explain to pupils the spirit
of ancient Roman life has constant occasion to insist on
this ; and it applies also to Greek life, though it is not there
so strongly forced on one's attention.

Why is it that the Kingdom of Heaven, the prophets and
the servants of God, are compared by Matthew in this pass-
age to hirelings, who all receive the same pay at the end
of the day, whether they have worked in the vineyard one
hour or a whole day ? In Matthew xxi. 28 it is the owner's
son who works in the vineyard ; in John xv. 2 the owner
himself is the workman. What is the reason for this differ-
ence? In the first passage there is no stress laid on the
trustworthiness or untrustworthiness of the hired labourers.
The only point of comparison lies in the reward that is
given to all alike : so much is true, but this does not

1 That household slaves were a part of the family, ancTregarded as specially
trustworthy servants, is a fact of immense importance in the study of ancient
society.

Chronology of the Life of Christ 223

quite satisfactorily and fully explain the choice of this
parable.

The Author points out that the passage in Matthew xx.
I -1 6 relates a conversation held about midwinter or Janu-
ary, whereas Matthew xxi. 28 and John xv. 2 were spoken
in the middle of March. Wherein, then, lies the difference ?
He very aptly quotes Mr. W. Carruthers, F.R.S., who
writes, " For tilling the ground and keeping it free from
weeds in winter, hired labour would be sufficient; but for
cutting off the rapidly growing shoots in March or later,
so as to prevent the energy of the plant from being directed
to mere vegetative development, an intelligent workman
would be needed". The delicate labour of pruning must be
intrusted to one who has both skill and interest in the
result ; but unskilled labour was sufficient to turn over the
soil and to destroy the weeds. Moreover, there is a great
deal more of tedious labour involved in the latter ; and it
must often have been necessary to get in more hands to do
the winter work in the vineyard.

In both cases the illustration was drawn from what was
actually being done at the moment. Speaker and hearers
saw the suggestion of the parable taking place before their
eyes, as the words were spoken. Similarly I have elsewhere
tried to point out1 how inevitable it is that, when Christ
said to Nicodemus " the wind bloweth where it listeth, and
thou hearest the voice thereof, but knowest not whence it
cometh and whither it goeth," the two were not in some
cellar in Jerusalem, but out on the side of the Mount of Olives,
with the wind of spring moving gently around them. The
character which is impressed on speech and thought by life
in the open air, is apt to escape the reader who is used to live

1 The Education of Christ, p. 74.

224 VII. The Morning Star

and think and study and address audiences in a room ; for
he often assumes unconsciously that scenes must have oc-
curred in closed spaces, though something of the vitality is
lost on this assumption. Part of what is called the Oriental
character of the Bible should more correctly be called the
open-air character.

These cases may be generalised as a principle. Those
who live in the open air and draw their imagery from the
visible phenomena of nature must be to a large extent
guided in their choice by the present circumstances. A
man who converses while sitting or walking in the open air
is not likely to talk about the beautiful bloom of the fruit-
trees, if the trees in an orchard close by are bare in the winter
season or loaded with fruit. If he talked of the beautiful
flowers that clothe the trees, you know that the conversation
occurred in the spring-time. The careful reader can tell in
many cases the time of the year when such illustrations were
spoken, and thus a system of annual chronology can be
established. Every reader of literature can illustrate this
from his own experience or study. There are few com-
mentators on any ancient author who have not sometimes
employed reasoning of this class. Colonel Mackinlay's merit
lies in employing it more systematically and thoroughly, and
with greater attention to the facts and habits of ancient
Palestinian life and surroundings, than any other person (so
far as the present reviewer's knowledge extends), and in
establishing on this basis, which is theoretically a perfectly
sound one, a complete chronology of the life of Christ. In
doing so he rests his reasoning on many acute and subtle
observations, which are well worth careful reading.

This method of reasoning has, of course, its dangers and
its defects. It is almost inevitable that the reasoner should

Chronology of the Life of Christ 225

press some of his observations too far, and should be too
subtle and too ready to take more from a passage than others
(and especially the hasty reader) think it can stand. But
there is always that danger in the cumulative method of
reasoning : one brings in everything, large or small, that can
add to the pile. I would illustrate this, and explain its limits,
by quoting a parallel case.

Mr. Hobart has been blamed in the same way for bringing
into his proof that the writer of the Acts and the Third
Gospel was a physician many details which add little or
nothing to the strength of his demonstration. This is quite
true, and Mr. Hobart was as fully aware of it as any of his
critics. But when his critics go on to maintain that this
detracts from the strength of his reasoning, they are alto-
gether mistaking the character of cumulative evidence.
The valuelessness of one detail, the lightness of one stone,
does not take away from the strength and the weight of the
other details, though it may annoy and mislead the hasty
reader, who judges by a sample and, by chance or design,
takes the poorest. Moreover, the critic who is accustomed
to the more fascinating and brilliant method of deductive
reasoning (in which, however, the weakness of even one link
in the chain is fatal to the strength of the whole) is apt to
forget 'that cumulative reasoning is not of the same kind.
Each has its distinct character, its own peculiar merits and
defects.

Accordingly, Colonel Mackinlay may lose in the reader's
estimate several of his props, and yet retain enough to sup-
port an edifice which continues to stand and to be habit-
able. The chronology of the life of Christ is difficult and
obscure; and every attempt to reason out a new line of
proof ought to be heartily welcomed. The reasoning in

226 VII. The Morning Star

this case proceeds from a mind which assumes at starting
the complete trustworthiness and perfect accuracy of the
Gospels. This will at once discredit the book with many
of the prejudiced and arbitrary class of scholars, whose mind
is already completely made up and closed to any new evi-
dence; and it may be granted that the prejudice in the
Author's mind does in some cases produce what I must
call a certain weakness in the argument, where he abandons
the cumulative method of observing details and facts, and
proceeds to reason from general principles, as for example
about the character and conduct and past life of the Magi
in his Chapter VII., in which he no longer stands on what
can be considered firm or safe ground.

While the present reviewer is personally most interested
in the thorough-going chronology of the life of Christ
month by month, or at least season by season and feast by
feast, which the Author works out, it is certain that many,
probably most, readers will follow with more lively interest
his observations on the meaning of particular sayings and
their relation to the surroundings of time, season, atmo-
spheric phenomena and the position of the familiar stars.
Although in regard to the phenomena of the heavens al-
most all interest inland knowledge of even the more striking
stars has i been lost in Western society, yet the true scholar
must try to place himself in the mental atmosphere of
ancient Palestinian life, when a certain familiarity with
some of the stars was possessed by all and was made an
essential part of their thought and expression and used as
a guide in their ways and times of life. One or two ex-
amples may therefore be given of the class of observations
on which the Author's system is founded.

When Christ saw Nathanael under the fig-tree, this may

Chronology of the Life of Christ 227

be regarded as an indication of summer or autumn. In
Matthew xxiv. 32, when the branch of the fig-tree " is now
become tender and putteth forth its leaves, ye know that
the summer is nigh ". The fading of the leaf of the fig-tree
is alluded to by Isaiah xxxiv. 4. Between those limits
lay the scene when Nathanael retired under the fig-tree.
He was astonished that any one could see him, and there-
fore he must have been hid from view by the thick foliage.
Moreover, the Author points out that he had evidently gone
there to pray in quiet and secrecy, as " an Israelite without
guile ". This was about the beginning of the Ministry of
Christ; the Baptism and the Temptation had already
occurred ; but there seems to have been no great interval
between them. The Temptation apparently followed the
Baptism immediately, and lasted forty days. The Author
places these events in August and September.

Some time previously occurred the first appearance of
John the Baptist as a teacher. The Author points out
that three expressions in his early teaching refer to the
season: (i) "The axe is laid to the root of the tree": the
decision to cut down a useless tree would be taken later than
the pruning season in March, when it had become evident
that the tree was no longer productive. (2) " Every tree
that bringeth not forth good fruit is cut down." This
emphasises the same allusion. Both point to April. (3)
" Whose fan is in His hand and He will thoroughly cleanse
His threshing-floor ; and He will gather His wheat into the
garner." The season is harvest and the locality was the
deep hot valley of the Jordan, where harvest was very early.
The preaching of John, therefore, began to arrest the atten-
tion of the Jews in April and the time immediately following.
The imagery quoted from him belongs to the months April-

228 VII. The Morning Star

June. After a certain interval, a few weeks or months prob-
ably, Jesus came to be baptised. As John passed like a
meteor across the sky of Palestine, or rather like the Morn-
ing Star heralding the light of day, there is no reason to
place the Baptism in a later year than the first appearance
of John. On this point there is a practically universal
agreement of opinion. All these events belong to the spring
and summer and early autumn of the same year. Since the
Baptist is so consistently spoken of as the Morning Star, it
must have been shining at his appearance and gladden-
ing the eyes of the crowd of his followers every morning.
The custom of so designating him arose among those who
saw the Star1 marking him out as the Herald. The cycle
of appearances of Venus as the Morning Star prove that
this year was A.D. 25.

To take another example of the influence which the seasons
and the state of agriculture exerted on the customs of the
people among whom Christ lived and taught, we take one
from the sphere of action and no longer from that of mere
language. The Author points out on p. 1 20 that at the feed-
ing of the five thousand Jesus " commanded the multitude to
sit down on the grass " (Matt. xiv. 19). To us who live in the
moist northern islands this conveys no intimation of the
time of year, but in the dry soil and under the hot sun of
the Levant lands, it means that the season was spring. Only
in spring is there grass, which withers early along with the
flowers under the summer sun. This fact plays an important
part in the economy of farm life ; and the traveller is often
reminded of it, when he seeks to hire horses at that season :
they are all out at grass. A free life on the grass for the
short time during which this food can be got is regarded
is emphasised below, p. 231.

Chronology of the Life of Christ 229

as necessary to their health and vigour. Their keep costs
nothing during that time, but they cannot do hard work on
grass. Hence the traveller, if he insists on getting horses in
that season, must tempt the owners by a higher price. Such
are the facts in Asia Minor, and I have no doubt that they
are similar in Palestine.

The brief phrase which Matthew uses may seem to some
— especially to those who have not had the opportunity
of familiarising themselves with the kind of thought and
expression which arises from the rarity and value of grass
in such countries — to be an insufficient basis to support
the Author's inference as to the season. But, as he points
out, Mark vi. 39 speaks of "the green grass," and John
vi. 10 says, "there was much grass in the place". Moreover
John vi. 4 mentions that the time of the year was just before
Passover.1 The inference from the scanty phrase of Matthew
is perfectly confirmed.

The Author points out well that this is the season of
the year when bread is scarce and dear for people who live
on the fruits of their own soil and are not affected by im-
ported grain. The produce of the last harvest is coming
near an end, and is often exhausted or almost exhausted
by this season, while the new harvest is ripening, but
not ready to eat. People have often to go hungry, and
prices rise high. In this time of dearth the relief which
Christ gave was really needed, for the villages (none of which
were even near) would be also on the verge of scarcity.

1 The inference from Mark and John is, of course, familiar and common,
and has been used as an argument against Hort's unfortunate suggestion that
rb Ilao-^o in John vi. 4 is an interpolation. But my object is to demonstrate
that the brief word of Matthew would alone be sufficient evidence, though I
suppose that some European scholars would have scouted such an assertion,
if it were not supported by the clearer testimony of John and Mark.

230 VII. The Morning Star

While in this case the individual character of the scene
and the suitability of the surrounding conditions are extremely
well marked, one must observe that the details which give
life to the incident are lacking in the story of the feeding of
four thousand (Matt. xv. 32 ff. ; Mark viii. I ff.), except that
there the people sit down on the ground : there was no
longer grass to sit on at this season. But that is the general
state of the soil : the other scene gathers individuality and
life from the unusual character of the circumstances.

When the Author attempts to find an allusion to the vary-
ing seasons in Luke x. 3, " Lambs in the midst of wolves "
(dated February or beginning of March), as compared with
Matthew x. 16, "sheep in the midst of wolves" (in harvest-
time, about May, "the young sheep by this time would no
longer be considered lambs"), I do not think his reasoning
can be accepted. In my experience the term "lamb" is
used in Asiatic Turkey for a young sheep at any season of
the year, and any flesh of sheep that is sold as fit to eat is
"lamb". The flesh of a sheep in its second year is already
coarse, and not considered eatable except by poor and hardy
peasants.1 Moreover, the Author himself dates the words of
John the Baptist, " Behold the Lamb of God," in the autumn,
whereas his principle would require a date about February to
April. No safe inference, therefore, can be drawn from the
use of the terms "lamb" and "sheep".

The main feature of Colonel Mackinlay's book is its insist-
ence on the importance of the Morning Star in the symbol-
ism of the Gospels. Some of the references to this Star in
the Gospels are so emphatic and distinct that they cannot be
misunderstood. This species of symbolism was employed
freely, as every reader knows, in the Gospels. The Author,

1 This is mentioned and illustrated in my Impressions of Turkey, p. 17.

Chronology of the Life of Christ 231

however, shows that it was carried very much farther than
has been hitherto observed ; and some of the passages in which
he detects the use of this symbolism gain much effect from his
interpretation. John the Baptist was the Forerunner, the
Morning Star. Christ was the Sun, the Light of the World.
On p. 16 the Author protests against the mistaken idea in
Holman Hunt's picture, " The Light of the World," where
Christ is represented as illuminating the world with a lantern.
It was as the Sun that He illumined the world; and He
used the words about Himself at the end of the Feast of
Tabernacles, which " reminded the Jews of their deliverance
from Egypt and of the Divine leading by the pillar of fire
in the wilderness (Neh. ix. I, 9, 12, 19)". At this Feast
large lamps were " lighted in the Temple court, which were
reminders of the ancient guiding pillar of fire in the wilder-
ness ; He said in effect, I am like the sun which gives light
to all in the world, — a greater blessing than the Hebrews
had of old, when they followed the pillar of fire".

Similarly in John ix. 5, where "the Light of the World "
is Christ, the allusion must be to the sun, for there is in
the context a contrast between day and night. The Author
also compares xi. 9; xii. 35 £,46; i. 9; I John ii. 8; Luke
i. 78 ; ii. 32 ; Acts xiii. 47, in all of which Christ is the Sun.
The usage persisted as it had been originated ; just as John
the Baptist was always the Morning Star and Forerunner of
the Sun.

In the first chapter the Author is careful to show how
much larger a part the Morning Star plays in the life and
language of the peoples in the Levant lands than it does
among the late-rising nations of the dark North. The
Morning Star begins the day for the nomads and the agri-
culturists of those southern regions, and even in the cities

232 VII. The Morning Star

people work at a very early hour; in southern countries
generally people rise very much earlier than they do in
the cold northern lands ; and, where artificial light is scanty
and bad, few sit up long after dark, and there is less dis-
position to lie late in the morning. Moreover, where sun-
light is abundant, one seems to feel much less need for long
sleep than in dark countries. The Author touches on the
question whether the ancients knew that Venus, the Morning
Star, assumes at times a crescent form (which they probably
did), and how they acquired this knowledge. He is dis-
posed to think that they sometimes employed artificial
aids to vision, as a lens was found by Layard at Nemrud ;
and that the naked eye could not discover the crescent form
though people who know what to expect can see it or think
they see it. But one of my friends, a distinguished Professor
of Mathematics, tells me that the crescent form could be
detected by a careful watcher of the skies, if he saw the planet
against the edge of a sharp upright cliff. At any rate it is
certain that the ancients " observed the planet with the
utmost attention" and gave it a prominent place in their
religion under the names Istar and Ashtaroth and Venus
and so on.

Now, just as John the Baptist about May- June A.D. 25
drew his illustrations from the harvest and the threshing-
floors, which were busy at that season, and just as about
December A.D. 27 the sowing which was busily going on
all around suggested the parables in Matthew xiii. 3-32 ;
Mark iv. 26-29, so the Author maintains that, when John
preached " He that cometh after me is mightier than I,"
drawing his idea from the Morning Star, herald of the Sun,
that Star must have been in its morning phase at the time,
guiding the conduct and plain to the eyes and touching

Chronology of the Life of Christ 233

the minds of all his audience every day before dawn, when
they rose at its summons. So with several other expres-
sions, as, " he was the lamp that burneth and shineth "
(John v. 35), "behold I send My messenger before thy
face" (quoted in Matt. xi. 10, as people applied to him the
prophecy of Malachi iii. i).

Incidentally we must notice that such accounts as those
mentioned in the beginning of the preceding paragraph
are not to be understood as reports of what John and
Jesus said in one single speech. They should rather be
taken as expressing the gist and marrow of the teaching
at a certain period, as the general purport crystallised in
the memory of certain auditors.

In the Apocalypse xxii. 16 Christ is called the Morning
Star, but in the Gospels He is the Sun, while the Baptist is
His Herald, an image taken from Malachi iii. I ; iv. 2, as seen
in Luke i. 76, 78 ; Mark i. 2 ; Luke i. 17 ; John iii. 28 ; Matthew
xi. 10 ; Luke vii. 27 ; Paul in Acts xiii. 24 ; John i. 7, 8, etc.
The comparison in the Apocalypse belongs to a different
period and another circle of thought. Its meaning may be
illustrated by the expression in the letter to the Church at
Thyatira, " he that overcometh ... I will give him the
Morning Star" (Rev. ii. 28). In this phrase there lies
probably more than is allowed for in the Letters to the Seven
Churches of Asia, p. 334. We must understand that the
Star is the dawn of a brighter day and a new career. To
the victor there shall be given the brightness and splendour
and power that outshine the great Empire, and the promise
of and entrance upon a higher life. It is the same thought
as afterwards suggested the term dies natalis for the day
on which a martyr died : this day was his birthday, on
which he entered into a nobler life. After the same fashion

234 VII. The Morning Star

Christ calls Himself in Revelation xxii. i6the Morning Star,
as the herald and introducer of a new era. In the Gospels
the point of view is so different as to show that they belong
to an earlier age and another style of thought, not con-
tradictory, but the result of different surroundings and
conditions.

In Chapter VI. the Author discusses the length of Christ's
Ministry, and concludes that it was three and a half years.
It has long seemed to me that this was the true length;
and the shorter periods assigned by many scholars appeared
to be based on misconceptions. The estimate of one year
(or, more strictly, one year and some months) is due to
misinterpretation of Luke iv. 19, where "the acceptable
year of the Lord " is taken as the period of Christ's Ministry.
This is an almost inexcusable error, for it supposes that the
period of one year and several months could be called one
year by the ancients. This period would have been called
two years, according to the universal rule.1 Some of the
early Fathers, who were uninterested in and careless of
chronological exactness, are responsible for this misinter-
pretation,2 which ought not to survive when it is recognised
that the Ministry must have lasted over at least two Pass-
overs, together with some months before the first.

The Author passes over this estimate as requiring no
notice, and inquires only into the possibility of the middle
estimate that the Ministry lasted two years and a half.
Besides the much debated question of the number of Pass-
overs that occurred during the Ministry, he also discusses
the number of Feasts of Tabernacles. In regard to the

1 See the article on " Days, Months, Hours " in Hastings' Dictionary of the
Bible, vol. v.

8 Clement of Alexandria and Origen both said so.

Chronology of the Life of Christ 235

former question there is, of course, nothing "new to be said.
The arguments have all been already drawn out to endless
length ; and the Author passes over them in a brief paragraph
of seven lines. The latter question opens up a topic of
considerable extent, on which the Author has much that is
quite novel to say, and which he insists upon a great deal
in other chapters also. He points out that the reading
of Isaiah Ixi. by Jesus in the synagogue at Nazareth must
have taken place at the beginning of a year, at the beginning
of a Sabbatic year, and at the Feast of Tabernacles. His
reasoning on this subject is extremely ingenious and inter-
esting, and merits the most serious consideration. Chrono-
logically, this would settle the question, if it should finally
stand scrutiny. My own impression is that it will establish
itself; but I may be prejudiced, as it confirms my own
chronological views in all except one point, which is of
merely speculative interest, viz.) the year of Christ's birth.
The length of Christ's Ministry and the year of His death
are matters of the utmost importance for the right under-
standing and for the historical value of the Gospels ; but it
makes little difference in those respects whether He was
born in any year between B.C. 8 and 5. Colonel Mackinlay
has maintained that the Birth was in B.C. 8 at the Feast of
Tabernacles ; and he has advanced distinctly stronger argu-
ments for this view than can be brought forward in favour
of any other year. A year later than 5 or earlier than 8
would be fatal to the historicity of Matthew and Luke ; *
beyond that the date is a matter only of chronological im-
portance. Incidentally we must here observe, as a conse-
quence of the very early date, that the residence of the

1 A date later t;han B.C. 5 would place the Birth after Herod's death ; a date
earlier than B.C. 8 would put the Ministry too early.

236 VII. The Morning Star

Holy Family in Egypt would have to be longer than is
usually supposed ; but there is absolutely no ground in the
words of Matthew to support an argument that the resi-
dence in Egypt could not have lasted so long as five years
and a third, which is the period assigned by the Author.

The Sabbatical year necessarily began in the autumn.
If it had commenced in spring, the beginning would have
occurred after corn had been sowed, and the land could not
have lain fallow for the year. It was inevitably implied in
the idea of a Sabbatical year that it should begin at the
end of the annual cycle of agriculture and before the next
annual cycle opened ; i.e., it must begin near the autumn
equinox at the Feast of Tabernacles. This was fixed by
the Law of Moses, whereas the ordinary arrangement of
the Calendar in the South-Syrian lands made the year begin
in spring.

The Author maintains that the Sabbatical year began at
the Feast of Tabernacles in the autumn of A.D. 26.1 This
then was the time when the scene in the Synagogue at
Nazareth occurred ; and Christ had been speaking in public
previously for some time. The conclusion which I have
reached as to the beginning of the Ministry (Christ Born at
Bethlehem^ p. 201) is that "in the later months of that year
A.D. 25, John appeared announcing the coming of Christ,
and very shortly thereafter Jesus came and was baptised by
John in the river Jordan. Some months 2 thereafter occurred
the Passover on 2ist March, A.D. 26." Colonel Mackinlay
would place these events earlier by a few months. He leaves
a longer interval between the appearance of John and of

1 There is some controversy as to the incidence of Sabbatical years ; but
the view which Colonel Mackinlay takes seems to be the right one.

2 In the original text I printed "one or two months thereafter," but this
was too precise, and I would substitute the vaguer expression.

Chronology of the Life of Christ 237

Jesus, viz., about four to five months ; and places the Baptism
about forty-five days before the Feast of Tabernacles A.D. 25.
The preaching of Jesus would then begin about that Feast.
I see no objection to this, though the evidence is too slender
to demonstrate it. Thus he finds the first two occurrences
of this Feast within the Ministry A.D. 25 and 26.

The third Feast he places at the time of Matthew xii. 18-
21 ; the Sabbatic year was now ended, and the period "of
special invitation to the Jewish nation " was past. Now
begins a new period ; and in the words quoted from Isaiah
in this passage of Matthew Christ is twice described as the
Saviour of the Gentiles.

The fourth Feast of Tabernacles, in the Author's scheme,
synchronised with the Transfiguration, which suggested to
Peter's mind the idea of making the three tabernacles. The
ordinary view seems to be that which is stated by Dr.
Plummer in his Commentary on Luke ix., "if they were to
remain there they must have shelter". Why superhuman
personages like Moses and Elias should need the shelter
of booths in order to remain on a mountain does not appear
very clear. But, if the Jews were everywhere making booths
at that very moment in order to spend in them the sacred
week, it seems a not unnatural suggestion of Peter's to con-
struct three booths for the three superhuman personages to
keep the Jewish feast : " one for Thee, and one for Moses
and one for Elias ".

The Author's suggestion agrees with the very slight in-
dications that can be gathered from the context.

The Transfiguration (Matt. xvii. I ff. ; Mark ix. 2 ff. ;
Luke ix. 28 ff.) occurred later than the Passover of A.D. 28
(about which time, as we have just seen,1 must have occurred

1 See above, p. 228.

238 VII. The Morning Star

the incident mentioned by Matthew xiv. 14 ff., and John vi.
4 ff.) ; but the visit to the borders of Judaea beyond Jordan
(Matt. xix. i ; John x. 40), the opening of the final period
of the Saviour's life, about the end of 28 and the beginning
of 29, had not yet occurred. This approximate date for the
Transfiguration is, of course, evident and universally accepted ;
but its connection with the Feast of Tabernacles is not a
matter of general agreement.

Now, Jesus spent part of this Feast at Jerusalem (John vii.
14) ; but it is mentioned that He would not go up at the be-
ginning of the Feast, but remained some days in Galilee, and
appeared in Jerusalem, " when it was now the middle of the
Feast," the third to the fifth day. On the Author's theory
we have thus a quite remarkable chronological agreement
between John and the Synoptics ; and the agreement is so
striking that it could hardly be purely accidental. On that
theory the Transfiguration occurred at the time when the
Tabernacles were being constructed, *'.*., either on the day at
whose sunset the Feast began or on the first day of the
Feast. In that event Jesus was manifested as the Son of
God, not publicly, but to three spectators, on a solitary
mountain-top ; and the three were ordered to keep the event
secret until after the Resurrection (as Mark and Matthew
mention, though Luke deliberately omits l this sequel to the
event). John vii. 4 mentions that when this " Feast of Taber-
nacles was at hand," the brothers of Jesus urged Him to go
up to Jerusalem, to abandon His privacy and secrecy, and
" manifest Thyself to the world ". Jesus refused to go up
at present, on the ground that " My time is not yet come ".

1 This remarkable omission of part of his chief authority must make the
scholar chary of allowing any weight to the argument that Luke knew no-
thing about any event or speech, because he does not record it.

Chronology of the Life of Christ 239

When the rest went up to Jerusalem to the Feast, " He abode
still in Galilee ". But afterwards He went up, " not publicly,
but as it were in secret " ; and suddenly, " in the midst of
the Feast," He appeared in the Temple. There He preached
the remarkable discourse, beginning, " I am the light of the
world ".

All that John mentions in this passage fits in so perfectly
in tone and in chronology with the Synoptic record as to
make it evident to any one possessed of the literary and the
historic sense that the two narratives, which complete one
another so remarkably, although neither of them mentions
any detail or any saying that occurs in the other, must be
founded on personal knowledge or first-hand evidence about
actual facts. The only other theory that would account for
such a singular coincidence amid difference is that there has
been deliberate and wonderfully skilful invention of a series
of incidents, and partition of them between two separate
narratives dovetailing perfectly into one another. Such a
theory, whether in the form that the two narratives were
concocted by agreement at the same time, or that one was
invented subsequently to suit the other which was already
in existence, is not likely to be advanced at the present day
by any scholar, for there are too many obvious difficulties
(which it is needless to state here). This agreement of the
two authorities 1 is so important a point as to deserve fuller
notice.

Take, first of all, the sequence of events.
I . Jesus went forth into the villages of Caesarea Philippi.
He asked His disciples, "Who do men say that I am?"
They answered that He was taken by some for John the
Baptist, by others for Elias or one of the prophets. He then
1 Mark is the authority on whom Luke and Matthew both rely.

240 VII. The Morning Star

asked, "Who say ye that I am?" Peter answered, " Thou
art the Christ ". Thereupon He bade them tell no man of
Him (Mark viii. 27-30).

2. Jesus now began to tell them of His approaching suffer-
ings and death and resurrection. This He stated openly.
Peter rebuked Him for speaking thus, and was sharply re-
primanded (Mark viii. 3i-ix. i).

3. Now the Feast of Tabernacles was at hand. His
brothers advised Him to go to celebrate it in Jerusalem, and
reveal Himself publicly to the Jewish world for what He
claimed to be ; but He refused, because His time was not yet
fulfilled ; and He abode in Galilee (John vii. 1-9). John's
narrative here presumes as well known the statements made
by the Synoptics about the claims now being advanced both
openly and in private to His disciples (headings I and 2).

4. Six days later He took Peter and James and John into
a high mountain apart. Here occurred the Transfiguration ;
and the thought of the Feast suggested to Peter that the
three heavenly ones should celebrate the Feast of Taber-
nacles, and the three earthly ones should enjoy the spectacle.
Afterwards, as they descended from the mountain, Jesus
again charged them to tell no man until the Son of Man be
risen from the dead. They questioned one another what
was the meaning of this rising from the dead. And Jesus
explained (Mark ix. 2-13).

5. Jesus then went up secretly to Jerusalem and appeared
in the Temple on the third or fourth day of the Feast, and
taught, so that the people wondered. He asked why they
sought to kill Him. He explained that He would be with
them only a short time, and would then go "unto Him that
sent Me". He publicly offered instruction to all, drink to
any that thirsted. And some said that this was the prophet,

Chronology of the Life of Christ 241

others the Christ. But the conclusion was that, since He
was of Galilee, He therefore could not be the Christ ; 1 and
no man laid hands on Him. He declared Himself in .the
Temple to be the light of the world, to be not of this world,
but sent by His Father. And He went out of the Temple
(John vii. xo-viii. 59). Presumably, John at least accom-
panied Him to Jerusalem (probably all the three disciples),
and thus knew what happened there ; but no other person
was informed, and the visit was little talked about in Galilee.

6. They rejoined the disciples,2 and He travelled in
Galilee, keeping Himself secret ; and He taught the disciples
about the resurrection ; but they understood not the saying
and were afraid to ask Him (Mark ix. 14-32).

Secondly, it is plain that the two accounts are agreed about
the importance of this moment in autumn A.D. 28. Jesus
was now beginning to make His fate known ; in Galilee He
spoke only to His disciples 3 about the coming events ; but
though He told them repeatedly, they failed to understand
the drift of His words. John alone adds that He made a
secret journey to Jerusalem and gave similar teaching in a
guarded symbolic fashion to the Jews in the Temple. Both
accounts agree that His death was now often mentioned by
Him, but that no one realised what He meant.

How is this remarkable agreement as to time and subject
to be explained? I cannot see any opening for doubt (i)
that it arises from the personal knowledge and memory of

1 The irony of this conclusion escapes many scholars. Their reasoning
was sound ; and their conclusion was inevitable, if the starting-point was
correct. They thought it was correct ; but they were in error. Hence their
reasoning was really a witness to the truth : Christ must be born in Bethlehem,
and Jesus (unknown to them) was born there. Such is the meaning of the
Fourth Gospel.

2 Luke alone says "on the next day " after the Transfiguration.

3 Except once the expression " openly " : see above, heading 2.

242 VII. The Morning Star

John ; and (2) that John knew the Synoptic narrative (not
necessarily all three accounts, of course). It is impossible
that John should so exactly fill up what is omitted by the
Synoptists, without repeating anything that they tell, unless
he was deliberately completing, with full knowledge of the
facts, a narrative which he regarded as incomplete, though
true. The irony of John (which is conspicuous in the touch
regarding the supposed birth of Jesus in Galilee) is seen to
be much more thoroughgoing when his report of the words
in the Temple is taken as a veiled and symbolic statement
to the multitude of the teaching which was given in Galilee
to the disciples alone before and after the Transfiguration,
and which was as little understood by them as it was by the
multitude in the Temple. There is irony in this, but how
much greater is the pathos than the irony ! This is what
the disciples afterwards discussed among themselves and
mourned and marvelled over, in the days that followed the
Resurrection.1

An agreement of this kind between two documents, lying
so much beneath the surface, yet so complete, would in the
criticism of non-Christian works be regarded as a weighty
proof of trustworthiness and authenticity, unless the suppo-
sition of elaborately concocted fraud was established ; but
frauds so elaborate and skilful are unknown in ancient litera-
ture.

In favour of this dating Colonel Mackinlay's arguments,
together with the reasons now advanced, seem to be conclu-
sive. From it follow several interesting results, which he has
not neglected to observe, and probably many more which fall
outside the scope of his book. One topographical inference
would be that the Mount of the Transfiguration could not

1 See above, p. 89 f.

Chronology of the Life of Christ 243

be Mount Hermon (which always seemed to me very im-
probable and incongruous with ancient habits and ideas), but
some mountain farther south and nearer Jerusalem. It
would be impossible without extraordinary exertion (possible
for a trained athlete, but not for ordinary human beings) to
be on the top of Mount Hermon at the beginning of the
Feast and in Jerusalem on the fourth day of the Feast. If
Tabor or some other peak of Galilee were the scene, the
circumstances are quite in accordance with ordinary life.

The Nativity also is placed by the Author at the Feast
of Tabernacles. This seems highly probable, and may even,
I think, be regarded as approximating to certainty. It has
been pointed out frequently that the circumstances of the
Birth are inconsistent with a winter date, for the sheep are
folded at night in winter, whereas they were feeding out on
the upland plains near Bethlehem on the night when Christ
was born : that is the custom only during the hot season of
the year. Considerable part of the summer is required for
the operations of harvest and thrashing in various parts of
Palestine, which take place earlier or later according to the
elevation above the sea ; and it would have been impossible
to order any movement of the people until those operations
were fully completed. Accordingly the conclusion has been
drawn, " we may say with considerable confidence that
August to October is the period within which the numbering
would be fixed" (Christ Born at Bethlehem, p. 193). Now,
at the Feast of Tabernacles there was always a considerable
movement of the Jews from the northern parts towards
Jerusalem ; and it was natural that the king should avoid
the disturbance caused by two movements near the same
time, and should make the numbering coincide with the
Feast, only requiring that all should go up on this occasion

244 VII. The Morning Star

to the town of Judaea, which was their original home. I have
pointed out how necessary it was that the prejudices and
customs of the Jews should not be interfered with; an
Oriental despot may be extremely cruel without offending
public feeling, and indeed may be all the more successful by
virtue of his cruelty ; but he must not run counter to the
national genius and habits, and this Herod seems to have
carefully refrained from doing. The journey to Jerusalem
which many were undertaking at the autumn Feast could
be combined with the enforced repairing of each to his own
city, for it must be remembered that these northern Jews at
this period were of the two tribes, not of the ten.

An interesting discovery has been made in Egypt bearing
on this point : an order dated A.D. 104 that every Egyptian
must repair to his own home in preparation for the number-
ing of the households. Mr. Kenyon and Mr. Bell append
the following note to this document : " It is a rescript from
the Prefect requiring all persons who were residing out of
their own homes to return to their homes in view of the
approaching census. The analogy between this order and
Luke ii. 1-3 is obvious." l

This may be taken as a parallel to the similar order at
the first numbering in Palestine ; and it tends to show that
when Herod issued his command, he was acting under Roman
orders, and had no choice but to obey. It was not a device
which he had chosen himself with his skill in kingcraft ;

1 British Museum Papyri, iii., p. 124. I am indebted to Professor J. H.
Moulton for directing my attention to this important document. Previously
I had been inclined to think that the method of carrying out the enumeration
on the principle that each man should be counted in his own city might have
originated from Herod. This possibility is now definitely eliminated. The
method was Roman, and the origin may therefore be assigned with perfect
confidence, as Luke assigns it, to the Emperor. 'See Moulton in the Exposi-
tory Times, 1907, p. 41 (October).

Chronology of the Life of Christ 245

it was one that was forced on him, and which he had to
carry into effect.

It is an unfortunate circumstance for the convincingness
of the Author's argument that he states " harmonies " as
if they were arguments. They are in his estimation and
from his point of view arguments ; but in the modern view
they have no value as proof. It would have been a wiser
plan to separate the " harmonies " from the evidence. The
harmonies are in some cases interesting, but, in view of the
feeling in the Bible, what value could it have (even if proved)
that Christ was baptised at a Full Moon ? Such " harmonies "
are valueless coincidences.

The very idea of "harmonies," as Colonel Mackinlay
works them out, will be found repellent by many minds.
But his system of chronology rests, as I am strongly inclined
to think, on a thoroughly sound basis of reasoning. One
cannot yet say that the basis is certain. The subject is
still too obscure and the evidence too scanty. But, in the
words of Professor J. H. Moulton (in the passage just quoted),
"We are getting on. One of the census papers of the
Nativity year will turn up next." When the chronology is
settled, the " harmonies " come in as very noteworthy coin-
cidences,! in which there maybe more than can as yet be
comprehended : the whole structure may be compared to
that of the great Pyramid, in the construction of which
astronomical facts certainly played a part, though it is not
easy to determine where design ends and coincidence
begins.

It becomes only more clear to the reader of this book
that the Gospels are a remarkable structure, resting on
fact and observation, and full of the sort of detail which
can originate only in the actual life of a real personage.

246 VII. The Morning Star

Note. — I may add that my object in the book, Was Christ
Born at Bethlehem ? was to demonstrate the historical possi-
bility of Luke's narrative. I did not try to prove that Christ
was born in B.C. 6 ; but showed that this date offered a per-
fectly reasonable and credible historical sequence of events
in perfect harmony with all other evidence, except the testi-
mony of Tertullian, who gave the date B.C. 8. The proper
year for the Enrolment was the one mentioned by Tertul-
liani; but I showed that a delay of two years was not incon-
ceivable, and in a subsequent article in the Expositor^
November, 1901, p. 321 ff., quoted a parallel case of long
delay. But the testimony of Tertullian is now confirmed
by Colonel Mackinlay's argument that the Enrolment took
place in the proper year B.C. 8 ; and this date may now be
accepted provisionally as the only one which has all the
evidence in its favour.

