OF mctr^^ 
 
 '!^mi stwv^ 
 
 Division I^) S Z 3S 5 
 Section . . C' 
 
SICIAN 
 
 TORY OF RELIGION 
 
[* APR 8 19 
 
 Division „ J 
 
 C 
 
 Section 
 
5ICIAN 
 
 ^ORY OF RELIGION 
 
^^ 
 
 ^E/« 
 
 Division ^ 
 Section . ; 
 
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, 12s. 
 
 St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. 8vo, 
 los. 6d. 
 
 The Cities of St. Paul. Illustrated. 8vo, 12s. 
 
 Pauline and other Studies. Svo, 125. 
 
 A Historical Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to 
 the Galatians. With Maps. Svo, 12s. 
 
 Letters to the Seven Churches and their Place in the 
 Plan of the Apocalypse. Illustrated. Svo, 12s. 
 
 Was Christ Born at Bethlehem? A Study in the 
 Credibility of St. Luke. Crown Svo, 5s. 
 
 The Education of Christ: Hill-side Reveries. Crown 
 Svo, 25. 6d. 
 
 Impressions of Turkey. Crown Svo, 6s. 
 
 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 Svo, 5s. 
 The Romance of Elisavet. Crown Svo, 5s. 
 
 London: HODDER & STOUGHTON. 
 
PLATE XXII. 
 
 Old Turkish Art : the Door of the SirtchaU Mosque in Konia. 
 Frontispiece. See'p. 185. 
 
LUKE THE PHYSICIAN 
 
 AND OTHER STUDIES IN THE 
 HISTORY OF RELIGION 
 
 I* Arn o 1909 
 
 '^;^r, — r**T , 
 
 W. M. RAMSAY, Kt., Hon. D.C.L., etc. 
 
 W/TH THIRTY-EIGHT ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 I 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON 
 
 3 & 5 WEST EIGHTEENTH ST 
 
 1908 
 
THE ABERDEEN UNIVERSITY PRESS LIMITED 
 
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 
 
vi Preface 
 
 dvpa 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, 1908. 
 
CONTENTS 
 I 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Luke the Physician i 
 
 II 
 
 The Oldest Written Gospel 69 
 
 III 
 
 Asia Minor : the Country and its Religion , .103 
 
 IV 
 
 The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire . 141 
 
 V 
 
 The Peasant God : the Creation, Destruction and 
 
 Restoration of Agriculture in Asia Minor . 169 
 
 VI 
 
 The Religion of the Hittite Sculptures at Boghaz- 
 
 Keui . . . 199 
 
 VII 
 
 The Morning Star and the Chronology of the Life 
 
 OF Christ 217 
 
 vii 
 
vlii Contents 
 
 VIII 
 
 PAGE 
 
 A Criticism of Recent Research regarding the New 
 
 Testament ........ 247 
 
 IX 
 
 The Historical Geography of the Holy Land . .267 
 
 X 
 
 St. Paul's Use of Metaphors drawn from Greek and . 
 
 Roman Life 283 
 
 XI 
 
 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. • . • • • -33^ 
 
 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 
 
 XI. 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 . . . . . • iS^ 
 
 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 Gk»ddess 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 . . . . . . -33° 
 
 8. Christian Architectural Decoration on the Grave of a 
 
 Physician at Nova Isaura ..... 330 
 
 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 
 
 11. Christian Architectural Decoration and Church Screen 
 
 on the Grave of a Bishop at Nova Isaura, a.d. 300 379 
 
xiv Illustrations 
 
 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, /or " 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. 
 
I. 
 
 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,^ " 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.- Modern criticism for a time entered on its task 
 with a decided negative. Its mind was made up, and it 
 
 ^Lukas der Artzt der Verfasser des dritten Evangeliums ttnd 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. 
 
 '^The bearing of this question is discussed in the opening paper of the 
 writer's Pauline Studies, 1906. 
 
 (3) 
 
4 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,^ 
 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 
 
 ^ 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 McGiffert's argu- 
 ments on the Acts." 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. Hobart^ and Mr. Hawkins"* have been thor- 
 oughly used by the Author. He mentions that Mr. Haw- 
 
 ^ In the Theologische Literaturzeitung (edited by himself and Professor 
 Schiirer), 7th July, 1906, p. 404. 
 
 2 The review is republished in Pauline Studies, 1906, p. 321. 
 ^Medical Language of St, Luke, Dublin, 1882. 
 *Horae Synopticae, 1899. 
 
6 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 " 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 Schiirer, 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 ; 
 
lo 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 ii 
 
 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/ 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^pL<i, Acts xxvii. 10, 21), "the barbarians," ^ 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 
 
 ^St. Paul the Traveller, pp. 21, 205 ff. 
 
 "^ 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,! 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 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. loi) of Luke's Paulinism, i.e.^ 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^ 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. 
 
 ^Christ Born in Bethlehem, p. 74 ff. 
 
14 I- Luke 
 
 But, with this qualification, the passage on p. loo 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- 
 102 — 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.^ 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. 
 
 ^ 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 {Idaaro), but Luke is not said to have healed the 
 invalids who came afterwards. They received medical 
 treatment {iOepaTrevovro), The latter verb is translated 
 
the Physician 17 
 
 *' cured " in the English Version ; and Professor Harnack 
 agrees. Now in the strict sense idepairevovro, 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 Idaaro, 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) ^ is advanced in 
 St. 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 - 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. 11), 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. 
 
 ^ In 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 aSeK<p6s might signify "cousin," and it might 
 indicate close friendship and intimacy (St. 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. 2 1 (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,^ 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 
 
 ^At 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.i But we must remember that the first of the Hst, 
 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 
 
 ^ Ein 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 suflficiently 
 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.^ 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. 
 
2 2 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. i8 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.^ 
 
 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. 
 
 ^ 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. II, 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. -Lt^ke 
 
 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 
 McGiff"ert'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. ^ 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 St, 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. \6)} 
 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-ii, 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 
 
 ^ 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. 2-1 1. 
 
 On p. 106 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.^ This seems 
 such a commonplace in English study, that I felt obliged to 
 
 1 Worauf, soviel ich mich erinnere, bisher noch nie aufmerksdm gcmacht 
 warden ist. . . . Erst Lukas hat sie [i.e., Frauen] so stark in die evangelische 
 Geschichte eingefiihrt. 
 
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, wk, 
 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," ^ 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 
 
 ^Die Ueber liefer ting en von Jesus, die bei Markus und Lukas vorliegen, 
 sind alter als man gcwohnlich annitnmt. Das macht sie nicht glaubwurdiger, 
 ist aber dochfur ihre Kritik nicht gleichgultig. 
 
 ^The Author dates Luke's History a.d. 8r, For a different reason I argued 
 that Luke iii. ii was written under Titus, 79-81 (St. Paul the Traveller, p. 387). 
 
the Physician 2i2i 
 
 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.^ The flaws can be distinguished, but the 
 marvel is that they are so {q.^^ 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, 
 
 ^ 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. 
 
 3 
 
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 Macedonian ^ 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. 11, 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.^ 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, 
 " 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. Paid 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 irapaarjfKo ALocrKovpoi,<i, 
 " 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, 
 w y]v rfrapd<T7]fjiov AioaKovpcov, which is Greek so unidiomatic 
 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 vi^hich 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-ii (z>., 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 "} 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 
 
 ^ 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.^ 
 
 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 thepre- 
 
 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 ii. i-io. Luke v. 17-24. 
 
 1. And when Reentered 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 Jud-ea 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 finding 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 " {nrapdXvTLKo'i) into the participle ** a man that was 
 palsied" {irapaXeXvixevo^), and so on. He substituted the 
 better Greek word K\ivlStov for the vulgar Kpa^arrov. 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,^ and let the sick man down through 
 the hole {hnpluvium) 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 
 
 ^ He imitates even the Latin usage, which used the term " the tiles " 
 (tegulcE) to indicate the roof. 
 
 ^St. 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 " (/cat) — 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 a:ttention 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".^ 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, ^^^ ^^e 
 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.^ He believed, 
 
 1 Pauline and other Studies, p. 198. 
 ^Christ Born at Bethlehem, Chap. IV. 
 4 
 
50 I. 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. 
 
 1 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 ; 1 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). 
 
 \, Hierosolyma occurs only four times in the Third Gos- 
 pel,2 always very definitely in a geographical sense, while 
 
 ^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. 
 
 n. Passages peculiar to Luke : name Jerusalem occurs in 
 Luke ii. five times; Luke x. 30; in xiii. three times; xvii. 
 II ; xix. II ; xxiii. 28 ; xxiv., five times. 
 
 III. Passages common to Luke with Matthew or Mark, 
 or both : — 
 
 uk€ 
 
 ; iv. 9. 
 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 Mt. 
 
 
 The holy city 
 
 
 V. 17. 
 
 
 M 
 
 Mt, 
 
 Mk. 
 
 omit. 
 
 
 vi. 17. 
 
 
 >> 
 
 
 
 Hierosolyma. 
 
 
 ix. 31. 
 
 
 >J 
 
 
 
 omit. 
 
 
 ix. 51. 
 
 
 » 
 
 
 
 » 
 
 
 ix. S3. 
 
 
 » 
 
 
 
 » 
 
 
 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.^ 
 
 IV. In Acts i.-xii., xv., Jerusalem occurs twenty-five times, 
 Hierosolyma six times. 
 
 ^The 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- 
 ceBSOr. 
 
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. 
 81-8. 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 Lake 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.^ 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 rrust 
 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 tha: 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 " ^ 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 : — 
 
 ' " A man sick of the palsy " in the Authorised Version. 
 ^ 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 ? ^ 
 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. yy). 
 
 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,^ seems to lie even more in the evolu- 
 tion of the thought of a striking modern personality, z/zk, 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 
 ^See above p. lo. 
 
6o 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 ttjv 
 'AvTiox^iav Kal ^vpiav is proved to be a Lukan usage (as if 
 any one could doubt this) by comparison with the totally 
 different sense of /cara in Acts ii. 10, Ai,^vr}<; t^<? Kara Kvprjvrjv. 
 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 oi irpea-- 
 ^vrepoi aB€\<f)OL is the easy reading and ol irpea-^vTepou kuX 
 Oi aSe\<j)ol 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 
 airayyeWecv (which is found in verse 27) is used by Luke 
 twenty-five times, by Mark only twice, and John twice ?i 
 What reason does this give for thinking that the Apostles 
 could not use the word? Paul uses it twice, the Epistle 
 
 ^ There are some textual differences on this point. Moulton and Geden 
 give it five times in Mark, three times in John. 
 
the Physician 6i 
 
 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 a.TTocnkXKw ; 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 sufificient 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 
 
 strative 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. 11 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 KaOijyjrev, 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 (KaOrjyjrev) ? 
 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 correspondent ^ 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 Iczvis, 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 
 ^ 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, ro fiev yevofi a>v 
 Toiv dir' 'AvTiox€ca<i. In St. Paul the Traveller^ p. 389, I 
 
 5 
 
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. i8, mentions Nearchos, son of Androtimos, 
 TO r^evo'i fiev Kp-q^ 6 Neapxo<i, wicee he ev 'A/x^'iTToXet rfj iirl 
 ^TpvfjbovL (compare Bui/. 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, r^kvet Tlpv/jivrjaeov'i,^ 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 W.pvixvf\aiovs 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., Karea-Keovacrav for KareaKevaffav, where 01; must be regarded 
 as a representation of the sound of W. In npvtJ.vr)<reovs 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 IIpvfjbvr]craev<; oIkwv iv ^OXvf^iro) (Cities and Bisk, of 
 Phr., ii., p. 471), or more formally after the analogy of C.I.G. 
 2686 {oLKi^crei fiev M.elXt^cno'^, (pvaet Be 'Ia<Ttv<i). Josephus, 
 Ant., XX., 7, 2, speaks of Simon resident in Caesareia Stratonis 
 as 'louBalov, Kvirpiov he 76V09. 
 
