ARISTIDES,
APOLOGY
OF
627
passing tlirougli the press, it was observed by the present strikes hard blows, and gives no quarter. He cannot writer that all the while the work had been in our hands see, as Justin and Clement see, a striving after truth, in Greek, though in a slightly abbreviated form, as it a feeling after God, in the older religions, or even in had been imbedded as a speech in a religious novel the philosophies of Greece. He has no patience with written about the 6th century and entitled “ The Life of attempts to find a deeper meaning in the stories of the Barlaam and Josaphat.” The discovery of the Syriac gods. “ Do they say that one nature underlies these version reopened the question of the date of the work. diverse forms ? Then why does god hate god, or god For although its title there corresponds to that given by kill god ? Do they say that the histories are mythical ? the Armenian fragment and by Eusebius, it begins with Then the gods themselves are myths, and nothing more.” The Jews are briefly treated. After a reference to their a formal inscription to “ the Emperor Titus Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius ” : and Dr II. Harris is followed descent from Abraham and their sojourn in Egypt, by Harnack and others in supposing that it was only Aristides praises them for their worship -of the one God, through a careless reading of this inscription that the the Almighty Creator; but blames them as worshipping work was supposed to have been addressed to Hadrian. angels, and observing “ sabbaths and new moons, and If this be the case, it must be placed somewhere in the the unleavened bread, and the great fast, and circumlong reign of Antoninus Pius (138-161). There are, how- cision, and cleanness of meats.” He then proceeds to ever, no internal grounds for rejecting the thrice-attested the description of the Christians. He begins with a dedication to Hadrian his predecessor, and the picture statement which, when purged of glosses by a comparison of primitive Christian life which is here found points to of the three forms in which it survives, reads thus: the earlier rather than to the later date. It is possible “ Now the Christians reckon their race from the Lord that the apology was read to Hadrian in person when he Jesus Christ; and He is confessed to be the Son of God visited Athens, and that the Syriac inscription was Most High. Having by the Holy Spirit come down from prefixed by a scribe on the analogy of Justin’s Apology, heaven, and having been born of a Hebrew virgin, He a mistake being made in the amplification of Hadrian’s took flesh and appeared unto men, to call them back from their error of many gods; and having completed His name. The Apology opens thus: “I, O king, by the provi- wonderful dispensation, He was pierced by the Jews, and dence of God came into the world; and having beheld after three days He revived and went up to heaven. And the heaven, and the earth, and the sea, the sun and the glory of His coming thou canst learn, O king, from moon, and all besides, I marvelled at their orderly that which is called among them the evangelic scripture, disposition; and seeing the world and all things in it, if thou wilt read it. He had twelve disciples, who after that it is moved by compulsion, I understood that He His ascent into heaven went forth into the provinces of that moveth and governeth it is God. For whatsoever the world and taught His greatness ; whence they who at moveth is stronger than that which is moved, and what- this day believe their preaching are called Christians.” soever governeth is stronger than that which is governed.” This passage contains striking correspondences with the Having briefly spoken of the divine nature in the terms second section of the Apostles’ Creed. The attribution of Greek philosophy, Aristides proceeds to ask which of of the Crucifixion to the Jews appears in several 2ndall the races of men have at all partaken of the truth century documents; Justin actually uses the words about God. Here we have the first attempt at a “ He was pierced by you ” in his dialogue with Trypho systematic comparison of ancient religions. For the the Jew. “ These are they,” he proceeds, “ who beyond all the purpose of his inquiry he adopts an obvious threefold division into idolaters, Jews, and Christians. Idolaters, nations of the earth have found the truth: for they know or, as he more gently terms them in addressing the God as Creator and Maker of all things, and they worship Emperor, “those who worship what among you are said no other god beside Him; for they have His commandto be gods,” he subdivides into the three great world- ments graven on their hearts, and these they keep in civilizations—Chaldeans, Greeks, and Egyptians. He expectation of the world to come. . . . Whatsoever they chooses this order so as to work up to a climax of error would not should be done unto them they do not to and absurdity in heathen worship. The direct nature- another. ... He that hath supplieth him that hath worship of the Chaldeans is shown to be false, because not without grudging : if they see a stranger they bring its objects are works of the Creator, fashioned for the him under their roof, and rejoice over him, as over a use of men. They obey fixed laws and have no power brother indeed, for they call not one another brethren over themselves. “ The Greeks have erred worse than the after the flesh, but after the spirit. They are ready Chaldeans . . . calling those gods who are no gods, for Christ’s sake to give up their own lives; for His according to their evil lusts, in order that having these commandments they securely keep, living holily and as advocates of their wickedness they may commit righteously, according as the Lord their God hath comadultery, and plunder and kill, and do the worst of manded them, giving thanks to Him at all hours, over deeds.” The gods of Olympus are challenged one by all their food and drink, and the rest of their, good one, and shown to be either vile or helpless, or both at things.” This simple description is fuller in the Syriac, once. A heaven of quarrelling divinities cannot inspire a but the additional details must be accepted with caution : reasonable worship. These gods are not even respectable: for while it is likely that the monk who appfopriated the how can they be adorable ? “ The Egyptians have erred Greek may have cut it down to meet the exigencies of worse than all the nations; for they were not content his romance, it is the habit of certain Syriac translators with the worships of the Chaldeans and Greeks, but to elaborate their originals. After asserting that “ this introduced, moreover, as gods even brute beasts of the is the way of truth,” and again referring for further dry land and of the waters, and plants and herbs. . . . information to “ the writings of the Christians,” he says : Though they see their gods eaten by others and by men, “And truly this is a new race, and there is something and burned, and slain, and rotting, they do not under- divine mingled with it.” At the close we have a passage which is found only in the Syriac, but which is shown stand concerning them that they are no gods.” Throughout the whole of the argument there is strong by internal evidence to contain original elements : “ The common-sense and a. stern severity unrelieved by conscious Greeks, because they practise foul things . . . turn the humour. Aristides is engaged in a real contest; he ridicule, of their foulness upon the Christians.” This is