VIII.
A CRITICISM OF RECENT RESEARCH.

A GOOD many years ago I expressed (I think in the Ex-
positor) the opinion, forced on one who lived far from
Oxford, that Dr. Sanday was to some degree giving up to a
single University what was meant for mankind. This re-
proach— if that can be called reproach which was merely
the recognition of a zealous and strict devotion to the im-
mediate duty — can no longer be uttered in view of the books
with which the Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity has
enriched us in recent years. One perceives that these are
the result of the long period of probation and preparation
to which Dr. Sanday's work has been submitted. The
marked characteristic of his writing is its maturity and
fulness of thought rather than its ingenuity. His books
derive their value, not from bold and brilliant views, which
seem to carry both the writer and the reader away with them
and almost to overmaster the judgment, but from the im-
pression they convey of a reserve of power that lies still
unused behind the written word, of a methodical toning
down of expression to the standard that is inevitable and
convincing. He never strikes one as speaking too strongly,
but always as having pondered over the expression of each
opinion till it is the last and completest word that has to be
said from that point of view. There is no modern writer
who more strongly impresses me with the sense of the moral

(249)

250 VIII. A Criticism of

element which is a necessary part of high intellectual power.
It is a truth which one has often to impress on students at
college, that mere cleverness is a poor and even a dangerous
part of a scholar's equipment, adequate by itself only for the
winning of entrance scholarships and class prizes, but having
no staying power in the race of life. One feels in Dr.
Sanday's work that it is founded and built up on the intense
desire to reach the truth, and that this intense desire has
directed the method, and concentrated the faculties in the
path of knowledge.

The book is made up of a series of lectures and reviews
which have no connection with one another except in two
very important respects, they all belong to one stage and
one period in the evolution of the Author's views, and they
to a large extent spring from a single purpose, viz.> to sum
up and estimate some leading tendencies and results in the
present stage of scholarship. That the various surveys which
are taken of separate parts of the whole field were worked
up to suit different occasions gives an appearance of dis-
jointedness; but the appearance is really only superficial,
and might by slight changes have been in great measure
eliminated, if there were anything to gain by eliminating it.

The opening chapter on the Symbolism of the Bible is a
very simple expression of much careful thought : many
problems have been pondered over for a long time before
it was written, yet they hardly appear above the calm sur-
face. On p. 14, as we see gladly, Dr. Sanday recognises
that " from the very first sacrifice was expressive of ideas ".
The use of the plural shows that he would not admit the
explanation of the origin of the rite of sacrifice from a single
idea, as some scholars would maintain. Sacrifice is the
expression of the human mind in its relation to God, and

Recent Research

251

is as various as the human mind. The thought of primitive
man was simple, but it can never be reduced to one idea
alone. The man who can explain the origin of sacrifice
from one idea is perilously near the discovery of the key to
all mythology, and he who has found that key is hopelessly
lost. You can with sufficient ingenuity always explain —
verbally — anything out of anything ; and thus you can draw
out — on paper — a process of development whereby all
mythology and all sacrifice evolve themselves from a single
origin ; but this process has nothing firmer to rest upon than
the paper on which it is written. Dr. Sanday's words might
easily be taken as indicating the view that there are only
two really primitive ideas in sacrifice, the gift and the sacri-
ficial communion ; but I think that this would be a miscon-
ception, and that, when he speaks of " two ideas that we can
trace farthest," he does not intend to restrict the number to
two, but merely expresses his conviction as to the reality and
certainty of at least these two.

On the other hand, I confess that I cannot entirely sym-
pathise with the point of view expressed in the paragraph at
the foot of p. 9 : " We are not surprised to find that in the
early books of the Bible, where dealings take place between
God and man, the Godhead is represented under human
form. Man was himself the noblest being with which he
was acquainted ; and therefore, in conceiving of a being still
nobler, he necessarily started from his own self-conscious-
ness ; he began by magnifying his own qualities, and only
by degrees did he learn, not only to magnify, but to dis-
criminate between them."

This is, in a way, perfectly proper and sensible. It is
what every one says — perhaps what every one must say —
and yet I do not feel that it is vital or illuminative : it seems

252 VIII. A Criticism of

to leave out the true principle. I should not venture to
attempt to define the true principle : the task is above my
power. But I cannot recognise it in this statement, which
is apt to suggest that the conceptions of the Divine nature
current among the Hebrews began by being anthropomorphic.
This does not convince me. I should rather approach the
problem from the point of view that the early Hebrew con-
ceptions were undeveloped, vague, and capable of future
growth in more than one direction. They might have de-
generated into anthropomorphism, as the Greek conception
did. They were equally capable of development in another
direction ; and they did in fact, under the impulse of a suc-
cession of prophets and thinkers, develop in a nobler and
truer way. But how to describe the unformed germ of early
Hebrew thought I know not.

Difficulties of various kinds impede the attempt to express
oneself clearly on this subject. You cannot speak precisely
about what is essentially vague. It is difficult to project
oneself into the mind of primitive man, or to picture to
oneself what was in his mind. It is also hard for us, who
are accustomed to aim at clearness and precision and definite
outlines, to sympathise with or understand the Oriental ex-
pression which rather shrinks from these qualities and prefers
the vague, the allusive and the indirect. The difference
between the European and the Asiatic mind is, to a large
degree, a mere matter of education lasting through genera-
tions and centuries, but perhaps it is to a certain extent
due to difference of nature and sympathy and endowment.
Most of what Dr. Sanday says on this hard subject seems
to me excellent, illuminative and suggestive ; but not
all.

I much prefer his other term "indirect description" to

Recent Research 253

the word " symbolism " by which he more frequently desig-
nates the Hebrew and Oriental style of expression.

The term " symbolism " which Dr. Sanday prefers, not as
perfect but as the least objectionable, is open to the objection
that the person who speaks symbolically is conscious of the
difference between the symbol and the real thing, and con-
sciously employs the one to stand in place of the other.
That is the case with the symbolic actions of the prophets,
described in the first section of this opening chapter of the
book which we are reviewing, as when Agabus took Paul's
girdle and bound himself with it in token that Paul would
be bound if he went to Jerusalem : the symbolism here was
conscious and intended, and Agabus explained its meaning.

But, as the Author himself says on p. n, the earlier
Hebrews often did not regard the "symbol" as different
from the thing symbolised : the " symbol " was the thing
symbolised. How are we to understand or to describe a
stage of thought when ideas are so vague and so unformed
that they thus pass into one another without any conscious-
ness of the transition ? Take the genealogical fiction, which
plays so important a part in the early history of many peoples,
not merely of the Jews. It was not a fiction in primitive
thought : it expressed a truth in the simplest and most direct
manner in which the natural mind could express it, though
to us the manner seems indirect. The Rev. Dr. White of
Marsovan gives an admirable example that came within his
own experience, where a wandering dervish used this mode
of expression : " He told me that he was a Shukhbazari ;
and then, to enlighten my ignorance, explained that Arabs,
Circassians and Shukhbazaris are own brothers, children of
one father and one mother. He used a Scripture form of
expression to make me understand that the three peoples

254 VIIl. A Criticism of

possessed the same traits of character." The dervish was
merely eager to emphasise the close resemblance in character
between the three peoples. He could think and speak only
in concrete terms : he could not generalise or deal in abstrac-
tions. Yet out of his language, in the process and hardening
of thought, there might rise naturally and easily a genea-
logical fiction: the common father and mother acquire
names, and the three peoples become three sons.

Nor is it merely real similarity of character that may give
origin to this genealogical expression of history. Geo-
graphical contiguity may cause it, or the speaker may express
by it little more than a common diversity from himself. He
looks out over the world, and distinguishes from himself
several peoples of the north-west as being children of one
father different from his father. So in Genesis x. 4 we have
" the sons of Javan : Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and
Dodanim ".

The "genealogical fiction," then, has to be understood
correctly, and it becomes valuable history. Only the un-
sympathetic and unintelligent historical criticism of forty or
fifty years ago, the period of Grote and Cornwall Lewis and
the Tiibinger, would be content to regard it simply as legend,
and leave it out of the sphere of history. But, in order to
understand aright any genealogical myth, we must put our-
selves at the point of view of the person or people who origin-
ated that particular expression. It tells us something about
the peoples whom it correlates to one another : it tells us
more about the person or people who originated it : it tells
us most of all about the standard and range of knowledge,
the limits of geographical outlook, and so on, in the period
when it took the form in which we have it.

Again, what was the conception in the mind of the ancient

Recent Research 255

Hebrew, when he spoke of the messenger (or angel) of the
Lord who conveyed certain knowledge to the mind of a
human being ? Who shall define this conception, or express
exactly the distinction between it and the thought in the
mind of another Hebrew, who used the expression that the
word of the Lord came to a man ? These two phrases belong
to two different stages in the thought of men, who had a
simpler and less clearly defined way of conceiving and ex-
pressing their relation to the unseen Divine power which
surrounds and is always pressing upon man. It is not
mine to define these Hebrew ideas. I do not understand
them. But I do at least feel that they are radically different
from the anthropomorphic conception of the Hellenes. And
I feel in a vague way that Luke the Hellene has unconsciously
and unintentionally transfused a Hebrew view into a Greek
view, when he described the angel of the Annunciation.
He seems to have thought of such an appearance as Iris
makes in the Iliad ; but I doubt if that was the idea in the
Hebrew mind of her from whom the story came. It is not
to be supposed that Luke added or invented any detail.
The name Gabriel beyond all question comes from the
Hebrew authority and belongs to the obscure later Hebrew
development of the angelic idea, when the power of God,
conceived as acting in different directions, was endowed
with various names ; and in this stage there was certainly a
certain approach to anthropomorphism, as Hebrew thought
was being misdeveloped and clothed with defined but false
form. Luke, however, was simply translating into Greek a
Hebrew narrative, rethinking it and then expressing it, but
in rethinking it he unavoidably gave it a more Hellenic
form.

But here lies the problem that is proposed to the modern

256 VIII. A Criticism of

student of ancient history. He must entirely dissociate
himself from the accepted method of investigating the
ancient documents — what is called the "critical" method.
He must forget the modern dichotomy of the world into the
"educated" and the "savage" races. He must separate
the primitive man alike from the "educated" and the
" savages " of modern time ; for men in the early stage
were neither one nor the other, but contained the possibility
of both.

In the second half of this most interesting chapter, Dr.
Sanday proceeds to apply to the Gospels the inferences
which he has drawn from the use of " symbolism " in the Old
Testament The discussion of the Temptation of Jesus
occupies the largest space in this part, and is of peculiar
interest to the present reviewer. The Temptation is in Dr.
Sanday's view entirely a parable (if I am not wholly mis-
understanding him). His idea of the Temptation is expressed
in the picture by W. Dyce — " a monotonous landscape and
a Figure seated upon a stone, with the hands clasped, and
an expression of intense thought on the beautiful but by no
means effeminate features". Not that he regards this as the
only correct representation of the Temptation. As he says,
" it would be a mistake if we were to insist too much upon
this contrast [z>., the contrast between the subjective
modern view, and that of Tissot with a conventional fiend,
or of mediaeval painters with every detail sharp and definite],
as though the modern presentation were right and true,
and the ancient or mediaeval wrong and untrue. Each is
really right in its place : they mean fundamentally the same
thing, and it is only the symbolical expression that is
different"

With Dr. Sanday's view I find myself on the whole in

Recent Research

257

thorough sympathy. That the story of the Temptation
is largely of the nature of parable seems established by the
Gospels themselves. I venture, as being the briefest way
in which I can express my criticism of the present study,
to quote part, and to abbreviate part, of what I once wrote
on the subject (The Education of Christ \ p. 31 f.): "The
authority obviously is the account given by Himself to His
disciples ; and we are told that c without a parable spake He
not to them '. How far the details partake of the nature of
parable, intended to make transcendental truth intelligible
to the simple fishermen, we cannot precisely tell, and no man
ought to dogmatise. But no one can doubt as to the essential
truth that lies under the narrative." Jesus counted the
cost before He began His career : He thought of other
possibilities, brilliant and tempting ; and He rejected them
as temptations. It is involved in the Temptation, when He
described it to His disciples, that He was already con-
scious of the superhuman powers and opportunities that
were His, if He chose to use them for personal ends. If
you regard the story as anything beyond pure fiction, you
must accept the superhuman consciousness of Him who was
tempted by means such as are here brought to bear on Jesus.
As a whole the temptations are meaningless and absurd, if
applied to an ordinary man. It is mere trifling or sarcasm
to say to a man who is hungry, " command that these stones
become loaves ".

If Jesus could think and speak of this as a temptation, He
must have been conscious of His own superhuman power ;
and at the time when He related the incident to His disciples,
He must have been already regarded by them as possessed
of such power. Even the idea that the Temptation was
either partly parable, or entirely and purely a symbolic way

258 VIII. A Criticism of

of explaining a thought too high for the capacity of simple
uneducated fishermen and rustics to comprehend, implies in
the person who related this story about Himself the con-
sciousness of powers and opportunities beyond the range of
mere humanity and the knowledge that His hearers had some
vague sympathetic conception of this nature. Accordingly,
those who hold and carry out logically the theory that Jesus
was a mere human being and that He was during His life-
time regarded only as a human being by His associates,
must necessarily dismiss the story of the Temptation as pure
legend, the invention of a later age, and must deny to it the
character of a parable spoken by Jesus.

If I understand Dr. Sand ay rightly, there is nothing in
this statement that would disagree with his views. The only
word of question that I would make with regard to his ex-
pression of them, is whether in the desire to give clearness to
his lecture (such was the original form of the first chapter)
he has not made it in some parts too clear and sharp and
definite in outline, too strongly modern in tone : though
the quotation which I have extracted from his book attests
his recognition of the fact that every age must and may
look at the Temptation with different eyes, and all perhaps
equally rightly.

Some may probably be afraid that Dr. Sanday's use of
symbolism may, from his premises, be quite logically carried
very far, much farther than he carries it or they would like.
But in an admirable concluding page he sums up the true
attitude of mind and the right temper in which historical
study ought to be carried on. With certain obvious modifi-
cations, what he says here is applicable to every department
of ancient history. A certain sympathy for peoples and
times and ideas remote from our own, an intense desire to

Recent Research 259

comprehend them, a determined effort to throw off the fet-
ters of nineteenth century views and to rise to a freer outlook,
a contempt for narrow reasoning and hard logicality (which
in these historical problems is often thoroughly illogical in
the higher sense of the term logic), all these are needed in the
reconstruction of ancient history and the interpretation of
ancient literature. But hear how delicately and finely Dr.
Sanday describes this attitude of mind : it "consists mainly
in three things : —

" i. In a spirit of 'reverence for old ideas, which may perhaps
be transcended, but which discharged a very important
function in their day ;

" 2. In a spirit of patience which, because those ideas may
be transcended, does not at once discard and renounce them,
but seeks to extract their full significance ;

" 3. In an open mindim the real extent of this significance.1
We have our treasure, perhaps, in earthen vessels, but the
vessels are themselves very deserving of study. I would
say rather that, for the purpose before us, we should not
think of them exactly as earthen, but as made of some finer
and more transparent material which permits us to see through
to the light within."

A survey of recent research would be an impertinent and
valueless production if it were simply a cataloguing of faults
and a statement of dissent. One is familiar with the criticism
written by the able young graduate, fresh from the schools,
whose condescending recognition of merit is as rare as a grain
of wheat in a bushel of chaff, whose principal aim seems to
be to show how much better he could have done the work,

1 The mind open to hear evidence is what we all desire, but none of us
fully possesses. We are all to some extent prejudiced by training, predilec-
tion, etc. The truest scholar has the most open mind. See above, p. 34 f.

26o VIII. A Criticism of

if he had cared to undertake it, than the author, and who has
evidently never made any serious attempt to understand the
book which he criticises, but merely touched it on the out-
side and gone off at a tangent. Criticism of this kind is
unerquicklich wie der Nebelwind.

Totally different is the character of Dr. Sanday's work.
He appreciates thoroughly the high principle that it is
the function of true criticism to find excellences, not
defects. He tells us what he finds that is good in each of
the authors whom he criticises; he expresses his dissent
only where necessary to bring out the state of modern
opinion ; and he expresses it in very gentle and gracious
terms. The sharpest statement of disapproval which I
observe is that on p. 171 ; and yet how much it is qualified
by preceding sentences of genuine hearty praise. I quote
the whole passage : " I have a sincere respect, and even
admiration, for perhaps five-sixths of his work, including
particularly — I should like to say in' passing — his reviews
of the literature of Patristics, in which he has been at once
just and generous to some of my friends here in Oxford.
I repeat that the pamphlet from which I started is not only
good but in many ways very good. One may go on for
wide stretches in his books and find only occasion to admire.
And yet every now and then one is pulled up sharp by
passages like those of which I have been speaking, which, I
confess, move me to indignation, so narrow are they, and so
hard, so deficient in sympathy and in intelligence for the
difference between one age and another."

A quality in Dr. Sanday which strikes me as peculiarly
admirable — perhaps because I lack it too much — is his
power of learning from writers who are so antipathetic to him.
If a commentator is devoid of sympathy for the ancient

Recent Research 261

author about whom he is writing, or lacks insight into the
more delicate and subtle aspects of the text which he is
discussing, I can hardly force myself to read him ; he has
nothing for me ; and I neither learn from him (except that
he sometimes makes me understand through antagonism
passages which I might otherwise have failed to comprehend)
nor criticise him. But we have just seen how Dr. Sanday
can respect and admire five-sixths of an author whose re-
maining sixth part moves him to indignation.

Now let us see how he expresses himself about another
writer, who "has directness and ability, and never minces
matters ; as I have said, he belongs to no school, and repeats
the formulae of no school. But he writes in the style of a
Prussian official. He has all the arrogance of a certain kind
of common sense. H is mind is mathematical, with something
of the stiffness of mathematics — a mind of the type which
is supposed to ask of everything, What does it prove?
It is a mind that applies the standards to which it is accus-
tomed with very little play of historical imagination. If
it cannot at once see the connection of cause and effect,
it assumes that there is no connection. It makes no allow-
ance for deficiencies of knowledge, for scantiness of sources
and scantiness of detail contained in the sources, for the very
imperfect reconstruction of the background that alone is
possible to us. If there is upon the surface some appearance
of incoherence or inconsequence, it is at once inferred that
there is real incoherence and inconsequence. And the
narrative is straightway rejected as history; though a
little reflection would show that life is full of these seeming
inconsistencies, and would be fuller still if our knowledge of
the events going on around us did not supply us with the
links of connection which make them intelligible. He argues

262 VIII. A Criticism of

as though we could exhaust the motives of the actors in
events that happened nearly nineteen hundred years ago,
whereas nothing is more certain than that we cannot in the
least come near exhausting them."

On one somewhat important matter I find myself, to my
great regret, distinctly in opposition to my friend the
Author (to whose counsel and help and never-failing en-
couragement I owe so much). He seems to me to estimate
too highly the possibilities of discovery which purely literary
criticism offers : while I seem to him to undervalue them.
This is a question that requires more space than can here
be given to it; but my impression is that the great and
epoch-making steps in advance come from non-literary,
external, objective discovery, and that the literary critics
adopt these with admirable and praiseworthy facility as soon
as the facts are established, and quickly forget that they
themselves (or their predecessors) used to think otherwise,
and would still be thinking otherwise, if new facts had not
been supplied to them. Nothing gives me such interest, and
so illustrates human nature, as to observe how principles of
literary criticism of the Old Testament, which were accepted
as self-evident when I was studying the subject under
Robertson Smith's guidance about 1878, are now scorned
and set aside as quite absurd and outworn by the modern
literary critics. But it was not literary criticism that made
the advance: it was hard external facts that turned the
literary critics from their old path, and they have utterly
forgotten how the change came about.

Moreover, it sometimes seems to my humble judgment
that Dr. Sanday is unconsciously guided by the prepossession
that there must be a certain residuum of truth in some
clever treatise which he has been reading; and he finds

Recent Research 263

this residuum by dividing the writer's total estimated result
by 10 or by 100.

He finds the English scholars on the whole to be nearer
the truth, the Germans to be more educative and suggestive.
I agree with him to a certain extent. I owe to the Germans
almost all the stimulus of my early years, and I owe to
several of them also almost all the encouragement which
I received at the beginning when I needed it most, and for
which I can never be sufficiently grateful to them. But now
I find the English most useful, because they often give me
facts without views, while the majority of the German writers
start from a definite and fixed theory, which one may almost
call a prejudice. They assume — many of them — the whole
in the opening paragraph of the book ; and often it seems
as if one could draw out the whole reasoning of a treatise
in inexorable logic after reading the opening assumptions.

I must find room for another saying, which seems pro-
foundly true and far too generally neglected : " The fact
is that the Judaism of the time of Christ had a wider and
more open horizon than that of a hundred years later. The
result of the terrific and almost superhuman efforts that
the Jews made to throw off the Roman yoke was a long
reaction that has lasted almost to our own time. When
the great effort failed, Judaism withdrew into its shell :
it contracted its outlook and turned in upon itself. It gave
up the hope of Divine intervention that had at one time
seemed so near, and was content to brood upon its past."
Several times, in a quite different line of thought, I have had
to protest against the prejudice that the later Jewish customs
and thought can be regarded as the norm according to
which we must judge about Jewish practice and views in
the first century before and after Christ. Dr. Sanday

264 VIII. A Criticism of

here states the true historical principle in a direct and
uncompromising fashion ; and the passage from which
I have quoted a few words is as well worth study as any-
thing in the whole space of these carefully thought-out
lectures.

In the style one is often also struck by an apparently
unconscious tendency on Dr. Sanday's part to use military
metaphors, to think like a soldier, and to count and marshal
his thoughts as methodically as a general estimates and orders
his force, not after the bold and creative fashion of a Caesar,
who discomfits his opponent by sheer audacity and almost
superhuman rapidity, and who imbues his army with some-
thing of his own genius and resourcefulness, but after the
fashion of a capable leader, trained to make the best use of
the forces that are placed at his disposal. So, for example,
" exactly five-sixths of Jiilicher's work is good and even admir-
able " ; and " the histories of Elijah and Elisha are much nearer
— indeed quite near — to the events ".

Other examples of similar character are : —

" Weinel's book is up to a good average, and Steinmann's
perhaps somewhat above it " (p. 44).

" I welcome much of his criticism both on the right hand
and on the left " (p. 44).

" With us dashing and desultory raids are apt to take the
place of what is in Germany the steady disciplined advance
of a regularly mobilised army " (p. 42).

" Whatever advance is made is made all along the line "

(P- 40.

Taken in conjunction with what is said in the opening
paragraph of the present article, these extracts seem to be
indicative of the methodical character of the Author's mind
and the orderly progress of his studies. The development

Recent Research 265

of a scholar is always an interesting study, certainly to other
scholars, and probably also to the world at large ; and this
quality seems to lie at the basis of the Author's intellectual
power. In this connection I need make no apology for
another observation, even though it may perhaps seem to
some people to savour of a too personal scrutiny.

In this book which now lies before us I am struck with
one difference, and, as I venture to think, improvement
in the style from his earlier writings — I am not referring
to English composition but to scientific exposition of opinion.
Dr. Sanday uses the simple first person singular more
frequently than he did in an earlier period of his work.
This usage is not necessarily egotistic ; in scientific work
it is rarely egotistic ; it is the briefest and most direct way
of calling attention to the subjectivity, and therefore neces-
sarily the uncertainty, of a statement : it is a danger flag, not
a claim of personal ownership. When a view seems to be
proved and trustworthy, one states it in the impersonal
language of science ; when it is advisable to call attention
to the subjective element in a view, and to warn the reader
that it is as yet only opinion (as one believes, true opinion),
but not thoroughly reasoned and assured knowledge,1 one
uses the personal form.

1 In Platonic language, it is o.\-r\Q^ 5<f£o, but not

IX.

HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE
HOLY LAND.

IX.

HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE
HOLY LAND.

IN venturing to write a review of Professor G. A. Smith's
Historical Geography of the Holy Land, I feel somewhat like
"the man in the street" attempting to criticise a work of
fine scholarship. But the wish that I should do so has been
expressed by those whom I am unwilling to disobey ; and
perhaps the impression made by the book on a bystander,
who is interested in the game of Old Testament study,
though not himself able to play, may possess some slight
interest, and warrant the following paragraphs in appearing
before the public. Besides having myself studied with some
minuteness the Historical Geography of another part of
Western Asia, I have had the advantage of frequently talk-
ing about the early history of the Hebrew people with my
friend Professor Robertson Smith, and of reading under his
guidance in 1878 everything that he thought most valuable
on the criticism and interpretation of the Mosaic books and
the historical books of the Old Testament — a long piece of
work which afterwards proved a most valuable education for
the problems that face the historical investigator in Asia
Minor. Naturally, after such a course as was marked out
by Robertson Smith, one retains a permanent interest in
the subject; and this interest has made me welcome most
heartily a book which attacks that fascinating problem in a

(269)

270 IX. Historical Geography

new way, bringing new methods of analysis to the investiga-
tion, and applying them with a union of boldness and caution
and free, wide view that is most refreshing after the niggling
way in which many of the recent investigations about Asia
Minor (over which I have had to spend too much time) are
composed. Here we have an investigator who sets himself
to master the problem as a whole, who tries to conceive
clearly the general disposition and character of the land
about which he is to treat, to view it always in association
with man and with history, and to understand the interrela-
tion of its parts, and then proceeds to take his readers along
the same path that he has trod. He has seen the places
with the reconstructive eye and the warm, creative imagina-
tion of the historian; he has inhaled the atmosphere with
the love and enthusiasm that breathe through his pages, and
make the reader fancy that he can catch the same breath.

A writer on Historical Geography could get nowhere
else so favourable a field as Professor G. A. Smith has found.
Not only does an eternal interest cling to it ; it is also a land
of singularly well-marked features, easy to understand and
easy to bring home to the reader's understanding; and
further, it is a small land, which can be pictured with that
breadth and fulness of treatment that are necessary to make
the scenes and facts live before the reader — and yet within
reasonable compass. And, having a good subject, the author
uses his advantage to the full, giving us a book which is of
the first importance as opening up a fresh path of study. It
applies the modern methods of united historical and geo-
graphical investigation to the department where preposses-
sions and inherited prejudices were strongest, and where
methods too purely literary absorbed the energy of the more
free and unprejudiced scholars. It applies them, too, with

of the Holy Land 271

a spirit of free, lofty and generous enthusiasm, that makes
it fascinating from the first to the last page. It is, of course,
far from completing its task ; it is really only the first open-
ing up of what will hereafter prove a fruitful field of study.
No one appreciates that fact better than Professor Smith
himself; and when the critic tries to estimate the future that
is opened up before us by this book — in other words, the
problems that it leaves unattempted or unsolved, — he feels
that the author himself would be best able to look out over
the vista in front.

There remain many sites which have to be localised
much more precisely before the full bearing of the incidents
connected with them becomes plain. This important part of
the subject Professor Smith has avoided — wisely and rightly
for his immediate purpose — but it must be faced hereafter
either by him or by others. See, for example, pages 221, 222,
where Professor Smith brings out very clearly both the local
character and vividness of the tale of Samson, and also the
obscurity in which it must remain involved until the localities
are more fully identified.

Book II., Western Palestine, nearly 400 pages in length,
is the main part of the volume, and shows Professor Smith at
his best. He is most familiar with this part of the country,
and he has put forth all his strength on the elucidation of
the many incidents which he has to introduce. Every page,
almost, seems more interesting than the preceding; one
must go through it steadily with the map and the authorities
by one's side in order to appreciate the character of the
book. The only criticism which one can make on it in
reasonable compass is — read it.

Book III., on Eastern Palestine, seemed to me less satis-
factory than any other part of the book. The questions

272 IX. Historical Geography

which have to be treated here are not so purely Hebrew,
but take us into a wider range of history. Perhaps it is
due to the necessity of bringing the book, already a long
one, to an end ; perhaps it arises from the fact that much of
the history of the East country appeals to a different class
of readers ; but the treatment as a whole is thinner in this
part; the subject has not naturally the same interest as
that of Book II., and is, I think, not handled with so sure a
touch as the main part of the work. To take one example :
there are on page 635 several statements from which I must
express dissent. Professor Smith is here giving examples
of the difference of tone between Christian and pagan epi-
taphs in the Hauran ; and contrasts the hopelessness of the
latter with the " quiet confidence" of the former. Such a
contrast is often obvious in literature ; but I doubt whether
it can fairly be traced in the epitaphs of either the Hauran
or of Asia Minor.

He says "icai <ru, Even thou, is a common memento mori".
I have always thought that this is the supposed reply of the
deceased to the greeting presumed to be uttered by the
passer-by ; it occurs sometimes in the fully expressed form,
%alpe - xalpe /cal crv, i.e., " Farewell," " Fare-thou-well
also". Again we read that " ' thou hast finished ' is a com-
mon epitaph ". But the verb reXeyrao) had come to be used
regularly in the sense of "to die" from the fifth century
B.C. downwards ; and no such connotation as Professor Smith
supposes could, I think, have been present to the epitaph-
writers of the Hauran. Hence the epitaph which he next
quotes must be translated, " Titus, Malchus' son, farewell !
Thou hast died ere thy prime (at the age) of twelve years —
Farewell."' The last word is the reply of Titus to the
greeting, and the epitaph is far from favouring the contrast

of the Holy Land 273

which Professor Smith draws. Still less do his next examples
support his case : " the dead are told that theirs is the in-
evitable fate, no one is immortal". But the formula on
which he relies, ov&ek dOdvaros, is very often Christian,
and not, as Professor Smith argues, pagan. Once or twice it
occurs in doubtful cases, but Waddington 2032, 2050, and
Ewing I63,1 are epitaphs containing the common and typical

Christian formula, eV#aSe Kelrai, Here lies ; while

Waddington 2459 'ls> as tne editor remarks, clearly Christian
(being one of the most interesting Christian epitaphs of
Eastern Palestine, belonging probably to the third century,
and being engraved while Christian formulae were still fluid,
and had not yet become fixed and stereotyped). Wadding-
ton 1 897 is also almost certainly Christian ; the name Domi-
tilla is one of the most interesting of early Christian names.
The formula Odpo-ei, Be of good cheer, which often precedes
ovSels dOdvaros, would alone be almost sufficient to mark
the whole as Christian, and to show that the hopelessness
which Professor Smith finds in the phrase is not really there :
• the precise sense in which the words should be taken is " no
one is free from death," rather than, as he maintains, " no
one is immortal ".2 It is quite probable that the phrase was
adopted from pagan epitaphs 3 by the Christians, as many

1 Mr. Ewing's inscriptions will be published in the ensuing Quarterly
Statement of the Palestine Exploration Fund by Mr. A. A. G. Wright and
Mr. A. Souter, two of my recent pupils in Aberdeen.

2 In n. 4 he quotes Wadd. 1986 as pagan, but Waddington considers it
as Christian (in my opinion rightly). In n. 5 " Wadd. 2429 " seems to be a
wrong reference.

3 [Examples probably pagan occur in Bulletin de Corr. Hell., 1902, pp.
175, 186 ; but it is elsewhere usually Christian (see Studies in the Eastern
Roman Provinces, 1906, p. 129). Fourteen years' further experience has shown
how frequently the exclamations, which are treated in the text, occur in
Christian inscriptions.]

274 IX. Historical Geography

other forms were, but most of the cases in which it occurs are
clearly Christian, and the contrast which Professor Smith
founds on it cannot be maintained.

In another interesting little inscription, mentioned on the
same page, Professor Smith restores pera irawa Ta(<£e>9),
After all things a tomb; but on the analogy of common
formulae, such as o /3to? ravra, Life is — this, I should prefer
//,era Trdvra Ta(vTa), After all — this.1

I have dwelt on this page at some length, because the
line of demarcation between Christian and non-Christian
epitaphs is a very delicate one, and there is no point in
antiquity on which more mistakes are made, while it is of
peculiar interest and even of importance to notice the gradual
steps by which the Christians separated themselves from the
customs and ways of ordinary society around them, and
created a code of manners and forms distinctive of them-
selves.2

Perhaps some readers may find the discussion of general
principles contained in Book I., The Land as a Whole, the
least interesting part of this fascinating volume ; but for my
own part, it appeals to me with almost greater interest than
Books II. or III. The descriptive part of Book I. is lumin-
ous and most successful, but I confess to being rather dis-

1 An excellent parallel in thought and in expression occurs in an inscrip-
tion of the Phrygian Hierapolis, which seems to Waddington No. 1687 (as
well as to myself) to be Christian, elScbs '6n rb re\os vpuv rov piov ravra. It
is given more accurately in many points as No. 28 in my forthcoming Cities
and Bishoprics of Phrygia. In Bulletin de Corr. Hell., iii., p. 144, a long
metrical epitaph and curse ends with Tavra in a line by itself: " So much ".

2 1 notice also that on p. 544 Professor Smith remarks that Tacitus (whom
I had quoted on my side in a discussion of the name Ituraei) is against me : he
must have made some mistake, for the MSS. and all good editions are with
me. Some school editions and English translations use the term Ituraea as
a noun, which is unknown (as I have proved) to the ancients.

of the Holy Land 275

appointed with the general reflections on the bearing which
Historical Geography has on the criticism of the Hebrew
authorities. These are rather vaguely and slightly indicated ;
they seem to express the general ideas with which one might
approach the subject for the first time rather than the cream
of the results which one gathers from the doing of the work ;
and I should imagine that chapter v., in which they are
contained, was written before Book II., and did not spring
from a mind filled with the facts and the method applied in
that part.

The first four chapters of Book I. deal with "the place
of Syria in the world's history," and with the form, climate
and scenery of the land ; and, finally, chapter vi. places the
reader at two points of view from which to acquire a general
idea of the effect produced by the characteristics described
in the preceding chapters, viz.) on the deck of a steamer1
and on the top of Mount Ebal beside Shechem. The rela-
tion of Arabia to Syria (including Palestine) and of Syria
to the outer world are set before us very suggestively in
chapter i. The Arabian tribes, always in process of growing
too numerous for their bare and barren land, are ever also in
process of forcing themselves into the surrounding countries,
sometimes in peaceful emigration, generally in the guise of
marauders or conquerors ; but of the four paths open to them,
the path of Syria is the easiest, and the one most trodden
by them throughout history. The frontier tribes of the
Arabian wilderness have been constantly pressing in on the
fertile lands of Syria. So long as Syria has been held by
strong, energetic rulers the nomads are kept back, or are

lOa p. 119 there is a harshness of expression. The steamer is sailing
north from Jaffa, but the places seen are enumerated as going south. Yet we
cannot read south for north.

276 IX. Historical Geography

allowed to enter only as peaceful emigrants or as useful
mercenaries in the service of the Syrian Government ; for,
while their warlike and restless character makes them a
terror to the settled Syrian peoples, who become steadily
less fit for war by continuance of peace, it also makes them
excellent soldiers to recruit the Syrian armies. Thus it is
impossible for any Arabian tribe to continue very long a
frontier-tribe ; an unvarying law pushes on each in succes-
sion towards and over the frontier ; and this constant immi-
gration tends to invigorate the Syrian population and keep
it from stagnating in Oriental peasant life. So the Hebrews
forced their way into Canaan. So also the Ituraeans, whom
we first hear about in the late period when Chronicles was
composed 1 as warring on the eastern frontier against Reuben,
Gad and Manasseh, gradually forced their way on towards
Anti-Lebanon (in the position where they are represented in
the maps attached to Professor Smith's work) and even
penetrated in part across Anti-Lebanon into the fertile valley
of " Hollow Syria," taking advantage of the disorganisation
caused by the decay of the Seleucid Empire after B.C. 190.,
Had not the Seleucid power been soon replaced by the
strong hand of Rome, in all probability the Ituraei would
have overrun Syria entirely, in pursuance of that eternal law
of succession by which the effete dynasties and peoples of
the East are swept away by fresh vigorous conquerors, a
process which the support of Europe, propping up the worn-
out stock of Turkish or Hindu or other dynasties, has some-
times stopped, always to the great detriment of their subjects.
There seems to be a curious and deep-seated variation

1 While these wars are projected into a remoter period by the writer, it is
probable that he took the name of this nomad tribe from the facts of his own
time. The Septuagint reads 'Irovpcuoi in i Chron. v. 19.

of the Holy Land 277

between two different points of view as regards the religion
and development of Israel. We read, e.g., " Monotheism
was born, not, as M. Renan says, in Arabia, but in Syria "
(p. 113) ; and Professor Smith goes on to argue that, as the
character of Syria and its peoples is so opposed to mono-
theism, we are driven to "the belief that the monotheism
which appeared upon it was ultimately due to direct super-
human revelation". So also on page 90, " those spiritual
forces which, in spite of the opposition of nature, did create
upon Syria the monotheistic creed of Israel ".