 The form ctTro 'O^vpuyx^cff, 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., ^AXoiv7)<i, K(ofMovo<;, 
 AiovvcTiov, Twv airo 'O^vpvyx^^ 7roA,eft)9, Grenfell and Hunt, 
 Oxyr. No. 48, 49. 
 
 The form tmv airb is also used in a way different from 
 the last example, equivalent to e'/c rcoi/, e.g., vtto Ne^epiro^ 
 TMv diro Me/jLipeo)^, Greek Papyri Br. Mus. p. 32 (Nepheris 
 was resident in Memphis) ; compare also Kda-Topo<i . . . 
 T(bv aTTo K(o/ji,r]<; 'A/c.(i)p€(0<; fcaTayetvofi6v[^ovY ev Kcofir) Mvd')(^ei, 
 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 rwv diro, e.g., He^rjpo'; twv diro Trj<i 
 dvwdev ^pvyla'i, 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 
 
 ^ wt in pap., corrected to [ov] 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. 2i8) ; 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 rwi/ airo is also used in the sense of 
 " descended from a person," e.g., rwv arrr' "ApBvo<i 'HpaKXeiScov 
 {Bull. Corr. Hell., 1892, p. 218), "of the Heracleids descended 
 from Ardys," the Lydian king. 
 
 Frankel, Inschr. Perg., i., p. 170, takes the phrase appended 
 to a royal letter, ' AO'r)va<^bpa<^ e'/c Uepyd/xov, 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 oi 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 
 
 (71) 
 
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.^ 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 
 
 ^ 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. 
 
 "^Spruche 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-I02 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 O 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 
 
^6 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. 5 Iff.). 
 
 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 "j^j 
 
 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 for 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,! 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 
 ^ The Author holds the same opinion. 
 
78 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, I2l). 
 
 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 
 ^ 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,^ the 
 ^See above, pp. 47, 4, 32. 
 
Written Gospel 
 
 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 W. 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 to to 
 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} 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, i.e.y 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 11. 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, i.e., 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 sufificient 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.y 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<5, 29) : in 
 this it is already implied, as is said in Luke xvii. 21, that 
 " 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 beingjustified by the spirit of wisdom 
 (section 15, 12). The revelation by the Son is the only and 
 Liecessary 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 25); 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 ^"j 
 
 regards the chance of Mark's pubh'cation 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 
 
 Q? 
 
 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 jiot 
 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 
 57.^ 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, vis.^ 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 1 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.^ 
 
 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 ".^ 
 We should also be disposed to think that the expressions 
 used in Acts xv. lO-ii, 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 
 ■npavs and raireiySs, or irpavrrts and Tatreivo<ppo(T\)vri), that Paul knew this Saying 
 (whether from the Collection of Sayings or from oral information). 
 
Written Gospel 95 
 
 passage of Matthew.^ 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.^ 
 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. 
 
 ^ 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. 
 
 ^ The Author does not mention thjs 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 ^ 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 
 
 ^ Notably my friend, Rev. Willoughby C. Allen, in his edition of the first 
 Gospel. 
 
Written Gospel 97 
 
 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."^ 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." ^ 
 
 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- 
 
 ^ 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. 
 
 7 
 
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.^ 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 
 ^ 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 mediseval) 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 io-v^ 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 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. 
 
lOO 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 loi 
 
 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 ; ^ 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- 
 
ft' 
 
 ffie 
 
 
 'i 
 
 / 1^1 
 
 1 
 
 K 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 K 
 
 
 lifli 
 
 i 
 
 "'< 
 
 
 / 
 
 fl 
 
 I 
 
 
 ^ § 
 
 1 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 h' ""' '^B 
 
 t 
 
 } 
 
 
 m ' 
 
 \^ 
 
 i he t^ass icauiiig cu iJurylaion (from the window ol a Railway Carriage) 
 PLATE II. 
 
 To face p. io6. 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.^ 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.^ 
 
 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.^ 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 
 
 ^ There is a fifth stream, Orgas, which rises some miles south-west of 
 Celasnae in a different range of hills. The whole series of fountains and 
 names is described in Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, chap. xi. 
 
 ^The name/ontes 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. 
 
CJ 
 
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.^ 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 
 
 ^A 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 ; ^ 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 Masander, and scattering before their first charge the 
 Turkish army drawn up on the further bank to prevent their 
 crossing;^ 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. 
 
 ^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. i 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 
 
 ^Studies in the History ajid Art of the Eastern Roman Provinces, p. 235 ff. 
 
112 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.^ 
 
 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 
 i^gean 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. 
 
 ^ 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.) 
 
 8 
 
114 ^^^' ^^^^ 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 1 1 5 
 
 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 
 Romani 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 
 
ii6 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 
 
■^ 
 
 m^ 
 
 -m-i- 
 
 ^-^.^•^ 
 
 ''0^X. 
 
 -**, 
 
 The Rock and Castle of Sivri-Hissar. 
 PLATE VI. 
 
 To face p. ii6. 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 1 07 1 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,^ 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 
 
 ' 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.^ 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 modem 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 about' 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, 
 
 ^ On the two routes see " Roads and Travel " (Hastings' Diet. Bib., v., 390). 
 
120 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 
 

 "<. 
 
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 w^hich 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.^ 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 
 
 iS^. 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. Asm 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.^ 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 thQ 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- 
 
 ^ Journal of Hell. Sttid., 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.^ 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 ^ — 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. 
 
 ^ It 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 in. 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.^ 
 
 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.^ Characteristic 
 
 ^ 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 AnatoHan 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 " (yonrnal 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,^ 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 ^ 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- 
 
 ^ 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 dov/n 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 
 of 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, 
 it 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 
 
 9 
 
130 in. 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.^ 
 
 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 
 modem 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.^ The male element in the divine nature was recog- 
 
 ^ 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 Cotmtry 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.^ 
 
 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 
 
 ^ This subject is treated more fully in Pauline and other SUidies, 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,^ 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 
 
 ^ St. 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 ^ prominent peaks and 
 lofty mountains was everywhere an object of popular vener- 
 ation. Elsewhere the writer has repeatedly alluded to this 
 subject,^ 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. 
 
 ^ See especially the Cities of St. Paul, p. 389, and Plates XL, XV. 
 
PLATE XI. 
 
 Rock-tomb in Phrygia : Roman period : Christian Arcosolia of later period in the 
 
 rock beneath. 
 Tofacep.12,6. See p. 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.^ 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,^ the ancient AkroSnos, 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.i 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 "? 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. 
 ^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 Caesarea 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.i 
 
 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 
 
 ' See above, p. io6, and Pauline and other Studies, p. 385 f. 
 
140 III. Asia Minor: The Country andits 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 XL 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 ElVIPIRE. 
 
 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.^ 
 
 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, 
 
 ^Address on behalf of Section VL (Church History) delivered to the final 
 general meeting of the Congress of Historical Sciences, Berlin, 12th August, 
 1908. It was shortened in delivery by the omission of many sentences 
 or clauses. 
 
 (143) 
 
144 ^^' ^^^ 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,^ 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 Dev Religions/revel 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 CEcumenical 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 
 
 10 
 
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 has never 
 been very favourable. It has never played the part in pre- 
 serving the ancient classical literature that the Latin 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,^ 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 
 
 ^ 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 HoU has published a con- 
 vincing argument to this effect in Hertnes, 1908, p. 240 ff. 
 
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 Christian ^ 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 
 
 ^ 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 " ^ 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 (^^copeTriaKOTroi). 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 modem 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.^ 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^ 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.^ 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.^ 
 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 Caesarea we learn 
 that as early as A.D. 370 a city church in Cappadocia was 
 
 ^ On the Isaurian masons see an important paper by Professor Hell in 
 Hermes, 1908, p. 242, and in this volume XII., No. 10-12. 
 
 "^ See below, p. 352. 
 
 ^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 
 
 cilready 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 Jiieron 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^ 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,^ 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. 
 
 ^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. ^ 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. 
 
 ^ 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,^ 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 
 
 ^ On 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.^ 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- 
 
 ^ 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,^ 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- 
 ^ 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.^ 
 
 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 v/as 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. 
 
 ^ 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, 
 
 y*'aM>,.'HbrfT 
 
 ''^*^^^ — 
 
 Church and Memorial Chapel of Leo on the Summit of the Kara-Dagh. 
 PLATE XV. 
 
 
 Church on the Summit of the Kara-Dagh : Apt-e 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.^ 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 
 
 ^ 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.^ 
 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 
 
 * 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 from the inside: 
 
 on the left is the Wall of the South Chamber of Narthex. 
 To face p. 160. 
 
in the Byzantine Empire i6i 
 
 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 
 
 II 
 
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 
 aUied 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. ^ 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 
 ^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.^ 
 
 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 
 ' 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,^ 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. 
 
V. 
 
 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.^ 
 
 [The following words, published a year after this article appeared in the 
 Co7itemporary 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 Coit- 
 
 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,^ 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 Railvi'ay: 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 [igo5: 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 eifect. Advance beyond 
 Bulgurlar implies an energetic eifort 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 
 ^ 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,^ 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. xs^.\ 
 
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 ".1 
 
 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 j 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.'^ The god shown in the sculpture at 
 
 ^ Miss Ramsay in Studies in the Art and History of the Eastern Roman 
 Provinces (Hodder & Stoughton, igo6), 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 filled with the gladness of the loud- 
 laughing water and the promise of fertility and growth and 
 prosperous husbandry. The Anatolian mind was generally 
 filled 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 ^ — 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 
 
 ^"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 xeligious 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 bums 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,! 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. 
 
 ^ 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 
 
i8o 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. ^ 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.^ 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 
 
 ^ 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. 
 
 "^ See in the present volume, p. 116. 
 
Agriculture in Asia Minor i8i 
 
 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.^ 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. 1 300 ; 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 
 
 ^ I 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.^ 
 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 ; ^ " 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 
 
 ^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 ff. ; 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,^ 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 which alone trade and communication 
 were kept up between the cities, required shelter at night 
 and protection from the nomads. The cities were islets iri 
 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 ^ 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. 
 
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.^ 
 
 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 
 
 ' 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. 
 
IQO 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 fighting against Christianity. ^ 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 
 
 ^ 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. 
 
 ifM-^ 
 
 Zazadin Khan near Konia. 
 
 See 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 
 
 13 
 
194 ^- ^^^ 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 magazine^ 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 ;^I50, 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 Blackwood'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. Pauly 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,^ 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). 
 
 ^Studies in the History of the Eastern Provinces, p. 319: ev t](? 5t7ry]A(jD. 
 On p. 349, I mentioned another restoration t]^ ^nri)[p(f 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 $nr{ip(f> 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 ^ 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- 
 
 ^ Archaic Artemisia of Ephesus, p. 173. 
 (201) 
 
202 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 Bogkaz-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.i 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.^ 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 
 
 ^ 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 ^I- '^^ 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 ^ in the narrow passage opposite the 
 most mysterious and perhaps the most sacred figures of the 
 whole to be Amazons. 
 
 ^ 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. 
 
 ^ I 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.] 
 
2o6 VI. The Religion of 
 
 One of the central ideas in the reh'gion 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- 
 padocia^ both the husbandman-god and the bearded king 
 wear earrings ; so also did Lydian men.^ 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,^ and M. 
 Perrot rightly comes to the conclusion that it must repre- 
 sent the high priest ; and we can easily recognise in it the 
 
 ^ See above, p. 174. 
 
 ^Xenophon, 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.^ 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. 9 10 
 
 Now Z is 7 feet 3 inches long, and the 
 
 8 I I Z 
 
 adjoining block, 1 1, is 5 feet 9 inches long, ' ' 
 
 so that these two exactly fill up the right 7 | [ ii 
 
 side of the entrance way. It is remark- 
 
 •' Fig. 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 
 
 ^ 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 Hit tit e 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.^ 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).^ 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 
 
 ^[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 Travattx, etc., vol. xiv.] 
 
 * Perrot, pis. 50, 51. 
 
 14 
 
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.^ It is evidently the 
 NLK'rj(f)6po<i Bed of an inscription of Comana (Journ. PhiloL, 
 
 iQne 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.^ 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, 11. 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 Essays, 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 
 
 ^ 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 ^ 
 . . . 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. 
 
 i[The preponderance of the female element in hieratic representations, 
 alike at Ephesus and at Boghaz-Keui, is noteworthy.] 
 
 "^ [Mr. Smith compares the position of the hand grasping the chain with a 
 statuette published by Chantre, Mission en Cappadoce, p. 151.] 
 
214 VI- '^^^ 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 Joum. Hell. Stud., 1882, pp. 40-46. 
 
the Hittite 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 Tr)v IlTepLTjv, rrjv 'Eifjea-Lijv, 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. 28, and the first part of the article 
 here reprinted ; also above, p. 127.] 
 
p€PC0@\ACC0O 
 
 \OJNlA InOCaI 
 )ony| CIO 
 
 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 
 
 ' 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. ^ 
 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, and.regarded 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 out^ 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 VI I. 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. Th^ reasoning in 
 
 15 
 
2 26 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 in[and 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 Star^ 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 
 ^This is emphasised below, p. 1231. 
 
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.i 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. 
 
 ^ 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 
 rii no(rxa 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.! 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 f., 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. y^, 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.^ Some of the 
 early Fathers, who were uninterested in and careless of 
 chronological exactness, are responsible for this misinter- 
 pretation,^ 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 
 
 ^ See the article on " Days, Months, Hours " in Hastings' Dictionary of the 
 Bible, vol. v. 
 
 '■^ 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 
 bom 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 
 
 ^ A date later than 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} 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 ^ thereafter occurred 
 the Passover on 21st 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 
 
 ^ There is some controversy as to the incidence of Sabbatical years ; but 
 the view which Colonel Mackinlay takes seems to be the right one. 
 
 ^ 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 flf. ; 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,^ must have occurred 
 ^ See above, p. 228, 
 
238 VII. The Morning Star 
 
 the incident mentioned by Matthew xiv. 14 fif., 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, ix., 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 ^ 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 ". 
 
 ^ 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 diflficulties 
 (which it is needless to state here). This agreement of the 
 two authorities ^ 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 EUas or one of the prophets. He then 
 
 ' 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. 31-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. A.nd 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 ; ^ 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. lO-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,^ 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 ^ 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. 
 
 ''Luke alone says "on the next day " after the Transfiguration. 
 
 ^ Except once the expression " openly " : see above, heading 2. 
 
 16 
 
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.^ 
 
 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."^ 
 
 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 ; 
 
 ^ 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 may be 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- 
 bihty 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. 
 
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. y^ 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. ^ 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 cind 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, 11, 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 VIII, ^ 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 Tubinger, 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 
 
Recefit 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 ? I'hese 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 modem 
 
256 VIII. y^ 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 ' 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 
 
 17 
 
258 VIII. y^ 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. Sanday 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 oi reverence for old ideas, which may perhaps 
 be transcended, but which discharged a very important 
 function in their day ; 
 
 " 2. In a spirit oi 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 mind {ox the real extent of this significance.^ 
 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. ^ 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. San day 
 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 formulas 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. ^ 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 chan^^ 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 lo 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 
 1 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. ^ 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 Csesar, 
 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. 41). 
 
 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,^ one 
 uses the personal form. 
 
 1 In Platonic language, it is hXr\Q^% S(J|o, but not iiriar-fifxri. 
 
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 Hke 
 " 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 -i^ji 
 
 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 "/cat o-u. 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, 
 Xalpe ' %at/3e Kol <tv, ?>., " Farewell," " Fare-thou-well 
 also". Again we read that " ' thou hast finished ' is a com- 
 mon epitaph ". But the verb reXevrao) 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, ovZel'^ dOdvaTo<;, 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 163,^ are epitaphs containing the common and typical 
 
 Christian formula, evdaZe KeiraL, Here lies ; while 
 
 Waddington 2459 ^^' ^^ ^^^ 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 1897 is also almost certainly Christian ; the name Domi- 
 tilla is one of the most interesting of early Christian names. 
 The formula Odpa-et, Be of good cheer, which often precedes 
 ouSet? dddvaro^;, 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 ".^ It is quite probable that the phrase was 
 adopted from pagan epitaphs ^ by the Christians, as many 
 
 ^ 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. 
 
 2In 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. 
 
 2 [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.] 
 
 18 
 
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 /iera iravra Ta(<^09), 
 After all things a tomb; but on the analogy of common 
 formulae, such as 6 ySto? ravra, Life is — this, I should prefer 
 fjiera irdvra Ta{vTa), After all — this.^ 
 
 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.'^ 
 
 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- 
 
 ^ 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, elSws Srt rh re\os v/xwy tov filov 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 ravra in a line by itself: "So much". 
 
 ^ I 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 H., 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 steamer^ 
 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 
 
 iQn p. 119 there is a harshness of expression. The steamer is saihng 
 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 ^ 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 
 
 ^ 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 'iTovpoTioi 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 j 
 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,^ 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 
 
 ^For example, if in a.d, i860 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. 
 
28o 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.^ I may however say 
 that, if a fuller discussion of the subject were possible, I 
 should take exception to Professor Smith's fundamental con- 
 
 ^ 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 /SaiToAot for 
 jSeruAoi (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 Caesarea, 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, 33, 
 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 ^ 
 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. ^ 
 
 ^ " Three " on p. 28, " two " on p. 29, by a natural variation in the 
 thought. 
 
 ^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. 
 
X. 
 
 ST. PAUL'S USE OF METAPHORS FROM 
 GREEK AND ROMAN LIFE. 
 
X. 
 
 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. SL 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." ^ 
 
 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," Xoyi^ojjbaL ; 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 ^ 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 
 (/erre expensuni and acceptum referre\ whereas Xofyi^ofiai is 
 
 ^Howson, p. 131, ^St. Paul the Traveller, p. 149. 
 
 ^ otpfiAfTiis, o<pfl\7)fia, four 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, 11, 22, 24, 
 ix. 8 ; 2 Cor. v. 19, xii. 6 ; 2 Tim. iv. 16, Xoyl^ofiai means 
 "reckon to the credit of". It means " reckon to the debit" 
 (iraXiv, 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. 11 ; Hebr, xi. 19.^ 
 
 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 pastur^e, 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. 11, 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 ; 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.^ 
 
 He is specially fond of expressing this idea of the Divine 
 power making and moulding the mind of man through a 
 
 ^ See Rev. Griffith Thomas in Expository Times, 1906, p. 211 ; Sanday and 
 Headlam on Romans iv. 3. 
 
 ^ See Cities of St. Paul, Pt. I., § II., where this idea was worked out sub- 
 sequently in a fuller way. 
 
288 X. SL 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 cv^div and affXeay) 
 might refer to any common athletic sport, but are probably 
 to be generally understood of the race-course : ^ 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, ^ 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. 
 
 2 rhy KuKhv aywva riydvitTfiai • rhv Zp6fiov TfTfKeKa • tV iriaTiv Ter})pr)Ka, 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," ^ 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 d6\r]aL<; (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,^ 
 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. 
 
 ^ ayuvi^ov rhv KaXhv aywva ttjs irla'Teais . 
 2 1 assume here the point touched on in the following paper, 
 19 
 
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 ; 1 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 s''.roundings 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. Si. 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.^ 
 
 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 
 Maccabsean rebellion (2 Mace. iv. 12-14). 
 
 2 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, ^ 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 ". 
 
 ^ Letters to the Seven Churches, ch. xiii. 
 
294 ^- •^^- 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 veryjfrequent, 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. Paul, 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.i 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 TertulHan was 
 mainly influential in devising a Latin expression for the 
 Greek Christian theology. 
 
 The whole of Dean Howson's discussion of architectural 
 
 ^ The statistics refer to the Greek words otKoS6fj.os and oiKoSofieu. He uses 
 once the word apxtreKruf, which is rendered " builder " (i Cor. iii. lo). 
 
296 X. SL 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 Lightfoot 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 ; " v^^e were the soldiers who march behind him in his triumph," as 
 the soldiers of the victorious army always did. 
 
298 X. SL 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. 
 
XL 
 
 THE DATE AND AUTHORSHIP OF THE 
 EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 
 
XI. 
 
 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," ^ 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 
 
 ^ 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 Lnot been guided and stimu- 
 lated by his earlier series of papers.^ While writing the 
 present article, I have also had before me his more recent 
 articles,'-^ 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).^ 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 studiet' 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 — 
 
 ^ 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 XI. The Date and Authorship of 
 
 that the Epistle to the Hebrews was finished in the 
 month of April or May, A.D. 59/ 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.^ 
 
 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 ".^ 
 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. 
 
 " McGiifert, Apostolic Age, p. 468, who gives a clear r^sum6 of the argu- 
 ments of Pfleiderer, Van Soden, etc., on this side. 
 
 20 
 
3o6 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." 1 
 
 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 '^ 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. 
 
 ^ 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, 11 ; 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 
 
 o 
 
 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. 
 
 ^ McGiffert, p. 46 f. 
 
3o8 XI. 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 "} 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 ar^air-q. Surely the writers who employ that argument 
 were writing, not with the eye on the Greek text, but with 
 a modem 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 {a'ydirrj). 
 
 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 
 ^ McGiffert, 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;^ 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 
 
 "^Church in Rom. Empire, pp. lo, 318 f. 
 