Such passages as these are quite in accordance with that
view of Hebrew history which sees in it a gradual rise to-
wards a loftier and purer conception of God and of the
Divine nature, as the people under the guidance of its
prophets disengaged itself step by step from the grosser
religion which was once shared by the Hebrews with the
other Semitic races. On that theory it would be quite
natural to assert positively that the Hebrew monotheism
arose in Syria, not in Arabia. But alongside of this view,
sometimes even in the same paragraph with it, we find
another, which seems — so far as I can venture to judge —
to be inconsistent with it, and to involve an opposite view
of the character of Hebrew history, viz., the traditional
view that the lofty character of Hebrew religion was im-
pressed on it, once for all, in Arabia, not in Syria, that
constant lapses from the purity of this religion occurred
amid the seductions and temptations of Syrian surround-
ings, that the prophets resisted these lapses and recalled
the people to the original purity of their faith, expounding
and unfolding in detail the character of that faith, and
applying it to each new political and social situation that
arose, but not making it loftier or purer, for it was abso-

278 IX. Historical Geography

lutely lofty and pure from the first. Take, for example,
the words on page 89: "the conception of Israel's early
history which prevails in Deuteronomy, viz., that the nation
suffered a declension from a pure and simple estate of life
and religion to one which was gross and sensuous, from the
worship of their own deity to the worship of many local
gods, is justified in the main — I do not say in details, but in
the main — by the geographical data, and by what we know
to have been the influence of these at all periods in history ".
But, in truth, what are called the moderate critics seem
all — in the rough judgment of ignorant outsiders, such as
the present writer — to be involved in the same double point
of view, and to be attempting to combine two different (and
I would add irreconcilable) theories in their attitude towards
the history of Israel. I am, of course, not speaking about
the recognition of the composite nature of the law-books
and the older class of historical records : those who do not
recognise that fact occupy a position so diametrically oppo-
site to mine that we can see nothing alike, and there can be
no profitable discussion between us. But to those who
recognise that fact there remains a further, and, I think;
far more important question, viz., as to the relation between
the various component parts of these books — one might say
between the different strata, were it not that the very word
strata implies and presupposes a settled opinion in regard
to the question which is put before us for settlement. That
question has been answered by almost all critics in one way,
viz., the relation between the components is one of time, and
the differences between them are due to gradual develop-
ment of religious feeling and organisation in the nation.
Those critics who carry out that principle logically and con-
sistently form the extreme critical school ; those who accept

of the Holy Land 279

it, but shrink with wise caution from the full consequences of
their own position, are the moderate critics. Professor Driver
puts the point in his usual clear, well-defined and unmistak-
able way, in his Introduction^ page 80 : " Can any one read
the injunctions respecting sacrifices and feasts in Exodus
xxiii. 14-19 beside those in P (Lev. i.-vii., Num. xxviii.-
xxix., for instance), and not feel that some centuries must
have intervened between the simplicity which marks the one
and the minute specialisation which is the mark of the other ? "
Any one who feels compelled to give to that question the
answer that Dr. Driver desires is making the assumption
that the principle of the extreme critical school is right,
though his natural practical sense makes him shrink from
carrying it out with ruthless logic. Neither the wise states-
man nor the wise scholar can permit himself to be thoroughly
consistent in carrying into practice the one-sided and in-
complete principles which occasionally he does not shrink
from enunciating in theory. It is a fair answer to Dr.
Driver's question to say that other reasons besides lapse of
time have been found sufficient to cause differences of this
class,1 and that no sufficient reasons have yet been brought
forward to prove that no other cause except progressive
development can account for the great difference which all

JFor example, if in A.D. 1860 two able American statesmen, deep in
practical politics, but of opposite parties, had been set separately to the task
of formulating the principles of the American constitution, they would have
produced very different books, at variance on many most fundamental points.
Of course the many centuries of organised civilisation that lay behind them
would have forced on them a great amount of similarity in other points;
whereas no causes existed to produce such similarity in the case of the
Hebrew tribes, who brought with them into Palestine, as we assume, a lofty
religion and moral law, which none of them had fully comprehended and
worked into their nature, much less developed into a practical working
system of ritual and life.

280 IX. Historical Geography

of us wish to understand. I entertain no opinion on the
point : I am merely seeking for information ; and I do not
find any one who faces fairly the question as a whole. All
seem to me to start with their faces set determinedly
towards one side of it alone.

When I say "no sufficient reasons" for the answer ex-
pected have been given as yet, it is necessary to except the
thorough and "advanced" critics, whose position is quite
logical and complete. They carry out thoroughly their
view that a gradual, progressive and perfectly natural de-
velopment took place on the soil of Syria, and infer that
those parts of the Hebrew documents which imply a de-
clension from a primitive revelation spring from a late mis-
representation of early history, in which the steps of ascent
were described as successive recoveries from lapses and
errors. Professor Smith seems in some places to use this
principle, and yet on the whole to declare that geographical
study is opposed to it. But it would lead us too far to ex-
emplify and make clear the results which, if I may venture
to criticise his method, seem to me to spring from this
unconscious inconsistency in principle.1 I may however say
that, if a fuller discussion of the subject were possible, I
should take exception to Professor Smith's fundamental con-

1 A few slips of expression may be noticed here, which it would be well
to correct in a later edition : p. 25, 1. 5, Africa was not made a Roman pro-
vince till B.C. 146 ; pp. 22-23, note, read Kronos for Chronos, and &airv\oi for
)3eTuAat (a form which is not given in the Thesaurus of Stephanus) twice ; p.
17, note, it is too vague to quote " Porphyry in the Acta Sanctorum," for
there are over sixty folio volumes of that work; p. 35, 1. 13, the number fif-
teen is too small (I notice often a tendency to state numbers rather low),
Nazareth is decidedly more than that from Cassarea, and is not within fif-
teen miles of any point on the coast, if the maps are right. The accentuation
of Greek words is often incorrect or wholly wanting (see, e.g., pp. 4, 22, 23,
356, 406, 415, 442, 455, 483).

of the Holy Land 281

trast between most of the Semitic religions on the one hand
as being purely polytheistic, and, on the other hand, the three 1
monotheistic religions, which arose among the Semites. I
cannot agree with the view that the character of the other
Semitic religions is adequately expressed by calling them
"polytheistic": the term " multiplicity-in-unity " seems to
express their nature better.2

1 " Three " on p. 28, " two " on p. 29, by a natural variation in the
thought.

2 See above, pp. 12 f. and 200. The present article (published in 1894) is
reprinted mainly in order to illustrate the difficulty that we of the West
experience in attempting to understand the Semitic and Oriental ideas of
religion ; and to show how they have been turned over in the writer's mind
year after year with a growing appreciation of the difficulty. Much that we
call " Oriental " in religion is really only early and undeveloped, and our
difficulty is to project ourselves into a primitive period and to sympathise
with inchoate thought.

ST. PAUL'S USE OF METAPHORS FROM
GREEK AND ROMAN LIFE.

THE late Dean Howson, in an interesting little book on the
Metaphors of St. Paul, well described the difference between
the Old and the New Testaments in regard to the range and
character of figurative language. In the New Testament
" we find ourselves in contact with circumstances far more
nearly resembling those which surround us in modern life ;
we are on the borders or in the heart of Greek civilisation
and we are always in the midst of the Roman Empire".
Especially is this the case with St. Paul. He was a master
of all the education and the opportunities of his time. He
turned to his profit and to the advancement of his great
purpose all the resources of civilisation. He draws his
illustrations from a certain range of thought and know-
ledge, and this reveals the scope of his education and his
interests.

Dean Howson points out that " his metaphors are usually
drawn, not from the operations and phenomena of the natural
world, but from the activities and the outward manifestations
of human life," and that in this respect he stands in marked
contrast with most of the writers in the Bible. " The vapour,
the wind, the fountain, beasts and birds and serpents, the
flower of the grass, the waves of the sea, the early and latter
rain, the sun risen with a burning heat— these are like the
figures of the ancient prophets, and there is more imagery

(285)

286 X. St. Paul's

of this kind in the one short Epistle of St. James than in all
the speeches and letters of St. Paul put together." 1

Paul's favourite figures are taken from the midst of the
busiest human society and city life, e.g., from the market —
"Owe no man anything but to love one another" (Rom.
xiii. 8), " I am debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians "
(Rom. i. 14), " Make your market to the full of the oppor-
tunity"2 (which the world offers, Eph. v. 16 ; Col. iv. 5),
" wages " (Rom. vi. 23) — and the word " riches " is a specially
characteristic mark of his style. Another metaphor of this
class is " I count," \oyi&fj,cu ; but this word, though strictly
it was a figure taken from the keeping of accounts, was in
such familiar and habitual use that Paul may often have em-
ployed it without any clear consciousness of the metaphor,
simply adopting it from ordinary semi-philosophic language.
The Romans were particularly methodical accountants, and
it is noteworthy that Paul uses this and other terms of the
same kind 3 more frequently in writing to the Romans than
anywhere else, as if unconsciously his mind was thinking in
a more Roman fashion. But the idea is Greek, although
such metaphors were less frequently used by the Greeks
than by the pragmatic and methodical Romans ; and Paul
of course had no need to go to Roman life in search of it.
Still the fact remains that the Romans make much more
frequent use of the metaphor, " enter in the account-book,"
than the Greeks. In Cicero's letters this metaphor is ex-
tremely frequent.

The Romans also carefully distinguish between entering
on the credit and on the debit side of the account-book
(ferre expensum and acceptum referre\ whereas \oyLfypeu is

1Howson, p. 131. *St. Paul the Traveller, p. 149.

r times in Romans, once in Gal., not elsewhere.

Greek and Roman Metaphors 287

used for both. In Rom. ii. 26, iv. 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, n, 22, 24,
ix. 8 ; 2 Cor. v. 19, xii. 6 ; 2 Tim. iv. 16, \oy[£ofji,ai means
"reckon to the credit of". It means " reckon to the debit"
(irdXw, per contra, on the opposite page) in 2 Cor. x. 7.
It means simply " enter in your accounts " in Phil. iv. 8, iii.
13 ; Rom. viii. 18, iii. 28, vi. n ; Hebr. xi. I9.1

Paul is rarely interested in the phenomena of nature or the
scenery of country life. Where he draws his illustrations
from the country and from agriculture, he chiefly " deals with
human labour and its useful results ". There are, of course,
some isolated exceptions, as when he spoke to the unedu-
cated rustic mob of Lystra, a small town dependent on
agriculture and pasturage, not on commerce and exchange,
about the " rain from heaven and fruitful seasons ".

Yet the idea of fruit which occurs in this Lystran address
is peculiarly characteristic of Paul. The idea of develop-
ment, of growth culminating in fruit, a process leading to an
end in riches and usefulness — this always appeals strongly
to him. It occurs, e.g., in Philippians i. n, 22, iv. 17;
Galatians v. 19-23; Colossians i. 6, 10; Ephesians v. 8, 9,
ii ; Romans i. 13, vi. 21-23, vii- 4> 5> xv- 28 J 2 Corinthians
ix. 10; Titus iii. 14, etc. His philosophy rests mainly on
this idea of growth and development. He looks on the
world as the development of a purpose ; the world is to him
always fluid and changing, never stationary ; but the change
is the purpose of God, working itself out amid the errors and
the wickedness, the deliberate sin, of men.2

He is specially fond of expressing this idea of the Divine
power making and moulding the mind of man through a

1 See Rev. Griffith Thomas in Expository Times, 1906, p. 211 ; Sanday and
Headlam on Romans iv. 3.

2 See Cities of St. Paul, Pt. I., § II., where this idea was worked out sub-
sequently in a fuller way.

288 X. St. Pauts

metaphor taken from the stadium. The person in whom
the purpose of God works, redeeming him from his sin and
setting him in the Divine path, fulfils the course marked out
for him and runs the proper race. He uses this figure very
often — about the word of the Lord (2 Thess. iii. i ; compare
Heb. xii. i); about John the Baptist (Acts xiii. 25); about
himself (Acts xx. 24, 2 Tim. iv. 7, Phil. ii. 16, Gal. ii. 2);
and in a general way, Romans ix. 16 ; 2 Corinthians ix. 24,
26 ; Galatians v. 7, etc. This figure of the runner in the foot-
race is peculiar in the New Testament to him and the writer
of the Epistle to the Hebrews (who was certainly a Hellen-
istic Jew). A strait and narrow Hebrew, hating all things
Greek and Western, could never have compared the Divine
life to the course in the stadium : still less could he have
done this so persistently as to show that the thought lay in
the very fabric of his mind (see Note, p. 298).

Again, the general terms connected with the athletic
ground are frequent in Paul, and in him alone in the New
Testament. These terms (derived from aycov and a0Xea>)
might refer to any common athletic sport, but are probably
to be generally understood of the race-course : 1 sometimes
the context makes this certain.

In 2 Timothy iv. 7-8, " I have fought the good fight "
is not a military, but an athletic metaphor : " I have played
a good game " is the correspondent in modern slang. The
whole sentence is literally, " I have competed in the honour-
able contest, I have run the race to the finish, 2 I have ob-
served (the rules of) the faith ". Similarly in i Timothy vi.
1 2, there is no reference to fighting (as the Authorised and

1 There is one exception : see following page.

z ri>v /coAbv a.yS>va T)y&vi<rp.a.i • rbv 8p6fji.ov rereA-e/ca • rfyv iriffnv rer^priKa, where
the last three words mean, " I have observed the rules which are laid down
for this race-course of faith." (See p. 290.)

Greek and Roman Metaphors 289

Revised Versions have it) ; but the instructions to Timothy
are, " Compete in the honourable contest of faith," l a more
compressed expression of the same comparison as in 2
Timothy iv. 7.

The race in this honourable contest is described most
fully in Philippians iii. 12-14, " It is not as if I had already got
the prize or finished the race, but I am rushing on hard, to see
if I may seize that for which I was actually seized by Christ ;
brethren, I do not count myself yet to have seized (the prize) ;
but this one thing only, forgetting everything that lies behind,
and straining forward to what is in front, I rush on with the
goal in my view so as to reach the prize " ; and the prize is
defined by the following words, " of the summons on high of
God in Christ Jesus ". The metaphor is concealed in several
other cases in the English Version under the term " conten-
tion" (i Thess. ii. 2) or "striving" (Col. iv. 12).

In this respect we must class with him the other great
Hellenist of the New Testament, the writer of the Epistle
to the Hebrews, who uses the word a6\7jo-^ (see p. 291).
Some of the latter's metaphors seem almost to depend for
intelligibility on the familiarity of the readers with Paul's
metaphors from athletics. As this writer was addressing Jews,2
he cannot have depended on his readers' familiarity with
games. He used the metaphors because they rose naturally
to his mind.

It was chiefly the race-course that furnished St. Paul
with these metaphors ; but the boxing contest also suggested
itself to his mind in one case at least. " I so box as one
that does not beat the air " (with his fists : I Cor. ix. 26) :
my effort is really effective.

1 aywvlfav T}>V Ka\bv ayoova TT}V Triffreoas.

2 1 assume here the point touched on in the following paper.

290 X. St. Paul's

The prize in the foot-race and other athletic contests was
the crown ; and the person who thinks of the Divine life as
a race towards a goal must think of the culmination of the
Divine life as the gaining of the victor's garland. But there
are two important differences: (i) in the games only one
can obtain the prize, whereas every runner in the Divine race
of life may gain it ; (2) the crown in the one case is an eva-
nescent garland, which soon withers, whereas in the other it
is permanent and unfading (i Cor. ix. 24-27).

The analogy which Paul has in his thought is not confined
to the eagerness of spirit and concentration of purpose and
to the prize which is aimed at. The athletic competitor
must live a life of training and strict discipline before the
actual competition begins. So for the Divine race, " I keep
my body under and bring it into subjection," to avoid the
danger of being led away and shipwrecked by passion and
self-indulgence. This training was guided by certain rules
and instructions.

The athlete must "strive lawfully" and observe all the
rules laid down by the trainers and the guardians of the
course, not merely for conduct in the course, but also during
the preparation for it (2 Tim. ii. 5) ; and similarly in the
Christian life it is Faith, like the arbiter, who lays down the
laws of the competition (2 Tim. iv. 8 : p. 288, note 2).

The metaphors of this class are confined almost exclu-
sively to St. Paul in the whole range of the Bible, and with
him they are extremely frequent. The Paulinistic author
of the letter to the Hebrews is almost the only other writer
who uses such figures, and with him they are only few.
The author of Revelation ii. 10 is hardly an exception :
" The crown of life," which in that passage is the reward of
the victor, is in a sense the garland of victory ; but the

Greek and Roman Metaphors 291

crown was suggested to the writer's mind rather by " the
crown of Smyrna" than by the garland of the games ; l and
the idea of victory which so often occurs in the Seven Letters
seems hardly to be consciously connected in the writer's
thought with the games, but rather with war. The crown
was not peculiar to the Greeks nor was it restricted among
them to athletic contests ; and, before assuming the connec-
tion, in any case, it is necessary to prove that the idea of
athletics lies in the passage as a whole. That is not the
case in any of the non-Pauline passages where the crown is
mentioned, except in Hebrews.

St. Paul stands alone in this respect; and his language
came to him because of his early training. It is quite im-
possible to suppose that a method of illustration which is so
frequent and characteristic was deliberately chosen, contrary
to the Apostle's nature and convictions, in order to suit
his readers in Gentile Churches. The Hellenist who wrote
to the Hebrews used metaphors of this class once or twice
in spite of the prejudice of his readers against those pagan
habits. See final note, p. 298.

St. Paul was free from the prejudice ; he found that
the keenness and enthusiastic, passionate attention, which
were lavished on athletic contests in the world where he
had been brought up, furnished the best illustration for
the spirit in which the Divine life must be lived. He could
not have appreciated this fact unless he had been brought
up amid those surroundings and had experienced the strength
of those feelings. If he had been educated in the same way
as the narrow strait-laced Jews, to whom such things were
an abomination, it is impossible to suppose that he could
have used these comparisons.

1 Letters to the Seven Churches , p. 275.

292 X. St. Paul's

The frequency of these gymnastic metaphors, with the
depth of feeling shown in them, is a striking fact. They
show real understanding of the intensity of feeling that the
competition rouses in the athlete. It is only in youth, and
especially in boyhood, that this can be learned. A Jew
brought up in Palestine to abhor such sports, which were
conducted by Gentiles in the Greek fashion of nudity,
could never come to understand this intense feeling, if he
merely saw the games in later life while living as a preacher
in Greek cities. Paul had been educated in a Hellenic city
where he had seen for himself that athletic sports are not
wrong or abominable ; * he had understood sympathetically
the feeling of the competitors; he knew that this feeling
contained an element of nobleness and self-sacrifice, and he
utilised it to express the intensity of the religious life. There
certainly was no idea in his mind that such comparisons de-
graded religion. The narrow Jew could not free himself
from that idea ; but it evidently had no place in Paul's mind,
which had been formed in other surroundings than those of
Palestine. He sympathised with the Gentile ; he had learned
from the Gentile ; he was a debtor to the Gentile.2

We must infer that this department of Paul's vocabulary
and thought originated in his early experiences as a child,
brought up amid the surroundings of a Hellenistic city and
familiarised with the conduct of the race-course. The spirit

1 The Jews of Jerusalem had begun to learn this fact early in the second
century B.C. ; and the building of a gymnasium (to which the priests hastened
after service in the Temple), with the spread of Greek fashions and increase
of heathenish manners in Jerusalem (especially the wearing of hats by the
young men) — which were not forced on the people by the tyrant Antiochus
(as modern writers often assume), but suggested to him by the " progressive "
party among the Jews themselves — are mentioned as having provoked the
Maccabaean rebellion (2 Macc.iv. 12-14),

8 Compare Rom. i. 14.

Greek and Roman Metaphors 293

of the competitors in the course was, on the whole, one of
the best and healthiest facts of Greek city life. Paul had
learned this from participating in the life of a Hellenic city
as a boy ; there is no other way in which the lesson can be
learned so thoroughly as to sink into the man's nature and
guide his thought and language as this topic guides Paul's.

When Ignatius compares the Christian life to a religious
procession, with a long train of rejoicing devotees clad in the
appropriate garments, bearing their religious symbols and
holy things through the public streets, we see that he was at
times ruled insensibly by old ideas and scenes familiar to him
in earlier life. As a general rule, he regarded his old pagan
life with shame as a cause of humiliation ; yet thoughts and
associations connected with it directed his mind and his ex-
pression. No Jew brought up from the beginning to regard
pagan ceremonial as simply hateful could have used the
comparison.

Just as the experience of Ignatius in the Pagan Mysteries,
and his understanding of the intense religious feeling which
they roused in their votaries, coloured and formed his lan-
guage in describing the deepest and most mystic elements
in the Christian faith, 1 so Paul's language was coloured and
formed by his experience in Tarsus. A man whose mind
was thus moulded could not long have remained in sympathy
with the Jews of Jerusalem. A common hatred for Him
whom they thought an impostor united them all for a time
to resist the religion of Christ. But his nature had been
formed in a freer fashion than the Palestinian, and he soon
burst their narrow bonds. His nature drove and goaded
him on into a wider field, and he found it hard to "kick
against the goads ".

1 Letters to the Seven Churches, ch. xiii.

294 X. St. Paul's

It would be useful to compare the Pauline metaphors with
the language of Philo, who was born and brought up in the
Hellenic city of Alexandria. In him also illustrations taken
from the stadium and the palaestra are very^frequent, though
they are (I think) more common in the form of similes than
of metaphors, and are therefore not so wrought into the
fabric of the thought as is the case with Paul's metaphorical
language.

But it is easy to carry this method to an extreme which
lands it in absurdity. Dean Howson, in his Metaphors oj
St. Pauly the last chapter of which we praised and freely used
in the preceding pages, devotes two chapters to the military
metaphors and the architectural metaphors in the Apostle's
letters. If his estimate of these is as reasonable as we con-
sider his account of the athletic metaphors to be, then, by
the same train of argument, Paul must have been as familiar
with and interested in Roman military methods and Greek
architectural details as with the spirit and eagerness of the
victorious athlete ; which is absurd.

But, when you look at the military and architectural meta-
phors, there is hardly one which is not of a quite vague and
general kind. Wherever Dean Howson finds the word
" fight " or " build," he detects an allusion to a Roman army
or a Greek temple. But there were soldiers before Rome
was heard of, and houses were built before the form of the
Greek temple had been evolved. The most pacific and un-
military of mortals will often use the word " fight ". Persons
absolutely ignorant of the shape of a Greek temple may
habitually use the word " build ". Even Hellenes were not
always thinking of a temple when they employed that meta-
phor.

These and many similar words have passed into the uni-

Greek and Roman Metaphors 295

versal language of mankind, and are constantly used without
any distinct thought of the original department of life from
which they are adopted. They are not peculiar to St. Paul
in the New Testament. The verb " to build " occurs there
thirty-one times outside of his writings and ten times in
them: the word (( builder" once outside, while he never uses
it.1 The noun "building" is not so unfavourable to the
Dean's view: it is found four times outside the Pauline
letters, and fifteen times in them ; moreover Paul shows a
marked tendency to employ the word in the moral sphere
to describe the building up of character and holiness. But
this peculiarity is not favourable to the supposition of archi-
tectural experience and training, for in comparison with
other writers in the New Testament he displays less familiar-
ity with the original process, and inclines to use the word
only in the transferred sense, which implies that he was not
consciously thinking of the metaphor, nor making the meta-
phor for the first time, but was adopting a previously exist-
ing mode of expressing the moral fact — a mode which had
been long familiar to him.

It is different in the case of the athletic metaphors. In
many of them it is quite clear from the passage that Paul
was consciously and deliberately using the metaphor as
such ; and it is highly probable that he was the first to strike
out this Christian use of the words. The Greek language of
Christian theology was created by him, and never wholly
lost the character he had impressed on it : so Tertullian was
mainly influential in devising a Latin expression for the
Greek Christian theology.

The whole of Dean Howson's discussion of architectural

1 The statistics refer to the Greek words oiKoS6fj.os and ot/co5o/tea>. He uses
once the word apxiTfKTwv, which is rendered " builder " (i Cor. iii. 10).

296 X. St. Paul's

Pauline metaphors comes to practically nothing, so far as
concerns his thesis that the Apostle was thinking in them of
the classical Greek temple. In so far as Paul was conscious
of his architectural metaphors — and in some places he was
clearly conscious — he was generally thinking rather of the
house than of the temple. It is a necessary rule in estimat-
ing the nature of metaphor that it must be presumed (apart
from any special reason) to be drawn from the realm that is
most familiar to the writer. Now Paul was certainly quite
familiar with the process of building a house ; but he may
never actually have seen a Greek temple in building. Yet
Dean Howson is convinced that it was the classical temple,
resting on columns and splendidly decorated, that floated
always before Paul's mind and determined his expression.

The degree to which the Dean presses his statistics is
shown by the following : on page 47 he says that the verb
" edify " and its substantive "edification " occur about twenty
times in the New Testament, and are with one exception
used by St. Paul alone, and the one exception is in Acts, a
book " written almost certainly under his superintendence ".
The passage of Acts is ix. 31, and it is straining facts to rely
on this as an example of Pauline influence. Moreover, the
very words " being edified and walking in the fear of the
Lord," prove that the writer had no sense of the original
realm from which the metaphor was derived, but was using
a word which had passed into the language of Christian
moral philosophy (quite possibly and even probably through
the influence of Paul, who in his turn used it rather philoso-
phically than with conscious metaphor). Such statistics
from the English Version are misleading. We have stated
the facts regarding the Greek words for building, and they
are not favourable to the Dean's view.

Greek and Roman Metaphors 297

Throughout the military metaphors, some of which are
clearly conscious and intended, there are none which even
in the slightest degree suggest any real interest in or fami-
liarity with military matters ; they are all quite popular ; and
there are only two which are certainly Roman in character.
All the rest are simply military in general ; they are not
Roman any more than they are Greek : they relate to the
popular conception of the soldier in genere. Even the
allusion in 2 Tim. ii. 3, 4, which probably implies a profes-
sional soldier, who "does not entangle himself with the
common affairs of life," would be quite well satisfied by the
mercenaries who were a common feature of the later Greek
or Graeco-Asiatic kingdoms and armies.

The two indubitably Roman military metaphors are the
two striking allusions to the triumph, which are resonant of
the dignity and majesty of Rome.

The first is in Colossians ii. 1 5 (14) : " the bond (consisting
in ordinances) which was opposed to us he hath taken out
of the way, nailing it to the cross: (15) having stripped off
from himself the principalities and the powers, he made a
show of them openly, celebrating a triumph over them in
his crucifixion ".

The other passage is a more detailed picture of the long
train of the Roman triumph, with incense and spices perfum-
ing the streets, when the chiefs of the defeated people were
taken into the Mamertine prison on the side of the Capitol
and there strangled, as the procession was ascending the
slope of the Capitoline hill. "Thanks be to God, who
always leads us (His soldiers) in the train of His triumph,1

1Lightfoot on Col. ii. 14 seems to take this in the sense "celebrates his
triumph over us as his conquered foes ". I think the meaning taken above
is better : "we were the soldiers who march behind him in his triumph," as
the soldiers of the victorious army always did.

298 X. St. Paul's Greek and Roman Metaphors

and makes manifest through us the fragrance of His know-
ledge in every place : for we are a fragrance of Christ unto
God, in them that are being saved and in them that are
perishing."

In these passages speaks the Roman ; and they are the
only two passages in all the letters of Paul in which I fancy
that one can catch the tone of the Roman citizen. Nothing
is sufficient to express the completeness and absoluteness of
the Divine victory except a Roman triumph. How different
is this from the way in which the writer of the Apocalypse
strives to find expression for the same idea.

There is in these two Pauline passages a striking analogy
to the passage just cited from Ignatius, who found nothing
so suited to describe the Christian life as a religious proces-
sion through the streets of a city. As in the one passage
you recognise the pagan and probably the priest, so in the
other you recognise the Roman citizen. It would be a
perfectly legitimate inference to deduce from these passages
that Paul was a Roman ; but, had he himself not mentioned
his standing in the Empire, the inference would have been
derided by the critics as fanciful and incredible.

NOTE to p. 288, 1. 15. — Now the full force of this obser-
vation is apparent only when we take into account that this
question had been raised for a long time back in Jewish
circles, and that opinion on the subject differed sharply. It
was almost a mark of the broader Jewish thought to regard
athletics without reprobation. It was a characteristic of the
narrower Jewish patriotic party, which abhorred foreign
ways, to abominate and reprobate the sports of the palaestra
or the stadium : see p. 292, note I.

THE DATE AND AUTHORSHIP OF THE
EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.

THE problem treated in the present paper is not soluble in
the sense of demonstrating absolutely that one view is true
and all other views are false. There is too little available
evidence, internal or external.

But there is a strong probability — almost amounting to
certainty — that the true view will be found to be widely
illuminative, will make clear much that is obscure, and will
show the Epistle not merely as a marvellous picture of " the
spiritual character of the readers," 1 but also as an important
passage in the history of the first century.

Tried by this test, all the common theories of date and
manner of origin fail. The Barnabas theory, the Apollos
theory, throw light on nothing, not even on the Epistle
itself. A date under Domitian, a date about A.D. 64-66?
make the document more enigmatical and isolated than it
is when one has no theory on the subject.

It is not a matter of mere idle curiosity to reason as to the
time and place at which the Epistle was written. It is true
that the work is independent of those external circumstances,
and can be understood and valued as a great book without

1 Westcott on Hebrews, p. xli.

2 The latter view formerly commended itself to me (Church in Rom. Emp.,
p. 307). Longer study shows it to be untenable.

(301)

302 XL The Date and Authorship of

a thought about them. But the history of the Apostolic
Age is a subject of serious importance ; and while that great
blank remains in it, while the doubt continues as to whether
the work belongs to Domitian's or Nero's time, whether it
was addressed to a Jewish or Gentile Church, there must be
a doubt as to the security of the foundations upon which
the history rests. So closely related to one another are all
the other phenomena of early Christianity, that, while this
wonderful book stands apart in such isolation, we cannot
(or ought not to) feel the same confidence in our conception
of the rest of the history.

The historical questions relating to the date and circum-
stances of the composition of the Epistle to the Hebrews
have been brought nearer to an answer in a series of note-
worthy papers by the Rev. W. M. Lewis. While in some
respects the view stated in the following remarks differs
from that advocated by Mr. Lewis, it agrees with his theory
as regards all the main circumstances of the time and place
and (to a considerable extent) the manner of composition of
the Epistle ; and it would certainly not have been attained
so soon, possibly not at all, had I not been guided and stimu-
lated by his earlier series of papers.1 While writing the
present article, I have also had before me his more recent
articles,2 which only confirm my general agreement with,
and my occasional dissent from, his opinion.

It will also be clear to any reader how much the writer
has been indebted to Westcott's great edition of the Epistle.
Very often the turn of a sentence or the expression of an
opinion is borrowed from him, with only the slight modifica-
tion that a great man's words always require when they are

1 In the Thinker, Oct. and Nov., 1893.

2 In the Biblical World, Aug., 1898, April, 1899.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 303

seized and thought anew by even a humble disciple. I have
also made frequent use of the Rev. G. Milligan's judicious
and scholarly book ; * but he is farther removed than the
Bishop of Durham from the opinion which I hold. Their
arguments are tested against those of Professor McGiffert, as
the best representative of the opposed point of view.

Deliberately and intentionally, here and elsewhere, I use
the words of others as much as possible, and preferably of
those who do not hold the opinion which I advocate. This
procedure is the best preventive against overstatement of the
reasons on which my opinion is founded.

The theory advanced by Mr. Lewis is that the Epistle to
the Hebrews was written from Caesarea during Paul's im-
prisonment in the palace of Herod (Acts xxiii. 35).2 He
considers that Luke, in a series of interviews (Acts xxiv. 23),
was instructed as to Paul's views, and directed to embody
these in the form of a letter. The part of the theory which
takes Luke for the author of the Epistle can hardly be ac-
cepted. But as regards the important matters of the place
and time and situation in which the letter originated, this
theory seems to be remarkably illuminative, and therefore
probably true.

The intention of the following remarks is not to recapitu-
late Mr. Lewis's arguments, which ought to be studied in
his own statement ; but to state my own reasons for think-
ing that he has come near the truth.

Stated briefly and dogmatically, the view to which this
paper leads up is —

1 Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 1899.

2 Mr. Lewis usually states the date in this wide way. In one passage,
however, he places the Epistle at the end of the imprisonment, after Festus
had succeeded Felix. That seems to me a little too late, and inconsistent
with xiii. 23, as will be shown in the sequel.

304 XL The Date and Authorship of

that the Epistle to the Hebrews was finished in the
month of April or May, A.D. 59,1 towards the end of
the government of Felix ;

that it treats certain topics which had been frequently
discussed between Paul and the leading men of the
Church at Caesarea during his imprisonment, and em-
bodies the general impression and outcome of those
discussions ;

that it purported to be, in a sense, the Epistle of the
Church in Caesarea to the Jewish party of the Church
in Jerusalem; this implies that the writer, practically
speaking, was Philip the Deacon (Acts xxi. 8) ;
he generally speaks as representing the Caesarean
Church, using the first person plural, but occasionally
he employs the author's first person singular, " I
may almost say " ( ix. 22 plural in the Greek), " what
shall I more say?" (xi. 32) ;

that the plan of composing such a letter had been
discussed beforehand with Paul, and the letter, when
written, was submitted to him, and the last few verses
were actually appended by him ;

that its intention was to place the Jewish readers on
a new plane of thought, on which they might better
comprehend Paul's views and work, and to reconcile
the dispute between the extreme Judaic party and the
Pauline party in the Church, not by arguing for or ex-
plaining Paul's views, but by leading the Judaists into
a different line of thought which would conduct them
to a higher point of view ;

1 The chronology advocated in St. Paul the Traveller is assumed through-
out; those who follow another system can readily modify the dates to
suit,

the Epistle to the Hebrews 305

and finally, that the letter, as being a joint production,
which was addressed to a mere section of a congregation,
was not prefaced by the usual introductory clause of all
ordinary letters, " So-and-so to So-and-so " : presum-
ably the bearer of the letter would explain the circum-
stances.

That there is at this period an opening for a letter in
which Paul was interested will at once be conceded. That
is proved by the fact that many excellent scholars have
placed, and some still place, during the Caesarean captivity
three letters which Lightfoot, supported by the almost
universal opinion of British scholars, places in the Roman
captivity.1

No progress is possible until a definite and unhesitating
opinion is formed whether the ancient title " Epistle to the
Hebrews" is approximately correct or wholly erroneous,
i.e., whether the letter was written to Jews or to Gentiles.
Some recent scholars have argued that the letter was
written "to a Church or group of Churches whose member-
ship was largely Gentile, where the Jews, as far as there
were any, had become amalgamated with their Gentile
brethren so that all race distinctions were lost sight of".2
With all due respect to the distinguished scholars who
have argued in favour of that view, I must express what
I think — that it would be difficult to find an opinion so
paradoxical, so obviously opposed to the whole weight of
evidence, so entirely founded on strained misinterpretation
of a few passages and on the ignoring of the general

1 Harnack, in the table appended to his Chronologic der altchr. Literatur,
p. 717, gives both possibilities, but leans to the Roman date.

2 McGiffert, Apostolic Age, p. 468, who gives a clear r£sum6 of the argu-
ments of Pfleiderer, Van Soden, etc., on this side.

306 XI. The Date and Authorship of

character of the document. "The argument . . . cannot
be treated as more than an ingenious paradox by any
one who regards the general teaching of the Epistle in
connection with the forms of thought in the Apostolic
Age."i

For example, it is argued that Hebrews ix. 14 — " How
much more shall the blood of Christ cleanse your conscience
from dead works to serve the living God ? " — could not be
addressed to Jewish disciples, but only to persons who had
been heathen. One would have thought that " dead works "
was precisely what the Jew as Jew trusted to for salvation,
and that Hebrews vi. I, 2 — "repentance from dead works,
and faith toward God, the teaching of baptism, and the lay-
ing on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead and of eternal
judgment " — is clearly a summary of the first steps 2 made by
the Jew towards Christianity, and a most improbable and
uncharacteristic way of describing the first steps of a pagan
towards the truth. Obviously there is an irreconcilable
difference in the fundamental ideas about history and early
Christianity, when two sets of scholars can look at words like
these and pronounce such diametrically opposite opinions on
them.

Contrast with one another such judgments as the follow-
ing:—

There is no trace of any admixture Not simply is there no sign that
of heathen converts; nor does the the author was addressing Jewish
letter touch on any of the topics of Christians . . . there are some pas-
heathen controversy (note xiii. 9) sages which make it evident that he
(Westcott, p. xxxvi.). was addressing Gentiles (McGiffert,

p. 467).