3IO XI. The Date and Authorship of 
 
 was not written by Paul. Origen's opinion, " every one com- 
 petent to judge of language must admit that the style is not 
 that of St. Paul," ^ 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- 
 ^ Westcott, 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. 
 
 41). 
 
 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.i 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.'-^ 
 
 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, 
 
 ' 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. 
 
 ^ Oi apxouoi HvSpfs : 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, dc Pud. 20)". That 
 is a third century statement, and Dr. McGiffert himself concedes that the 
 Pauline connection has second century authority. 
 
312 XI. 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. \2} 
 
 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 
 
 ii. 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.^ This indication of their position 
 must be combined with another. 
 
 " They were addressed separately from their leaders." ^ 
 This remarkable fact has not as a rule been suflficiently 
 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 
 
 1 Westcott, 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 
 ' Westc tt, p. 451, quoting Theodoret. 
 
314 XI. 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 rjr^oviJievoL. 
 
 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.y 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.^ 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. 
 
3i6 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 (01 amo 
 'T?(jii}i7]^ or the like) ; ^ hence " 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 theory 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).! 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- 
 1 St. Paul the Traveller, p. 287, compare p. 264. 
 
3i8 XL The Date and AtUhorship 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 Caesarean 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) ^ 
 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 ^ 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 
 
 ^ 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 Lecttires, 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, Judceos ivipulsore Chresto assidue 
 tumulttiantes, 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 XI. 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/ 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.^ 
 
 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.^ 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,* 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 
 
 ^ On the year, see below. "^ Tacitus, Hist., i. 31. 
 
 ^ See p. 309. ^ 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.^ In this interval the Italian 
 pilgrims, 01 airo ^lTaXia<i, 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, 
 
 21 
 
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 view^ 
 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 
 
 ^ 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 Caesarea 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,^ 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 XL 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. 11, vi. 9, ii. 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 ^ 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. 
 
 (i) The Jewish nationality of the writer seems as certain 
 as that of the readers : Mr. Milligan, on p. 16 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,^ 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 Caesarea. 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- 
 
 ^ One can hardly accept Mr. Lewis's interpretation of S«o j3pox««»' (Heb. 
 xiii.) as " in snatches " during brief interviews. 
 
326 XL 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," ^ 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,^ . ; . 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;^ 
 
 l^ 
 
 >> 
 
 Heb. X. 30; 
 
 
 
 
 
 43 
 
 )> 
 
 Rom. 
 
 XV. 
 
 10 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 
 43 
 
 )) 
 
 Heb. 
 
 i. 6. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ Westcott, p. Hi. 
 
 2 Hebrews viii. ii, " from the least to the greatest ". Mr. Lewis says that no 
 similar expression occurs in the Epistles of Paul. 
 
 ^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<^ecri9, 
 '* forgiveness of sins," in Hebrews ix. 22, x. 1 8 ; Ephesians 
 i. 7; Colossians i. 14, and in the defence, Acts xxvi. 18, 
 etc. ; ^ 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- 
 
 ^ 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. 
 
 A Y P A M N AI\«W|llli|| PAY KYTATH N ©YrATEPAAieNeNKGYCAN 
 II APGG NeiAKAl4>lA€PriA AY POPtCTl A NO C 1< Y PO Y OTIATHP 
 
 4^ _ ^O^ 
 
 Fig. 6. — The Dove in the Art of Isaura (see p. 385). 
 
XII. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF LYCAONIA IN THE 
 FOURTH CENTURY. 
 
AYP^AAelANA^I 
 ^ATTIC AC i TTl 
 TAZOHCXAP 
 Al43pONCON! 
 ArrCJKOlMH 
 IM/N H M-H C X A 
 
 Fig. 7. — The Cross in Lycaonian Ornamental Style (see p. 406). 
 
 ENeA^ErHK^TEXlAYPrrPlCKON/El HTPoNij 
 EoNTAElOXONHMkrlHlETTiETED EZMKONT 
 ANECTHCENA EA.Y>NTl MOG EO C ^ (oC 
 AYToYCYNTHlAlACYME)\^AAE2AlslAPIHTIK 
 
 Fig. 8. — The Fish in the Art of Isaura (see p. 403). 
 
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 ; ^ 
 
 ^ 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 contemporary 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 
 
 ZZ2> 
 
 
 Province 
 
 AFTER 
 A.D. 372. 
 
 1 .5 .g 
 
 S .-H , -S 
 
 ' C/5.S 
 
 a! J> 
 
 
 3 _ „ ^ 5 .^ - -.;§ - - -3 - -'3 
 
 - .S CO 
 •rt 3 
 
 1, S 
 s| 
 
 J3 
 
 .22 ^ 
 
 . CO 
 
 Province in 
 THE Third 
 Century. 
 
 •Z3 „ ^'x:: " -z! -^ .2 
 
 ;s'2 
 
 to bo 
 
 CO 
 
 Province in 
 St. Paul's Time. 
 
 = .2 = 
 1 1 
 
 rt ^ ^^ 42 
 
 t^ 0^ 
 
 rj CIS 
 
 :§> 
 
 CO 
 
 15 to 
 
 n 
 
 E « 
 
 t: <u 
 
 :SO i 
 
 CO 'S 
 
 S . CO 
 
 to tJ 
 
 .23 !2 rt 
 
 to n, _ 
 C <* 
 
 — z 
 •S3 gz 
 
 3-S ^--1 
 iJ cs rt •o 
 
 .:!-|§ 
 ,3 -> 
 
 ^ <^ 3 
 . "is 
 
 •-^ rt n. 
 
 "> V.' f « 
 
 15 5 "^ 
 
 Bishops 
 A.D. 381. 
 
 Amphilochius 
 
 Paulus 
 
 Darius 
 
 Cyrillus 
 
 Daphnus 
 
 Theodosius 
 
 Hilarius 
 
 Inzos (Inzas [?]) 
 
 Aristophanes 
 
 Leontius 
 
 Eustathius 
 
 Eugenius 
 Severus in 372 
 
 C/3 U-) 
 Pi N 
 ro 
 
 a . 
 £2 Q 
 
 Eulalius 
 
 Patricius 
 
 Theodorus 
 
 Cyrillus 
 
 Tiberius 
 
 Paulus 
 
 Stephanus 
 Theodorus ^ 
 
 Erechtius 
 Julius Eugenius 2 
 Academius 
 
 
 Iconium 
 
 Lystra 
 
 Misthia 
 
 Amblada 
 
 Vasada 
 
 Homonades 
 
 Ilistra 
 
 Laranda 
 
 Derbe and Possala 
 
 Barata 
 
 Hyde 
 
 Isaura Nova 
 
 Corua 
 
 Savatra 
 
 Perta 
 
 Canna 
 
 Egdaumava and Drya 
 
 Laodiceia 
 
 Pappa 
 
 Sinethandos 
 
 Isaura Palaia 
 
334 XII. The Church of Lycaonia 
 
 I. 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 Fourth Century 335 
 
 more rapidly, from Iconium than from the first centre in 
 Asian Phrygia {vis., 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.^ 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.^ 
 
 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 
 
 1 See Zeitschriftf. vgl. Sprach/orschung, N.F. viii., p. 382 f., and Oesterr. 
 Jahreshefte, 1905, Beiblatt, introd. to art. on " Later Phrygian Inscriptions " ; 
 also above, p. 146. 
 
 ^Cities and Bish. of Phr,, ii., pp. 526, 713. 
 
^;^6 XII. TAe Church of Lycaonia 
 
 according to a careful examination and argument ; ^ 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 greatly. 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 '}^2)1 
 
 in the earliest period. Certain individual epitaphs of 
 this class present various other features, which point to an 
 early date, and thus confi rm 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," ^ is of a later 
 period. It was imitated from the Latin hie j'acet, 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," ^ may 
 be regarded as a later development, and assigned to the end 
 of the fourth century and later. These classes of formula 
 
 * ivda or ivOdSe Ktlrai or KaraKfirai, 
 
 ^MdSe KfKolfiTirai, KCK^Sei/rai, iKoi/ji-fiBr) : the last is probably latest. 
 
 22 
 
^2,^ XII. TAe 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 " (0 ^ov\o<i tov 
 Qeov), 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 
 long. 
 
 II. 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, 1 905-6. 
 
 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 
 
 - , , t -e- to 
 
 .3 ^5^ c^ a. P aO 
 
 ? *& S :. « ^ ^ ^ b 'JSS 
 
 I §g^ cl-... t^S- |'°i "'"i'S 
 
 h "^ ?d: 
 
 tio 
 
 b^ M ►^ 'S O s ,^ P is t- ^ 53 .0 h ^ ^ £ c" rt P 00" 
 
 --'s ^c^ § . .- r^ ?-§ t=^ ^'i =^'3- 
 
 
 Q. f-H^3. ^60§ Sb ^KE.'^i 
 
 ^§ ^i^.^ X^^^ ^^CQ.^ t.^ I ^=^ 3-^g, ^t^g 
 
 ^bvf-H"Shb-y:i-J><i5eV :!'-« « iS^.g- 5j ^ s ^ -< &" 
 
 L. '(!>•" "o J!; 43 
 
 o ^ i c2 = "= > 
 
 ^ X:? ^^ Z *^ 
 
in the Fourth Century 341 
 
 renouncing the life of men (for a hermit's), I made 
 for myself sepulchral buildings {pelta) and a sarco- 
 phagus, on which ^ I caused to be engraved all 
 these afore-mentioned word«?, 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,^ 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 Gains (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. 
 ' On the importance of this fact, see Pauline and other Studies, p. 376. 
 
342 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.^ 
 
 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.^ 
 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.^ 
 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. 
 
 (i) 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 
 
 ^ 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 ^ to have governed Pisidia about this time. His date 
 is fixed by the fact that at Apameia he erected a monument 
 
 ^C.I.L., iii., 6807, 13661. 
 
in the Fourth 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 fn 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.i 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, Ik Oefie- 
 Xifov, so Eusebius tells that they were rebuilt e'/c ^ddpcov. As 
 Eugenius mentions the " adornment " or " equipment " {k6<t- 
 /io?) 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 "the splendid ornaments 
 of this temple " {ra rovhe tov veoD Trepi/caXki] Koafi-^fiaTo). 
 
 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 {irvXat) had been cut down with axes, 
 the holy books had been destroyed and the church had been 
 burned ; ^ but Paulinus built a new, much larger and more 
 magnificent church and series of constructions, surrounded 
 by a wider enclosing wall (vepi^oXo^). On the east side he 
 built a large and lofty entrance {irpoTrvXov), calculated to 
 attract the attention even of strangers and enemies, to 
 
 1 Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., x., 2, and the African donations, x., 6 (Calder). 
 ^ iveirvpicrav iv irvpl rh ayiaariipiov rov &iov. 
 
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.^ 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 {irpoirvXov) 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 (yao?, /3ao-tA,eto? otKo<i, tw? av ^aaiXisi) was 
 surrounded with porticoes {aroai) on both sides. In the 
 church the holy place {OvataorTtjptop) was partitioned off by 
 beautifully wrought wooden screens of lattice-work,^ 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.^ 
 
 ' (TToals Klocrty iravraxiBev eiraipo^ivais • Siv tk fnaa 5ia<ppdyfiaai ro7s airh 
 ^v\ov SiKTvcDToTs is rh (rv/j./j.eTpov ^iKOvffi fM'fiKOvs TrepLKKei(Tas. 
 