1 Westcott, p. xxxv.

2 What the writer calls " the foundation " : he exhorts his readers not to
confine their attention to this, but to proceed onwards to the more complete
knowledge of what Christianity is.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 307

The widening breach between the Nothing whatever is said about

Church and the Synagogue rendered apostasy to Judaism. . . . There is

it necessary at last to make choice no sign that the author thinks of

between them, and " the Hebrews " such apostasy as due to the influence

were in danger of apostasy : ii. i, 3; of Judaism, or as connected with it

iii. 6, 12 ff. ; iv. i, 3, n ; vi. 6 ; x. 25, in any way (McGiffert, p. 466 f.).
29, 39 (Westcott, loc. cit.).

To put the matter in brief, Pfleiderer and his supporters
neglect the obvious fact that the Epistle is addressed to per-
sons who believed in the Jewish Scriptures, and were half-
hearted in proceeding therefrom to Christianity; whereas
Gentile Christians were persons who accepted the author-
ity of the Old Testament Scriptures because they first had
become Christians. "The Old Testament belonged to
the Gentile as truly as to the Jewish wing of the Church,
and an argument drawn from it had just as much weight
with the former as with the latter." * That is perfectly true ;
but how different is the spirit in which the Old Testament
is appealed to in the two cases. In addressing a Jew the
preacher began his first approach by showing that the Old
Testament pointed him forward to Christ. In addressing a
pagan audience the preacher would complete the last steps
in his approach by appealing to that prophetic preparation
for Christ. Dr. McGiffert compares Hebrews with Clement,
and finds that the latter " makes even larger use of" the Old
Testament than the former. But how different is the
manner ! We also rest our case on the same comparison.

But it is not the intention of this paper to argue that
point. Those who agree with Pfleiderer will not care to
read any further, as we look from incompatible points of his-
torical view. They may be referred to the arguments of
Westcott and Milligan ; and if they do not listen to those
scholars, they would not listen to me.

A McGiffert, p. 46 f.

308 XL The Date and Authorship of

But one more specimen of the arguments that are used
to prove that the Epistle could not have been addressed
to the Jews of Palestine, and specially of Jerusalem, must be
given, because important inferences depend on it : " The re-
ference to the great generosity of those addressed, and to
their continued ministrations to the necessities of the saints,
does not accord with what we know of the long-continued
poverty of the Church of Jerusalem 'V When reduced to a
syllogism, this argument may be thus stated : —

No poor man can be generous.

The members of the Church at Jerusalem were poor.

They therefore were not generous.

If the major premise is correct, the syllogism is perfect.
But who will accept the major premise, when it is put plainly
before him ?

The argument is a glaring fallacy, and a libel on human
nature.

Moreover, the Greek word which is rendered " generosity "
is ajaTrrj. Surely the writers who employ that argument
were writing, not with the eye on the Greek text, but with
a modern commentator before them. Surely, not even
Pfleiderer himself, who of all moderns is the least trammelled
by the actual facts of nature and of history, would knowingly
and intentionally assert that a poor Church cannot show
love (wyd'7rr[).

Let any one who is interested in probing the matter travel
in the East for some months or years, and travel not as a
Cook's tourist, with tents, and beds, and cooks, and stores of
food, and " a' the comforts o' the Sautmarket" (which Baillie
Nicol Jarvie could not take with him into the Highlands),
but live in dependence on the inhabitants, and come into

1 M cGiffert, p. 464. Heb. vi. 10.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 309

actual relations with them. He will learn how true it is that
generosity and hospitality may be practised by very poor
people even towards travellers with plenty of money, and
may be lacking in the rich.

Or, if he cannot travel in the East, he may learn at home,
provided that he does not keep himself shut up in his study,
but comes close to real life, to appreciate Matthew Arnold's
sonnet about the tramp who begged only from labouring
men, because

She will not ask of aliens, but of friends,

Of sharers in a common human fate.
She turns from that cold succour, which attends

The unknown little from the unknowing great.

The truth is that Jerusalem was pre-eminently the city in
which there was most opportunity for even the poorest
Christians to show the virtues of generosity and hospitality,
because it was crowded at frequent and regular intervals with
strangers, many of them poor. Corinth and similar " way-
side " stations on the great through route of traffic had many
similar opportunities ; 1 but even Corinth in that respect
could not be compared to Jerusalem. These opportunities
afforded admirable opening for the Christians to come into
friendly relations with the Jews of distant lands ; and there
cannot reasonably be any doubt that they used these oppor-
tunities. It was certainly in this way, through the frequent
journeys of Jews to and from Jerusalem, that the Gospel
spread so early to Rome and Italy ; and it is the reason for
the friendly relations that evidently existed between the
Roman Jews and the Christians, as we shall see in the follow-
ing pages.

It may be regarded as incontrovertible that the Epistle

1 Church in Rom. Empire, pp. 10, 318 f.

3io XI. The Date and Authorship of

was not written by Paul. Origen's opinion, ll every one com-
petent to judge of language must admit that the style is not
that of St. Paul,"1 will not be seriously disputed, and is
echoed almost unanimously by modern scholars. The few
exceptions in modern times, such as Wordsworth and Lewin,
may be taken as examples of the remarkable truth that there
is no view about the books of the Bible so paradoxical as
not to find some good scholar for its champion.

But are we therefore to disconnect it absolutely from the
Apostle Paul ?

If that were so, it is difficult to see how such a strong body
of early opinion should have regarded it as originating in-
directly from Paul, and as conveying his views about a great
crisis in the development of the Church. Clement of Alex-
andria and Origen, while both recognising that the language
is not that of Paul, suggest different theories to account for
what they recognise as assured fact — that the views and plans
are those of Paul.

Now how did Clement and Origen come to consider the
connection of Paul with the Epistle as an assured fact ? It
was not because the views and ideas are those which Paul
elsewhere expresses, for, on the contrary, the Epistle presents
a different aspect of the subject from the ideas expressed in
Paul's Epistles. It obviously was because an old tradition
asserted the connection.

Further, this belief and tradition is most unlikely to have
arisen without some real ground. Mere desire to secure
canonical authority for this Epistle is not sufficient reason,
for the Epistle differs so much from Paul's writings that
general opinion, in seeking for an apostolic author, would
have been more likely to hit upon one of the Apostles, separ-

1Westcott, p. Ixv.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 3 1 1

ated for a time from the community addressed, and hoping
soon to revisit it (xiii. 19). " The true position of the Epistle
... is that of a final development of the teaching of * the
three,' and not of a special application of the teaching of St.
Paul. It is, so to speak, most truly intelligible as the last
voice of the] Apostles of the Circumcision, and not as a pecu-
liar utterance of the Apostle of the Gentiles " (Westcott, p.

4i).

This tradition of a Pauline connection was so strong as to
persist even though there was prevalent already in the second
century a clear perception that the style was not that of
Paul.1 It was common in early manuscripts to place
Hebrews in the midst of Paul's Epistles, even between
Galatians and Ephesians (as was the case in an authority on
which our greatest manuscript, B, was dependent). Origen
mentions that " the primitive writers " were positive as to
the connection of Paul with the Epistle.2

A very ancient tradition, therefore, of the strongest
character guaranteed that Paul stood in some relation to
the Epistle. While it evidently did not assert that Paul
was the author in the same sense as of Romans or Corin-
thians, it did assert that the thoughts in the Epistle either
emanated from him, or were approved by him when written,

1 Origen mentions theories already current in his time that Clement of
Rome or Luke had written the thoughts of Paul in their own words. Clement
of Alexandria thought that Paul had written in Hebrew, and Luke translated.
These prove that speculation was already active when they wrote.

2 Ol apxatoi &v$pes : compare Wordsworth, p. 356, on the meaning of this
phrase. How Dr. McGiffert can say, " the idea that Hebrews was Paul's
work appears first in Alexandria in the latter part of the second century, and
seems to have no tradition back of it " (p. 480 note), is to me unintelligible :
and equally so his words, " the only really ancient tradition that we have
links the Epistle with the name of Barnabas (Tertullian, de Pud. 20)". That
is a third century statement, and Dr. McGiffert himself concedes that the
Pauline connection has second century authority.

312 XL The Date and Authorship of

or in some way were stamped with his authority, and that
the Epistle must be treated as standing in the closest rela-
tion to the work of the Apostle.

The persons addressed had been Christians for a consider-
able time, " when by reason of the time — because they had
been Christians so long — they ought to have been teachers,
they were themselves in need of elementary teaching" : such
is the implication of v. I2.1

They had not heard the Gospel from Jesus Himself, but
only from those who had listened to Jesus. " (Salvation),
which, having at the first been spoken through the Lord,
was confirmed unto us by them that heard " (ii. 3). It is, how-
ever, a mistake to infer from this that the writer and the
readers were Christians "of the second generation," and
therefore the Epistle must be as late as Domitian. All the
3,000 who were converted on the fiftieth day after the
Crucifixion might be addressed in the words used in

". 3-

But, indubitably, the writer and the readers were all alike
persons that had not hearkened to the preaching of Jesus,
but had only heard the Gospel at second hand from men
who knew the Lord.2 This indication of their position
must be combined with another.

"They were addressed separately from their leaders."3
This remarkable fact has not as a rule been sufficiently
studied, though almost every commentator from the earliest
times notes it. The words — " salute all them that have the
rule over you " — in xiii. 24, imply " that the letter was not
addressed officially to the Church, but to some section of

1Westcott, p. 132.

2 It is evident that Paul would never have classed himself in the category
so described, ii. 3.

3 Westcott, p. xxxvi.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 313

it ".* The inference is correctly drawn by Theodoret :
"they that had the rule did not stand in need of such
teaching" as it is the object of the Epistle to convey.

There is implied in these words (i) a marking off and
separating of a body holding rule in the community (of
which those addressed formed part) : there was a distinct
class of persons recognised generally as " the leaders " ; (2)
a certain distinction between the views entertained by the
leaders and the views entertained by the persons addressed.

In what relation does this peculiar and remarkable fact
stand to the history of the period, so far as we know it ?

There was one community in which the leaders were a
distinct and well-marked body. At Jerusalem James and
the Twelve were a clearly defined body with a peculiar
standing and authority. That is implied throughout the
narrative, and is formally and explicitly recognised in
various passages in Acts and in the Epistles. But along
with them must be classed the original disciples that had
listened to the words of Jesus. Wherever they were, clearly
those who had followed the Lord Himself were recognised
as possessing dignity and character which none converted
by men ever attained. In Jerusalem this class must have
constituted a certain considerable body even as late as A.D.
59. In no other Church is there likely to have been more
than a very few, if any, resident and settled members of this
class.

The writer, himself a convert at second hand, does not
presume to address his " word of exhortation " to any one
who had followed Jesus personally.

Further, these leaders are conceived both by Paul and by
the author of Acts as differing in opinion from at least a

1 Westcott, p. 451, quoting Theodoret.

314 XL The Date and Authorship of

certain considerable section of the Christian community in
Jerusalem. It is beyond doubt that Paul claimed (and
Luke confirmed the claim) to be in essential agreement with
the leading Apostles. It is an equally indisputable fact that
Paul was at variance with a large section of the Jewish
Christians in Jerusalem, who regarded him as an enemy of
Jewish feeling and as bent on destroying Jewish ritual.

There was no other community in which such marked
divergence of view between the leaders and the congrega-
tion existed, so far as our records show. There was no other
community in which it is at all probable that such a division
existed. We learn of divisions and differences of opinion
existing in several other congregations ; but there is not the
slightest appearance or probability that in any of them a
body of leaders took one side and the congregation as a mass
took the other side, while in some cases it is clear that the
lines of division were quite different in character. In fact,
there is no allusion to anything like a body possessing
higher position in any congregation except that of Antioch
(Acts xiii. i) ; and that isolated case hardly seems to be one
that would justify us in speaking of a class of fj^ovpevoi.

Further, the subject on which the Epistle dilates is the
subject on which divergence existed between the leaders
and the general body of the congregation in Jerusalem—
viz., the relation of Judaism and the Law to Christianity
and Faith. It is precisely on that subject that it would be
least easy to address the leaders and the mass at Jerusalem
in the same terms.

Moreover, in Acts xxi. 20-24, James, speaking evidently
on behalf of the leaders, recognises that many myriads of
the Christian Jews held very different views from what he
himself entertained about Paul's views on the Jewish ritual.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 315

They thought Paul was an enemy bent on destroying that
ritual : James and the leaders knew that Paul practised
that ritual personally, and James urged Paul to show publicly
his adhesion to and belief in the value of the ritual.1 The
writer of the Epistle, similarly, is bent on bringing out the
true character and value of the Jewish ritual, on proving that
Christianity does not destroy that ritual but perfects it, and
on showing that the Christian principle of Faith was already
a powerful factor in the life of the ancient Jews.

It is therefore certain that the situation implied in the
Epistle existed in Palestine during Paul's last stay in the
country ; and there is no evidence that it existed anywhere
else.

This argument is based on the supposition that the narra-
tive in Acts is authoritative, that the picture which it gives
of the harmony between Paul and the leading Apostles is
trustworthy, and that Paul was justified in claiming Peter and
James and John as friends and sympathizers. Against this view
the almost unanimous consensus of modern scholars is that
the anticipations which Paul entertained about the right de-
velopment of the Church were out of harmony — some say to
a less, some to a greater degree, while some assert that they
were utterly discordant — with the views of the older Apostles.
This modern opinion seems to me erroneous, not merely
to a certain degree, but wholly and absolutely. It is the
main source of difficulty in first century Christian history
(along with the topographical error about Galatia which is
closely linked to it). Here it is the greatest cause of the

1 It must, of course, be assumed that Paul regarded the ritual as having a
distinct value for Jewish Christians. He continued through life the attention
to Jewish ritual in which he had been trained. Accordingly some modern
scholars regard the story of James's advice given to Paul as invented and
unhistorical.

316 XL The Date and Authorship of

difficulties which the Epistle to the Hebrews offers to the
historical student. If you accept Luke's presentation of the
Apostolic history, there is no difficulty, and everything be-
comes simple.

In xv. 24 the writer conveys to the readers the salutation
of " those from Italy ". It is grammatically quite possible to
understand this Greek phrase as meaning simply " those who
belong to Italy"; and this might imply that the writer
conveys from some place in Italy, where he composes the
letter, " the salutations of the Italian congregations generally "
to his readers. But, as the Bishop of Durham (from whom
I quote) goes on to say, " it is difficult to understand how
any one could give the salutations of the Italian Christians
generally " ; the writer would more naturally give the greeting
of the Church of the city in which he was writing (ol CLTTO
fPo)yit?75 or the like) ; 1 hence c< it appears more natural . . .
to suppose that the writer is speaking of a small group of
friends from Italy who were with him at the time".

The conclusion which the Bishop considers more natural
is, of course, imperative on our theoiy of Caesarean origin.
There must have existed near the writer, and in communica-
tion with him, a company of persons belonging to various
towns of Italy.

Now, are there any circumstances in which a company
of persons from Italy are likely to have been at Caesarea ?

1 Westcott, p. xliv. It is not inconceivable either that the writer was on a
circular mission to the Italian Churches, or that he wrote from a city, Rome
or Puteoli, where representatives of several Italian cities had met. Both
suppositions, however, are improbable, and difficult to harmonise either with
the Epistle or with what we know about the history of the time. A circular
mission through Italy was not the experience which would naturally suggest
a letter of this kind; and a meeting of representatives is also unlikely in it-
self, and would probably be explained by the writer, so that the readers might
understand who were the persons that saluted them.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 317

Obviously this was quite a natural thing. A company of
Jews on pilgrimage would be pretty certain to use a ship
from Puteoli to Syria (joining it either at Puteoli or at some
of the harbours in Southern Italy, as it coasted along).
There were undoubtedly such pilgrim ships sailing every
spring. It was on board a ship of that kind that Paul dreaded
a conspiracy against his life (Acts xx. 2, 3).1 The Roman
Government had often guaranteed the right of safe passage
of Jewish pilgrims to Jerusalem. In B.C. 49 Fannius, the
Governor of Asia, wrote to the Coan magistrates on the
subject : the pilgrim ships naturally passed by Cos, which
had been a great Jewish centre of trade and banking as
early as B.C. 138 (i Mace. xv. 23). Compare the letter of
Augustus quoted by Josephus, Ant. Jud., xvi., 6, 2.

Every spring, then, a company of Italian Jews passed
twice through Caesarea on their way to and from Jerusalem.
Now it is obvious that such a company is most unlikely to
have consisted wholly of Christian Jews : it may be regarded
as certain that there would be a majority of non-Christian
Jews, but also it is probable that both Christian and non-
Christian Jews would travel in one company in the same
ship. Except Paul the Christian Jews had not yet come to
be regarded as foes by the Jews outside of Palestine.

But is it not unlikely that such a company of Jews would
come into social and religious intercourse with Paul and
Paul's friends, considering the relations in which Paul stood
to the Jewish authorities of Jerusalem ? Surely not at the
period in which our theory places the letter. A body of
Italian Jewish pilgrims would be received hospitably by
Caesarean Jews, and it is in the last degree improbable that
the Christian Jews of Caesarea would fall short of their non-

lSt. Paul the Traveller, p. 287, compare p. 264.

318 XL The Date and Authorship of

Christian brethren. Certainly, so far as Paul had any influ-
ence with the Caesarean Church, the Italian Jews would be
welcomed and generously entertained.

But we are assuming there must have been some Christians
among the company of the Italian pilgrims. The question
may be raised whether this is not improbable ?

Certainly not ! If Paul went on pilgrimage, why not the
Italian Jewish Christians of Italy, who were still on far more
friendly terms with the Jews than he was ?

Further, the friendly spirit which we suppose to have ex-
isted between the Italian pilgrims and the Cassarean Chris-
tians harmonises excellently with the facts recorded in Acts
xxviii. 17 ff. The friendly tone of the Roman Jewish leaders
towards Paul, their ignorance (or rather diplomatic ignoring) 1
of any hostility between him and the Jews, their perfect
readiness to hear what he has to say, is precisely the tone
which we suppose in Caesarea. The one incident throws
light on the other. The narrative in Acts xxviii. 17-28 has
always been regarded as a serious difficulty : it is mentioned
by Dr. Sanday 2 as one of the four striking " real difficulties "
of the book. It has been counted a difficulty, because it
was thought inconsistent with the presumption from other
recorded facts. It ceases to be a difficulty when we find it
in perfect harmony with the situation revealed in this Epistle.
Moreover, as Dr. Sanday proceeds : " the indications which
we get in Romans xvi. as to the way in which Christianity
first established itself in Rome would be consistent with a

1 It is noteworthy that they do not deny having heard of the proceedings
against Paul. They have no official report by letter, and no one has reported
to them any actual crime of which he had been guilty. They expressly say
that they are aware of the general bad feeling which existed against Paul
among Jews.

*Bampton Lectures, 1893, P- 329, note.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 319

considerable degree of ignorance on the part of official
Judaism ". The " difficulty " solves itself when the evidence
is fairly looked at as a whole.

It is clear that, if we are correct in this, a common inter-
pretation of Suetonius, Claud. 25, must be abandoned. The
Latin historian's words, Judaos impulsore Chresto assidue
tumultuantes, cannot be taken as an allusion made through
Roman ignorance to quarrels which occurred between Chris-
tian and non-Christian Jews ; such quarrels seem to belong
in Rome only to a later period than the time of Claudius
(A.D. 41-54).

The salutation of the Italians would of course be sent to
Jerusalem on their homeward journey, not on the way up to
the Holy City, when they would carry their salutations in
person. On the return journey they would naturally send
greetings to their late hosts and the whole community from
which they had just parted, if they happened to be passing
through Caesarea at the time when a public letter was about
to be sent to Jerusalem.

This seems to be self-evident to any one who understands
the circumstances and accompaniments of ancient travel ;
but it may be better to discuss the situation more fully,
inasmuch as there is a widespread idea that in that period
people generally, and early Christians especially, were
governed in practical life by totally different conditions from
ordinary human beings ; and commentators or critics, who
write in the study and know or care little about the practical
facts of ancient travel, sometimes fail to see what must
inevitably have happened. Moreover, a consideration of
this case throws light both on the situation in which the
Epistle to the Hebrews was written and on the relations in
which Paul and his companions stood to Caesarea and its

320 XL The Date and Authorship of

congregation when they arrived in A.D. 57 from the Aegean
lands (Acts xxi.).

In the first place, it may be assumed that the Italian pil-
grims when they landed in the harbour of Caesarea on their
way up to Jerusalem in A.D. 59,1 would rest there some days
before they began the land journey of about sixty miles to
Jerusalem (just as Paul and his company had done two years
previously). After a long voyage in an ancient ship with
its cramped space and uncomfortable circumstances, such
opportunity of refreshment was urgently needed. Tacitus
mentions that troops, which had been sent out to the East
by Nero in A.D. 68, and brought back again forthwith to
Italy, were incapacitated by the voyage and its discomforts
for military service in the war of A.D. 69. 2

During these days of rest the pilgrims would be in friendly
intercourse with the Jews and Jewish Christians at Caesarea.
Hospitality to pilgrims and travellers was a duty, incumbent
on Jews and Christians alike, and this duty was especially
insisted on by the early Church.3 But there would be
no motive for the Caesarean Church to send to Jerusalem the
salutations of pilgrims who were themselves going up to
Jerusalem and would arrive there almost or quite as soon as
the letter. When the pilgrims were hiring horses and mak-
ing their preparations for the land journey,4 the Jewish
Christians were quite as likely to help them as the old Jews.
Strangers in an eastern town are always exposed to many
troubles and many attempts at overcharge and cheating;
and residents who were willing had abundant opportunity
of doing much service at small cost to the pilgrims. In this
way, both by hospitality in their houses and by kindness

1 On the year, see below. 2 Tacitus, Hist., i. 31.

3 See p. 309. 4 Pauline and other Studies, p. 266 ff.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 321

and help in other ways, friendly relations were established
between the pilgrims and the Caesarean Church before the
former went up to Jerusalem.

Secondly, in Jerusalem there was abundant opportunity
of a similar kind for establishing friendly relations between
the pilgrims and the Church of the Holy City ; and, as we
have seen above, it must be regarded as certain that the op-
portunity was systematically used by the wise policy of the
Christian leaders.

When the pilgrims returned, probably after several weeks,
to the port of Caesarea, their former relations with the local
church were, of course, resumed. Again an interval of at
least a day or two would almost invariably occur before a
suitable ship was found sailing to Puteoli and preparations
for the long voyage completed.1 In this interval the Italian
pilgrims, ol OLTTO 'IraXt'a?, were again in intercourse with the
Caesarean Church, and sent a message of greeting in the
letter which that church was composing and sending to
Jerusalem. Very probably Paul himself was interested in
the pilgrims and in their message.

The message in itself contributes to the effect which the
Epistle aims at. The writer, while explaining and placing
on a well-reasoned basis the true relation between Judaism
and Christianity as the less and more perfect stages of one
faith, desired to facilitate and preserve harmony between the

1 Although ships, indubitably, were on the outlook for the pilgrim trade,
and there were thus ships carrying large parties of pilgrims, it cannot be sup-
posed that the same ship in which pilgrims had come to Cassarea always lay
in the harbour waiting till they returned. In many cases it would find
another cargo too soon, and would sail as soon as it was loaded. Even if in
some cases the ship waited for the pilgrims, it had also to load ; and arrange-
ments could not be so exactly made that the ship would sail a few hours after
the party arrived. Things move more slowly in the East.

322 XL The Date and Authorship of

Jews and the Jewish Christians ; and the salutation exempli-
fies and confirms the harmony.

Incidentally the passage shows the exact date when the
Epistle was composed. The final words were written shortly
after the Passover ended ; about April-May, either A.D. 58
or 59. The latter year is preferable, as the analogies of
Hebrews are to Paul's last defence before Agrippa and
Festus (Acts xxvi.), not to his earlier speeches in Jerusalem
and Rome. Moreover the Epistle represents the outcome
of a long period of thought and quiet discussion, after the
stormy period at the beginning of the Caesarean captivity
was ended.

The relation of the writer to the persons addressed is
shown most clearly in the conclusion. He was in some
way prevented at the moment from being with them (xiii.
19) ; he does not state what cause is detaining him against
his will. Yet immediately afterwards he says confidently
that he expects to see them shortly. He therefore regards it
as practically fixed that he is shortly to be in the place where
the persons addressed are. Accepting Delitzsch's view1
that the last few verses were appended by Paul himself, we
make the following inferences.

When Paul was at Caesarea, it is clear from xxv. 9 and
from the general circumstances of the case, that if the
formal trial of the prisoner occurred, it was almost certain
to be held at Jerusalem, where the evidence was most
readily accessible, and where the Jews wished it to be held.
Every historical student knows how much influence the
general wish of the provincials exercised on every Roman

1 The change of author was marked, not merely by change of handwriting,
but probably also by a break, or some other device, which was lost in the
later manuscripts.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 323

governor. It is therefore natural and probable that at some
time during his long imprisonment Paul expected that the
trial would not be longer delayed, and that he would shortly
be in Jerusalem. This was, of course, written before the
plot to assassinate Paul on the way up to be tried had been
discovered (when, in despair of a fair trial in Palestine, he was
driven to appeal to the Emperor), in the summer of A.D. 59.

The reference to Timothy in xiii. 23 is obscure on every
theory. It touches facts of which we are wholly ignorant.
But the intention is clear that, if Timothy be not detained
too long by possible hindrances, he will accompany the writer
to the city where the persons addressed live. Timothy, more-
over, is an intimate and dear friend of the writer, who there-
fore expects this dear friend to accompany him. Timothy
at the moment is away at a distance, and there maybe im-
pediments to his speedy arrival ; but, if he comes in time, it
is a matter of course that he will accompany the writer.

Timothy, it is certain, accompanied Paul to Jerusalem in
A.D. 57 (Acts xx. 4). We need not doubt that he and the
other delegates soon followed Paul to Caesarea. It is, how-
ever, in the last degree improbable that the delegates all re-
mained in Cassarea throughout the two years' imprisonment.
It may be taken as certain that Paul carried out his usual
policy of sending his coadjutors on missions both to his
churches and to new cities, and that mission work went on
actively during that period. Paul then says : " Know that
Timothy has been sent away on a mission,1 with whom, if
he returns quickly, I will see you ".

In the Epistle "we" generally denotes the body of Chris-

1 This interpretation, advocated by Lewis, seems more probable than " set
free from prison " : cp. Acts xiii. 3, and St. Paul the Traveller, p. 67 f. But
it seems self-contradictory to suppose that his mission was to carry the letter
to Jerusalem, as has been suggested.

324 XI. The Date and Authorship of

tians not immediate hearers of the Lord, in particular the
writers in Caesarea and the readers in Jerusalem (though, of
course, in several places what is said would apply to all
Christians). Sometimes, however, " we " and " you " are dis-
tinguished and pointedly contrasted as the writers and the
readers, as in v. n, vi. 9, n. Moreover, "we" sometimes
(as ii. 5), and "you" often, denote the single body of writers
or of readers respectively. The writers express themselves
always as a group, for the first person singular in xi. 32 l is
an instance of literary and impersonal usage, not an in-
dication of personality; and the last few verses we with
Delitzsch take as added by Paul with his own hand.

The personality of the writer and his relation to Paul are
the points in which Mr. Lewis's theory seems to require
serious modification.

(1) The Jewish nationality of the writer seems as certain
as that of the readers : Mr. Milligan, on p. 36 of the work
quoted above, says, " The writer, who was clearly himself a
Jew". Probably this will be disputed by no one, and least
of all by Mr. Lewis himself. He, as we may gather, would
explain that, when Luke (whom he considers to be the
writer of the Epistle) writes as a Jew, he does so because he
is expressing the thoughts of Paul. This brings us to the
second point.

(2) Mr. Lewis seems to attribute too little independent
action to the writer. He hears only Paul speaking through
the words of Luke. He holds that Luke was, if not the
amanuensis, yet the mere redactor of Paul's thoughts. That
appears a somewhat anomalous and improbable position.
One can understand that Luke might act as secretary, and

1 The first person singular is used in the English translation in ix. 22, but
not in the Greek text : here also it is a mere literary form.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 325

reproduce as faithfully as he could the words and thoughts
of Paul ; but one sees no reason why Paul should instruct
Luke as to his ideas in a series of short interviews,1 and leave
him to express them in his (Luke's) own words and style,
without making sure that he succeeded in expressing them
correctly. If the writer was striving simply to express Paul's
thoughts and ideas, he was not successful. The opinion of
scholars is practically unanimous, that the letter is not
Paul's because the ideas expressed in it are not Paul's, though
related to them. The truth is that the Epistle is clearly not
an attempt by another to express Paul's ideas, but an in-
dependent thinking out of the same topics that Paul was
meditating on and conversing about at Csesarea. The person
who wrote the Epistle was not trying unsuccessfully to ex-
press Paul's ideas as to " Faith " and " the Law," for example :
his own individuality and character are expressed in the use
which he makes of those terms — not contradictory, but com-
plementary to, and yet absolutely different in nature from,
Paul's ideas.

It has just been said that Paul was thinking at Caesarea
about the same topics that the Epistle discusses. Mr. Lewis
has treated this subject excellently, and it should be studied
in his own words. I give only a few examples.

In the first place, he quotes from the address to Agrippa
and Festus expressions which show that Paul had recently
been dwelling on the topics of the Epistle. The idea —
" The hope of the promise made of God to the fathers, unto
which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God night
and day, hope to come" (Acts xxvi. 6, 7) — moves in the
same sphere as Hebrews. The insistence upon the cease-

1 One can hardly accept Mr. Lewis's interpretation of 5ia fyaxeW (Heb.
xiii.) as "in snatches" during brief interviews.

326 XI. The Date and Authorship of

lessness of the ritual, the conception that the Law may be
regarded as a system of ritual, and " a scheme of typical pro-
visions for atonement," l are noteworthy in Paul's words, and
are characteristic of the Epistle. Again, " the sufferings of
Christ, as distinguished from his death," are a characteristic
feature of Hebrews, but not of any of Paul's Epistles. In
Acts xxvi. 22 f., " I continue unto this day witnessing to both
small and great,2 . . . that Christ should suffer".

These are quoted as examples of Mr. Lewis's striking
demonstration of the parallelism between Paul's defence
before Agrippa and the Epistle, especially in respect of
points which are not characteristic of Paul's Epistles.

Secondly, Mr. Lewis gives some important arguments to
show that topics and ideas and expressions used in Hebrews
must have been in Paul's mind at that period, in order to
effect the transition from his earlier to his later Epistles.
These topics lead on from Corinthians and Romans, and are
presupposed in Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians.

An interesting little point of expression lies in Paul's use
of the Song of Moses, Deuteronomy xxxii. 1-43 : he makes
the following quotations or references to it : —
Deut. xxxii. 4 in I Cor. x. 4 ;
„ 17 „ i Cor. x. 20;
„ 25 „ 2 Cor. vii. 5 ;

,, „ 35 „ Rom. xii. 19 and Heb. x. 30 ;3

„ 36 „ Heb. x. 30;
„ 43 „ Rom. xv. 10 ;
„ „ 43 „ Heb. i. 6.

1 Westcott, p. Hi.

2 Hebrews viii. n, " from the least to the greatest ". Mr. Lewis says that no
similar expression occurs in the Epistles of Paul.

3 The two quotations are in identical words, yet differing both from the
Septuagint and the Hebrew text.

the Epistle to the Hebrews 327

On the other hand, among ideas which are characteristic
of the later Epistles, but not of the earlier, Mr. Lewis quotes
the headship of Christ over the Church, the use of a<£eo-£?,
"forgiveness of sins," in Hebrews ix. 22, x. 18; Ephesians
i. 7; Colossians i. 14, and in the defence, Acts xxvi. 18,
etc. ; 1 also Lightfoot's note on the analogy between the con-
text of Colossians i. 12 and Acts xxvi. 18, "where all the
ideas and most of the expressions occur," points us to the
fact that both " are echoes of an argument entered into at
length previously in Hebrews ".

These brief notes are not intended as an adequate treat-
ment of the subject. That would require a detailed ex-
amination of many passages in the Caesarean light, and a
discussion of several well-known arguments. In fact, the
present article is simply a justification of, and a preface to, a
historical commentary on the letter.

In conclusion, it may be added that probably the most
important result of the Caesarean view is the light it sheds
on the relation of the Caesarean Church to Paul on the one
hand and to the Jewish-Christian party on the other. The
reconciliation between the two parties in the Church was
making good progress. It is an argument of my chapters
on Christian Antiquities in Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia
that the reconciliation was nearly complete in Asia Minor.
Moreover, as has been shown, it justifies in a remarkable
way the historical accuracy of the book of the Acts. You
have only to take the right point of view, and always you
find Luke a safe guide.

NOTE. — Dr. Harnack in a paper which attracted much
notice has attributed the Epistle to Priscilla. In his argu-

1 It must, however, be noticed that the word is used by Paul also in Acts
xiii. 38 (thrice by Peter, Acts ii. 38, v. 31, x. 43).

328

XI. The Epistle to the Hebrews

ment he does not quote from the Epistle itself any words or
thoughts characteristic of a woman. It seems to be an in-
dispensable part of such a theory that some proof of womanly
character should be shown in the letter. The allusions to
milk, and to folding up as a garment, cannot be considered
to indicate authorship of a woman, for they are customary ;
and Dr. Harnack himself evidently thinks so, for he does
not allude to them as furnishing any support to his theory.
If one could find the slightest indication of a woman's feeling
in the letter, one might think of Philip's four daughters, pro-
phetesses ; but, as it is, there seems to be absolutely nothing
on that side to lay hold of.

AY PAO M N AINWlllillPAYKYTATHN 0Y PATERA A l£N£N KOYOAN
IT Ape 6 N6lAKAl4>lA€PriA AYPOP£CTl A NO C l< Y PC Y OTFATHP

FIG. 6.— The Dove in the Art of Isaura (see p. 385).

XII.

THE CHURCH OF LYCAONIA IN THE
FOURTH CENTURY.

£ATTIC AC £ Tf
TAZOHCXAP
Al cf>PONU)N
AVT03KOIMH
MNHM-i C X A

FIG. 7. — The Cross in Lycaonian Ornamental Style (see p. 406).

HTPoM
EiWKONr

/AV/W/W/W

FIG. 8. — The Fish in the Art of Isaura (see p. 403).

333

XII.

THE CHURCH OF LYCAONIA IN THE FOURTH
CENTURY.

THE country of Lycaonia has furnished the largest body of
early Christian inscriptions, with the exception of the Cata-
combs in Rome. At some time it is proposed to publish the
whole collection, amounting to many hundreds, mostly un-
published ; but the number known increases so much every
year that it is premature to attempt to do so at present. It
is, however, a useful task to select a certain number of the
most typical texts, to exhibit their value as evidence for the
development of Christianity in its earliest Anatolian seat, to
describe the problems which they raise, and to suggest a
partial solution of some of these problems.

They form a group around Iconium as centre, and they
therefore represent one of the earliest and strongest bodies
of Christian opinion, whose origin goes back to St. Paul's
first missionary journey in Asia Minor, and whose ecclesi-
astical organisation was practically completed in its per-
manent and final form at an earlier period probably than
the Church of any other Roman province. The bishops of
every city of Lycaonia and of all the region in immediate
connection with Iconium were present at one or other of the
two great Councils of the fourth century, in A.D. 325 and 381 ; 1

1 Psibela was not represented ; but I believe that it was then subject to
Laodiceia and became a city and a bishopric only at the end of the fifth
century under the name Verinopolis. Also Sinethandos became a bishopric
only in the eighth century.

(331)

332 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

and this could hardly be the case unless the ecclesiastical
organisation was practically complete in the third century.
It was a long journey from Lycaonia to Nicaea or to
Constantinople, where those Councils were held ; yet the
Lycaonian bishops were far more completely represented
than those of provinces which lay within easier reach of the
Councils. Taking this in conjunction with the fact that one
of the earliest Councils was held at Iconium in A.D. 236, we
must regard Lycaonia as having been very important in
Christian history during the third century.

It would, therefore, be useful to study the Church organisa-
tion, the priests and other ecclesiastical officials, and the
relation in which they stood to the ordinary population in
this old Christian land during the fourth century. The
method must start from the inscriptions and compare them
with contemporary4 literature. A few initial steps are made
in this paper, which may facilitate the way for deeper study,
and show what value and interest belong to the work.

The following table gives a list of the bishoprics from
which are drawn the documents which are here described.
As the political organisation varied greatly in the Roman
period, I give a statement of the Provincial system at
different epochs. The original Province of Galatia included
almost the whole of these bishoprics, until a few of them
were detached at the formation of the triple Province Cilicia-
Lycaonia-Isauria, probably about 135 A.D. After South
Galatia was made into a separate Province called Pisidia
about 295, the majority of them were finally detached from
Galatia. In 372 a new Province Lycaonia was formed out
of parts of Pisidia and Isauria.

in the Fourth Century

333

3 (x) CO

> H

g .

> °.
O •<

3 |T3 rf 'O

,2 "S ' "3 ' "I

,3
cS

^S - - r P

•|

oS
O

1 — ' co

i i rfJiUll

_^ x! o^gSn^

>> ^ X!;2c'C(uP

o Q E~* rn 1 1 *^ t-3 M

(M
CO

«*

a
£ Q

PQ <

S S

C3 O

•8.

8 '-

'-a 8

334 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

©The basis of all historical study must be the chronologi-
cal arrangement of the documents ; but as we approach the
Christian inscriptions of Lycaonia, we encounter the initial
difficulty of specifying the period to which they belong.
Whereas the Phrygian Christian inscriptions are frequently
dated exactly by year, month and day, and the dated texts
form a fixed and certain series alongside of which the undated
can be arranged with an approximation to certainty, not a
single Lycaonian inscription has been found dated according
to an era, such as was used in Phrygia ; the custom of
dating by an era was rarely, or not at all, practised in
Lycaonia. Except where an Emperor or other known
person is mentioned, no Lycaonian inscription can be fixed
by external and indubitable evidence ; and among the
Christian inscriptions that means of determining the period
is, of course, rarely available. The only useful method is to
arrange them in classes, according to the formulae used, then
to place these, as far as possible, in chronological succession,
and finally to try to determine approximately the period
when the earliest class began and when the others were in
use.

A first question that arises in this connection is whether
there is any reason to expect that in Lycaonia Christian
inscriptions should begin later than in Phrygia. So far as
regards the time when the new religion became so general
in the country that a large number of Christian epitaphs
could be openly set up, there is no reason to think that Asian
Phrygia was more quickly Christianised than the country
about Iconium and Pisidian Antioch, z>., the Southern Galatia
of St. Paul's time. On the contrary, Christianity seems, so
far as the indications afford ground for judgment, to have
penetrated farther to the North, and therefore presumably

in the Foiirth Century 335

more rapidly, from Iconium than from the first centre in
Asian Phrygia (viz., the Lycus valley, where Colossae,
Laodiceia and Hierapolis were situated). So far as this
consideration goes, we should expect Christian inscriptions
to be numerous in Lycaonia at an earlier time than in
Phrygia.

But, on the other hand, ordinary Pagan epigraphy seems
to have spread from the West eastwards, and to have been
generally practised in Phrygia earlier than in Lycaonia or
Galatia or Cappadocia. Epigraphy spread along with the
Greek language and education. From this point of view
Christian epigraphy was probably affected by the general
principle, and should be dated later in Lycaonia than in Asian
Phrygia. But the difference in time cannot have been very
great, especially as it seems clear that Christianity was an
effective agent in spreading the knowledge of Greek and
killing the native languages in Anatolia.1 It seems safe to
suppose that Christian epigraphy was not more than fifty
years later in Lycaonia than in Asian Phrygia. Now the
earliest Christian epitaphs known in Phrygia are fixed
about A.D. 192 and about 224, while about 250 the dated
inscriptions become numerous.2

On this line of argument we should have to look for the
earliest Christian epitaphs in Lycaonia about A.D. 240, and
expect that about 300 they should be common ; but as 300
lies within the time of the severest persecution, we should
rather regard 310-400 as the time when they were frequent.
A.D. 250-360 is the period when the rich Christian epigraphy
of Nova Isaura (between Lystra and Derbe) has been placed

. vgl. Sprachforschung, N.F. viii., p. 382 f., and Oesterr.
Jahreshefte, 1905, Beiblatt, introd. to art. on " Later Phrygian Inscriptions " ;
also above, p. 146.

2 Cities and Bish. of Phr., ii., pp. 526, 713.

336 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

according to a careful examination and argument ; l but it is
mostly of an earlier type than Lycaonian epitaphs in general.

As a general rule it is certain that formulae which ap-
proximate in form to, or are identical with, Pagan formulae
were earlier in origin than those which are overtly Christian
in character. As has been frequently pointed out, Christian
society and social customs were only slowly differentiated
from the common everyday society and customs of the time.
This then must be taken as a principle to start from, that
epitaphs expressed according to a form ordinarily used by
the Pagans are to be arranged earlier in chronological order
than those which are purely Christian in character. This
principle will, at once, simplify our task gr°atly. The
following criteria of date may be enumerated.

It will, I think, be found that several formulae, which
probably most scholars were formerly disposed to consider
as quite late and purely Byzantine in period — as was
formerly the present writer's view — had come into use in
Lycaonia at least as early as the fourth century ; and there
is some probability that part of the earliest Christian sym-
bolism in art originated or at least was very early adopted in
common use in that country.

(i) The overwhelming majority of Pagan epitaphs in the
central regions of Asia Minor under the Roman Empire
follow the form that such and such a person constructed
the tomb for himself, or for some other person or persons,
or for both himself and others. The construction of the
tomb was a religious duty; and the document began by
mentioning the performance of this duty. The Christian
epitaphs, which are expressed in this form, may be placed

1 See Miss Ramsay's paper in Studies in the Art and History of the Eastern
Roman Provinces, 1906, p. i ff.

in the Fourth Century 337

in the earliest period. Certain individual epitaphs of
this class present various other features, which point to an
early date, and thus confirm the general principle. The names
and the lettering are, as a whole, of an early type ; neither
of these criteria are sufficiently definite to date, or even
fix the order of, the inscriptions, but occasionally they fur-
nish in isolated cases strong and even complete evidence.
The presumption is that epitaphs with this formula are not
later than the fourth century; and the change to a new
form probably began soon after 350.

In some cases the name of the person buried is placed
first (accusative) and the maker of the tomb is mentioned at
the end (nominative). One might at first be disposed to
regard these as indicating a transition to the second class of
epitaphs, and to place them later than the straightforward
formula ; but the examples that occur do not suggest a late
date.

(2) The formula, "here lies so-and-so,"1 is of a later
period. It was imitated from the Latin hie jacet, and is
more characteristic of the cosmopolitan religion Christianity
than of the more localised paganism ; but it is not confined
to the former. It is a sign probably rather of the fourth
century or later, than the third. The employment of this
formula, with the preceding one introduced in a supple-
mentary way at the conclusion of the epitaph, characterises a
series of grave-stones which probably belong to the period
A.D. 340-380: they are chiefly metrical epitaphs. A more
overtly Christian form, " here has been laid to rest," 2 may
be regarded as a later development, and assigned to the end
of the fourth century and later. These classes of formula

roi or

2 £i>0c£5e Ke/coi/xrjTat, /ce/rtjSewTat, ^Koi^Qij : the last is probably latest.

XII. The Church of Lycaonia

lasted very long through Byzantine time. The periods
specified here represent merely the probable beginning.

(3) The name Aurelius (usually Aur.), employed in Greek
incorrect fashion as a praenomen, indicates the period A.D.
220-330 (see commentary on No. 15).

(4) The name Flavius (usually Fl. or sometimes Fla., i.e.,
Phi. or Phla.), employed in the same fashion, marks the in-
fluence of the Constantinian dynasty ; and belongs to the
period A.D. 330-400 or later. Such cases are much less
numerous than the use of Aur., as the Latin style of using
two and three names passed into desuetude, and the Greek
fashion of the single name became predominant. Moreover
inscriptions became rarer after A.D. 400.

(5) The nomen Julius is, on the whole, remarkably com-
mon in these epitaphs. It occurs too early to have been
suggested by the occurrence of the name in the later Con-
stantinian family. Nor is it likely to have originated from
a short-lived Emperor like Philip. More probably it belongs
to older usage, which persisted through the centuries.
Especially among the Jews Julius Caesar and the early Em-
pire roused strong partisanship; and the name Julius is
likely to have been much used among them. They were
strong in the chief Lycaonian cities.

(6) The name Valerius belonged to the dynasty of Dio-
cletian, and was not likely to be favoured by Christians ex-
cept through its connotation (as connected with valere> to be
strong).

(7) The use of the Roman triple name is an indication of
early date. In rural Lycaonia it seems to have ceased be-
fore A.D. 400.

(8) The formula " Here lies the slave of God " (o Sov\os rov
, followed by the name of the deceased, belongs to a

in the Fourth Century 339

much more developed stage of Christian expression. It
cannot safely be dated before the fifth century, and it lasted

The only Christian inscription of Lycaonia that can be
dated with exactness is the following, about A.D. 338-340.
It confirms the conjectural dating of these inscriptions,
adopted from the general criteria above stated, and pub-
lished in the Expositor, 1905-6.

I. Laodicea Katakekaumene on a sarcophagus.
Marcus Julius Eu[gen]ius, son of Cyrillus Celer of (the
village) Kouessos and senator (of Laodicea), after
having been a soldier in the Governor's maniple in
Pisidia, and having married Gaia Julia Flaviana,
daughter of Gaius Nestorianus, a man of (Roman)
senatorial rank ; and having gained military honours ;
and after the command had meanwhile gone forth in
the time of Maximin that the Christians should sacri-
fice and should not retire from military service ; and
after having endured very many tortures under Dio-
genes, Governor (of Pisidia) ; and after having suc-
ceeded in retiring from military service, guarding the
faith of the Christians ; and after having spent a
short time in the city of the Laodiceans ; and after
having been constituted bishop through the will of
the Almighty God ; and after having administered
the episcopate during 25 full years with much dis-
tinction ; and after having rebuilt from the founda-
tions the entire church and all the adornment around
it — i.e. (consisting) of stoai and tetrastoa and paint-
ings and screens and water-tank and entrance gate-
way along with all the constructions in masonry —
and having, in a word, set everything in order ; and

340

XII. The Church of Lycaonia

o-r[p
Kal
T]a.

a >§

in the Pourth Century 341

renouncing the life of men (for a hermit's), I made
for myself sepulchral buildings (pel to] and a sarco-
phagus, on which1 I caused to be engraved all
these afore-mentioned words, to be my tomb and
that of the succession of my race.

This inscription, which was found by Mr. W. M. Calder
of Christ Church, Oxford, in July, 1908, and published by
him in the Expositor, November, 1908, is one of the most re-
markable documents of the kind that has ever been found,
and a historical authority of the first importance. It ranks
next in interest to the epitaph of Avircius Marcellus in the
list of Christian inscriptions ; and is so full of historical sug-
gestiveness, that one finds it hard to restrict the commentary
on it within moderate limits.

Marcus Julius Eugenius was, like so many of the leading
men in the early Christian history of Anatolia, born of one
of the wealthy families,2 which could afford to give the
higher education to their scions. In accordance with his
birth from a leading provincial family, he entered the Im-
perial service, the door of which was through a military
career. He was enrolled in the body of troops attached to
the immediate service of the Governor of the Province
Pisidia. He must therefore have been stationed at Pisidian
Antioch. There he married Gaia Julia Flaviana, daughter
of Gaius (Julius) Nestorianus, who was a member of the
Roman Senate, and therefore belonged to the aristocracy of
the Empire. It is not open to doubt that Julius Eugenius
was an officer, but he intentionally refrains from stating his
rank, whether because he thought that this was of too purely
mundane interest, or because an officer was obliged, not

1 The inscription is said to be on the sarcophagus, not on the pelta.

2 On the importance of this fact, see Pauline and other Studies, p. 376.

34 2 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

merely to acquiesce tacitly in pagan ceremonial (as the
private soldiers were), but to take an active part in the re-
ligious ritual of the regiment ; and he was unwilling to lay
stress on this aspect of his career. He mentions, however,
that he served with distinction, which may be taken to mean
that he gained decorations and medals.1

Meantime there went forth an Imperial decree in the time
of Maximin that the Christians should offer sacrifice (in the
State religion) and should not retire from military service.
This is a novel and striking record, which throws unexpected
light on the character of the persecution ordered by Maxi-
min. Here is absolutely contemporary evidence, and the
circumstances in which it was written down place it beyond
all suspicion of being intended for temporary effect or
suggested by controversy.

During the persecution of Diocletian, A.D. 303, the inten-
tion was at first to clear the army of Christians, and Christian
soldiers were in the opening stage of the persecution given
the choice between dismissal from the honour of service and
compliance with the Imperial decrees enforcing sacrifice.2
A large number of soldiers, preferring their religion, forth-
with abandoned their career. Thereafter persecution, which
had not originally been contemplated, was begun ; and
soldiers were executed on their confession. And again at a
later time, when Licinius was preparing for the final struggle
against Constantine in A.D. 315 and 323, he tried to purge
his army of Christians.

In contrast with this policy it appears that in the time of
Maximin, A.D. 307-313, an Imperial decree forbade Chris-

1 Donatus donis militaribus.

2 Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., p. viii. i., Lactantius, de Mort. Persec., x., quoted
by Harnack, Verbreitung (ed. 2), ii., p. 46 f., and Expansion of Christianity,
ii., p. 211 f.

in the Fourth Century 343

tians to give up military service (doubtless attempting to
coerce them into compliance with the State ritual). Be-
yond question, the reason must have been that the enforced
retirement of so many Christian soldiers was weakening the
army too much, It is certain that the armies of the Eastern
Empire were largely composed of Christians, and Maximin
found that the earlier policy was dangerous. If Licinius
recurred to the older policy, the reason was easy to see.
His enemy, Constantine, was recognised as the champion
of the Christians ; and Licinius was afraid to trust Christians
to fight against him. This war was fought by Licinius as
the champion of paganism.

Already, in the time of Diocletian, it is apparent from the
Acta of St. Maximilian that Christians were being compelled
to enlist : Maximilian, in spite of his protests that he was
a Christian and could not be a soldier, was measured and
put through the first stages of enforced conscription.1
Apparently, it was hoped that he would submit and accept
the position when he found there was no escape ; and pro-
bably the suspicion was entertained that he was merely shirk-
ing service under the plea of religion. When he persevered
he was executed.

The Imperial and ecclesiastical orders regarding military
service form a remarkable series which throw light on one
another and on the relation of the Church to the State.

(1) Diocletian and Maximian in A.D. 303 ordered Christians
to leave the service. They must have relied on the men's
loyalty or the attractions of the army to make Christians
abandon their faith ; and, evidently, these proved strong
influences.

(2) Maximin forbade Christians to leave the service, when

1 Harnack, Verbreitung, p. 48 (ed. 2) ; Expansion of Christianity, ii., p.
214; Ruinart, Acta Sincera Mart., p. 341 (Ratisbon, 1859).

344 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

the Eastern army was being dangerously weakened by the
loss of the Christian soldiers, who abandoned the service
rather than their religion.

(3) The Council of Aries forbade soldiers to lay down
arms in time of peace. This implies that the Church now
took the side of the Christianised Empire of the West and
ordered Christians to remain in the army and not to abandon
the service on grounds of conscience.

(4) Licinius in his war against Constantine, 315 and 323,
ordered Christians to leave the army of the East. He could
not trust them to fight for him against Constantine.

(5) The Nicene Council in 325 decreed very severe penal-
ties against those who, after having left the army, had re-
sumed service. This cannot be taken as referring to ancient
events in the persecution of Diocletian or of Maximin. It
applies to those who had returned to the army in 323 and
fought against Constantine. Licinius evidently tried to at-
tract the Christians back to the ranks and succeeded : some
were even eager to return. Here again we find the Church
officially siding with the Christian Emperor, and using
ecclesiastical penalties to enforce loyalty. The Church at
Nicaea definitely takes one side in a political question, and
begins the close alliance with the Imperial Government, on
which see Article IV. in this volume.

The edict under Maximin must have been issued shortly
after his accession to the Imperial dignity in A.D. 307. It
was followed by the arrest and torture of the young officer
in Pisidia by order of the governor Diogenes. The official
in question, Valerius Diogenes, is known from other docu-
ments l to have governed Pisidia about this time. His date
is fixed by the fact that at Apameia he erected a monument

1C.I.L., iii., 6807, 13661.

in the Pourth Century 345

in honour of the Empress Valeria, who fell into unmerited
disgrace and had to flee from court in A.D. 311. Diogenes,
therefore, was governor before that year ; and, as there is no
reason to think that duration of office was longer at this time
than previously, it is probable that Julius Eugenius suffered
shortly before the persecution was stopped by edict of
Galerius in A.D. 311. The edict of Maximin, in that case,
would be a supplementary decree issued during the long
persecution 303-311, and not mentioned by Eusebius in his
History.

But the possibility must be considered that Diogenes may
have governed Pisidia for a longer period, and that the time
when Eugenius suffered was during the recrudescence of per-
secution in the East under Maximin in A.D. 312 and 313.
In that case, however, it is difficult to reconcile this edict of
Maximin with the description of his conduct as given by
Eusebius : he did not issue any formal edict annulling
Galerius's act of toleration, but contented himself with
sending letters and practically setting aside the edict of
grace, until at last just before his death he issued a new
edict of toleration. All reasons, therefore, point to the
earlier date.

We conclude, then, that Eugenius suffered about A.D. 310,
and that his escape from death (which is contrary to the other
evidence about the character of the great persecution) may
have been due either to the fact that towards the end feeling
was changing and punishments were not always carried so far,
or to the mildness of persecution in Pisidia (see No. 28).

Julius Eugenius obtained permission to retire from military
service, and settled in Laodicea, where he was soon made
bishop, about A.D. 314-316 (see p. 351). He devoted him-
self to the restoration of the church, which had evidently

346 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

been destroyed in the great persecution and had to be re-
built from the foundations. This is in striking agreement
with the History of Eusebius, who, immediately after the
final edict and the death of Maximin, proceeds to describe
the restoration of the churches. The new churches were
far more splendid than those which had been destroyed.
Christianity was now dominant and prosperous; money
flowed in ; and the Imperial bounty contributed to the re-
building.1 The emperors had always made a practice of
contributing liberally to works of public utility ; and churches
were now regarded as a necessary part of municipal equip-
ment. As here the Laodicean church was restored, e'/e 0e//,e-
\LCOV, so Eusebius tells that they were rebuilt e'/c ftdOpav. As
Eugenius mentions the " adornment " or " equipment " (KOO--
/409) of his church, so Eusebius, x., 4, in the panegyric which
he addressed to Paulinus, bishop of Tyre, on the dedication
of his new-built church, speaks of l( the splendid ornaments
of this temple" (ra rovBe rov z/eo> 7rept,Ka\\rj /coa-fjL^fjLaTa).

We may fairly take the rest of Eusebius's very full de-
scription as of the church at Tyre as an illustration of what
Eugenius did. Paulinus used the old site, which had been
purposely polluted with all kinds of impurities, so that the
cleansing of it was a troublesome work. In the old establish-
ment, the outer gates (7rv\cu) had been cut down with axes,
the holy books had been destroyed and the church had been
burned ; 2 but Paulinus built a new, much larger and more
magnificent church and series of constructions, surrounded
by a wider enclosing wall (-Tre/n/SoXo?). On the east side he
built a large and lofty entrance (TrpbirvKov), calculated to
attract the attention even of strangers and enemies, to

1 Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., x., 2, and the African donations, x., 6 (Calder).
3 tveirvpurav £v irvpl rb ayiaffT'fipiov rov &eov.

in the Fourth Century 347

astound them by the contrast of the present splendour and
the former desolation, to afford them, as they stood far outside,
a good view of all that was inside, and entice them to enter.
Passing through the outer gateway or Propylon, the visitor or
the devotee came next into a wide square space, open to the
heavens, surrounded by four covered porticoes supported on
columns. From column to column stretched screens of
wooden lattice-work.1 This atrium is what Eugenius calls a
tetrastoon. In the open space of the atrium there were foun-
tains of flowing water, so that all visitors might enter the holier
buildings purified and not with unwashed feet. Opposite the
outer entrance he made another gateway (jTpoTrvXov) with
three gates, the largest and loftiest in the middle. These
caught the rays of the rising sun, like the outer gateway.
The church itself (vaos, /rWtXeto? olxos, ft>? av (3aari\ls) was
surrounded with porticoes (o-roaL) on both sides. In the
church the holy place (QvcriavT^piov) was partitioned off by
beautifully wrought wooden screens of lattice-work,2 to the
admiration of spectators. He made the pavement of marble,
and on each side he constructed chambers and exedrai for
various hieratic purposes of purification, baptism, etc.

The analogy of this contemporary church at Tyre not
merely shows what was the arrangement and appearance of
the Laodicean buildings, but also proves that the same type
was widely accepted in the Christian world of the fourth
century. Another example has recently been uncovered in
the excavations conducted by Dr. Wiegand at Miletus.3

(Treats nioffiv iravraxdQfv eVaipo/ieVcus • S)v ra fj.e<ra 8ia<ppdy/Ji.a(rt ro?s
rb (rv/j./j.fTpov ^Kovari /j.-f}KO
irepi€<ppa.TTe SIKTUOIS, els &Kpov
fji.fi/ois, &s 6av/j.d(riov rots dp&ffi Trape^ew rfyv deav.

3Sechster vorldufige Bericht, p. 28 ff. (Berlin, 1908; Anhang zu den
Abhandl. d. Akad.).

34-8 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

Here also the Propylon leads to an atrium of the usual form ;
and through the atrium one enters the church (which has
the form of a basilica). A variety of other buildings are
grouped closely around, forming one single complex struc-
ture. The entrance is from the west, not from the east, as
at Tyre.

There is, therefore, no doubt as to the character of
Eugenius's constructions. The whole was surrounded by an
enclosing wall or peribolos. This wall is implied by the
entrance gateway (7rpo7rv\ov), and is summed up among the
works of masonry, which are comprehensively mentioned at
the end of the list. The enclosure was entered by a gateway,
which admitted to an open space in which there were at least
two atriums or square spaces open to the sky and surrounded
by porticoes. The church also was bordered by porticoes.
There was a water-tank instead of the fountains of the
Tyrian church. The church and perhaps the atria were de-
corated with paintings. There remain the /ce^T^o-et?, a word
not elsewhere quoted in the technical sense here employed.
There can, however, be no doubt that Mr. Calder is right in
taking the word to denote carved work, made by piercing
holes in wood. I should unhesitatingly identify them with
the lattice-work screens, which were used at Tyre both in the
church and in the atrium : see also No. 1 1.

Eusebius in his panegyric makes no reference to the
municipal side of this great work. He regards it as in-
tended for the faithful alone, and speaks only of its ecclesi-
astical purpose. The pagan strangers look from outside, and
the hope is entertained that the interior splendour may allure
them to qualify for entrance. But it is clear that these great
structures were intended to be a centre of social life for
the faithful ; and, as the cities became entirely Christianised,

in the Fourth Century 349

the church buildings formed the centre of city life gener-
ally.1

Ti\is architectural enterprise must have absorbed all the
energy of Bishop Eugenius for the twenty-five years of his
episcopate, and was perhaps the reason why he did not
attend the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325 (though the situation
of Laodicea on the great road made it easier for him to at-
tend than it was for such distant bishops as those of Barata,
Isaura, Vasada, and others in Pisidia and Lycaonia). It was
necessary for him to find the workmen and the money,
as well as to exercise constant supervision over the work.
The well-known letter of Gregory to Amphilochius about the
much smaller building which he intended to erect at Nyssa 2
shows how much depended on the bishop in such a case.

In later life Julius Eugenius, according to the old Phrygian
custom, proceeded to prepare his own grave and sepulchral
monument. It consisted of pelta and a sarcophagus. The
curious term pelta is frequently used in Lycaonian, Pisidian
and Phrygian epitaphs. It is probably a native word (used
as a neuter, TreXroz/, in Greek) ; and is explained with high
probability by Keil in Hermes, 1908, p. 551, as denoting a
palisade or partition surrounding the plot of ground on
which the sarcophagus was placed, and which was the
property of the maker of the tomb. The palisade was, ac-
cording to Keil, composed of staves — (Sopara) ; and we are
reminded of the screens in churches of that period, on which
see especially No. n. Such pelta, originally wooden, were
likely to be made also of stone, and to retain the old name.

1 See above, p. 153 ff.

2 It is translated and commented on by Bruno Keil in Strzygowski's
Kleinasien ein Neuland der Kunstgeschichte, p. 77 f. This church was only a
martyrion or memorial of a martyr ; and was a single small church of the
usual memorion type.

350 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

Within the palisade there was probably a large basis or
sub-structure on which the sarcophagus was placed : the sub-
structure is called in West-Phrygian epitaphs by various
names indicating the whole or parts.1

Following the example of St. Avircius Marcellus, a cen-
tury and a half earlier, Eugenius caused to be engraved on
his sarcophagus a record of his life, and this record has been
revealed by Mr. Calder's important discovery. Contrary to
the usual custom, the bishop makes no mention of his immed-
iate family except in the vague general phrase of the conclu-
sion (which shows that he had children). He mentions his
wife at the beginning in such a way as to suggest that her
noble birth was a cause of pride to him ; but he does not say
that she was to be buried in the same grave. Possibly, she
was already dead and buried at Pisidian Antioch, the city to
which her family probably belonged. The bishop's attention,
however, was fully occupied in the task of compressing into
the brief limits of an epitaph the account of his own career ;
and we must be grateful to him for bequeathing so note-
worthy a record of this critical period, which furnishes strik-
ing confirmation of Eusebius's historical sense in selecting
for record the typical facts and processes of the time.

It is clear that Eugenius was a bishop of the fully de-
veloped monarchical type, head of the Laodicean Church,
controller of its finance, director of its work, speaking in its
name. He rebuilt the old Church, as he says; but there can
be no doubt that he employed all the resources of the local
Church, as well as his own, for this end. The organisation
of each city-Church in Lycaonia must therefore be under-
stood as completed on the same type at this time. Yet he

l&a8piK6v, ffiryKpovffrov, ypdSoi, etc. (Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, ii.,
P- 367).

in the Fourth Century 351

uses the old native formula of epitaph, not a new Christian
style. As he made a point of retiring (o-TrovSdcras a,7ra\\a-
yfjvcu) from service as soon as the law was relaxed in 3 1 3 by
the last edict of Maximian, and as he resided only a short
time in Laodicea before he was made bishop, his elevation is
not likely to have been later than 316. Apparently, his
sufferings and his rank caused him to be selected without
passing through the lower orders. His twenty-fifth year of
office, then, was A.D. 340 or earlier.

UUb While it is impossible here to enter on the vexed
question of the relation between bishops and presbyters —
nor is the writer qualified to do so — it is equally impossible
to ignore the fact that these inscriptions throw some light on
the character of the presbyterate in the fourth century, and
that the information serves to complete in some ways the
accepted views. I may take Dr. Hatch's article, " Priest,"
in the Dictionary of Christian Antiquities ', ii., 1700 ff., as a
fair specimen of those views : to the effect that where the
bishop existed he was from the first the manager of the
Church finance and custodian of the Church funds, and that
through this and other functions he gradually became, first
of all, president of the whole body of Church officials, as
primus inter pares of the presbyteroi ; and thereafter ruling
and monarchical bishop ; that " by the beginning of the
third century the organisation of almost all Churches had
begun to conform to a single type, bishop, presbyters
and deacons," though " in some places the older organisation
lingered on" through the third century; and that "the
functions of the presbyterate in this fully organised and
generally accepted type may be mainly grouped according
as they relate (i) to discipline, (2) to the sacraments, (3) to
teaching, (4) to benediction ".

35 2 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

The most important of the inscriptions relating to the
duties of the presbyter in Lycaonia is

2. Alkaran, near Nova Isaura (R. in Journal of Hellenic
Studies •, 1902, p. 167) : —

Helper of widows, of orphans, of strangers, of the poor,
[Nestor ? son of Nestor ?], presbyter of the sacred ex-
penditure: i(n) (remembrance).1

This epitaph may be assigned with much confidence to the lat-
ter part of the fourth century, but the earlier part of the fifth
is possible. The disuse of the older form of epitaph prohibits
an earlier date. The individual characterisation and full
description of the deceased is unfavourable to a later date.
There is nothing of a stereotyped and formulated character.
It reads like the free expression of an individual mind, and
formulae were likely to grow out of this expression in subse-
quent time.

The preceding sentence was printed in the Expositor,
December, 1905, p. 445. In 1908 I observed a remarkable
confirmation of it in the opening of the Acta Sanctorum
Anthousae Athanasii, etc.,2 where the description here given
of the presbyter is caught up and applied to Athanasius,
Bishop of Tarsus, who is called " the protector of orphans,
the champion of widows, the help of the oppressed, and the
harbour of the storm-tossed ".3

The words of the Acta are only a turgid variation of the
terms used in the epitaph : the four classes of persons aided

apcaybs [Nearcwp ? Sis ? ],
ruv i\epu>v a.va\<a][j.dr(av yu.x- The name of the deceased is supplied conjectur-
ally, to show the construction.

2Analecta Bolland., xii., loff. (ed. Usener), a longer and earlier form ; Acta
Sanct., August, iv., 499 f., a shorter but later form of the Acta.

Ko.1

in the Fourth Century 35 3

by the church officer remain, orphans, widows, strangers and
wretched ; but in respect of each class a special epithet is
applied to the official, and " strangers " are fantastically
called "storm-tossed," the " wretched " are styled " the op-
pressed ". It is possible that the words of the epitaph are
taken from some religious work of the fourth century ; and that
the expression became customary in the south-eastern part of
Anatolia,1 and thus came to be known both to the composer
of this epitaph and to the author of the Acta? But at least
it is evident that the epitaph gives the simple and early form,
while the expression used in the Acta is later in date and
pedantic in phraseology.

In this inscription the Presbyter is described as dispenser
of charity and hospitality, which implies control of the funds
for those purposes. If the restoration of the conclusion be
accepted, he was in control of the entire finance of the
Church. Yet this duty is supposed to have been the most
characteristic and determining function of the bishop's
office.

The only other restoration that seems possible at the end
is that which Professor Cumont suggested at the time when

1 The verb connected with avTiX-^irrtap was used in this region : see No. 43.

2 The scene of the Acta lies in this Province. The time is given as the
reign of Valerian, when Cilicia, Isauria and Lycaonia formed the Province
called the " Three Eparchiae " (p. 332) : Anthousa belonged to Seleucia of
Isauria, yet her two Christian slaves were tried and suffered at Tarsus of
Cilicia, metropolis of the whole Province. This seems so strange to the
author of the earlier Acta, that he omitted the specification of Anthousa's
city (which, however, is retained in the later Acta and in the Menologia, and
even in § 4 of the earlier Acta). This author wrote much later than A.D. 295,
when Cilicia was disjoined by Diocletian from Isauria. Usener, ignoring the
provincial facts, maintains in his edition that Anthousa belonged to Tarsus ;
his sole reason is that she saw Athanasius, Bishop of Tarsus ; but a journey
was needed before they met. He rightly observed that the longer Acta,
which he published, are older than the shorter Acta,

354 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

I found the inscription, rwz/ fop&v Trpay^drcov ; he compared
the words applied in Apostol. Const., ii., 35, to the priest, Sioi-
K7)Tr)<; TWV €/cK\r)(ria<TTt,Ka)v TrpayjjbaTcov. But this seems to
require in the inscription the use of a preposition eVt, and
the longer word suits the large gap better. Moreover, the
reading ''expenditure" is, perhaps, demanded by the cir-
cumstances here : the last words furnish the explanation for
the opening words. The deceased presbyter was the helper
of widows, etc., because he was in charge of the expenditure
of the Church. It is therefore clear that the word lep&v in
the one case is practically equivalent to eKK\r)(ria<TTiK(ov in
the other: "the expenses of the Ekklesia" are "the sacred
expenses ".

The word " strangers " is a pure restoration ; but some
word is required by the context, and this word almost im-
poses itself as necessary. The duty of hospitality was
strenuously insisted on in the early Church from the very
beginning.1 Charity and hospitality formed a most im-
portant part of the ecclesiastical establishment.

The restoration "strangers" is further confirmed by in-
scription No. 3. Moreover, we remember the great founda-
tion built by Basil near Caesarea,2 including almshouse,
hospital and place of entertainment for strangers.

In the village church where this presbyter officiated,
we find ourselves in the same surroundings as those which
Basil had in his mind. The Church is the centre of practi-
cal work in social organisation, charity and hospitality, the
Church of the people.

In early documents the duty of presbyters to take care of
widows is strongly emphasised : Dr. Hatch quotes Polycarp,

1 Pauline and other Studies, pp. 118, 385.
a See above, p. 154.

in the Fourth Century 355

ad Phil., 4 ; Epist. Clement, ad Jacob '., 8 ; Apost Const., iv., 2.1
Hermas rather associates this duty with bishops, and so
does Ignatius, ad Polyc., 4.

The question arises whether this epitaph can be supposed
to describe one of a body of presbyters, on the theory that
the various ecclesiastical duties were apportioned among
them.2 This view seems to be impossible, as there is no
reason to think that the various functions of the presbyterate
were ever divided in this strict businesslike way among the
members of the body, or that one presbyter superintended
finance, charity and hospitality, another taught, a third dis-
pensed the sacraments, and so on. Division of duties inter
pares was voluntary, not permanent and official.

It is preferable to suppose that the deceased is described
as having discharged certain of the duties of his office with
special zeal and success, without implying that he did not
also discharge all the other functions of the presbyterate.
We must remember that in the many village churches there
was no bishop, but only a presbyter in charge ; and this
presbyter necessarily exercised all the powers which in a
great city church were exercised by a bishop and presbyters.
In that view the village presbyter was simply the village
priest ; and, as we shall find in other epitaphs, he was often
called hiereus. Lycaonia was covered with innumerable
villages, and the remains show that in each village there
must have been at least one church, which needed its priest.
In a small city like Barata there were quite thirty
churches. But in the entire Province of Lycaonia there
were only eighteen bishops. The presbyter or hiereus of

1 The second and third authorities may be called early from our point of
view in the present article.

2 Formerly I inclined to this view, Expositor, Dec., 1905, p. 447 ff.

356 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

the village church had, therefore, to discharge all the various
duties which the Orthodox Church regarded as its sphere of
work : he managed finance, charity, hospitality, as well as
the strictly ecclesiastical and hieratic functions ; and in his
epitaph it is those social duties that are emphasised. They
were what endeared the presbyter to his people and made
him live in their memory. The Orthodox and Imperial
Church was still the Church of the people.1

That a presbyter administered a village church in this
way in the fourth century is proved by a reference in Basil's
letter 188, 10, a difficult passage which is discussed at length
in my paper on Pisidia in Annual of the British School of
Athens, 1902, p. 266 f. It seems in this passage to be pre-
supposed that in the unnamed village under discussion
there was only one presbyter, Longinus. When the district
was in A.D. 371 transferred and placed under Iconium,
Amphilochius the metropolitan of Iconium found that
Longinus (who had been favoured by the metropolitan of
Isaura, his former head) was unworthy ; and ordered another
presbyter, Cyriacus of the village Mindana, to perform his
duties.2

Again in letter 54 Basil, addressing his Chorepiscopi
(village-bishops or country bishops) reprimands them for
admitting, without proper examination and without reference
to himself, numbers of persons into the lower order of the
ministry. This practice they had carried so far that in
every village there were many ministers,3 but often not one

1 See above, p. 152.

2 Professor Holl, Amphilochius, p. 20 (Berlin, 1906), comes to different
conclusions. He quotes only my Historical Geography, not my later article,
on the topography ; and topography is the key to the whole incident.

3 These ministers are defined as subdeacons in the Benedictine annotation.
The priestly order (tepoTeloj/, rdy/JM T&V iepariKwv) is usually extended by

in the Fourth Century 357

single person worthy to perform the service of the altars.
He requires that a strict investigation be made as to the
ordination and the personal character of the ministers in
every village, and the unworthy relegated among the laity.

It seems therefore that in this region of Asia Minor a
village church usually had a presbyter with deacons and
subdeacons. The presbyter evidently must have stood in
the same relation to these subordinate clergy, as the bishop
did to his presbyters and deacons in the church of a city ;
and similar functions in regard to finance fell to the lot of
the bishop in a city and the presbyter in a village.

The relation of the presbyter in a village to a village-bishop
or country-bishop (xcope7ri<r/co7ros) remains uncertain, as the
exact position of the latter is not strictly defined. There
was not a country-bishop in every village. Basil had fifty
country-bishops under him; but in the vast disocese of
Caesarea there must have been hundreds of villages. It
seems from his letter 104 that a village-bishop had to
look after more villages than one.

The ill-defined relations between the country-bishops and
the other clergy, superior and inferior (as attested by Basil,
Ep. 104), were probably the cause of their suppression. Basil
mentions, Ep. 190, that there was a tendency to do away
with them : already in his time.

Now the question arises whether there was not some
special term to denote a church which was administered by

Basil to include these lower orders, though the synod of Laodicea distin-
guished them (according to the Benedictine note), and though Basil him-
self defines rovs Upu^vovs as presbyters and deacons (excluding subdeacons)
in his letter 104. He mentions in letter 54 that fear of the conscription was
driving many persons into the ministry.