 ^Tots airh ^v\ov irepif<ppaTT€ Siktvois, els &Kpov iVTexvov \€iTOvpy(as e^ricTKr)- 
 fifpois, ws davfidcriov to7s 6pw<ri Tropexetj/ rijv deav. 
 
 3 Sechster vorldufige Bcricht, p. 28 ff. (Berlin, 1908 ; Anhang zu den 
 Abkandl. d. Akad.), 
 
34^ 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 {irpdirvXov), 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 /cez/xTfo-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.i 
 
 This 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 ^ 
 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 oi 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, irekrov, 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 — {hopara) ; and we are 
 reminded of the screens in churches of that period, on which 
 see especially No. 11. Snch. pelta, originally wooden, were 
 likely to be made also of stone, and to retain the old name. 
 
 ^See above, p. 153 ff. 
 
 2 It is translated and commented on by Bruno Keil in Strzygowski's 
 Kleinasitn ein Neuland der Kunstgesckichte, 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 paHsade 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.^ 
 
 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 
 
 ^ 0a0piK6v, (TvyKpov<TToy, ypdSot, 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 (CT-7rouSao-a9 aiTahXa- 
 yijvac) 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. 
 
 III. 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 ". 
 
352 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).^ 
 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 Atkanasii, etc., ^ 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 "} 
 
 The words of the Acta are only a turgid variation of the 
 terms used in the epitaph : the four classes of persons aided 
 
 ^ XOP^v optpavuu [^(veov Ta\ai]w(ipa)v apooyhs [NeVrap ? Sis ? ], 7rpe(r)8uTf [p]oy 
 rwy i[epa>v wa\(>)]iJ.iTwv fx-x- The name of the deceased is supplied conjectur- 
 ally, to show the construction. 
 
 ^Analecta Bolland,, xii., lo ff. (ed. Usener), a longer and earlier form ; Acta 
 Sand., August, iv., 499 f., a shorter but later form of the Acta. 
 
 ^ 6p<pavu)y avTiA-fiTTTicp, XVP^*' irirfpaCTnCTiis, Karairovovfjiivuv fiorjOSi, /col 
 
in the Fourth Century 353 
 
 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,^ 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 
 
 ^ The verb connected with avTiA^jTrraip 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. 
 
 23 
 
354 XII. The Church of Lycaonia 
 
 I found the inscription, twv '^epwv 'jrpa'y]ixdT(ov ; he compared 
 the words applied in ApostoL Const., ii., 35, to the priest, Stot- 
 Kr}Tr)<; ra)v CKKX'qcnacrrLKSiv irpa'^ixdroov. But this seems to 
 require in the inscription the use of a preposition eV/, 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 lepwv in 
 the one case is practically equivalent to eKKXrja-taa-TLK&v 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.^ 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,^ 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, 
 
 ^ Pauline and other Studies, pp. 118, 385. 
 " See above, p. 154. 
 
in the Fourth Century 355 
 
 ad Phil., 4 ; Epist. Clement, ad Jacob., 8 ; Apost. Const., iv., 2} 
 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 hiereiis. 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 
 
 ^ 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.^ 
 
 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,^ but often not one 
 
 ^ 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. 
 
 ' These ministers are defined as subdeacons in the Benedictine annotation. 
 The priestly order {Upareloy, riy/xa ruv UpariKwv) 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 {■xcopeTria-KOTros:) 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 TOWS Upufxevovs 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, 
 
 ^The bishops of small cities or large villages, whose suppression he there 
 speaks of, are probably x^peTrtV/foiroi, 
 
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 a 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.i . . , 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 {oIkovo^os:) 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 (oIkovo/jlos;) 
 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 
 ^ Tois TTfvrfcriv : in the prose epitaph ra\aiirtipwy 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 the Bishop ; and as Son is subordinate^ 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, islin 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 
 
 ^ iyK6x(>fo% ; in No. 4, line 6, the presbyter is \rKo\)^6\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. 
 
 Koalas 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.^ 
 
 arjfiaTL raJS'] iveiro) Trapiovri </>[. . .]oe ')(avpeLV I 
 'X^povoi'i [7r]a[X,a]to[fc]9 lepe\yev] apo\yp'\7]^ 4 
 iracrt nTap6p')(pfjb\evot<i • crv Be fioL ')(apia-aLO irpoa-eXOdiv, 2 
 Kol Tep^]^et9 [e7r]eeo-crfc, fxaOatv he aa(f)(o<i ore Nearcop 3 
 5 cre/j,vb<i 7rp6cr^v]Tepo<i, iierplwv '^rfpcov €7rapcoy6<i ' 5 
 
 av^rap [oSe ev\KparLr)<; 6 ScdKOvo<i eadX6<i v7rovpy6<; 
 -^/j,eTep]T]<i 6r)aavpo<i e'irap')(iri<; i'jri\eKTO<; 
 hoYy/Maro'i ov]paviOv 6 SiBdcrKd\o<i rjtOeoLatv. 
 Kol cro^o<i [eV yu.6/307r]e(T<7t BiKda7ro\o<i eTrXero Tna-TO'i 
 10 '^yefioo'iv ^[vveBpeve r' • 'i]aaai Be fivpia (f)v\a. 
 Kol fMvr)<T0el<; (fyiXorrjro'i €fjb[r]<; KeBv^r)<i aocj^ir}'; re 
 a7re[v]a-€v efiol crrevd'x^cov diro (Ttw[yu,aT09, ep^irdXi '^aipoav 
 rjfierepT]'; (f>i\LT)<i fji,€fiv7)fjbev[o<i rjiJbaT]a ^iray-TrdpTa 
 T7)v (rep,vr)v (fyiXaBeXcfyov C . . . o 7r[apaK0ir]iv dpiar'qv 
 
 ^ I 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 raCro at the beginning, and five 
 syllables after x«f/'e«>'- 
 
in the Fourth Century 361 
 
 1 5 T'r)\e<p(,8T}v Mafjbfielv [fj a€fJiVOTaT\r] /e[/3]e[t]wy 
 TTKTTrjv ivKparirjq oiKOVOfxov, e[« re 7rpov]oia^ 
 /xv7)fi[oavv]r]^ /J'[v'>]]/jL7)<i [rje %a/3tx/ [0]€pd7revd[ re Xpiarov 
 
 °X' ^P^<^'''0'i iv v/xvol<i 
 reiaev otto cr<^er[€p 
 
 20 a\crijbara \_K\aka [<^p^dcrov<TL koI ia-(rofiivoca[c irvdiaOai 
 
 I described in th& 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 Upevev. 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 6 BidKovo<i 
 in 6 and o SiBd<rKa\o^ 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 ^ : 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 jepew is involved in the verb 'Upevfy, a restoration not certain 
 (letters here very faint), and in the fern. iepf(i)uv. 
 
in the Fourth Century 365 
 
 wife, Mammeis, daughter of Telephus. The expressions are 
 all in the accusative, except that [ae/MvoTdr]!] lepecav is no- 
 minative, which I have tried to explain by using the relative 
 and understanding the verb 771/. 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]60iv seems certain, and, on account of the 
 feminine termination preceding, this can only be taken as a 
 slip of the engraver for Upecwv} In that case we should have 
 a clear example of the use of hiereia in the sense of " wife of a 
 hiereus". It is certain that in Latin documents of the sixth 
 century and later preshytera 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 "^ 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 ".^ 
 
 In lines 16, 17, is a clear proof of the carelessness of the 
 engraver. The text . . . oia<i jjuvrjixrif; fiv^/jLr)<; re x^P''^ ^^ 
 
 1 " Descendant of priests" is not impossible; but the other is much more 
 satisfactory, as it preserves the metre. 
 
 " The nominative, as restored, seems to point to a verb following ; 6epd- 
 rrfvaly 'Itjo-oO] also suggests itself. 
 
 3 See Studies in the History of the Eastern Prov., p. 226 (Anderson). 
 
366 XII. The Church of Lycaonia 
 
 unmistakably a poetical working up of the formulae evvoLa<i 
 X'^pi'V and fMvijfirj'i %a/3tv ^ ; and the repetition oi fivrifji7}<i 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 fivr]fir)<i, which in the copy 
 supplied to him was ixvrjjjuoavvrj'i. 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 ^ 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] ".^ The 
 building is well worth an architect's careful study. 
 
 Nestorios, Presbyter, lies here, who shone a star among 
 the Churches of God * [one hexameter and a half lost : 
 D]iomedes lies here.^ 
 
 We notice here, first of all, the reminiscence of Homer, 
 "shone like a star,"^ 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 'Iwivov are possible ; but the 
 above is the most probable. 
 
 ■* 'NecrrSpios Trpe<rfivrepos iv6a.Se Kire 
 affriip hs ivfXa/j.irev iv eK\ri(rU(Tiv 6fo7o. 
 The y before e€o7o 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. 
 
 ^ The gap ought to be re-examined : the stone is upside down. 
 ^iffritp &s ane\aixireu, 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, airokcunreiv (to shine forth), 
 is varied in this epitaph to ivKa^Tretv (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.^ 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). 
 
 Ny/^IA y^\^/ 6. Nevinne, in the hills above 
 y >v K ) y/\. Laodicea (T. Callander). 
 
 ^ ' ^^ " ^ t ^ \ N j^ ^yj. Eugenius, son of Maxi- 
 
 mus, raised to my sweetest 
 
 brother Palladius and to my 
 sweetest children Basilis and 
 Eugenia in my lifetime in 
 remembrance. 
 
 ArP<i€Vr6NfOCYI0CMA 
 f I M O Y A ///'/////C T HCAT Kti 
 
 r A YKYTATWMOYAAeA 
 
 <|»w7rAAAAAiai K- rye 
 rAYKYTAT YCMoVTek^n«c 
 BAci AkXh KCCY re N I H 
 ZWNMNHMHCXAPJN 
 
 Fig. 9. 
 IV. 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 Fourth 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, 1 1. 
 
 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. 
 Chret. Gaule, No, 369, and Manuel, p. 29). 
 
 V. Nova Isaura {Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1905, p. 
 172). 
 
 7. Claudia adorned Aur. Thal[]ais ^ 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 pseud o-praenomen Aur., from the use of the 
 simpler term honourable (hreifjLov) instead of the superlative 
 TifMccoTUTov (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. 
 
 ^ An example at Syracuse dated a.d. 416, Rom. Quartalschr., 1896, p. 48. 
 ^ There are probably one or two letters lost in this name. 
 
 24 
 
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.^ 
 It would be quite contrary to analogy, and perhaps to the 
 allowable possibilities of usage,^ 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 veiy 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 titlos 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 prcenomen ; (3) by the term " titlos," 
 which is frequent in inscriptions of the earlier type, and dis- 
 appears from later epitaphs. 
 