1 The bishops of small cities or large villages, whose suppression he there
speaks of, are probably

358 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

a presbyter, as distinguished from a church which was ad-
ministered by a bishop and a board of presbyters. On a later
inscription I shall advance reasons for thinking that such a
church was sometimes called & presbyterion.

This epitaph and No. 4 seem to have arisen in the same
surroundings of thought and custom in which chapter 35
of the Apostolic Constitutions •, ii., grew up ; but the latter
is expressed in more formed and almost stereotyped phrase-
ology. " Thus will your righteousness surpass [that of the
scribes and Pharisees], if you take greater forethought than
they for the priests and the orphans and the widows : as it
is written, He hath scattered abroad : He hath given to the
poor.1 . . . For thy duty is to give, and the priest's duty to
manage, as manager and administrator of the ecclesiastical
things."

The term " ecclesiastical " seems to indicate a more ad-
vanced state of organisation than the word " sacred," which
is used in the corresponding part of the epitaph. Moreover
the manager (olicovoiws) is in the next sentence of the Con-
stitutions said to be the bishop, while in the epitaph the
presbyter is the administrator. The title manager (OLKOVO/AOS)
is used several times in the Lycaonian inscriptions to indicate
apparently a presbyter, not a bishop — one who was charged
specially with the duty of managing the money of the
church devoted to charitable purposes. Thus it seems to be
implied that in each Lycaonian church there was a certain
fund, contributed by the congregation, as the Constitutions
state, and distributed to widows, orphans and poor (perhaps
also to strangers in the form of entertainment) by the bishop
or presbyter, who was entitled Oikonomos in performance of
this duty. When the Lycaonian inscriptions speak of the

1 rois v(vr)<riv '. in the prose epitaph TaXanrupuv is the word.

in the Fourth Century 359

presbyter in relations in which the Apostolic Constitutions
would probably mention a bishop, we must understand that
the idea in the minds of every one is " priest " : bishop and
presbyter alike are priests. In the Constitutions, ii., 30, is
given an elaborate statement of the relation of the deacon
to the bishop ; exactly the same might be said about the
relation between the deacon and the presbyter : " Let the
Bishop be honoured by you in the place of God, and the
Deacon as his prophet, for as Christ without the Father
does nothing, so neither does the Deacon without the Bishop ;
and as Son is not without Father, so neither is Deacon
without i the Bishop ; and as Son is subordinate 1 to Father,
so also every Deacon to the Bishop ; and as the Son is
messenger and prophet of the Father, so also the Deacon
is messenger and prophet of the Bishop". Moreover, in
the Constitutions ', ii., 19, the name bishop is roughly used
in a still wider generic fashion, to include the entire clergy
as distinguished from the laity : " Listen, ye bishops ; and
listen, ye laymen ". In this and in the following chapter 20,
it is clear that the generic distinction between guide and
guided, shepherd and sheep, isjin the writer's mind, and that
the clergy, higher or lower, are the shepherd, but only the head
and representative of the clergy is named on behalf of the
whole order. Where the bishop is, the rest of the clergy does
not act except as ministers of his will and policy ; but, as
doing so, they share in his honourable position and dignity ;
and where he is not, the next in order acts for him, and is
the father and shepherd of the people.

" Let the laymen honour the shepherd, who is good, love
him, fear him as father, as lord, as high priest of God, as

1 vv 6xpe os ; in No. 4, line 6, the presbyter is uirovp7^[s] to the bishop
(unless the deacon is really meant : see commentary).

360 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

teacher of piety. . . . In like manner let the bishop love the
laity as his children." One feels that the Lycaonian epitaphs
might use the same words about the presbyter.

Here it seems probable that in the Constitutions the re-
lation of deacon and bishop is generically the relation of
deacon to the higher order of the ministry, and practically
includes the relation of deacon to presbyter. I do not
mean that bishop and presbyter were the same thing ; but
that the term bishop could still be used, and was sometimes
used, as a generic term to include presbyters and bishops.

3. Alkaran near Nova Isaura.

Koulas to Solon, a stranger, i(n) r(emembrance).

This is a practical example of the last duty of hospitality
in ancient usage. The stranger received the honour of a
tomb from his host. There is no proof that the inscription
is Christian or ecclesiastical ; but in the late period and in
the circumstances of that period, both are probably true.

4. Dinek near Nova Isaura.1

atj/jLari, roSS'] eVe-Tno Trapiovri <£[. . .Joe %aipeiv I

%]/o<Wt9 [7r]a[Xa]to[fc]9 lepe\yev\ dpo[vp]rj<; 4

Tracrt, 7rap€pxofjL]evois • av 8e pot, ^apiaaLo Trpocre\da>v, 2

Kal Tep0]0et9 [eVJeWo-A, paOtov Se <ra(f)cos ore Necrrcop 3

5 cre/Az/09 Trpecrpv^Tepos, /juerpioDV %r]pwv eVa/xwyo? • 5

av\rap [o8e ev\tcpa,Ti7)s o

ov]pavLov o

Kal <ro<j5>o9 [eV /J,ep67r]e(rcri, Si/cdor7ro'\o$
IO rjyeiibo-w i;[vveSpeve T' • I'Jcracri Be

<^tXoT7?T09 efjffjs K6&v]?js cro^L^ re

ol CTTevatoV CLTTO

rrjv cre/j,vr)v <f)(,\a§e\<j)bv C . . . o 7r[apaKOLr}iv dpicrrrfv

ll have received much help from Mr. J. G. C. Anderson, Professor Sanday,
and Professor T. Callander ; and to them the best restorations are due. Line
i is most uncertain. Perhaps restore only ravra at the beginning, and five
syllables after gaffei?.

in the Fourth Century 361

1 5 TijT^etyi&rjv Mafjupelv [r)

evKpaTirjs ol/covo/jbov, €[K re

r]e ^dpiv [6]epd7revd[ re XptcrroO

relcrev CUTTO (T<f)6r[ep
2O a\o-fJua,Ta [/e]aXa \^)p\dcr overt, /cal ecra-o/jLevoi,(r[i,

I described in \h& Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1905, p. 349,
the circumstances which made my copy in 1901 defective
and unsatisfactory. In 1905 I saw the inscription again,
but it had suffered much in the interval. My eyes are not
sensitive to very delicate effects, and I should be accom-
panied on another visit by some persons with sharper eyes
for faint lines. This stone also lies far away from the press-
ing needs of exploration, and would require two long days
of travelling and one day of work to copy it properly. Such
conditions add immensely to the cost of a single inscription,
but this one would reward the expense. The stone is
broken down the middle, and on the right and left sides,
but complete at top and bottom. The two halves lie separate,
and one is in a very awkward position so that the copier can
hardly see it except upside down. Only a facsimile would
be sufficient to give a fair idea of the state of the text, as
the surface is often broken in parts.

I have never known an inscription in which so many
letters are preserved, yet so much of the meaning remains
entirely obscure, and restoration is so difficult. There
seems to be no proper connection between the parts, and
thus the restorer has no foundation to work on. Accordingly
I have been forced at last to the hypothesis — almost the
last refuge of despair — that the second line is misplaced.
The first line is engraved on the square capital of the stone
(which is shaped like an ornate altar). Then I conjecture
that the following second and third hexameters were en-

362 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

graved on the shaft of the stone, and that the stone-cutter
accidentally omitted the fourth hexameter. Finding his
error too late, he engraved the omitted words on the re-
treating face between the first line and the second. It is
not a rare thing to find words thus omitted in an inscription
and added at the side or the end. Where the inscription is
complete, the correct order can easily be detected (though
some strange errors have been made in publishing inscrip-
tions that contain such misplaced letters or words, because
the editor failed to notice the misplacement). Here, where
the inscription is incomplete, and where there are lacunae
both at beginning and end of every line, and sometimes also
in the middle of the lines, the difficulty is almost insuperable,
especially as the hexameters do not correspond to the
lines of the engraved text. Elsewhere I have pointed out
more than once that the engraver of such epitaphs generally
had a written copy to work from. Thus it comes about
that the misplaced words here are not exactly a hexameter.
There is generally a little more than a hexameter in each
line of the text.

If we try to correct the misplacement, the meaning of the
opening lines would be : —

By this sign (or stone) I bid the passer hail, and all who
go by; but do thou show me favour, approaching,
and taking pleasure in my words and learning clearly
that Nestor in old times was priest in these lands [a
revered presbyjter, the help of virtuous widows.
A salutation to the passers-by is a common feature in
ancient epitaphs : it was sometimes placed at the end, some-
times at the beginning. Such salutations were taken over
from pagan custom into early Christian epitaphs. In the
present case the use of the salutation must be regarded as a

in the Fourth Century 363

sign of comparatively early date. The salutation was evi-
dently closely connected in construction with the following
line (line 3 on the stone).

The description of the duties and position of Nestor as
presbyter, and several other points of interest in the sequel,
make this epitaph an important document, and it is unfor-
tunate that a good deal of the interpretation has to rest on
conjectural restoration : —

that Nestor in ancient times was priest in these cultivated
lands, a revered presbyter, helper of virtuous widows ;
moreover, he (was) the minister of continence, excel-
lent subordinate worker, chosen treasure of our
Province, the teacher of the heavenly decree to
young men ; and he was a trustworthy judge among
men, and he sat among the governors, and a thousand
nations know this.

Here, as in the previous inscription, the stress Is laid
strongly on the presbyter's work as a dispenser of charity.
The practical side of the Church's work is dominant in the
popular estimation. The judicial or disciplinary side of his
work, and the teaching side, are also strongly emphasised in
lines 9, 8 and 6. The other two more ritualistic or hier-
atic sides of the presbyter's work (as enumerated by Dr.
Hatch in the passage quoted above), relating to the sacra-
ments and to benediction, seem to have been much less
regarded in the Lycaonian world ; they may be supposed
to be summed up in the verb tepevev. As to the general des-
cription " select treasure," that vague expression refers rather
to his popularity in the Province : Nestor, like Timothy,
was well spoken of and well esteemed in Iconium and the
whole country. The word " deacon " in line 6 would natur-
ally be taken, at first sight, as a parenthetic reference to a

364 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

deacon who was subordinate minister 'to Nestor ; but I
have been unable to work this into a satisfactory interpreta-
tion of the document. I take the two expressions o Sta/coi/o?
in 6 and o St£ae™aXo9 in 8 as both parts of the description of
the presbyter's work, understanding that the former is not used
in its official sense but as defining one side of Nestor's
duties : he was the minister of self-restraint, and the teacher
of the divine ordinance.

We notice here the same thought that appears in the
opening words of the preceding inscription. The priest was
the helper of virtuous widows, and dispenser of charity. It
is important to find that he is described as both presbyter
and hiereus l : the two terms are therefore synonymous. The
bishop was archiereus (No. 37), and it is probably to the
bishop of Nova Isaura that Nestor was a good subordinate
worker. As the deacon was a helper and subordinate to the
presbyter, so the presbyter was an assistant to the bishop.

The strong expression in line 10 seems to imply that Nes-
tor acted as assessor or associate to the civil officials of the
Province in the administration of justice and discipline; and
suggests that very grave powers were entrusted to the pres-
byters. Everywhere we are struck with the strength of the
influence which the Church exercised over society.

In lines 11-13 we Pass to Nestor's domestic relations. It
is clear that his wife made the tomb. The exact restoration
is doubtful and difficult ; but the meaning seems to be that
Nestor, as he thought of his wife's love and prudence, de-
parted sorrowing, and then again rejoicing when he re-
membered her continuous affection.

Lines 14-16 describe at length the character of the

1 The term lepevs is involved in the verb ifpevev, a restoration not certain
(letters here very faint), and in the fem. <epe(t)cDi/.

in the Fourth Century 365

wife, Mammeis, daughter of Telephus. The expressions are
all in the accusative, except that [creyLtz/oTar]?/ te/oe^wz/ is no-
minative, which I have tried to explain by using the relative
and understanding the verb fy. In this description she ap-
pears as a " trusty dispenser of continence/' as Nestor was a
minister of continence. Extremely important is the rather
bold restoration which makes her " most holy of priestesses ".
The reading ie[p]eow seems certain, and, on account of the
feminine termination preceding, this can only be taken as a
slip of the engraver for lepeiwv.1 In that case we should have
a clear example of the use of hiereia in the sense of " wife of a
kiereus". It is certain that in Latin documents of the sixth
century and later presbytera and presbyterissa were used in
the sense of " wife of a presbyter," but no similar example
has been found as yet in Lycaonia, except that in No. 21
hierissa perhaps means the wife of a Christian hiereus.

A restoration like "handmaid of Christ"2 seems to be
required : similar expressions are often found in Lycaonian
epitaphs (see No. 44 f.). The meaning of the last lines seems
to be that Mammeis, handmaid of Christ, in remembrance,
made the tomb and honoured the dead; and that certain
persons will sing beautiful hymns, for posterity also to learn.
The last line perhaps refers to some sort of service for the
dead, or ritual celebrated at the grave: in a Phrygian
metrical epitaph a relative of the deceased " sends up holy
hymns".3

In lines 16, 17, is a clear proof of the carelessness of the
engraver. The text . . . otas /jt,vij/j,r)<; ^1/77/^779 re xapw is

1 " Descendant of priests" is not impossible; but the other is much more
satisfactory, as it preserves the metre.

2 The nominative, as restored, seems to point to a verb following : 0€pd-

'IrjcroG] also suggests itself.

3 See Studies in the History of the Eastern Prov.t p. 226 (Anderson).

366 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

unmistakably a poetical working up of the formulae
%apw and ^1/77/^779 %oipLv l ; and the repetition of /-O/T^? twice
must not be charged against the composer, but undoubtedly
against the engraver.' I have supposed that he by a slip
omitted four letters in the first iLwrjws, which in the copy
supplied to him was pvypoavvris. This restores the metre.

5. On a stone high up in the front wall of an early Turkish
khan, on the left hand as one enters the gateway in the im-
portant village of Suwerek, the ancient Psebila 2 or Pegella
The khan is a very fine specimen of Seljuk work, and part
of it seemed to be a Byzantine church, on one of whose
capitals was the dedication in letters not of a very early
period : " The vow of John [and of] his [household] ",3 The
building is well worth an architect's careful study.

Nestorios, Presbyter, lies here, who shone a star among
the Churches of God 4 [one hexameter and a half lost :
D]iomedes lies here.5

We notice here, first of all, the reminiscence of Homer,
" shone like a star,"6 showing that the composer of the
epitaph was a person of some education. But far more im-
portant is the unmistakable reference to the Stars of the
Apocalypse. The Stars were held in the hand of Him who
walked in the midst of the Churches, symbolised by the

1 Epitaphs often show double, sometimes (as here), triple cumulation.

2 See above, p. 138.

3 Other restorations of the missing letters after 'Iwdvov are possible ; but the
above is the most probable.

4 NeoWpzos irpea'ftvTfpos e»/0a5e /are

affrfyp t>s €V€\afjnrev ev fK\rj(rleffiv 6fo?o.

The v before 0eo?o makes the metre needlessly bad. It was impossible to get
close to the stone, which also is upside down. The letters are too faint to
permit an impression. Hence Professor T. Callander and I both failed to
read the middle part.

5 The gap ought to be re-examined : the stone is upside down.
6a<rr)ip &s cwreActytTrej/, Iliad, xix., 381, and elsewhere.

in the Fourth Century 367

golden lampstands. The Stars were the Angels of the
Churches. Nestorios, then, was the angel who shone among
the Churches of God.

The verb used by Homer, aTroKa^ir^iv (to shine forth),
is varied in this epitaph to evKd^ireiv (to shine in), for the
evident purpose of making it suit better the scene alluded to
in the Apocalypse.

It seems also highly probable that the six-rayed rosette,
which is so common an ornament on Christian gravestones
in Lycaonia, may have been understood as the Star of the
Church. The position so often assigned to the rosette on
those stones, balanced symmetrically against a more or less
elaborately ornate cross, seems to prove that it had a mean-
ing in the symbolic ornamentation of Christian stones.1 This
is not at all inconsistent with the suggestion, No. 10, that it
was a developed form of the monogram of I and X, implying
that Jesus Christ was the Star of the Church. Rather it
seems to be implied that the presbyter (bishop) stands to
the Church in the same relation as God does, a very similar
stage of thought to that which appears in the Apostolic
Constitutions, ii., 30 : see the quotations given above on
No. 2, e.g., " let the Bishop be honoured by you in the place
of God ".

This seems to corroborate strongly the view which we
have already stated as to the picture of the office of
presbyter given in the Lycaonian inscriptions, and perhaps
justifies us in speaking even more positively and emphatically.
The term presbyter in those inscriptions is used in very much
the same sense as hiereus and episkopos. The presbyter was

1 It was, of course, used also as an ornament on pagan stones ; practically
every Christian symbol was previously employed by pagans, as the cross, the
vine-branch, etc. ; but the Christian symbolism turned those pagan ornaments
to its own purposes.

368

XII. The Church of Lycaonia

not simply one of a board of elders in the congregation ; he
was the head and priest and leader of the local Church. The
presbyter administered the revenues of the Church, cared
for the poor, the stranger, the widow and the orphan, and
was assisted in these duties by the deacon his subordinate.

This description applies to the country churches. A city
church had a bishop at its head, and there was doubtless a
board of presbyters under his presidency. What relation
there was between these presbyters and the board surround-
ing the bishop, cannot be determined from the inscriptions.
But probably the presbyters of the country churches came
into the city to sit at councils where the bishop presided.
In each congregation there were deacons and deaconesses,
and subdeacons, also perhaps readers, evangelists, confessors,
etc. (the last very rarely mentioned in the inscriptions).

f iMoY A///W//C THCATU/
r A YKYTATCJMOYAAeA

<j>jwrrAAAA&/u; K rye

rAYKYTVT YCMoVTCkNWl

6. Nevinne, in the hills above
Laodicea (T. Callander).

I, Aur. Eugenius, son of Maxi-
mus, raised to my sweetest
brother Palladius and to my
sweetest children Basilis and

Eugenia in my lifetime in
ZWNMNHMHCXAP.N remembrance.

FIG. 9.

The above, an early inscription, is specially remark-
able on account of the ornamentation. There is here the
most patent and indubitable intention to employ the mono-
gram of X and P (indicating the name of Christ) for a
decorative purpose, symmetrically on each side of a circle
over the inscription. This monogram was of later origin
than that of I and X (on which see No. 10). From the
latter, as I believe, arose the Christian use of the six-rayed

in the Pourth Century 369

star or rosette ; and it is sometimes placed on one side of
an epitaph to correspond to a cross on the opposite side.
The cross with bent arms, swastika, was another decorative
variety: see No. II.

The monogram of I and X seems probably to belong to
the third century, of X and P to begin about 300 A.D.,
while the upright monogrammatic cross 1 is not earlier than
350 A.D. in common use (see Cities and Bisk, of Phr., ii.,
p. 739; De Rossi, Inscr. Crist., No. 127; Le Blant, Inscr.
Chrtt. Gaule, No. 369, and Manuel, p. 29).

(y/ Nova Isaura (Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1905, p.

7. Claudia adorned Aur. Thal[]ais 2 her husband honour-
able oikonomos in remembrance.

Though there is no proof that Claudia's deceased husband
was an ecclesiastic, yet it is highly probable that the honour-
able oikonomos here should be understood in a similar
sense to the oikonomos of No, 4. One aspect of the bishop's
or presbyter's duty, which was specially appreciated by the
congregation, is emphasised and consecrated to memory (as
has been mentioned on No. 2).

The date is early, as appears from the name Claudia,
from the pseudo-praenomen Aur., from the use of the
simpler term honourable (evreipov) instead of the superlative
Ti/jLicoraTov (which occurs in No. 12, and was stereotyped
before the time of Basil), and from the absence of all overtly
ecclesiastical character. The epitaph is to be ranked along
with that of Septimia Domna (see No. 16), and, like it, pro-
bably belongs to the third century. The oikonomissa in
No. 22 is not earlier than the late fourth century.

1 An example at Syracuse dated A.D. 416, Rom. Quartalschr., 1896, p. 48.
3 There are probably one or two letters lost in this name.

370 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

8. An unnoticed example of Oikonomos used simply as a
title, implying probably presbyter or bishop as administrator
of a village church, occurs in the district of Drya, the ex-
treme northern bishopric of Lycaonia (united with Gdamava).

Gallikos the oikonomos of the people Plommeis.1
It would be quite contrary to analogy, and perhaps to the
allowable possibilities of usage,2 to take Gallicus here as
a slave of the emperor stationed in this village (after a
fashion illustrated for Laodicea and Zizima in Classical
Review ', Oct., 1905, p. 369).

The presbyters mentioned are very numerous. With re-
gard to them we note that in many cases they were married.
The number of cases where marriage is proved by mention
of wife or children or both is so large, that this was evidently
the ordinary custom in the Lycaonian congregations, and the
unmarried presbyters were exceptional. Some of the in-
scriptions in which they are mentioned may perhaps be as
early as the end of the third century : e.g. —

9. I Aur. Nestor erected this titles to my sweetest father

Callimachus, a Presbyter, in remembrance.

This is marked as early (i) by the formula; (2) by the
use of Aurelius as a prcznomen ; (3) by the term " titles,"
which is frequent in inscriptions of the earlier type, and dis-
appears from later epitaphs.

*$ft) The earliest known Christian inscription of Lycaonia
is probably the following from Isaura Nova, published in
Studies in the Art and History of the Eastern Roman Pro-

1 Anderson, in Journ. of Hell. Studies, 1899, p. 124, No. 136. The sym-
bols, basket on table and cooking-pot on a portable charcoal fireplace, which
are shown under the inscription, are common on tombstones of the district,
pagan and Christian alike. I have copied many examples. They point to a
time not later than the fourth century.

2 Exactor reipublicce Nacolensium, C./.L., iii., 349, is hardly a sufficient
defence.

in the Fourth Century

vinces, p. 22 ff., by Miss Ramsay, most of whose commentary
is adopted here. This is one of the most interesting Christian

372 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

inscriptions that have as yet been discovered, coming after,
though at a long interval, the recently discovered No. I, and
the epitaph of Avircius Marcellus. The ornamentation is
the best example of the class, which is exemplified also by
Nos. 1 1 ff.

10. [Non ?] ilia honoured the blessed papas, the sweetest
one and the friend of all.

Very dear is the blessed papas, the friend of God (Theo-
philus).

In remembrance.

The stone, a massive rectangular block 5 feet r \ inches
in length by 3 feet g\ inches in height, was discovered in
1901 on the hill on the left or western bank of the stream
that flows through the village of Dorla. On one of the long
sides is an architectural decoration, which takes the form of
four columns supporting a round arch and two side pediments.
The jMllars supporting thejcentral arch are ornamented with
a pattern in incised lines, and above the arch are two branches
with leaves and bunches of grapes. The shape of these
leaves is doubtful, as the stone is very much worn. They
seem to be trefoils, but whether rounded or pointed it is im-
possible to say : they are probably intended for vine-leaves,
but if so, the delicate points have been worn away. Below
the arch is an open book, or rather a set of tablets opened ;
and in the central niche between the columns is a wreath tied
above with a ribbon, and surrounding the second part of the
inscription, and the letters M X, for fivtffjLTjs x^PiV- Each of
the side pediments has a round boss in the centre ; and a
garland hangs from the supporting pillars, and beneath it is
the representation of a fish. All the ornament is in relief,
with the exception of the ribbons supporting the garlands,
and the fins of the fish, which are merely incised. The

in the Fourth Century 373

larger part of the epitaph is inscribed above the ornament,
close to the upper edge of the stone.

The tomhi^vidently that of a bishop. In the expression
the blessed papas (6 pa/capias TraTnx?), papas must be either
the name or the title of the person buried there, probably
the latter. Judging from the general character of Anatolian
inscriptions, I came to the conclusion, in view of the stone
in 1901, that it was not later than the second half of the
third century, and that papas was the title. But this
epitaph shows the remarkable peculiarity that the title
supplants the actual name, in imitation of the pagan custom
according to which a priest who became " hieronymos "
(like the principal priests at Eleusis and in various of the
great Anatolian cities) dropped his own name and was
known simply by his title. This peculiarity is suggestive
of a very early date ; and that the stone is an early one, prior
to the time of Constantine, is shown also by the lettering
and by the general character of the epitaph and the orna-
ment.

The title vraTra? employed in this inscription is extremely
interesting. It proves what was before probable, that this
title was at first employed much more widely and was gradu-
ally restricted in use. The use of Papa to indicate the bishop
in Roman inscriptions begins about A.D. 300, and from the
sixth century it is confined to the Pope.1 Dr. Harnack in
BerL Sitzungsber., 1900, p. 990, points out that in the West
Papa was, in early times, used only in Rome, but was there
employed as the ordinary term for bishop, either of Rome,
or of any other place. Tertullian uses it sarcastically of the

1Heraeus, Archiv. fur latein. Lexicogr., xiii., 157; De Rossi, Inscr. Chr.
Urb. Rom., i., p. cxv. ; Anth. Lat. Epigr., 656, 2 ; Caesar, de aet. tit. Christ.,
p. 65.

374 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

Roman bishop Callistus. In the East Harnack thinks it
was used only in Egypt, and only of the Bishop of Alexandria,
so that 6 pa/capias trafjras was the recognised title of that
bishop alone, while other Egyptian bishops were styled
Traryp r^L^v. In the pre-Nicene period, as he says, the title
TraTra.9 is not known to have been used of any other Eastern
bishop : but it was customary for the Alexandrian bishops
from at least as early as 250. Only in the letter of Pseudo-
Justin to Zenas and Serenus the title o Travra? occurs. The
phrase 6 paKapios Travra? is found several times during the
third century in Egypt, and was a recognised title of the
Bishop of Alexandria. This Isauran inscription shows that
it was used also in Asia Minor during the same period.
Dr. Sanday also quotes Gregory Thaumaturgus,1 which
implies that it was used in the province of Pontus about
250.

The name TraTra-9, applied to the priest of Malos Galatiae
in Acta S. Theodoti, is quoted by a writer in Anal. BolL,
xxii., p. 327, as a proof that the document was not written
by a contemporary, but belongs to a later age. In view of
our inscription this argument falls to the ground, and the
use of the term iranras in that document is rather favourable
to the view (advocated by the writer many years ago, and
recently by Prof. Harnack and others) that the Acta S.
Theodoti is a good document of early date.

The natural human feeling shown in the wording of the
epitaph, "the sweetest one and friend of all" (TOV j\vKvrarov
fcal Trdvrwv $i\ov), points to an early Christian period ; the
epithets applied to such persons as bishops afterwards be-
came much more religious and stereotyped in character.

1 Ep., Canon i., ou ret ftpd>/j.ara r)pas /Sapet, tepk (v.l. tep^rore) Trdira (Routh,
Rell. Sacr., Hi., 256).

in the Fourth Century 375

Compare the tender expression, "dearer than light and
life " (y\vKi>T6pov </>&>ro<? /cal fo^?), applied by Aur. Xanthias
to his son who died at the age of seven, in a Christian in-
scription of Rome, dated by the consuls of A.D. 238. The
phrase Travrav $/A,o? is here used in an inscription which is
undoubtedly Christian, and such moral sentiments are found
on many Christian tombstones, but they cannot alone be
taken as a proof of Christian origin.1 In some cases similar
sentiments were inscribed on non-Christian tombs as a
counterblast to Christianity ; these clearly belong to the
pagan philosophical reaction.2 It seems most probable
that they were ordinarily Christian, and their occurrence on
pagan stones is a proof of the strong influence which the new
religion exerted even on its opponents. Another example
is found in Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia> ii., p. 386 f,
No. 232. The expression TTCIVTCOV ^>tXo? occurs in an inscrip-
tion of Tarsus, which may perhaps be restored [rj ^t»%^ eV]
To5 alwvi £77. <£o>«r(£o/oo9 o Trdvrcov <£tXo? /e.r.X. ; the inscrip-
tion continues in the ordinary style of epitaphs, though with
some unusual features (published with some difference by
Messrs. Heberdey and Wilhelm in Wiener Akad. Denk-
schriften^ 1896, p. 5): it is evidently either Christian or of
the reaction, when the aim was to show that paganism was
superior to Christianity on its own lines. At Salonika rw
jrdvTcov c/HX<» Mv\dya) is probably pagan (Mitth. Inst. Athen.^
1896, p. 98).

06ov <f>i\os is probably a play on Theophilus, and thus
reveals the real name of the bishop.

1]he_fish^the common symbol of the Christians in the

1 Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, ii., p. 495.

2 Compare Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, ii., p. 506 f,, and Pauline and
other Studies, pp. 103-122,

376 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

early centuries, passed out of use at a comparatively early
date, and the same is true of the open tablets which appear
on this stone. This symbol occurs also on several North-
Phrygian tombs, which were published in the Expositor in
1888 and 1905.

The character of the ornament on this stone also points to
an early date, probably the third century A.D. It seems at
first sight to be an earlier stage of the elaborate decoration
common on Byzantine and Roman sarcophagi of the fourth
century, a row of figures standing in niches, with highly
intricate and elaborate tracery and architectural ornament.
Here we have the semi-architectural schema, without the
human figures. But, as one stone after another is discovered,
we see that the schema is a traditional type in Nova Isaura,
characteristic of the place, which is likely to have lasted for
centuries, varied, but never essentially changed. The fact
that it is a simpler stage of the fourth century sarcophagus
style would not, taken alone, prove anything about date.
But this monument is very much larger than the other Dorla
monuments, and represents an attempt to improve upon and
elaborate the native type. New elements are introduced on
this tomb which are unknown on any of the other stones in
Dorla ; and yet it is indubitably among the very earliest of
all the examples found in the village. This more ambitious
style is a proof that more money, care, and work were spent
on this stone. It was the tomb of an exceptional person
(either through his wealth or through his rank), and it
represented the highest stage of which local art was capable,
elaborating the native schema by imported additions,
especially the fish, that widespread symbol, which was
certainly not invented in Nova Isaura, but introduced there
from outside. Now, had this large and ambitious monument

in the Fourth Century 377

been built in the fourth century, it would probably have
shown some of the Graeco-Roman forms most characteristic
of that time ; taking into consideration the entire absence of
those characteristic fourth century forms, and the fact that
in the Dorla series this has all the appearance of being
among the earliest, we must infer that it belongs to the
third century. See on No. 1 1.

The ornament scattered liberally over the surface of the
stone contains various elements ; but none of these are
necessarily borrowed from a formed Graeco-Roman art.
The fish was taken as a symbol, not as an artistic element,
and is placed on the tomb to be significant, and not merely
to be ornamental.

Other elements in the ornamentation, besides the fish, are
almost certainly symbolical. The vine branch above the
central pediment indicates that the bishop was a branch of
the true vine, and the garland symbolises the crown of life.
The open tablets, as has been pointed out in the Expositor,
April, 1905, p. 296 f., are to be taken as representing the
record of the covenant between God and man. It is there
shown that the idea of the tablets is derived from Rev. v. I
ff., and that "the book," which is mentioned in that passage,
is really a set of double or triple tablets, with a document
or covenant written in duplicate, one inside closed up,
witnessed and sealed by seven witnesses, the other on the
outside open and public (according to the usual Roman
custom in regard to important business documents or wills).
The book should be compared with the mosaic inscription of
Naro in Africa (Hammam-Lif), instrumenta servi tui, on an
open diploma : this inscription was in mosaic in a room
beside the church, in which were kept the sacred books, etc.
(Rev. Arch., 1904, p. 368).

378 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

As is shown in this article, the Revelation is the one book
of the New Testament which is often referred to in the
Lycaonian inscriptions ; and John is, next to Paul and Mirus
(Wonderful), the commonest male name in those inscriptions
during the fourth century.

It is probable that the six-leaved rosettes are also sym-
bolical. The frequency of this rosette on Lycaonian Christian
monuments, and the way in which it is sometimes employed,
suggest that it is a modification of the early Christian mono-
gram^, originally representing 'I (770-01)9) X (/MO-TO?). See
Nos. 5, 6.

Though a bishop is mentioned in this epitaph, the name
Isaura never occurs in the Byzantine lists of bishoprics. It
has been shown in an article on Lycaonia, published in the
Austrian Jahreshefte, 1904, Part ii., that the two neighbour-
ing towns, Isaura Nova and Korna, were bishoprics in early
time, but were merged in the great autokephalos bishopric of
Isaura Palaea, called Leontopolis, some time after 381, and
probably at the same time that the name Leontopolis was
given to Isaura, namely about 474. Basil himself, Ep. 190,
dreaded this loss of independence " for the small states or
villages which possess an Episcopal seat from ancient times,"
and in order to prevent it when the bishopric of Isaura
Palaea was vacant about 374, he wrote to Amphilochius of
Iconium and recommended the nomination of officials called
TTpola-ra^evoi, for the smaller towns or cities before a new
bishop was appointed for Isaura. The grave of one of these
officials at Alkaran, between Korna and Nova Isaura, is
published in Eastern Studies, p. 29.

n. Nova Isaura (Miss Ramsay in Eastern Studies? p. 35).

1 This abbreviation is used here and below for the book quoted with fuller
title in Nos. 10, 15.

in the Fourth Century

379

Macer and Oa[s] and Anolis(?) J their sister adorned the
bishop Mammas, friend to all men.

The ornamentation is similar in subject and arrangement to
the preceding, but more conventional and therefore probably
later. The object like a net between the columns on the
right apparently represents one of the screens which are

MAKGPOCKA1OA AlAN

f T

FIG. ii.

mentioned in the preceding commentary (No. i): the
screens at Tyre are described by Eusebius as being " made
in net -fashion ".2 It might be possible to take the ob-
ject here portrayed as a net, and to understand that the
bishop is indicated symbolically as a fisher of men ; but the
architectural character of the ornamentation on the grave-
stones at Nova Isaura, and the skill of Isaurian masons,3 make

1 The names are all faint and uncertain.

3 Their skill is described and proved by Professor Holl in Hermes, 1908,
p. 242.

380 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

it practically certain that one of the wooden latticed screens
used in the churches is here intended.

The origin of this symbol from the arrangement of the
Christian church building, taken in connection with the
architectural character of the Isauran scheme of decoration,
makes it highly probable that this scheme has the same
origin. We regard it as probable, therefore, that the typical
Isauran decorative scheme on tombstones was suggested by
some typical form of the Lycaonian Church, either the rounded
arch of the apse between the two aisles, or the triple door-
way at the west end with a round arch flanked by two
pointed pediments.1 The latter is perhaps the more pro-
bable. Some of the Isauran monuments show a pointed
middle pediment between two round arches ; and this might
be explained as due to similar variety in the west doorways
of churches. The weak point of the theory is that I cannot
point to any example in the triple church doorways that
remain ; but these are all of much later date. The alterna-
tion of round and pointed occurs in a Roman building at
Basilika Therma in Cappadocia, and also in theatres of the
Roman period in Asia Minor (as Professor Strzygowski
pointed out to me) ; and it may be quite plausibly supposed
to have characterised the triple doors of early churches.2

The habitual use of wooden screens in the churches of
central Asia Minor is, therefore, proved with certainty for the
early fourth century and with probability for the third. These
screens were made by piercing the wood with a sharp in-
strument called a kenteterion. The example shown on this

1 Compare the Tyrian church door, p. 347, 1. 13, and Eastern Studies, pp.
19-54. The pagan tomb was a temple, the Christian grave a church.

2 Those who explain the scheme as originated by the interior view of the
church with apse between aisles, will hold that the scheme with pointed middle
is due to unintelligent variation of a form whose origin had been forgotten.

in the Fourth Century 381

monument at Nova Isaura is very simple in kind, and
might be made out of straight wooden staves ; but the ken-
teseis of No. I probably imply a more elaborate kind of
work. The importance of this fact about the use of wood-
work in early churches appears, when one remembers the
influence exerted on the development of art in later Roman
times by oriental woodwork, as shown by Strzygowski (see
especially his Rom oder Orient, a highly suggestive and truly
bahnbrechend work, though with the faults that inevitably
belong to a book of the pioneer type). In later churches we
have found in several cases stone screens instead of wooden.
Wood was scanty and expensive on the open plateau gener-
ally ; but both Laodicea and Nova Isaura were close under
hills where trees grew and wood was cheaper.

There was also an ornament between the left-hand pair
of columns, but it has been carefully obliterated in modern
times. The crosses placed so inconspicuously in the two
pointed pediments might pass for mere ornament among
pagans, while they would be significant to the initiated.
Such was the character of early Christian epitaphs.1 On the
later gravestones the symbolism is more patent and uncon-
cealed.

The use of the screen as a symbol might at first sight sug-
gest a date about 330-350, when screens are mentioned in
the churches at Laodicea (close at hand) and Tyre. But
in all probability the use of screens in churches was of older
origin, and characterised the pre-Diocletian Church as much
as the post-Diocletian. The epithet of the bishop is not of
the style which was usual in the fourth-century writers, but
of an earlier kind. The concealed crosses strongly suggest
the third century ; and this date agrees well with the nomen-

1 Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, ii., p. 502.

382 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

clature. The rustic symbols, mattock and sickle, are also of
an early character. On the other hand the ornamentation
is so exactly similar to that of No. 12 (an epitaph which
distinctly belongs to about A.D. 350), that the two cannot
be far removed from one another in date. We incline there-
fore to assign to the period A.D. 310-330 this monument.

The crown or garland in the central pediment was doubt-
less also symbolical.

The descriptive epithet " friend to all " (" friend of all " in
No. 10), while it is in a sense a summary of a chapter in the
Apostolic Constitutions ; ii., 20, on the duties of the bishop, be-
longs to an earlier time than the stereotyped formulae of honour
assigned to ecclesiastical officials in the writings of the fourth
century authors and in the epitaphs of that period. It was
used in the pagan reaction A.D. 303-3 13,1 and was therefore
in older Christian use. Accordingly, we cannot assume that
this epitaph is older than A.D. 303 ; but we can confidently
believe that it is not very much later.

12. Nova Isaura (Miss Ramsay in Eastern Studies, p. 37).
The most honourable deacon Tabeis, Nanna his mother

and Valgius and Lucius his brothers, adorned (him)

i(n) r(emembrance).

There is evidently no long interval between this monu-
ment and No. 10. Both were probably made in the same
workshop. The screen (represented here in slightly different
fashion) and the bent cross, are both Christian symbols.
The latter is frequent on Isaurian Christian tombstones (p.
385). The formula of styling the deacon Tefc/u&>Taro9 is quite
in the developed fashion, which was usual in fourth-century
writers such as Basil.

13. Somewhat later than No n, but probably earlier than

1 See above, p. 375.

in the Fourth Century

383

No. 12, and therefore of the period 290-320, is the follow-
ing:—

<r Z<
5 ° Z

?«!S!55i

i <

Nova Isaura (Miss Ramsay in Eastern Studies, p. 30).
The very pure and sweet-voiced and with-all-virtue-
adorned Sisamoas, bishop.

384

XII. The Church of Lycaonia

The epithets here differ from, yet have a distinct analogy
to, those used of the bishop by Basil of Caesarea about 370 :
the epithets are there quite conventional and stereotyped, and
had therefore already been fixed in use for a considerable
time. Take for example "the most God-beloved Bishop,"
o 0eo(£uXecrTaT09 eVtoveoTro?, addressed as "your piety," " your
perfection," " your God-fearing-ness," " your divine and most
perfect consideration," " your comprehension ": l these have
all come to be used as polite designations and forms of address.

KAIHAY£TH
KAlTTACHC A P C
K£KOCMHM£NOC

AcerncKonoc

THCK€
OCAM)

FIG. 13.

Contrast these forms with the simple direct expression of Nos.
10 and 1 1.

By comparison with this inscription we observe that Nos.
2, 4, describing the duties of the presbyter, present to us the
free and unstereotyped stage of expression, out of which
grew the forms used in Basil's time ; and therefore we can
hardly date them later than A.D. 350.

Another example of an early bishop is —

1 Basil, Ep. 181 (dated A.D. 374), T\ euAojSeio <rou (frequent), ^ <r^ rf\fi6rijs
(172), f) Oeocre&fia aov (167), j} -fvdeos ical T€A.6iOTCtTTj tppAvyffis ffov (141), T\
fffofffis ffov (165). A presbyter, on the other hand, is simply "your perfect
consideration," T\ reAeto <f>p6vr)<ris ffov, or " honoured head," ripia

in the Pourth Century 385

14. Yuruk-Keui, near the base of the Kara Dagh.
Apas son of Kouanzaphees erected to his brother Indakos,
bishop, just, beloved, in his own life-time and for him-
self, in remembrance.1

(Symbol.) (Leaf.) (Garland.) (Leaf.) (Symbol.)2
This unpublished inscription, found in 1905 between Nova
Isaura, Derbe and Barata, is of the early class. The bishop
who is here mentioned was indubitably a mere village-
bishop (probably under Barata) or ^wpeirLaKOTro^ of the
fourth or even the third century.

15 and 16. Alkaran near Nova Isaura (Miss Ramsay in
Studies in the History of the Eastern Provinces^ p. 33).
Aur(elia) Domna sweetest daughter, who persevered in
virginity and industry : her father, Aur(elius) Oresti-
anus, son of Cyrus (honoured her with the sepulchral
monument). See Figure on p. 328.

The scheme of ornament is the architectural type common
in this Isauran region (see No. 10). The two doves, one hold-
ing a leaf in its mouth (Genesis viii. n), are undoubtedly
symbolical, and would alone be enough to prove the religion,
which is also clearly indicated in the words of the epitaph.
The doves are incised, and were added later (doubtless after
purchase of the stone from the artist) : the rest of the orna-
ment is in relief. The bent cross, or swastika, occurs very
frequently on I saurian Christian gravestones.3 On the dove,
compare No. 19.

Beside the tombstone of Aurelia Domna was found the

1 'Anas Kovav£a<j>fovs a.vfffTijffev ci§eA<J><£ avrov 'I

$£>v K^ eavrov /K..X. The misspelling of ayatrriTds is usual.

2 The " symbols" in this line were defaced: they were enclosed within
circles, and were probably either crosses or six-leaved rosettes.

3 Sterrett, Wolfe Expedition, Nos. 56, 93, 220 ; and scores of other examples,
then unknown to him, have been discovered since.

386 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

epitaph of " [L ?] Septimia Domna, the sweetest and holiest
wife " of [Aurelius ?] Orestes, son of Cyrus. The two stones
belonged to a family cemetery ; and evidently were not very
far removed in date from one another. L ? Septimia Domna
was almost certainly born about A.D. 200. The use of
Aurelius as a sort of praenomen J began about A.D. 212, when
the provincials were elevated to Roman citizenship by the
Emperor Aurelius Caracalla. It lasted about a century.
Hence Aurelia Domna may have died about the end of the
third or the beginning of the fourth century. Her grave-
stone may be dated between No. 10 and No. 12. It is not so
stereotyped as the latter, but it wants the freedom of No. 10.

The name Orestianos perhaps indicates a generation later
than Orestes. Septimia, the wife of Orestes, might be by
marriage the aunt of Orestianos, the father of Aurelia Domna.
It is, however, not impossible that Cyrus had two sons, Orestes
and Orestianos,2 and that Septimia was the aunt of Aurelia
Domna. Either supposition would suit the date suggested
by the art, though the latter would tend to make No. 1 5 a little
earlier than the former. There is nothing indicative of
religion on the tombstone of Septimia Domna;3 but the
family was probably Christian. It was characteristic of the
earlier period that the religion should not be obtrusively
mentioned.

It cannot be inferred from the remarkable language of this
epitaph that Aurelia Domna was officially a virgin (irapOevos)
in the church. But the Christian character is unmistakable
in the phrase " persevering in virginity ". See No. 29 ff.

1 Studies in the History of the Eastern Provinces, p. 355. The custom is
a Greek fashion, not true to Roman usage. The use of Aurelius as a nomen
was, of course, older, and is found in the whole period 160-300 A.D.

2 In that case Cyfus would be son of an older Orestes.

3 The ornamentation is two rosettes and three leaves.

in the Fourth Century 387

The "industry" which is also attributed to her was un-
doubtedly in the feminine arts of spinning and household
work, which are often indicated on gravestones by the proper
implements, distaff and spindle, pots and pans, tripod for
supporting them, etc. In one inscription these are called the
" works of Athena" (Studies in the Eastern Prov.> p. 70).

\yn) The distinction between clergy and laity as separate
orders is clearly marked in the Lycaonian inscriptions,
hardly indeed in the earliest class, but certainly in those
which may on our view be placed soon after the middle of
the fourth century. The popular use of the term hiereus to
designate a bishop or presbyter probably marks the full and
general recognition of this distinction between the clergy
and the ordinary congregation; and the correlative term
taos, to indicate the laity, must have come into use at the
same time.1 It is true that the words were in Christian use
from the beginning; but not hardened in the technical
sense of contrasted orders of society. The distinction, how-
ever, is older than Basil.

The Anatolian inscriptions in which either term occurs seem
generally to be as late as the fifth century ; though some may
perhaps be as early as the second half of the fourth. The
fact that the term hiereus is much rarer in these inscriptions
than presbyteros affords an argument that we have been right
in placing a large number of the epitaphs before A.D. 350.

Further, any inscription which plainly neglects or is ignorant
of the distinction between priest and laity is to be dated
earlier than A.D. 350 ; and inscriptions or documents in which
the occupation of the presbyter is mentioned are likely also
to be earlier than that time.

1 See an inscription of Northern Phrygia, given in the Expositor, Oct., 1888,
p. 261.

388 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

17 and 1 8. Zazadin Khan (Cronin in Journal of Hellenic
Studies, 1902, p. 361).

Two epitaphs from an ancient village beside the very
interesting early Turkish building, Zazadin Khan, twelve
miles north-east of Iconium, show the same metrical form
applied to two hiereis or priests of the village. The
lines were therefore a standing formula for epitaphs of
priests.

Here lies a man, priest of great God, who on account of
gentleness gained heavenly glory, snatched hastily
from Church and congregation, having the name
Apollinarius [in the other case, Gregory], great glory
of the congregation.

The formula, " here lies," is of later type than the epitaphs
in which the maker of the tomb is mentioned ; it is a mere
translation of the Latin hie jacet, and marks the spread of
Roman custom in the Greek-speaking districts of the East.
Probably no example of it in Christian Anatolian use can
be safely dated earlier than the fourth century.

One of the two epitaphs, that of Gregory, has two addi-
tional lines, worse in syntax and expression than the four
stereotyped verses, and hardly intelligible : perhaps

"A man who was a care to God through joyousness;
E[lpidio?]s erected the stele and thus inscribed on
the tomb." J

Here the older form of epitaph, mentioning the maker of
the tomb, makes itself felt at the end, implying that that
class was not yet forgotten or wholly out of date. In
accordance with the principles on which we are working, it

1Rev. H. S. Cronin in Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1902, p. 362, No. 126 ;
but I should prefer now to restore a proper name at the beginning of the fifth
hexameter, E[ . . .]s. The formula, so-and-so aveffrnaev the deceased, is
common in Lycaonia.

in the Fourth Century 389

would be impossible to place this inscription later than about
400 A.D. Now the formula of the first four lines was not
composed for Gregory, but taken from an already stereo-
typed epitaph suitable for any priest ; and when the com-
poser of Gregory's epitaph tried to add something distinctive
in the last two lines he sank to a much lower level and
became almost unintelligible. The metrical formula, there-
fore, was a rather early composition, perhaps not later than
350, like several others in the same region.1 No. 4, a
metrical epitaph, probably contains the verb iepevev in 1. 2,
which would presuppose the use of the noun hiereus. Thus
we can push back the popular use of the term hiereus in
Lycaonia as far at least as about 350 A.D.

There is, of course, no difficulty in supposing that the
distinction between priest and laity (tepeu? and Xao?) was
even older than this : the words are taken from the language
of the Septuagint Already in A.D. 218 an expression
(quoted by Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., vi., 19, 1 8) is found
where the congregation (Xao?) is set over against the bishop :
the distinction is here latent though not explicit. At the
same time it is certain that priests even late in the fourth
century ordinarily lived by practising some trade, as Basil,
Ep. 198, says, "the majority of them ply sedentary crafts,
whereby they get their daily bread ".

Another example of the relation of Hiereus and Presby-
teros may be quoted —

19. Iconium (Cronin in Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1902,
p. 124). Four rough hexameters.

Gourdes, good man, sleeps here like a dove. He was
among men priest (hiereus) of the Most High God-

1 For example, No. 25 of the New-Isauran inscriptions published by Miss
Ramsay in Eastern Studies, p. 47.

390 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

To him Trokondas, his successor and comrade, made
a stele in memory, doing him honour on his tomb.
(A Cross in relief on each side of the epitaph.)
Trokondas is called the comrade (birdtov) of the deceased ;
but the word, like the Latin comes, implies indubitably
inferiority in position. Trokondas was probably a Deacon
and Gourdes was his Bishop or Presbyter. The same
Gourdes, perhaps, is mentioned in another inscription—
20. Aur. Gourdos, a Presbyter, erected (the tomb of)
Tyrannos his adopted son (or foundling son) in re-
membrance (Sterrett, Epigr. Journey, No. 197).
The latter epitaph has all the marks of the earliest class
of Lycaonian epitaphs ; and it might very well be twenty or
even forty years earlier than the former, which was engraved
on the tomb of Gourdos. The omission of the praenomen
Aur. in the former is no proof of diversity in the person :
both because this praenomen is frequently found omitted
and inserted in different references to the same person,1 and
because the epitaph of Gourdos is in hexameter verse, in
which proper names were always treated more freely. The
unusual name Gourdos (never elsewhere found) is not likely
to have occurred twice in the case of a Presbyter and a
Hiereus at Iconium during one century. The Presbyter and
the Hiereus were assuredly the same person.

The epitaph of Gourdos is interesting in several respects.
It unites the old formula with the new ; " here sleeps " is a
mere poetic variation of "here lies," while the concluding
lines name the maker of the tomb. The occurrence of the
old formula at the end in addition to the later formula at
the beginning has been regarded above as belonging to the
transition period, before the old formula had been forgotten ;

*See Studies in the History of the Eastern Provinces, p. 355.

in the Fourth Century 391

and most of the cases where the old and the new are united
are in metrical epitaphs which seem to belong to the period
A.D. 340-370.

The comparison to the dove is suggested by the type
found (sometimes in relief, sometimes incised) on many
tombstones of Lycaonia. One example from Isaura Nova
is given as No. 15.

21. An inscription which must cause some hesitation is —
Papas and Gaius, sons of Titus Lorentius, to their father
hiereus and Mania their mother hierissa in remem-
brance.1

I published this at first as an ordinary pagan inscription ;
but, since subsequently published epitaphs have shown that
hiereus and archiereus came into ordinary use in Lycaonian
epigraphy as technical Christian terms, it seems more prob-
able that here we have a Christian epitaph involving the
distinction between clergy and laity. The bare words hiereus
and hierissa seem not to be in keeping with a pagan
epitaph. In pagan usage a hiereus belonged to the worship
of one deity, and as a rule either the name of the god to
whom the hiereus belonged was expressed, or the context or
situation left no doubt as to what deity and cult the hiereus
was attached. At one of the great sanctuaries (Hiera) of
Anatolia, where a single supreme priest stood at the head
of the college of priests as representative of the god, it
would be natural and was quite common to state a date
"in the time when Noumenios was priest" without men-
tioning in any part of the document the deity or the cult ;
but the situation and facts in that case left no doubt, for
dating was practised only according to the one supreme
priest. Similarly, archiereus is often used absolutely, be-
1 Laodicea, No. 7 (Athen. Mittheil,, 1888, p. 237).

392 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

cause it was a perfectly distinctive term, inasmuch as there
was only one archiereus in the city or district. But the use
of the bare terms hiereus and hierissa in an ordinary pagan
epitaph in a city where there must have been many priests
and hierissai seems so contrary to custom and difficult of
understanding that it cannot be admitted with our present
knowledge. Yet it is perhaps strange that T. Lorentius
(popular pronunciation of Laurentius) and Mania were priest
and priestess, perhaps a bishop and his wife, in Laodicea
not later than about 360 A.D.

The explanation of these difficulties possibly is that this
inscription belongs either to the pagan reaction A.D. 303-31 1,
or to the time of Julian, A.D. 363-365, when something similar
occurred. There was then a tendency to model pagan in-
stitutions, epitaphs, etc., on the established Christian usages ;
and we may suppose that the distinction of priest and laity
was like many other Christian customs caught up by the
pagan revivalists.1

It would certainly be impossible to take hierissa in this
epitaph as indicating a special official position in the Church.
If the inscription is Christian, hierissa can only mean "wife
of a priest". This might, perhaps, be best explained as
belonging to a quite early stage, when terminology was
not properly settled and understood, and when the pagan
custom, that man and wife should hold the offices of high-
priest and high-priestess,2 was still not forgotten. It seems,
however, to have a parallel in No. 4, 1. 1 5.

22. The interpretation might be defended by an inscrip-
tion of Isaura Nova. (Miss Ramsay in Journal of Hellenic
Studies, 1904, p. 283).

1 On this most interesting phase of religion, which has never been properly
studied, see a paper in Pauline and other Studies, p. 103 ff.

2 See Classical Review, Nov., 1905, p. 417.

in the Fourth Century 393

Doxa Oikonomeissa the revered

In this case also it is improbable that oikonomissa indi-
cated a special official position in the Church. It may per-
haps be interpreted " wife of an oikonomos ".l But perhaps
the oikonomissa may have been an official in a nunnery.
This epitaph is of the later type which probably began
about A.D. 360; and there may have been a convent at
Isaura Nova as early as A.D. 400.

Similarly, Presbyterissa would perhaps have to be taken
as the wife of a Presbyter ; but its occurrence is uncertain.
The index of the Corpus of Greek inscriptions quotes it from
No. 8624 ; but it depends there on a restoration, which is
quite incorrect and unjustified by the copy. The Lexicon
of Stephanus quotes it once, but the place does not bear on
our purpose. If the inscriptions, which name many Presby-
ters and their wives, never use the term Presbyterissa, this
would go far to show that a Presbyter's wife did not share
his title in Lycaonia. See p. 365.

(VIIJ) These cases suggest the question whether Diako-
nissa in the inscriptions of Lycaonia may mean simply the
wife of a Diakonos, and not an official. In one case two
sons raise the tomb to their mother Nonna, Diakonissa.2
Another would probably be a test case, but the language is
so ungrammatical as to be practically unintelligible. It is
the epitaph of two persons, styled the excellent (and) blessed
(dead), Flavius Alexander and Amia Diakonissa, belonging
probably to the latter part of the fourth century, or the
early fifth.3 Here Alexander and Amia are certainly hus-

1 Oikonomos is used as feminine (like Diakonos for Diakonissa) in the long
metrical epitaph of Nestor the Presbyter and Oikonomos, No. 4. The wife
of Nestor is there styled Oikonomos, like her husband.

2 Anderson in Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1899, p. 130, No. 155.

3 Anderson, ibid., 1898, p. 126, No. 89.

394 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

band and wife. Alexander has no official title; but the
doubt remains whether the omission is due merely to help-
lessness and inadvertence, the uneducated composer having
a vague idea that the title Diakonissa might imply also that
the husband had corresponding rank. If that could be as-
sumed, the-casejvould be conclusive that the official title of
thejhusband was cpmjiumicated Jgj^gjvtf^ BiiT It is more
probable that Alexander held no office, and Amia was
deaconess in her own right.

Less uncertainty attaches to another case.

23. Zazadin Khan (Cronin in Journal of Hellenic Studies,

1902, p. 359)-

Quintus, son of Heraklios, headman of the village, with
his wife Matrona and his children Anicetus and
Catillus, all four lie here in the tomb ; and the wife
of Anicetus, Basilissa, a diakonos, constructed the
pleasing 1 tomb along with her only son Nemetorius,
still an infant.2

Here the husband Anicetus has no title, and we cannot
suppose that the title of Basilissa implied his official position.
We must assume that she was deaconess during the life
of her husband, who held no official rank. The tomb was
evidently erected immediately after his death. Considering
that marriages were ordinarily entered on at an early age,
we must regard it as probable that Basilissa was still young
when she made the grave.

24. In confirmation of the previous epitaphs showing that a
deaconess was sometimes wife of a person who held no office
in the Church, we may quote Laodicea, No. 65 : —

1 apeffrds, not &piffTOs.

2 Basilissa is called SidKovos, not Sia^vKro-a, perhaps for euphony ; but the
form diakonos often occurs where no such reason is possible.

in the Fourth Century 395

Here lies Appas, the Reader (the younger tall son of
Faustinus), to whom his mother Aurelia Faustina
the Deaconess erected this heroon l in remembrance.

From these examples we must generalise the principle
that in Lycaonia diakonissa (or diakonos in feminine) always
denoted an official in the Church ; and from the number of
cases that occur, we must conclude that there were deacon-
esses as a rule in every congregation.

d^: An interesting little epitaph is the following from
Tyriaion : —

25. Here lies (sic I) Heraklius and Patricius and Poly-
karpus Presbyters : in remembrance.

It is remarkable to find three presbyters in a common
grave. The reason may probably be that they perished
together in a persecution (like the five Phrygian " children,
who at one occasion gained the lot of life " : Cities and
Bisk, of Phr., ii., p. 730) ; if so, their death might perhaps
be placed during the last persecution, somewhere near
A.D. 300 ; but, as that would carry the initial formula back
further than we have hitherto put it, we must regard the
point as uncertain. There is, of course, no reason why the
Latin formula should not have been imitated in Lycaonia
as early as A.D. 300.

Q£} The criterion by which in Phrygia many early Christian
inscriptions reveal their religion — the concluding curse
against the violator of the tomb in some such form as
" he shall have to reckon with God " 2 — is almost entirely
wanting in Lycaonia, where such imprecations are rarely
appended to epitaphs. One example is published by Mr.

lAthen. Mittheil., xiii., p. 254. Read avJiyipefy] for a.vt]yip\6]i] : the two
letters € H are better read thus : the formula is thus more typical.
avrcp TFpbs rbv 6e6v.

396 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

Cronin from the copy of a Greek physician, Mr. Savas
Diaman tides, ending with the words, " Whosoever shall force
an entrance, shall give account to God "-1 The exact proven-
ance of this epitaph is uncertain ; but other examples occur
in northern Lycaonia ; and there can therefore be no doubt
that in the region which was most immediately under the
influence of Iconian Christianity, several varieties of this
kind of Christianised imprecation were at one time in use.
The reason why it was far commoner in Phrygia than in
Lycaonia must be that it was an early formula, which passed
into disuse in the fourth century. The Lycaonian inscrip-
tions, therefore, which belong as a rule to the fourth century,
rarely use it; some of the Lycaonian epitaphs in which it
occurs belong beyond all doubt to that century, proving that
it lingered on in a sporadic way.

26. Another example of the curse against violators of the
tomb is the following from Laodicea, No. 45 2 : —

The priest (hiereus) of the Trinity, Hesychius, wise, true,
faithful worker . . . and if any one shall lay another
in the tomb, he shall render judicial account to the
living Judge.

The opening formula is of the later class, the allusion to
a priest of the Trinity is of the developed ecclesiastical type,
and the simple cross at the beginning is not early ; and yet
the concluding expression cannot be placed with any prob-
ability later than about A.D. 400, as this originally pagan,
and in the strict sense non-Christian, habit of curse seems
to be inconsistent with developed Christian custom, which

1 Scfxrei 6e$ \6yov, Journ. Hell. Stud., 1902, p. 354.

zAthen. Mittheil., xiii., p. 249, 6 rys TptdSos tepvs (!) 'Ha-vxios <ro(f>bs oArj-

0})S Triffrbs epydrys . IT . . to, M[TJ]J/(^>I\OS [re ]. ij ris 8' erepov eTrei/^aAp

T£ rdqxp KPITT) re? &VTI \6yov wSiitov 7ro[i]^[<T€t. Iambics are rare in epi-
taphs : the last word is doubtful,

in the Fourth Century 397

no longer set such value on the inviolability of the
grave.

27. Another example, probably of the same period, occurs
at Laodicea (No. 18) : —

, son of Valerianus, quaestor, erected the inscription,

while still living, to my sweetest wife Flavia Sosanna
and my foster-child Sophronia in remembrance : if
any one shall put another in (the tomb), he shall give
account to God.

28. Here may be given in the way of contrast a developed
Christian form of curse, from a rock in Phrygia near the
site of Leontos Kephalai (see p. 140). It was copied by
Professor Garstang of Liverpool. It belongs to a later time
and style than the Lycaonian epitaphs. There is a large
cross at the beginning.1

May he [who disturbs the tomb], and the accomplice
privy to the act, and . . . have the curse of the three
hundred and eighteen fathers.

The 318 fathers were the bishops present at the first
Council of Nice, A.D. 325 ; but the use of the curse is dis-
tinctly later than the holding of the Council. It is remark-
able that in Phrygia the Christian inscriptions are for the
most part either very early or quite late. There is a marked
absence of fourth century epitaphs ; and the reason for this
is found in the virulence with which Diocletian's persecution
was carried out in Phrygia (Cities and Bisk., ii., p. 505). In
Lycaonia, for some reason or other, probably the difference
of character in the governor of the Province Pisidia, the
persecution was apparently much less severe (see p. 345)-

^CI/ A small series of inscriptions relates to that interesting

1 va. ex??' TOV [rpfoaKOfffov /ce oKrb /ce 5e'/ca \ir]ar[epo}v rb avafle^uaj/ <5 . . . /c(e)
. . The Greek is bad and late.

39 8 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

but enigmatical institution in the early Church, the Parthenoi
or Virgins. One of these was found at Drya.1

29. Aur. Matrona (daughter) of Strabo, to her own
daughter, a Virgin, Douda, erected in remembrance.

The name Matrona occurs not infrequently in Christian
Lycaonian inscriptions. It is not in keeping with ancient
custom that the epithet Parthenos should be added in a
pagan inscription in prose simply to show that Douda died
unmarried; I know nothing to justify such an opinion.
The word must be taken in the ecclesiastical sense.

30. The following inscription of Laodicea (found at Serai-
Inn in 1904) is probably of the late fourth century :—

Here has been laid to rest she who was kind to mortals
and beauteous in form, by name Zoe, whom all held
in great honour ; and to her a tomb was built by her
husband and also by her sister, Varelianos with
Theosebia, very pious Virgin, a memory of the
generation of men, for that is the privilege of the
dead.2

The abbreviation of an already stereotyped epithet,
euXa/3(er) or euXa/^eo-Tar^), proves that "Virgin" must
here be taken in its technical sense as an ecclesiastical
term. The prose epithet, " friend of all," which is charac-
teristic of Christian epitaphs,3 is here transformed for

1 The most northern town of Lycaonia. The epitaph is published in Journ.
of Hell. Studies, 1899, p. 121 (Anderson).

2 fj/OdSe K€K^8evTe <pi\6fipOTos ay\a6/j.op<pos
ovvojj.a (Se) Z6r) T^V ireprieffitov airavrss
rfj 5' &pa Tvvfiov eStyicw ebs ir6(Tis 778' aft
OuapeAiaj/bs <rvv ®eo<Te/8ir; €i»A.aj8. irap6ev(f>,
fj.vfl/j.r}v av8pS>v ycvfys, rb ykp yepas fo
In 1. 2 8^ was omitted by fault of composer or engraver ; but the metre
requires it. In 1. i 8 was inserted, but the metre rejects it.
3 See above, p. 375.

in the Fourth Century 399

metrical reasons into the much poorer term " kind to
mortals ".

The date of this inscription is proved, also, both by the
late formula, and by the shape of the stone, which I have
observed only in the later Christian tombs : it is not a simple
stele of the earlier class with pointed or rounded or square
top, but one with a rude resemblance to a Herm, with cir-
cular head springing from broad shoulders. On the head-
piece is incised an ornament like a six-leaved rosette, which
was probably understood by the Christians as an elaboration
of the old monogrammatic symbol % , i.e. JI(rjcrov^ X(pLa-To^) ;
yet the occurrence of the older formula in 1. 3 makes it
unsafe to date the tomb later than 370 or 380, on the prin-
ciples which we have been following. Although the tech-
nical term ev\,aj3. in abbreviation is a mark of lateness,
yet it cannot be doubted that Basil would have written in
that way; and we may safely admit that the usage may
have been practised as early as A.D. 375, in epigraphy as
well as in handwriting.

A third is one of a pair found at Laodicea : —

31, 32. Gaius Julius Patricius erected to my sweetest
aunt Orestina, who lived in continence,1 in remem-
brance.

Gaius Julius Patricius erected this inscription to my dear-
est brother Mnesitheos in remembrance.

This pair of inscriptions on one stone is certainly early.
The letters are fine and good, the formula is of the earlier
class, and the full Roman name seems to have disappeared
from popular use in this region during the fourth century.
The widening of the area of Roman citizenship by Caracalla
about 212, by giving every free man a right to the Roman

(Ath. MittheiL, 1888, p. 272). Compare No. 16 above.

400 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

citizenship and the full Roman name, destroyed its distinc-
tiveness and honourable character.

It would not be safe to regard the word evKparevaa-
here as necessarily a proof that Orestina stood apart
from the Orthodox and Catholic Church, or was connected
with any definite Enkratite sect or system. The use of the
word evKpdreia twice in the long metrical epitaph of the
Presbyter Nestor, quoted below, shows clearly that no ex-
travagant asceticism is implied by these terms, for in one
case the quality is ascribed to the Presbyter's wife. But the
following hitherto unpublished epitaph found near Laodicea
shows that there was in that city a congregation of sect-
arian character, probably with Enkratite tendencies, and
it may well be that Orestina belonged to that congrega-
tion.

33. Doudousa, daughter of Menneas, son of Gaianos, who

became He(gou)menos of the holy and pure Church

of God, to Aur. Tata my much beloved daughter

and only child erected this tombstone, and of my-

self in my lifetime in remembrance.1

Here beyond all question Doudousa is described (regard-

less of gender) as the Hegoumenos of the holy pure Church

of God. She seems to have been one of those female leaders

of unorthodox religious movements, so many of whom are

known in Asia Minor, from the lady of Thyatira(Rev.ii. 20)

downwards. It is hardly possible to regard a female leader

as belonging to the Orthodox Church; and the epithet

"pure" applied to the Church in which she was a leader

1 AovSoucro, 0vydr[rjp Mjej/j/eou Ta[iavov ?, yfiv^a/j-evr] l(yov)^vos rris ayelas
[«e] KaQapas rov 0(eo)S eK^ffelas, Avp. Tara ry iroXviroQei.voTa'rri «e /j.oj/oy€j/f) pov
9vyarpl ayeffrrja'a rfyv IffriiX-riv ravrt]v we eouTT/s £a)<ra /j.vfjfj.'ns %optv. The title
1/j.fvos, though not marked as an abbreviation (whereas ®v is), can hardly be
for anything except fwotpevos : the masculine form is remarkable.

in the Fourth Century 401

seems perhaps to lay more emphasis on the ascetic tendency
than the orthodox opinion approved.

" The Holy Church of God " is an expression that shows
the fully formed ecclesiastical expression, and can hardly be
dated earlier than the latter part of the fourth century. Its
first employment as a common phrase cannot be placed later
than A.D. 400, and is probably earlier, for we find it in an
inscription copied by Hamilton (C.I.G., 9268).

34. Aurelia Domna erected to my sweetest husband
Tinoutos, the very pious deacon of the Holy Church
of God of the Novatians, in remembrance.

The formula is of the early type. The ptcenomen Aur.
is used, and the name Novatians in open use implies a date
at least earlier than A.D. 420, when the sect and the name
were proscribed. I should confidently regard this inscrip-
tion as older than A.D. 340.

35. In 324-5 Gregory, father of the more famous Gregory
Nazianzus, was converted from the sect of the Hypsistarii
to the Orthodox Church. The sect took its name from its
worship of the Most High God alone (6eo<$ V^IO-TOS) ; it is said
to have adored light and fire, but to have used neither sacri-
fice nor images of God, to have kept the Sabbath and cer-
tain rules of clean and unclean foods, but not to have
practised circumcision. Gregory of Nyssa about 380
speaks of a sect Hypsistianoi, who adored the one Godj,
styling him Hypsistos or Pantokrator, but not Father.1
Neither sect (if they are two sects, and not one) can be
traced in that precise form outside of Cappadocia About
them we have only the untrustworthy account contained in the
brief allusions of two of their opponents, whose hatred for

1 Contra Eunom., ed. Migne, vol. ii., p. 482 ff. Pantokrator is used in
No. i.

4O2 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

the Hypsistianoi makes it difficult to regard what they say
as a fair account.

It is possible that the inscriptions of Iconium may throw
some light on this obscure sect. There is every probability
that a Cappadocian sect should spread also into Lycaonia,
for there is no natural line of demarcation in the dead level
plain where the frontier of the two Provinces lay. The
epitaph quoted on p. 389 may commemorate a priest or
bishop of the sect. At any rate it probably originated in
circumstances similar to those which produced the Cappa-
docian sect. Gourdes is in that epitaph called "priest of
the most high God " ; l but the style and character of the
document seems to permit no doubt that it is Christian and
did not emanate from a half-pagan, half-Jewish eclectic sect,
such as the two Gregories describe. It is probable that
their denial of the Christian character of the sect was merely
the result of prejudice and ill-feeling, and that the Iconian
epitaph is a fairer and safer witness to the character of the
Hypsistarii than the malignant account of ecclesiastical
enemies. If our opinion be not correct, the only alter-
native probably is that the epitaph originated in ordinary
Christian circles, where the Cappadocian sect was unknown
and where the typical epithet (which in Cappadocia would
have proved the sect) was used as a right and orthodox
term, occurring often in the Bible. But see No. 36.
36. A second epitaph partakes of the same character —
The God of the tribes of Israel. Here lie the bones of
the prudent deacon Paul ; and we adjure the Almighty
God [to punish any violator of the tomb ?].2

Oeov v\l/forov (where the metre would require

2C./.G., 9270. The copy of Lukas has QUTWV instead of $v\wv. The cor-
rection made in the Corpus is probably right. Compare Nos. 26-28.

in the Fourth Century 403

The abbreviations 0C and ON for God mark this as the
product of a more developed thought than most of the epi-
taphs of Lycaonia. Here the other typical epithet Panto-
krator is used. The occurrence in two Iconian epitaphs of
the two epithets marking the Cappadocian sect favours the
opinion that both inscriptions originate from a branch of the
Hypsistarii in Iconium. It is however possible that this
second epitaph originated in a Jewish circle, though the most
probable view perhaps is that a branch of the Jewish Chris-
tians survived in Lycaonia, and were nicknamed Hypsistarii
by the " orthodox " Christians of the fourth century from
their fondness for that favourite Jewish phrase, " the most
High " : they had been so far influenced by surrounding
opinion as to abandon circumcision.

.XIII. Deve-yuklu (Sarre, Reise in Kleinasien, p. 174;
A. E. Mitth. Oest., xix., 31 ff.).

37. Here lies Palladius, p(resbyter ?) and high-priest of God
for us : readers, pray for me.1

If the initial letter is rightly completed as "presbyter"
(and I see no other way), the title high-priest, which seems
more suited to the bishop, is given to a presbyter. Perhaps
we have here also a trace of some non-Orthodox sect. The
concluding formula is of developed Christian style; and the
epitaph is of the fifth century or later.

(Xiy The following epitaph, engraved on the tomb of a
physician at Alkaran, near Isaura Nova, probably belongs to
the period A.D. 330-350. The first two lines are in rude
metre : the last two are in prose : —

38. Here earth contains Aur. Priscus, who was an excellent
physician during the sixty years of his age. And

1 $vra KO.ra.Kirf

inrep

404 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

(his tomb) was erected by his son Timotheos and his
own consort Alexandria, in honour (Figure, p. 330). 1
This inscription is engraved above an elaborate ornamenta-
tion, partly incised, partly in relief, varied from the usual
Isauran architectural scheme. There are the usual four
columns supporting three pediments or arches, which, in this
case, are all rounded.2 In each of the three spaces between
the four columns is a fish. The central arch is filled with
the common shell pattern ; the other two contain a doubtful
symbol, perhaps a large fir-cone.

The ornament is executed in rude village work, quite
different from the fine lines of the Dorla (Isauran) work,
and implying the existence of the latter as model. Epi-
graphical reasons point to the same conclusion. The formula
" Here the earth contains " is a mere poetic variation of
" Here lies," the later formula which took the place of the
older formula stating that " so-and-so made the tomb," or
" honoured " or " set up " the deceased. These circumstances
point to a later date. On the other hand, the second part
of the physician's epitaph follows the old formula : " his son
and wife set up ". The mixture of the old and new formulae,
and thepr&nomen Aur., give a date about A.D. 340.

The ££aise given in this epitaph to the jphysician at the
end of his long career is quite in the style of Basil, who says,
in writing to the physician Eustathius about A.D. 374 :
" Humanity is the regular business of all you who practise as
physicians. And, in my opinion, to put your science at the
head and front of jife's-pursuitsjs Ito3ecjde"reasonably and
Brightly. Th!s7at all events, seems to be the caseTTTnan's

1 TIMI at the end : perhaps the beginning of T^TJS xfyiv, but the available
space is exhausted, and the rest of the stone is crowded with ornamentation,
so that the concluding letters were never engraved.