 VI. 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. 
 
 ^Exactor reipublicce Nacolensiutn, C.I.L., iii., 349, is hardly a sufficient 
 defence. 
 
in the Fourth Century 
 
 371 
 
 vinces, p. 22 fif., by Miss Ramsay, most of whose commentary 
 is adopted here. This is one of the most interesting Christian 
 
 •^- f i ,/ (• 
 
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. II ff. 
 
 lo. [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 i\ inches 
 in length by 3 feet 9J inches in height, was discovered in 
 190 1 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 pillars supporting the central 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 fxvrjixr]<i %«pi^- 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 tomb is evidently that of a bishop. In the expression 
 the blessed papas (6 fiaKapto^ Trd-nasi), 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 irdira^ 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.^ 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 
 
 1 Heraeus, Archiv. filr latein, Lexicogr., xiii., 157; De Rossi, Inscr. Chr. 
 Urb. Rom., i., p. cxv. ; Antk. Lat. Epigr., 656, 2 ; Caesar, de aet. tit. Christ., 
 p. 65. 
 
374 ^11- ^^^ 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 fiaKaptof; TraTra? was the recognised title of that 
 bishop alone, while other Egyptian bishops were styled 
 iraTTjp r]fio)v. In the pre-Nicene period, as he says, the title 
 Trdira'i 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 6 Travra? occurs. The 
 phrase /ia/ca/9to9 7ra7ra9 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,^ which 
 implies that it was used in the province of Pontus about 
 250. 
 
 The name irdira^, 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 7rd7ra<; 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" (rbv yXvKvrarov 
 KOi irdvTwv <^ikov), points to an early Christian period ; the 
 epithets applied to such persons as bishops afterwards be- 
 came much more religious and stereot3/ped in character. 
 
 ^ Ep,, Canon i., ov ra ^pd/iara rifias $apet, tepe {v.l, lepdraTe) irawa (Routhi 
 Rell. Sacr., iii., 256). 
 
in the Fourth Century 375 
 
 Compare the tender expression, "dearer than h'ght and 
 life " {'yXvicvTepov (f>coT6<; Kol ^6r)<{), 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 iravTcov (f)L\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.^ In some cases similar 
 sentiments were inscribed on non-Christian tombs as a 
 counterblast to Christianity ; these clearly belong to the 
 pagan philosophical reaction.^ 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 iravrcov (f>i\o<i occurs in an inscrip- 
 tion of Tarsus, which may perhaps be restored [^ "^vxv ^^] 
 Tw alS>vi ^fj. 'P(o(r(j)6po<i 6 ttolvtcov <l>i\o<i k.t.X. ; the inscrip- 
 tion continues in the ordinary style of epitaphs, though with 
 some unusual features (published with some difference by 
 Messrs. Heberdey and VVilhelm 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 tco 
 irdvrwv (f>iX(p MvXdyw is probably pagan {Mitth. Inst. Athen., 
 1896, p. 98). 
 
 Seov (f>i\o(; is probably a play on Theophilus, and thus 
 reveals the real name of the bishop. 
 
 The fish, the common symbol of the Christians in the 
 
 ^Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, ii., p. 495. 
 
 * Compare Cities and Bishoprics 0/ Phrygia, ii., p. 506 f., and Pauline and 
 other Studies, pp. 103-123, 
 
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. 11. 
 
 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 betaken 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), 
 
37^ 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(r}a-ov<i) X(pi<TT6<i). 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 fakreske/te, 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, Ej>. 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 
 Trpola-rdfievoL 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. 
 
 II. 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(?) ^ 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 
 
 MAKCPOCKAIOA A(AN 
 n AlCHAAt/\4>H€tiOGM«HC^N 
 I ONlTAClc|'f^0^JtlT/CKOTToN 
 M. A M. M.AN 
 
 ZA. 
 
 ■ / \ 
 
 / \ 
 
 V_A. 
 
 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,^ make 
 
 ^ The names are all faint and uncertain. 
 "^ SiKTvurSs. 
 
 •■' 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.^ 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.^ 
 
 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. 
 ig-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.^ 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. 303-313,^ 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 rei/xccoTaro^ is quite 
 in the developed fashion, which was usual in fourth-century 
 writers such as Basil, 
 
 13, Somewhat later than No 11, but probably earlier than 
 
 ^ See above, p. 375. 
 
in the Fourth Century 
 
 383 
 
 No. 12, and therefore of the period 290-320, is the follow- 
 ing :— 
 
 'nr^-y tl _/»»/ t 
 
 Nova Isaura (Miss Ramsay in Eastern Studies, p. 30). 
 The very pure and sweet-voiced and with-all-virtue- 
 adomed 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," 
 6 deo(f>tX€aTaTo^ iiriaKOTro'i, addressed as "your piety," " your 
 perfection," " your God-fearing-ness," " your divine and most 
 perfect consideration," " your comprehension ": ^ these have 
 all come to be used as polite designations and forms of address. 
 
 KA1HAY£7?I 
 KAlTlACHCAPC 
 k£KOCMHM£NOC 
 
 AceiriCKonoc 
 J C 
 
 C 
 
 THCke 
 
 J_ 
 
 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 — 
 
 ^ Basil, Ep. 181 (dated a.d. 374), ^ (vKdfieia aov (frequent), rj <r^ Te\et6Tris 
 (172), 7) dfotXffieia aov (167), r/ tvdfos koI reKeiordrri (ppivrjais ffov (141), ^ 
 avveffis (Tov (165). A presbyter, on the other hand, is simply "your perfect 
 consideration," ^ reXeia <ppivi}<Tis aov, or " honoured head," Ti^ia Ke(paKii (156). 
 
in the Fourth 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 Hfe-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 'xoDpeTria-KO'rro^i 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. 11), 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.^ On the dove, 
 compare No. 19, 
 
 Beside the tombstone of Aurelia Domna was found the 
 
 * 'AirSy Kouov^a^coi/s h.vi(TTt\aiv h,^i\^Q omtov 'IfSc^Kt^ iwia'K6ir(fi SiK4(f ayaupifr^ 
 (wy Ki iaxnov fi.x- The misspelling of ayoirTjrJs is usual. 
 
 ^The "symbols" in this line were defaced : they were enclosed within 
 circles, and were probably either crosses or six-leaved rosettes. 
 
 ^ Sterrett, Wolfe Expedition, Nos. 56, 93, 220 ; and scores of other examples, 
 then unknown to him, have been discovered since. 
 
 25 
 
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 ^ 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,^ 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. 15a little 
 earlier than the former. There is nothing indicative of 
 religion on the tombstone of Septimia Domna ;2 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 {irapOkvo<i) 
 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 Cyrus would be son of an older Orestes. 
 2 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). 
 
 VII, 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 
 laos, to indicate the laity, must have come into use at the 
 same time.^ 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 18. Zazadin Khan (Cronin in Jotimal 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 kiereis 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." ^ 
 
 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 
 
 1 Rev. H. S. Cronin in jfournal 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 kvicr-qcnv 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.^ No. 4, a 
 metrical epitaph, probably contains the verb lepevev in 1. 2, 
 which would presuppose the use of the noun hiereiis. 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 {Upev^ and \a6<;) was 
 even older than this : the words are taken from the language 
 of the Septuagint. Already in A.D. 21S an expression 
 (quoted by Eusebius, Htst. Ecctes., vi., 19, 18) 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 m Journal of Hellenic Studies^ 1902, 
 p. 124). Four rough hexameters. 
 
 Gourdos, 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. 4^, 
 
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 {hiraviv) of the deceased ; 
 but the word, like the Latin comes, implies indubitably 
 inferiority in position. Trokondas was probably a Deacon 
 and Gourdos was his Bishop or Presbyter. The same 
 Gourdos, 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,^ 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 Gains, sons of Titus Lorentius, to their father 
 hiereus and Mania their mother hierissa in remem- 
 brance.^ 
 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 (^aodicea, No. 7 {Aihen. 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. 303-311, 
 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.^ 
 
 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,^ 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. 
 '^See Classical Review, Nov., 1905, p. 417, 
 
in the Fourth Century 393 
 
 Doxa Oikonomeissa the revered (a-efjivri). 
 
 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 "} 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. 
 
 VIII. 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.^ 
 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.^ Here Alexander and Amia are certainly hus- 
 
 ^ Oikonomos is used as feminine (liite 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 yournal of Hellenic Studies, 1899, p. 130, No. 155. 
 
 '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 case would be conclusive that the official title of 
 the husband was communicated to the wife. But 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 \x\. 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 ^ tomb along with her only son Nemetorius, 
 
 still an infant.^ 
 
 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 : — 
 
 ' apfffrSs, not dpiarros. 
 
 2 Basilissa is called SiaKovos, not SiaKSi/ura-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 ^ 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. 
 
 IX. An interesting little epitaph is the following from 
 Tyriaion : — 
 
 25. Here lies {sicf) 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 
 Bish. of Phr.y 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. 
 
 X. 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" ^ — is almost entirely 
 wanting in Lycaonia, where such imprecations are rarely 
 appended to epitaphs. One example is published by Mr. 
 
 ^ Athen. Mittheil., xiii., p. 254. Read avi\yipi\y] for a.vj)yip[6]ii\ the two 
 letters € H are better read thus : the formula is thus more typical. 
 '^ ((Trai OAJT^ irphs rhv 6f6y, 
 
396 XII. The Church of Lycaonia 
 
 Cronin from the copy of a Greek physician, Mr. Savas 
 Diamantides, ending with the words, " Whosoever shall force 
 an entrance, shall give account to God "} 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 ^ : — 
 
 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 
 
 ^ 5(i(r«t fle^ \6yov, Journ. Hell, Stud., 1902, p. 354. 
 
 ^Athen. Mittheil., xiii., p. 249, b ttjs TpidSos Upxn (!) 'Hauxios <ro<phs aKri- 
 
 OtJs TTicTThs ipydrris . tt . . «, yi[T}]y6tpi\os [re ]. ij ris 5' (Tepof fVevjSaA,*/ 
 
 rf ra(t>Cf) Kpirr) t(J) (wvti \6yoi> evSiKOv iro[t]^[(r€«. Iambics are rare in epi- 
 taphs : the last word js 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.^ 
 
 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 Phtygia 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 Bish., 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. 34S). 
 
 XI. A small series of inscriptions relates to that interesting 
 
 ^ va. ?xj/ '■Of \rp\i\aKoai\ov kc okt\> k\ SfKa [■tr]aT[fpo]t> rh avaBe/xai/ d . . . k{() 
 iirriaffT'fiixoyos ni. . . , The Greek is bad and late. 
 
398 XII. The Church of Lycaonia 
 
 but enigmatical institution in the early Church, the Parthenoi 
 or Virgins. One of these was found at Drya.^ 
 
 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 1 904) 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, 
 ev\a^{eT) or ev\a^{ecndrri), 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,^ is here transformed for 
 
 ^ The most northern town of Lycaonia. The epitaph is published in Journ. 
 of Hell. Studies, i8gg, p. 121 (Anderson). 
 