2 In the ordinary Isauran scheme, the two side pediments are pointed.

in the Fourth Century 405

most precious possession, life, is painful and not worth living
unless it be lived in health, and if for health we are depend-
ent on your skill" (Epist. I89).1

We notice also the emphasis which the ornamentation on
the tombstone of Priscus lays on his Christian character.
The connection of the physician with religion and his interest
in it are emphasised in Basil's two letters to Eustathius (151
and 189). He writes : "In your own case medicine is seen,
as it were, with two right hands : you enlarge the accepted
limits of philanthropy by not confining the application of
your skill to men's bodies, but by attending also to the cure
of the diseases of their souls" (Epist. i89).2 The letter to
the physician Pasinicus (324) also shows on what friendly
terms Basil wrote to men of this profession, and how much
he seems to have esteemed their educated view of life ; while
he corresponded with Eustathius as a valued and respected
friend on whose sympathy he could rely.8

39. A metrical epitaph found beside Derbe may belong to
the tomb erected by one of those Christian physicians : —

Thou hast caused sorrow to thy companions (i.e.y by thy
death) and in exceeding degree to thy parents ; and
thy name is Herakleon, son of Hermeros, physician.4

40. The initial formula of No. 38 appears in a somewhat
more elaborate form in another epitaph, found near Isaura
Nova in a bridge at Dinek Serai (Journ. of Hell. St., 1905,
p. 176) :—

1 and 2 Translation of Mr. Blomfield Jackson. See Harnack in Texte «.
Untersuch., viii., and list in a review Anal. Boll.t xii., 297.

3 While respecting educated physicians, Basil was not above the belief in
cures by words and charms, provided they were Christian, as the present
writer has pointed out in more detail in the Quarterly Review, vol. clxxxvi.,
p. 427 (Pauline and other Studies, p. 380).

4 MM. Radet and Paris in Bull. Corr. Hellen., 1886, p. 510 ; Sterrett, Wolfe
Expedition, p. 28.

406 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

Here the bounteous earth, taking him to her bosom, con-
tains Papas, who lived a just one among men, and
whom Vanalis, his daughter, honoured with monu-
ment and beauteous muse, longing for the dead
one.

The imitation marks the two epitaphs as of the same period,
which is proved also by the presence in both of the new
formula followed by the old. As one epitaph is Christian,
the other may confidently be set down as also Christian.

(XV) Allusions to the words of the Bible are rare in the
epitaphs : compare No. 5 and the following.

41. Dikaios, measurer of corn for distribution, raised the
stele to his wife Mouna, after a wedded life of 23 years,
[ ] months, 20 days, and made (the tomb) for himself
in his life-time. And the sarcophagus belongs to Him
who knocks where the door stands before Him.

The allusion to Revelation iii. 20, " Behold, I stand at the
door and knock," seems indubitable ; though the Greek
shows rather less similarity than the English.1 It is possible
that on the broken ornament of the top a personal name was
engraved, and then the first line should be translated " a just
measurer of corn ". But Dikaiosyne occurs as a woman's
name in a neighbouring village, and Dikaios is sometimes
found as a man's name and probably so used here.

42. An epitaph from Suwerek, if the restoration be on the
right lines, is important ; and I should be glad to elicit either
criticism or corroboration. See Fig. 7, p. 330.

Aurelius Alexander [son of Alexander?], hoping in the

1 Kpovca and fffrrjKa eTrl in Rev. iii. 20, K^TTTW and eTre'tTTTjKe*' (sic) in the
epitaph ; but the latter is composed by an uneducated villager, who made
K6irrwvos the gen. of Kdirrow, and remembered badly the words of the New
Testament : he spoke Phrygian, not Greek.

in the Pourtk Century 407

after-life and joy, while living and of sound mind,
made for himself a resting-place in remembrance.1
This is an epitaph of the earliest class, and may quite prob-
ably belong to the third century. The formula, apart from
the Christian hope, is of the early style, and the use of
Aurelius as prcenomen was commoner in the third century
than in the fourth. The ornamentation shows the sym-
metrical use of crosses : compare No. 6 and Studies in the
Eastern Provinces, p. 90.

'XVI. The phrase " slave of God," SoOXo? #eoO, is the com-
monest in Byzantine epitaphs. Examples occur from about
A.D. 400 or earlier to the latest time. Expressions, similar in
sense but different in word, should be dated in the third or
fourth century, before the common form was established.
The phrase "slave of Christ," is, evidently, later than
"slave of God," as being more remote from pagan forms
of expression. The latter might quite conceivably be used
by a pagan, though I cannot quote any case in which it was
so used. The only inscription known to me in which
£oi)Xo9 XpLo-Tov occurs, is marked beyond question by
other characteristics as of the developed Byzantine period ;
the title " Comes " occurs, and the detestable spelling
(occurring not in rude village work, but on the tomb of a
high officer) shows that the epitaph is likely to be of the
seventh century or even later.

43. At Laodicea, published in Athen. Mittheil., 1885, p. 43.

Athenodorus, house-servant of God, and Aelia Eupatra his

wife, while in life (prepared the grave) for themselves.

1 A better restoration is suggested by my friend Mr. W. R. Paton, differing

very slightly from that in the illustration ; cp. i Pet. i. 13 ; iii. 17 ; Tit. i. 2 : —

Aup . 'A\f£av8p[os Sis], f\Trl<ras eVl [r^v TTJS

408 XII. The Church of Lycaonia

The term "house-servant of God" (olKerrj^ Seov) in

itself might quite fairly be taken as a mere refinement of

the commoner *' slave of God," and therefore later in

origin ; but such an opinion is refuted by the character of

this inscription, which is expressed in the earlier class of

formula, mentioning first the name of the maker of the

tomb. The names, too, are of an early type, especially the

name of the wife Aelia Eupatra ; and we may feel confident

that the inscription must be as early as the fourth, and more

probably the third, century. Looking at the style of letters,

and the general impression given by the inscription as a

whole, I should be inclined to place it in the third century.

The strange phrase " house-servant of God " (oiKer^ Oeov)

might be interpreted by some as a variation of the technical

" home-born slave of Caesar " (verna Ccesaris). But the term

Divus, 0eo9, was applied only to a deceased emperor ; and

it is contrary to an otherwise unbroken rule to speak of a

slave of the deified deceased emperor. At the same time it

must be noted that many slaves of the emperor occur in

epitaphs of Laodicea and the neighbourhood : they resided

there to manage the estates and valuable copper and quick-

silver mines belonging to the emperors in the mountain

country immediately south of the city.1

It is also possible that Athenodorus, to indicate his religion,
purposely chose an expression which was susceptible of an-
other meaning. I have elsewhere pointed out 2 that in the

1 The name Burnt Laodicea evidently arose from the furnaces for smelting
the copper. Mr. Edwin Whittall pointed out to me that the ancients did not
refine the ore (cinnabar) to extract the pure quicksilver, but used it in its raw
condition as a colour. It was the red earth of Cappadocia, called 77} 2«/a>7riK^,
because it was brought to Greece by way of Sinope before the land Trade-
Route to Ephesus came into use.

2 Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, ii., p. 502.

in the Fourth Century 409

earliest Christian epitaphs language was often employed
which could be taken in a pagan sense by the uninitiated.
This custom originated in the time when it was dangerous to
profess Christianity ; and after the numbers and influence of
the Christians increased in any district, profession was made
in more public fashion. If my suspicion be correct, this
would be the earliest Lycaonian Christian epitaph. From
the names and style there is no reason why it should not be-
long to the second century. According to ordinary rule one
would class it as probably of that date.

The forms, attendant, companion, servant or slave of
Christ (OepaTTtov OepaTrcuva vary between those meanings;
also Trat? SoOXo?) are found sporadically : cp. No. 4 .

44. An example, found in Isauria, is published by Pro-
fessor Sterrett (Wolfe Exped., p. 60).

[So-and-so], while still living, faithful slave-boy of [Jesus]
Christ, inscribed the stele for himself.1

45. Copied by my friend, Professor T. Callander, at
Savatra in Lycaonia : —

The attendant of Christ, Paulus, I lie in this tomb, and
the gravestone was set up by my young sister Maria
in solemn remembrance to me her only brother.2

46. From the same place and authority : it is a mere
concluding fragment : —

the brothers, attendants of Christ, constructed.3

47. A quaint inscription found in 1908 at Obruk (perhaps
the site of Congoustos), eight miles east of Perta, concludes
our survey of the Lycaonian Church.

favrcfj iraT[s 'iTjtroD Xpurrov

2 XY Oepdirwv IIa[G]\os ey T<j38e rvp.&(f KaTa/n[/n]€ o^fia Se
Ka(Tiyvi\\_Ti]\ Mapia jtj^Tjs civetta <rtfj.vrjs ofy Kaffiyvi\TCf. depdvtai/, like o
in No. 19, is equivalent to comes, subordinate companion.

3 KaffiyvijTOi Xpicrrov Oepdirovres erev^av.

410

XII. The Church of Lycaonia

•f Holy Trinity, protect the order of the deacons. Amen.1
This text perhaps indicates some disagreement between
the deacons and the higher clergy ; but other explanations
are possible, and I publish it in hope of instruction on the
point. The tagma of the clergy is mentioned by Basil
(quoted on p. 356 note).

1 ayia Tpieis, cu'TrjA.ojSoC rov rdyfiart TU>V SiaK6vw(v)
at the beginning and a large cross below the letters.

/. A cross is cut

>YCANECTHCErt
MAPIAMNHMHC
PIN

FIG. 14. — Anthropomorphic Lycaonian gravestone (see p. 399) with cross
and rosette (monogram) as corresponding decorative elements. See pp»
330, 368 f., 406 f.

INDEX.

Christian Inscriptions —

Account to God, giving of, 396.
Anthropomorphic gravestone, 399,

410.
Aurelius as pseudo-praenomen,

338, 386, 390.
Beginning of epigraphy in Central

Anatolia, 335.

Chronology of, 334 ff., 338, 369.
Church of God, 401.
Concealment of Christian charac-
ter shows early period, 381,

408 f.

Curse on violator of tomb, 395 ff.
Fathers 318 of Nicaea, 397.
"Friend of all," 375, 382.
" Here lies," 337, 338, 388.
Holy Church of God, 401.
Reckoning with God, 396.
Salutations on gravestones, 362.
Slave of Christ, of God, 338, 365,

407 ff.
Titles, growth of Byzantine

Christian, 369, 384, 398.
Trinity, 396, 410.
Women's industry, 387.

Luke, 3-101, 220-46 —
Acts, conclusion of, 27.
- chap, xv., 28, 60 f., 313 f.
— credibility of, 58, 64, 87, 91,

315 ; see Luke gen.
Annunciation, 255.
Authorities, use of his, 58, 71, 80,

83-
Birth narrative, 49 f., 219, 243-46,

255-

Character, 31 ; see Hellenism of.
Choice of details, 21.
Connection with Antioch, 18, 35,

65-68.
Ephesus, 21 ff., 35.

(411)

Luke, 3-101, 220-46 (contd.) —
Connection with Corinth^gPryj^

Macedonia, 31,34^., 48.

Criticism of method in, 3, 8, 58,.

60, 64, 72, 76, 87, 91, 315 ; see

Luke gen.

Hellenism of, 10 ff., 15, 255.
House and roof, 46.
Inexactnesses and inconsistencies

in, alleged, 24 ff., 28 f.
Jerusalem, 76.

— and Hierosolyma, 51, 76.
John, relation to, 29 f.
Mark in Luke, 39 ff., 71.
Marvellous in, 8-ro, 65, 251-59.
Method in criticism, see Criti-
cism.

— as a historian, 21, 34, 38.
Omissions from his authorities,

238.

Paulinism of, 12.
Physician, 4, 6, 16, 27, 56 ff.
Roof of house, 46.
Ship, 36.
Source, Lost Common Source of

Matthew and, 71-101.
Sources, 34, 38, 49, 55, 63, 73 f.,

78 ff., 96 f.

Speeches in, are they his com-
position ? 22, 83.
Style, 34, 44, 47 f-, 5° f-
Temptation in, 256 ff.
Trustworthiness of, 4 f., 3*5 £»

327.
Unity of authorship in his two

books, 6 f.
Use of his authorities, see

Authorities
Viper in Malta, 63 ff.
We-passages in Acts, 15, 27, 33 ff.,.

37 £
Women in, 13, 30 f.

412

Index

-Miscellaneous —

Agriculture, 179-98.

— directed by religion, 197.
Alphabet, see Greek.
Anthropomorphism, 251.

Arabs could not conquer Asia

Minor, 114 f., 180 f.
Asia and Europe, contact of,

105 ff., 143.
Asia Minor, situation of, 105 f.

roads of, 107 ff.

dividing line in, 112 ff.

contrast of coast and in-
terior, 113.

Aulokrene fountain, 108.
Bull-god, 209.

Clothes, philosophy of, 175.
Coinage, origin of, 125.
Commerce, methods in Asia, 125.
Criticism, true, seeks excellences,

not defects, 260.
Crusades, influence on Europe,

125.

Earrings worn by men, 206.
Egoism not Egotism in literature,

265.
First person singular, its use in

exposition, 265.

German Method, value of, 263.
Germans do not read Hawkins
and Hobart, 6.

— Dr. Sanday on, 261 ff.
Greek alphabet, entrance to Asia

Minor, 123.

Hieroglyphics, Hittite or Anato-
lian, 127 f., 159 f.

Hired labour despised, 221 f.

Huda-verdi, 132, 163 ff.

Judaism, freer in first century
than later, 263.

Khans, 185 ff.

Landscape of the plateau, 131.

Legend, nature of, 100.

Libation, 208.

Lycaonia, organisation of, 332 f.

Monotheism, origin of, 277.

Morning star, crescent, 232.

Nomadisation, 116, 181 ff., 275 f.

Nomads, 180 f. ; in Syria, 275.

Old Testament criticism, 76 f.,
262, 277 ff.

Organisation of Lycaonia, 332 f.

Pelta, 349.

Semitic conception of God, 12 f.,
250-55, 280 f.

Miscellaneous (continued) —
Tekmoreioi, 197.
Tetrapyrgia, 187.
Turkish conquest of Asia Minor,
116, 181 ff.

— art, 185 f.

Water engineering, 129, 154, 164,

179, 188, 193, 348.
Women warriors, 209 ff.

Paul, St.—

Acts xv. and Gal. ii., 28, 60 f., 313.
Architectural metaphors, 294 ff.
Athletics, 288-94.
Citizen rights, 25.
Development and growth, idea of,

287 f.

Ephesian Address, 22.
Epistle to Hebrews, relation to,
304, 309 ff.

— its relation to Paul's epistles,

326 ff.
Galatians ii., i-n, 28, 60 f., 313.

— origin in teaching of Jesus,

96.

Hellenism of, 15, 285-98.
Language of, 219, 285 ff.
Luke, his physician, 27.
Metaphors, 285-98.
Military metaphors, 294, 297.
Name, 53 f., 76.
Quotations from Deut. xxxii., i,

326.

Quoted in inscription ? 407.
Roman citizenship, 25.

— metaphors, 297 f.
Saul and Paul, 53 f., 76.
Veiling of women, 175.
Width of education, 285.

Religion, Christian —

Acts, credibility of, 22, 28, 60 f.,

87.

Archiereus, 391, 403.
Anatolian languages destroyed

by, 146.

Anthropomorphism in Bible, 251.
Aristocratic birth of Church

leaders, 187, 341.
Asceticism, 400.
Birth of Christ, date of, 235, 243,

246.
Bishop of Laodiceia, Lycaonia, in

fourth century, 153 f.
Bishops, 350-60, 368, 385.

Index

413

Religion, Christian (continued) —
Book or tablets as symbol, 377.
Byzantine art, 145.

— Church, 143.

deterioration in, 161 f.

Chorepiscopus, 356 f.
Chronology of Gospels, 221-46.
Church architecture, 339, 346 if.,
366.

— as sepulchral monument,

156, 165.

— as a defensive power, 157.

— door on gravestones. See

gravestone.

— Imperial contribution to ex

penses of, 346.
- the centre of social life,

153 ff-> 348, 364-
Churches, thousand and one, at

Barata, 155 ff.
Clergy and laity, 387 f.
Concealment of Christianity, 381,

408,
Continuity of pagan ideas, 133,

136, 138, 158 ff.
Deacons, 363, 410.
Diakonissa, 393 ff.
Diocletian, persecution of, 342 ff.,

397-

Dove, symbol of, 385, 389.
Elohim, Jehovah, 76.
Epistle to Hebrews, 301-28.

athletics in, 289, 291.

Epitaphs, 272 ff., 331-410.
Evangelists in church, 368.
Fig-tree, 227.
Freedom in the teaching of Jesus,

92 ff.
Genealogical expression in Bible,

253 £
Gospels, i-ior, 219-46.

— later elements in ? 14, 32.

— metaphors from life and

nature, 219.

— trustworthiness of, 32, 87,

i-ioi, 219-65.

— sources not recoverable from

internal evidence alone, 75.

Grass, sitting on the, 228 f.

Gravestone symbolises a church,
and the tomb is a church, 380,
also 328, 330, 371, 376, 379,

383.

Greek language spread by, 146.
Hegoumenoi. See Leaders.

Religion, Christian (continued) —

Herald, 233.

Heretics, 400 f.

Hiereus, 355, 365, 387 f.

Hierissa, 391 ff.

Hospitality, 154, 354.

Hypsistarii, Hypsistiani, 401 ff.

Industry of women mentioned on
gravestones, 387.

Inscriptions of Lycaonia, 150 ff.,.
331-410.

Italian pilgrims, 316 f.

Jerusalem, Church of, division in,
313 ff.

Jews, relation to earliest Chris-
tians abroad, 317 ff.

John the Baptist, 227 ff., 232.

Kingdom of God, 85.

Latin and Greek Church, con-
trast of, 144 f.

Laity. See Clergy.

Leaders, separate class of, in one
congregation, 313.

Legend, nature of, 100.

" Light of the World," 231.

Lycaonia, Christian in fourth
century, 152.

Mark and the type of a Gospel,.
82 ff.

Martyrs, 395.

Matthew, 4-101, 221-46.

— Logia of, 80.

Messenger of God, 13, 255.

Ministry of Christ, length of, 234..

Miraculous element in, 8 f., 65,

25I-59-
Misunderstood at the time by

disciples, 89 ff.
Morning star, 230-46.
Nineteenth and twentieth century

view, contrast of, 9 f.
Official titles, growth of, 369,

384, 398.

Oikonomos, 358, 369 f., 393.
Oikonomissa, 393.
Open-air life, effect of, 223 ff.
Ornament, 367 f., 370 ff., 376 f.,,

378 f., 385, 399, 404, 410.
Orthodox Church, 143.
its alliance with the Em-
pire, 147.

the Church of the people

in fourth century, 152.

pagan survivals in, 159 f.,,

164, 174.

414

Index

Religion, Christian (continued] —
Pantokrator, 339 f., 401 f.
Papas, 373 f.
Permanence of religious feeling.

See Pagan Religion.
Physicians, 403 ff.
Pilgrims to Jerusalem, 317 ff.
Presbytera, presbyterissa, 365,

392 f.

Presbyterian, 358.
Presbyters, 351-65, 367, 370, 403.
Q, 71-100.

— source of knowledge of

Christ's teaching, 85, 97 f.

— date of, 81-89, 97 f-
Reinvigorated the Roman Em-
pire, 144.

Revelation of John, 233, 378,

406 f.

Sabbatical year, 236.
Screens in churches, 347 f., 379 ff.
Soldiers, 342 ff.
Spread of Christianity, lines of,

134 f-

Star, 230-46.
Subdeacons, 356, 368.
Symbolism in Bible, 250-59.

— in art, 375 f.
Tabernacles, feast of, 235-43.
Teaching of Jesus misunderstood

by His disciples in His life,

89 ff., 240 ff.
Tekmoreioi, 197 f.
Temptation, the, 256 ff.
Transfiguration, 237-43.
Trinity, 396, 410.
Unified the Empire, 148.
Virgins, 386, 398 f.
Verbal criticism, 59 ff., 262.
Water supply at churches, 348.
Writing, early use of, 98 f.

Religion, Mohammedan —

Accepted old religious sites, 132,

i33» 138, 175.

Art, 185 f.

Bektash Dervishes, 155.

Brotherhoods, an ancient institu-
tion, 155.

Mosque built twice at Tyana, 114.

Religion, Pagan, 171-215 —

Amazons, 200 ff.

Anatolian religion, 171-214.

directed agriculture, 197.

Asian influence on Greece, 128.

Birth and death, 205.

Bull god, 209.

Confession, 178.

Continuity of religious awe, see
Permanence.

Divine nature as feminine, 130 f.

beneficence of, 132.

on mountain peaks, 136.

Domestication of animals through
religion, 130.

Ephesian priest, 212 f.

Eunuch priest, 201-13.

Feminine element in, see Mother-
goddess.

Grave as temple and church, 140,

105.
— as a holy place, 173 f.

High-places, 159 f.

Huda-verdi, 132, 163 ff.

Megabyzos, 213.

Mother-goddess, 130 f., 203 ff.

Permanence of religious awe, 133,
136, 138, 140, 159, 164 f., 174,
197, 336.

Priest-king, 211.

Religion the model and type of
earthly life, 205.

Sepulchral religion, 140.

Virgin-Mother goddess, 134.

Roman Empire —

Alliance with the Orthodox

Church, 147.
Emperor contributes to building

of church, 346.
Hellenism, its place in, 143.
Lycaonia Pro/ince, 332.
Mines, 408.
Reinvigorated by Christianity,

144.

Relation to Hellenism, 143.
Slaves of the Emperor, 408.
Three Eparchiae, Province of,

332, 353-

Unity of the Empire, religious,
148.

NAMES.

I. Christian and

Biblical—
Agabus, 25, 253.
Amphilochius, 151, 349,

356, 378.

Anthousa, 353 note.
Apollos, 301.
Athanasius, Bishop of

Tarsus, 353 note.
Augustine, 12.
Avircius Marcellus, 341,

35°, 372.

Barnabas, 20, 301.
Basil, 151 ff., 187, 354,

356, 378, 384, 387, 389,

404 f., 411.
Callistus, 374.
Clement (Alex.), 234 note.

— (Rome), 310.
Cornelius, 19.
Cyriacus, presbyter, 356.
Elias, 237.
Eusebius, 18, 65 f., 342

note, 345 ff., 379, 389.
Eutychus, 65.
Gabriel, 255.
Gregory, 401.

— of Nazianzus, 151,

401.

— of Nyssa, 151, 187,

401.

— Thaumaturgus, 374.
Hermas, 355.
Ignatius, 24, 293, 355.
Jairus, 58.

James, 240.

John, 24, 133, 220-241.

— Baptist, 227 f., 230 ff.
Longinus, presbyter,

Lye., 356.
Malachi, 233.
Mammas, Tribune, 156.
Maria, 409.
Mark, 4-101, 221-46.

I. Christian and

Biblical (cent.) —
Mary, Virgin, 13, 63,

131, 133 f., 197.
Matthew, 4-101, 221-46.
Maximilian, St., 343.
Michael, 158.
Mnason, 19.
Naaman, 20.
Nathanael, 226 f.
Nicholas, Bishop of

Myra, 123.
Nicodemus, 223.
Origen, 234, 310 f.
Papias, 80 f.
Paulinus, Bishop of

Tyre, 346.
Peter, 55, 81 ff., go, 237,

240, 407.

Phocas, St., 121, 123.
Polycarp, 354.
Pseudo-Justin, 374.
Publius, 16.
Stephen, 82 ff.
Tertullian, 373.
Theodoret, 313.
Theodotus, St., 374.
Theophilus, Bishop, 375.
Timothy, 288, 323, 363.
Titus, 17 f., 272, 287 f.,

407.

Trophimus, 35.
Tychicus, 35.
Zacharias, 49 f.

II. Historical —
Aeschylus, n.
Agamemnon, 124.
Agrippa, 322, 326.
Alexander the Great, 107,

126.

Al-Mamun, 114.
Anna Comnena, 180.
Aristides, 67.

(415)

II. Historical

(cont.) —
Augustus, 317.
Barbarossa, Kaiser, in,

i66f.

Bismarck, 9.
Caracalla, Aurelius, 386,

399-

Claudius, 319.
Constantine, 151.
Croesus, no, 215.
Cyrus the Persian, no.
Diocletian, 152 ff., 338,

342 f-, 353 note, 397.
Diogenes, Governor of

Pisidia, 344.
Dodanim, 254.
Domitilla, 273.
Domitian, 312.
Elishah, 254.
Eumenes, 187.
Galerius, 345.
Godfrey, 107.
Hadrian, Emperor, 133.
Harun-al-Rashid, 114.
Herod, 244.
Herodotus, 125, 215.
Homer, 367.
Ibrahim Pasha, 33 note.
Javan, sons of, 254.
Joannes Cinnamus, 180.
John Comnenus, 181 note.
Josephus, 67, 317.
Julian, 392.
Justinian, 133, 138.
Kiamil Pasha, 194.
Kittim, 254.
Licinius, 343 f.
Lucretius, 24.
Manlius Consul, 108.
Manuel, no, 181 note.
Maximian, 351.
Maximin, 342 f., 345 f.,

368.

416

Index

II. Historical

III. Modern Scho-

(cont.)—

lars (cont.) —

Memluk Sultans, 117.

Frankel, 68.

Plummer, Dr., 237.

Nearchos, 66.

Gardner, Prof. P., 125

Radet, M., 125, 405 note*

Nicetas of Khonai, 180.

note.

Ramsay, Miss, 175, 336,

Newton, Sir Isaac, 220 f.

Garstang, Prof., 397.

37i, 378, 382, 392.

Pindar, n.

Gelzer, 204.

Reichel, Dr., 160.

Philip, Emperor, 338.

Gibbon, no note, 181.

Reinach, A. J., 198 note.

Philo, 294.

Grenfell, 67.

— Theodore, 118 note*

Plutarch, 187.

Hamilton, 401.

Renan, 277.

Porphyry, 280 note.

Harnack, Prof. A., 1-68,

Sanday, Prof. W., 13,98,

Semiramis, Mounds of,

305 note, 342 note, 373.

249-65, 318, 360, 374.

206 note.

Hastings, Dr., 130 note,

Sarre, 187, 403.

Suetonius, 319.

177, 205 note.

Sayce, 160.

Tacitus, 274 note.

Hatch, Dr., 35 1, 354, 363.

Schurer, 9.

Tarkuattes, Priest King,

Hawkins, Sir J., 5 f.

Sloman, A., 64 note.

160.

Headlam, Principal, 287

Smith, Cecil, 201, 212.

Tarshish, 254.

note.

— Prof. G. A., 269-81,

Valeria, Empress, 345.

Heberdey, 375.

— Robertson, 77, 262,

Valerian, 353.

Heraeus, 373 note, 374.

269.

Valerius Diogenes, 344.

Hobart, 5 ff., 225.

Souter, Prof. A., 18 note,.

Verina, Empress, 138.
Xenophon, 119 f.

Hogarth, 113 note, 201.
Holl, Prof., 146 note,

273-
Steinmann, 264.

151 note, 356 note, 379

Sterrett, Prof., 385 note,.

III. Modern Scho-
lars —

note.
Hook, Bryan, 64.
Howorth, Sir H., 181.

390, 405 note, 409.
Strzygowski, Prof., 380.
Thomas, Rev. Griffith,

Allen, 96 note.

Howson, Dean, 285-89.

287.

Anderson, J. G. C., 360

Humann, 203.

Tissot, 256.

note, 370 note, 393.

Hunt, 67.

Trail, Prof. J. W. H., 64..

Arnold, Matthew, 309.

Julicher, 264.

Usener, 353 note.

Bachofen, 204.

Keil, 349.

Van Soden, 305 note.

Bell, Miss Gertrude, 155,

Kenyon, 244.

Waddington, 68, 273 r

!59, 197-

Knowling, R. J., 17.

274 note.

Bell, Mr., 244.

Korte, A., 124.

Weinel, 264.

Blass, Prof., 36, 47, 63.

Layard, 232.

Weiss, Bernard, 55.

Blomfield Jackson, Rev.,

Le Blant, 369.

Wellhausen, 46.

405 note.

Lewis, W. M., 302 ff.,

Westcott, 301 note, 302,,

Calder, W. M., 153 note,

324 ff.

306 note, 307, 310 note,

34i. 35°-

Lightfoot, 297, 305, 327.

311 f.,3i3 note,3i6 note^

Callander, Prof. T., 360,

McGiffert, Prof. A. C.,

White, Rev. Dr., of Mar-

366 note, 368, 409.

5, 26, 303 ff.

sovan, 253.

Carruthers, Mr. W.,

Mackinlay, Colonel, 219-

Whittall, Mr. Edwin>

F.R.S., 223.

46.

408 note.

Chantre, 209 note.

Maspero, 209 note.

Wiegand, Dr., 347.

Cronin, Rev. H. S.,

Milligan, Dr. G., 303,

Wilhelm, 375.

388 f., 394, 396.

307, 324.

Wilkinson, 72 note, 97

Cumont, Prof., 353.

Mommsen, 144.

note.

Delitzsch, 322, 324.

Moulton, Prof. J. H., 51,

Wilson, Sir Charles, 202,,

De Rossi, 369, 373 note.

60 note, 244 note, 245.

203, 207.

Diamantides, Savas, 396.

Sfewton, Sir C., 212.

Winckler, 127 note.

Dindorf, 67.

Paton, W. R., 407 note.

Wood (Ephesus), 133.

Doughty Wylie, Mrs., 174.

Perrot, G., 203, 204 note,

Wordsworth, Bishop, 311

Driver, Dr., 279.

206 ff., 212, 214.

note.

Foucart, 128.

Pfleiderer, 305 note.

Wright, A. A. G., 273.

Index

417

IV. Pagan Gods-

V. Places (font.) —

V. Places (cont.)—

Achilles Pontarches, 121

Bagdad Railway, 138,

Galilee, 40, 42, 239,241 ff.

188.

Gennesaret, 44.

Apollo, 108, 167, 216.

Barata, 150 note, 155 ff.,

Halys, 215.

Archigallos, 207.

385 ; Plates XVI.,

Hauran, 272.

Artemis, 197 f., 201.

XVII., XX.

Herakleia, 172.

Ashtaroth, 232.

Basilika Therma, 380.

Hermon, Mount, 343.

Athena, 108.

Bin-Bir-Kilisse. See Bar-

Hierapolis, 109.

— works of, 387.

ata.

Hierosolyma, 51, 53, 76,

Atys, 211.

Black Sea, 105.

335-

Bacchus, 211.

Boghaz-Keui, 127, 201

Hirakla, Castle of, 172,

Cybele, 207.

ff., 212 f., 215.

193-

Dipylon, 198.

Bulgurlar, 172 note.

Holy Land, 269-81.

Helena, 121.

Bulladann, 192.

Huda-verdi, 132, 173 ff.

Heracleids, 68.

Caesarea of Cappadocia,

Ibriz, 171, 193, 206 ;

Heracles, 179, 211.

114, 154, 357.

Plate XXI.

Hermaphrodite, 206.

Csesarea Philippi, 239.

Iconium, 151 f., 331 f.f

Hermes, 13.

Caesarea, Stratonis, 19,

356, 363. 4°2 f.

Ida, Trojan, 119.

320 ff.

Isaura Nova or Dorla,

Ipta Meter, 215.

Capernaum, 40.

335, 352, 360, 370, 372,

Iris, 13.

Cappadocia, i53i 204,

376 f., 378 f., 385, 404 f-

Istar, 232.

401 f., 408 note.

Isaura Palaea, 378.

Janus, 198.

Caspian, 105.

Jerusalem, 19, 25, 42, 51,

Kronos, 280.

Caucasus, 105.

53, 76, 81, 223, 238 ff.,

Lityerses, 108.

Celaenas, 107 f.

253, 320.

Marsyas, 108.

Cilician Gates, 109 note,

Jordan, 227, 236.

Mother goddess, 206.

US, 139, 172 f., 186.

)• / j j
udaea, 42, 244.

Omphale, 211.

Comana, 210.

Kara-Bunar, 189 note.

Pta, 215.

Congoustos, 410.

Kara-Dagh, 163; Plates

Sabos, 211.

Constantinople, 116.

XIV., XV.

Tekmoreian, 198.

Corinth, 21 f., 309.

Kara-Hissar-Afion, 137,

Venus, 232.

Crimea, 121.

140 ; Plate IV.

Zeus, n, 168.

Cyme, ^Eolic, 124.

Kases, Kasis, 209.

Cyprus, 19, 122, 134.

Keramon Agora, 120.

V. Places—

Damascus, 20.

Khadyn-Khan, 129.

Achaia, 21 ff., 35.

Deghile, 140 ; Plates

Khasbia, 209.

Ak-Giol, White Lake,

XIII., XVIII., XIX.

Kizil Dagh, 160.

172.

Derbe, 335, 385, 405.

Korna, 378.

Akroenos, 137.

Deve-yuklu, 403.

Kybistra, 172.

Alexandria, 122, 374.

Dindymos, 119.

Laodicea, 153 f., 331

Alkaran, 352, 360, 378,

Dinek, 360.

note, 335, 370, 381,

403-

— Serai, 405.

398, 407 f.

Amanus, 117 note.

Dorla. See Isaura.

Laodicea, burnt, 408 note.

Anava, the Salt Lake,

Dorylaion, 107, 166.

Leontopolis, 378.

107.

Drya, 370.

Leontos Kephalai, 140,

Ancyra, 67.

Egypt, 231, 236, 374.

397; Plate X.

Anthios, 140.

Eleusis, 373.

Lerna, 179.

Antioch, Pisidian, no,

Emir-Ghazi, 209.

Limnai, 197.

134,341; Plate XII.

Ephesus, 21 ff., 1 19,

Lycus, 107 ff.

Antioch, Syrian, 18 ff.,

131 ff.

Lystra, 65, 216, 335.

62, 66.

Eregli, 172.

Macedonia, 23, 34 ff.

And- Taurus, 114.

Eski-Sheher, 107.

Maden-Sheher. See Ba-

Argos, 179.

Euyuk, 205 ff.

rata.

Aries, Council of, 344.

Frahtin, 205.

Maeander, 107 ff., 119;

Aurokra, 108 f.

Galatia, 23, 27.

Plate II.

Index

V. Places (cont.) —
Malta, 64.
Marsyas, 107.
Melitene, 114.
Mesopotamia, no, 194.
Miletus, 347.
Mindana, 356.
Mount of Olives, 223.
Mycenae, 139.
Myra, 122.
Naro in Africa, 377.
Nazareth, 40, 236.
Nemrud, 232.
Nevinne, 368.
Nice, Council of, 349,

397-

Nikopolis, 138.
Obrimas, 107.
Obruk, 409.
Osyrynchos, 67.
Panhormos, 186.
Palestine, 44, 46, 188,

229, 243 f., 269-81, 292,

3i7-

Paphlagonia, 117.
Pegella, 138, 331 note.
Perga, 134.
Pergamos, 68.

V. Places (cont.} —
Pessinus, 211.
Philadelphia, 157.
Philippi, 27, 34, 46.
Phrygia, 395.

— Galatic, 48.

— Asian, 48, 335.

— Upper, 67 f.
Pisidia, 397.
Plommeis, 370.
Prymnessos, 67.
Pteria, 214.
Puteoli, 317.
Rome, 23.
Salonika, 375.
Sarus, 172.
Seleucia, 353 note.
Serai-Inn, 398.
Sinethandos, 331 note.
Sinope, 121, 408 note.
Sivri-Hissar, 138; Plate

Smyrna, 191, 195.
Stymphalos, 179.
Sultan Dagh, 140 ; Plate

XII.

Suwerek, 366, 406.
Syracuse, 369 note.

V. Places (cont.)—
Syria, 107.
Tabor, 243.
Tarsus, 114, 120, 293,

375-
Taurus, 106, 112 if., 115

ff., 137.
Temnos, 119.
Therma, 108. See Ba-

silika.

Thessalonica, 35.
Thyatira, 233, 400.
Tomb of Midas, 139 f.;

Plate VIII.
Trapesus, 120.
Troas, 27, 34 f., 48, 65.
Tyana, 172.

Tyre, 25, 346 ff., 379, 381
Tyriaion, 395.
Ushak, 19 1.
Verinopolis, 138, 331

note.

Yuruk-Keui, 385.
Zazadin Khan, 388, 394;

Plate XXIII.
Zizima, 370.

THE ABERDEEN UNIVERSITY PRESS LIMITED

HOME USE

CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT
MAIN LIBRARY

This book is due on the last date stamped below.
1 -month loans may be renewed by calling 642-3405.
6-month loans may be recharged by bringing books

to Circulation Desk.
Renewals and recharges may be made 4 days prior

to due date.

ALL BOOKS ARE SUBJECT TO RECALL 7 DAYS
AFTER DATE CHECKED OUT.

FEB 16 1975 1 8 ~

REG, cm JAN
APR 8 1976

- .

• '

JH13-81

LD21— A-40m-i2,'74 General Library

(S2700L) University of California

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Luke the physician and other studies in the history of religion"

See other formats