 "^ ivddSe KeKTiSevre <pi\60poTOs ayKaS/xopcpos 
 odvo/xa (Se) Z6r] rijv ireprieffKOv airavres 
 rfj S' &pa Tvvfiov eBtfiav ehs irSffis t)5' a/x a.Se\<l>'fi, 
 OuapeKiafhs avv 0eo(Tefiiri ev\aP. irapdevcf, 
 fiviijxriv avhpwv yeviris, rh yap ytpas iffrl QavSvrw. 
 In 1. 2 5f was omitted by fault of composer or engraver ; but the metre 
 requires it. In 1. i 5 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 t-he 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. 'I{7}crov<;) X{piarr6f;) ; 
 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 evXa/3. 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,^ 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 
 
 ^ ivKpaTfviTaix4y7i (Ath. MittheiU, 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. 
 
 XII. It would not be safe to regard the word' ipxpareva-a- 
 fievT] 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 ivKpdreca 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.^ 
 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 
 
 ^ AouSoucra, Bvydrlrip M^evveov Faliavov ?, yfty]afxev7i i(yo'6)ij.euos rjjs oye^BS 
 [Kf] Kudapas rod 6{fo)v iK\T](rtlas, Avp. Tdra rp TroXviroBeivoTdrr) Ke fioyoytyp nov 
 Ovyarpl avearrjaa tV l<yTi]\7)v ravrriv /ce (avrrjs (axra ij.vfifj.7]s X''P"'- The title 
 Ififvos, though not marked as an abbreviation (whereas @v is), can hardly be 
 for anything except rjyoi/xfvos : 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 prcenonien 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 (^eo? vyjrccrro'i) ; 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 God, 
 styling him Hypsistos or Pantokrator, but not Father.^ 
 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 
 
 ^Contra Eunom., ed. Migne, vol. ii., p. 482 ff. Pantokrator is used in 
 No. I. 
 
 26 
 
402 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. Gourdos is in that epitaph called "priest of 
 the most high God " ; ^ 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. "^6. 
 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 P].^ 
 
 ^/6pe{»j OeoC xi^lcTov (where the metre would require v^iaToio). 
 ^CJ.G., 9270. The copy of Lukas has *oiTa)v instead of *yAc5»'. The cor- 
 rection made in the Corpus is probably right. Compare Nos. 26-28. 
 
in the Fourth Century 403 
 
 The abbreviations 0C and 0N 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. 
 
 Xni. 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.^ 
 
 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. 
 
 XIV. 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 
 
 ^ ivTa KardKire Tla\iSis ir{pfffPvTfpo5 ?) «€ apxtfpfvs rod 0eoS fifiiv • v &.vayiyw- 
 ffKOvns (i^acTTi inrep i/jiov. 
 
404 XII. The Church of Lycaonia 
 
 (his tomb) was erected by his son Timotheos and his 
 own consort Alexandria, in honour {Figure, p. 330).^ 
 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.^ 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 the prcBnomen Aur., give a date about A.D. 340. 
 
 The praise given in this epitaph to the physician 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 life's pursuits is to decide reasonably and 
 rightly. This, at all events, seems to be the case if man's 
 
 'timi at the end: perhaps the beginning of rt/iijs x"?'"' t*"* '^^ 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. 1 89).^ 
 
 We notice also the emphasis wh'Vh 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 " (£)>w/. 189).^ 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.^ 
 
 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 (z>., by thy 
 death) and in exceeding degree to thy parents , and 
 thy name is Herakleon, son of Hermeros, physician.* 
 
 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. 0/ Hell. St., 1905, 
 p. 176; :— 
 
 ' and -* Translation of Mi. iJlomfield Jackson. See Harnack in Texte u. 
 Untersuch., viii., and list in a review Anal. Boll., xii., 297. 
 
 ^ 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). 
 
 * MM. Radet and Paris in Bull. Corr. Hellen., 1886, p. 510 ; Sterrett, Wolfe 
 Expedition, p. 28. 
 
4o6 XII. The Church of Lycaonia 
 
 Here the bounteous earth, taking him to her bosom, con- 
 tains Papas, who Hved 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.^ 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 
 
 ' Kpoica and eVrjjKa eiri in Rev. iii. 20, k6itt(i) and iire(Trr)K€y (sic) in the 
 epitaph ; but the latter is composed by an uneducated villager, who made 
 kStttcdvos the gen. of K6irT0}v, and remembered badly the words of the New 
 Testament ; he spoke Phrygian, not Greek. 
 
in the Fourth Century 407 
 
 after-life and joy, while living and of sound mind, 
 made for himself a resting-place in remembrance.^ 
 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 pr(2no'men 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? O^ov, 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 
 Zov\o^ Xptarov 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. 
 
 ^ 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\6|oj'Sp[os 5fs], eA.7rx'(ros eVJ \_t^v ttjs eirejra ^cw^s x"P<^['') C'i''' "^^ f]<*i 
 ippovwy K\_aTfffKtva<riv e]avrw KotfJ.r]T{][piof eVOaSe] nv'ff/xris xt^p[»'' 
 
4o8 XII. The Church of Lycaonia 
 
 The term "house-servant of God" {olKerT}<; Qeoii) 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 " (olKeTrj<; deov) 
 might be interpreted by some as a variation of the technical 
 " home- born slave of Caesar " (verna Ccesaris). But the term 
 Divus, 6e6<i, 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.^ 
 
 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 - that in the 
 
 ' 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 yri ^iwiriKii, 
 because it was brought to Greece by way of Sinope before the land Trade- 
 Route to Ephesus came into use. 
 
 ^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 (depdircov Oepdiraiva vary between those meanings; 
 also 7rat<? 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.^ 
 
 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 v/as set up by my young sister Maria 
 in solemn remembrance to me her only brother.- 
 
 46. From the same place and authority : it is a mere 
 concluding fragment : — 
 
 the brothers, attendants of Christ, constructed.^ 
 
 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. 
 
 ^ [e-ypajij/ei/ eoi/Tijj irai[y 'Itjitoi! XpicroO ■f(i(n6i. 
 
 *XY OepaTTcov na[v]\os if rfSf Tv/x$<fi KaraKi[fj.]f <rrjna Se fxoi rtv^ev i]i6fos 
 Katriyvftlr-n] Mapla ixviifir)^ f'lveKa (Tifjivris oX(f Ka<Tiyvi)r<f. Bfpdirwv, like dirdaiv 
 in No. ig, is equivalent to comes, subordinate companion. 
 
 ^ Kaffiyyrjroi Xpiaroii Bepdiroi'Tfs trfv^av. 
 
410 
 
 XII. The Church of Lycaonia 
 
 •f Holy Trinity, protect the order of the deacons. Amen.^ 
 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). 
 
 ^ayia Tpicis, h.vT-i)\a^ov tov Tay/xaTi rZv 5iaK6vui(u) ■ afj.riv. A cross is cut 
 at the beginning and a large cross below the letters. 
 
 + MlWNeA 
 Z^IAKOJYION 
 
 EN/eAA£re\ 
 ocnAcHCAPE 
 
 NOCHNENlBiOO 
 
 4)iAMEl<TEArCA 
 
 TovAArToyrA 
 
 CVNKATAKITElft 
 KMuOlONlgF 
 
 To^EnrXoN 
 
 X A, 
 
 omcyAAB' 
 
 A€0NTH4OY 
 KAAYHTi 
 rHCKEKoCHHM- 
 
 CfNeAaeiciTt 
 
 VKePDCAfltAt^ 
 
 4>iMoi:ArAeo£ 
 
 OYCANECmCEK 
 HAPIAMNHHHC 
 PIN 
 
 J\ 
 
 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 Nica;a, 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 Byzantme 
 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, 243-40, 
 
 255. 
 Character, 31; see Hellenism of. 
 Choice of details, 21. 
 Connection with Antioch, i8, 35, 
 65-68. 
 Ephesus, 21 ff., 35. 
 
 Luke, 3-101, 220-46 {cotitd.) — 
 Connection with Corinth, 21, 35. 
 
 Macedonia, 31, 34 ff., 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, 8-10, 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, 236 ff. 
 
 Trustworthiness of, 4 f., 315 f., 
 
 327- . , . 
 
 Unity of authorship m 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 f- . 
 Women m, 13, 30 t. 
 
 (411) 
 
412 
 
 Index 
 
 Miscellaneous — 
 
 Agriculture, 179-98. 
 
 — directed by religion, 197. 
 Alphabet, see Greek. 
 Anthropomorphism, 251. 
 
 Arabs could not conquer Asia 
 
 Minor, 114 f. , 180 i. 
 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-ii, 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 {continue^ — 
 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 ff., 
 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 if., 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 f- 
 Gospels, i-ioi, 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, 
 
 251-59- 
 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. 
 Presbyterion, 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, 
 
 133. 138, 175- 
 
 Art, 185 f. 
 
 Bektash Dervishes, 155. 
 
 Brotherhoods, an ancient institu- 
 tion, 155. 
 
 Mosque built twice at Tyana, 114. 
 
 Religion, Pagan, 17 1-2 15 — 
 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, 
 
 165- 
 — 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, 
 
 i97» 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 Eparchise, 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, 
 
 350, 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 {cont) — 
 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., 90, 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, 11. 
 Agamemnon, 124. 
 Agrippa, 322, 326. 
 Alexander the Great, 107, 
 
 126. 
 Al-Mamun, 114. 
 Anna Comnena, 180. 
 Aristides, 67. 
 
 (41 5) 
 
 II. Historical 
 {cont.) — 
 Augustus, 317. 
 Barbarossa, Kaiser, iii, 
 
 166 f. 
 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. 
 
4i6 
 
 Index 
 
 II. Historical 
 
 (cont.) — 
 Memluk Sultans, 117. 
 Nearchos, 66. 
 Nicetas of Khonai, 180. 
 Newton, Sir Isaac, 220 f. 
 Pindar, 11. 
 Philip, Emperor, 338. 
 Philo, 294. 
 Plutarch, 187. 
 Porphyry, 280 note. 
 Semiramis, Mounds of, 
 
 206 note. 
 Suetonius, 319. 
 Tacitus, 274 note. 
 Tarkuattes, Priest King, 
 
 160. 
 Tarshish, 254. 
 Valeria, Empress, 345. 
 Valerian, 353, 
 Valerius Diogenes, 344. 
 Verina, Empress, 138. 
 Xenophon, 119 f. 
 
 III. Modem Scho- 
 lars — 
 
 Allen, 96 note. 
 Anderson, J. G. C, 360 
 
 note, 370 note, 393. 
 Arnold, Matthew, 309. 
 Bachofen, 204. 
 Bell, Miss Gertrude, 155, 
 
 159. 197- 
 Bell, Mr., 244. 
 Blass, Prof., 36, 47, 63. 
 Blomfield Jackson, Rev., 
 
 405 note. 
 Calder, W. M., 153 note, 
 
 341, 350. 
 Callander, Prof. T., 360, 
 
 366 note, 368, 409. 
 Carruthers, Mr. W., 
 
 F.R.S., 223. 
 Chantre, 209 note. 
 Cronin, Rev. H. S., 
 
 388 f., 394, 396. 
 Cumont, Prof., 353. 
 Delitzsch, 322, 324. 
 De Rossi, 369, 373 note. 
 Diamantides, Savas, 396, 
 Dindorf, 67. 
 
 Dough tyWylie, Mrs. ,174. 
 Driver, Dr., 279. 
 Foucart, 128. 
 
 III. Modern Scho- 
 lars {cont.) — 
 Frankel, 68. 
 Gardner, Prof. P., 125 
 
 note. 
 Garstang, Prof,, 397. 
 Gelzer, 204. 
 Gibbon, no note, 181. 
 Grenfell, 67. 
 Hamilton, 401. 
 Harnack, Prof. A., 1-68, 
 
 305 note, 342 note, 373. 
 Hastings, Dr., 130 note, 
 
 177, 205 note. 
 Hatch, Dr., 351, 354, 363. 
 Hawkins, Sir J., 5 f. 
 Headlam, Principal, 287 
 
 note. 
 Heberdey, 375. 
 Herseus, 373 note, 374. 
 Hobart, 5 ff., 225. 
 Hogarth, 113 note, 201. 
 Holl, Prof., 146 note, 
 
 151 note, 356 note, 379 
 
 note. 
 Hook, Bryan, 64. 
 Howorth, Sir H., 181. 
 Howson, Dean, 285-89. 
 Humann, 203. 
 Hunt, 67. 
 Jiilicher, 264, 
 Keil, 349. 
 Kenyon, 244. 
 Knowling, R. J., 17. 
 Korte, A., 124. 
 Layard, 232. 
 Le Blant, 369. 
 Lewis, W. M., 302 ff., 
 
 324 ff- 
 Lightfoot, 297, 305, 327. 
 McGiffert, Prof. A. C, 
 
 5, 26, 303 ff. 
 Mackinlay, Colonel, 219- 
 
 46. 
 Maspero, 209 note. 
 Milligan, Dr. G., 303, 
 
 307, 324- 
 Mommsen, 144. 
 Moulton, Prof. J. H., 51, 
 
 60 note, 244 note, 245. 
 Newton, Sir C., 212. 
 Paton, W. R., 407 note. 
 Perrot, G,, 203, 204 note, 
 
 206 ff., 212, 214. 
 Pfleiderer, 305 note. 
 
 III. Modern Scho- 
 lars {cont.) — 
 Plummer, Dr., 237. 
 Radet, M., 125, 405 note. 
 Ramsay, Miss, 175, 336, 
 
 371, 378, 382, 392. 
 Reichel, Dr., 160. 
 Reinach, A. J,, 198 7iote. 
 
 — Theodore, 118 note. 
 Renan, 277. 
 
 Sanday, Prof. W., 13,98, 
 
 249-65, 318, 360, 374. 
 Sarre, 187, 403. 
 Sayce, 160. 
 Schtirer, 9. 
 Sloman, A., 64 note. 
 Smith, Cecil, 201, 212. 
 
 — Prof. G. A., 269-81. 
 
 — Robertson, 77, 262, 
 
 269. 
 Souter, Prof. A., 18 7iote, 
 
 273- 
 Steinmann, 264. 
 Sterrett, Prof., 385 note, 
 
 390, 405 note, 409. 
 Strzygowski, Prof., 380. 
 Thomas, Rev. Griffith, 
 
 287. 
 Tissot, 256. 
 
 Trail, Prof. J. W. H., 64. 
 Usener, 353 note. 
 Van Soden, 305 note. 
 Waddington, 68, 273, 
 
 274 note. 
 Weinel, 264. 
 Weiss, Bernard, 55. 
 Wellhausen, 46. 
 Westcott, 301 note, 302, 
 
 306 note, 307, 310 note, 
 
 311 f.,3i3MOi«,3i6MO<tf. 
 White, Rev. Dr., of Mar- 
 
 sovan, 253. 
 Whittall, Mr. Edwin, 
 
 408 note. 
 Wiegand, Dr., 347. 
 Wilhelm, 375. 
 Wilkinson, 72 note, 97 
 
 note. 
 Wilson, Sir Charles, 202, 
 
 203, 207. 
 Winckler, 127 note. 
 Wood (Ephesus), 133. 
 Wordsworth, Bishop, 311 
 
 note. 
 Wright, A. A. G., 273. 
 
Index 
 
 417 
 
 IV. Pagan Gods- 
 Achilles Pontarches, 121 
 
 f. 
 Apollo, 108, 167, 216. 
 Archigallos, 207. 
 Artemis, 197 f., 201. 
 Ashtaroth, 232. 
 Athena, io8. 
 
 — works of, 387. 
 Atj's, 211, 
 Bacchus, an. 
 Cybele, 207. 
 Dipylon, 198. 
 Helena, 121. 
 Heracleids, 68. 
 Heracles, 179, 211. 
 Hermaphrodite, 206. 
 Hermes, 13. 
 Ida, Trojan, 119. 
 Ipta Meter, 215. 
 Iris, 13. 
 Istar, 232. 
 Janus, 198. 
 Kronos, 280. 
 Lityerses, 108. 
 Marsyas, 108. 
 Mother goddess, 206. 
 Omphale, 211. 
 Pta, 215. 
 Sabos, 211. 
 Tekmoreian, 198. 
 Venus, 232. 
 Zeus, II, 168. 
 
 V. Places — 
 Achaia, 21 ff., 35. 
 Ak-Giol, White Lake, 
 
 172. 
 Akroenos, 137. 
 Alexandria, 122, 374. 
 Alkaran, 352, 360, 378, 
 
 403- 
 Amanus, 117 note. 
 Anava, the Salt Lake, 
 
 107. 
 Ancyra, 67. 
 Anthios, 140. 
 Antioch, Pisidian, no, 
 
 134, 341 ; Plate XII. 
 Antioch, Syrian, 18 ff., 
 
 62, 66. 
 Anti-Taurus, 114. 
 Argos, 179. 
 
 Aries, Council of, 344. 
 Aurokra, 108 f. 
 
 V. Places [cont.) — 
 
 Bagdad Railway, 138, 
 188. 
 
 Barata, 150 note, 155 ff., 
 385 ; Plates XVI,, 
 XVII., XX. 
 
 Basilika Therma, 380. 
 
 Bin-Bir-Kilisse. See Bar- 
 ata. 
 
 Black Sea, 105. 
 
 Boghaz-Keui, 127, 201 
 ff., 212 f., 215. 
 
 Bulgurlar, 172 note, 
 
 Bulladann, 192. 
 
 Ciesarea of Cappadocia, 
 
 "4. 154. 357- 
 Cassarea Philippi, 239. 
 Caesarea, Stratonis, 19, 
 
 320 ff. 
 Capernaum, 40. 
 Cappadocia, 153, 204, 
 
 401 f., 408 note. 
 Caspian, 105. 
 Caucasus, 105. 
 Celcenae, 107 f. 
 Cilician Gates, log note, 
 
 ii5i 139. 172 f., 186. 
 Comana, 210. 
 Congoustos, 410. 
 Constantinople, 116. 
 Corinth, 21 f., 309. 
 Crimea, 121. 
 Cyme, ^olic, 124. 
 Cyprus, 19, 122, 134. 
 Damascus, 20. 
 Deghile, 140 ; Plates 
 
 XIII., XVIII., XIX. 
 Derbe, 335, 385, 405. 
 Deve-yuklu, 403. 
 Dindymos, 119. 
 Dinek, 360. 
 — Serai, 405. 
 Dorla. See Isaura. 
 Dorylaion, 107, 166. 
 Drya, 370. 
 
 Egypt. 231, 236, 374. 
 Eleusis, 373. 
 Emir-Ghazi, 209. 
 Ephesus, 21 ff., 119, 
 
 131 ff. 
 Eregli, 172. 
 Eski-Sheher, 107. 
 Euyuk, 205 ff. 
 Frahtin, 205. 
 Galatia, 23, 27. 
 
 27 
 
 V. Places {cont.) — 
 Galilee, 40, 42, 239, 241 If. 
 Gennesaret, 44. 
 Halys, 215. 
 Hauran, 272. 
 Herakleia, 172. 
 Hermon, Mount, 243. 
 Hierapolis, 109. 
 Hierosolyma, 51, 53, 76, 
 
 335. 
 Hirakla, Castle of, 172, 
 
 193- 
 Holy Land, 269-81. 
 Huda-verdi, 132, 173 ff. 
 Ibriz, 171, 193, 206 ; 
 
 Plate XXI. 
 Iconium, 151 f., 331 f., 
 
 356, 363. 402 f. 
 Isaura Nova or Dorla, 
 
 335. 352, 360. 370, 372, 
 
 376 f., 378 f., 385, 404 f. 
 Isaura Palaea, 378. 
 Jerusalem, 19, 25, 42, 51, 
 
 53, 76, 81, 223, 238 ff., 
 
 253. 320. 
 Jordan, 227, 236. 
 Judaea, 42, 244. 
 Kara-Bunar, 189 note, 
 Kara-Dagh, 163 ; Plates 
 
 XIV., XV. 
 Kara-Hissar-Afion, 137, 
 
 140 ; Plate IV. 
 Kases, Kasis, 209. 
 Keramon Agora, 120. 
 Khadyn-Khan, 129. 
 Khasbia, 209. 
 Kizil Dagh, 160. 
 Korna, 378. 
 Kybistra, 172, 
 Laodicea, 153 f., 331 
 
 note, 335, 370, 381, 
 
 398, 407 f. 
 Laodicea, burnt, 408 note. 
 Leontopolis, 378. 
 Leontos Kephalai, 140, 
 
 397 ; Plate X. 
 Lerna, 179. 
 Limnai, 197. 
 Lycus, 107 ff. 
 Lystra, 65, 216, 335. 
 Macedonia, 23, 34 ff. 
 Maden-Sheher. See Ba- 
 rata. 
 Maeander, 107 ff., 119; 
 
 Plate II. 
 
4i8 
 
 Index 
 
 V. Places [cont^ — 
 Malta, 64. 
 Marsyas, 107. 
 Melitene, 114. 
 Mesopotamia, no, 194. 
 Miletus, 347. 
 Mindana, 356. 
 Mount of Olives, 223. 
 Mycenas, 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. 
 Oxyrynchos, 67. 
 Panhormos, i86. 
 Palestine, 44, 46, 188, 
 
 229, 243 f., 269-81, 292, 
 
 317- 
 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, 40b note. 
 Sivri-Hissar, 138; Plate 
 
 V. 
 Smyrna, 191, 195. 
 Stymphalos, 179. 
 Sultan Dagh, 140; Plate 
 
 XII. 
 Suwerek, 366, 406. 
 Syracuse, 369 note. 
 
 V. Places (<;<?«/.) — 
 Syria, 107. 
 Tabor, 243. 
 Tarsus, 114, 120, 293, 
 
 375. 
 Taurus, 106, 112 ff., 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, 191. 
 Verinopolis, 138, 331 
 
 note. 
 Yuruk-Keui, 385. 
 Zazadin Khan, 388, 394; 
 
 Plate XXIII. 
 Zizima, 370. 
 
 THE ABERDEEN UNIVERSITY PRESS LIMITED 
 
Date Due 
 
 JltC'-ii FtJSIf 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^^if^mm^fm^ 
 
 
 
 rnntiffh-tiWiittti 
 
 iir^ 
 
 
 
 
 ™^ 
 
 
 
 -^-urnnnciMtfrt— 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 [ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 @ 
 
 PRINTED 
 
 IN U. S. A.