__________________________________________________________________ Title: The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol. IX: Petri - Reuchlin Creator(s): Schaff, Philip (1819-1893) Print Basis: Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1953 [reprint] Rights: Public Domain CCEL Subjects: All; History LC Call no: BR95 LC Subjects: Christianity __________________________________________________________________ NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE Editor-in-Chief SAMUEL MACAULEY JACKSON, D.D., LL.D. Editor-in-Chief of Supplementary Volumes LEFFERTS A. LOETSCHER, Ph.D., D.D. Associate Professor of Church History Princeton Theological Seminary BAKER BOOK HOUSE GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE EDITED BY SAMUEL MACAULEY JACKSON, D.D., LL.D. (Editor-in-Chief) WITH THE ASSISTANCE, AFTER VOLUME VI., OF GEORGE WILLIAM GILMORE, M.A. (Associate Editor) AND THE FOLLOWING DEPARTMENT EDITORS CLARENCE AUGUSTINE BECKWITH, D.D. JAMES FREDERIC McCURDY, PH.D., LL.D. (Department of Systematic Theology) (Department of the Old Testament) HENRY KING CARROLL, LL.D. HENRY SYLVESTER NASH, D.D. (Department of Minor Denominations) (Department of the New Testament) JAMES FRANCIS DRISCOLL, D.D. ALBERT HENRY NEWMAN, D.D., LL.D. (Department of Liturgics and Religious Orders) (Department of Church History) FRANK HORACE VIZETELLY, F.S.A. (Department of Pronunciation and Typography) __________________________________________________________________ VOLUME IX PETRI ? REUCHLIN __________________________________________________________________ BAKER BOOK HOUSE GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN 1953 EXCLUSIVE AMERICAN PUBLICATION RIGHTS SECURED BY BAKER BOOK HOUSE FROM FUNK AND WAGNALLS PHOTOLITHOPRINTED BY CUSHING--MALLOY, INC. ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1953 EDITORS __________________________________________________________________ SAMUEL MACAULEY JACKSON, D.D., LL.D. (Editor-in-Chief.) Professor of Church History, New York University. GEORGE WILLIAM GILMORE, M.A. (Associate Editor.) Formerly Professor of Biblical History and Lecturer on Comparative Religion, Bangor Theological Seminary. DEPARTMENT EDITORS, VOLUME IX. CLARENCE AUGUSTINE BECKWITH, D.D. JAMES FREDERICK McCURDY, Ph.D., LL.D. (Department of Systematic Theology.) Professor of Systematic Theology, Chicago Theological Seminary. (Department of the Old Testament.) Professor of Oriental Languages, University College, Toronto. HENRY KING CARROLL, LL.D. HENRY SYLVESTER NASH, D.D. (Department of Minor Denominations.) Secretary of Executive Committee of the Western Section for the Fourth Ecumenical Methodist Conference. (Department of the New Testament.) Professor of the Literature and Interpretation of the New Testament, Episcopal Theological School, Cambridge, Mass. JAMES FRANCIS DRISCOLL, D.D. ALBERT HENRY NEWMAN, D.D., LL.D. (Department of Liturgies and Religious Orders.) Rector of St. Gabriel's New Rochelle, N. Y. (Department of Church History.) Professor of Church History, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Fort Worth, Tex. FRANK HORACE VIZETELLY, F.S.A., (Department of Pronunciation and Typography.) Managing Editor of the Standard Dictionary, etc., New York City. __________________________________________________________________ CONTRIBUTORS AND COLLABORATORS, VOLUME IX. JUSTIN EDWARDS ABBOTT, D.D., CARL BERTHEAU, Th.D., Missionary in Bombay, India. Pastor at St. Michael's, Hamburg. ERNST CHRISTIAN ACHELIS, Th.D., EDWIN MUNSELL BLISS, D.D. Professor of Practical Theology, University of Marburg. Author of Books on Missions, Washington, D.C. SAMUEL JUNE BARROWS (), D.D, THEODORA CROSBY BLISS, Late corresponding Secretary of the Prison Association, New York. Writer on Missions. GEORGE JAMES BAYLES, Ph.D., MABEL THORP BOARDMAN Writer on Civil Church Law. Member of Executive Committee of the American National Red Cross. DONALD BEATON, HEINRICH BOEHMER, Ph.D., Th.D., Minister at Wick, Scotland Professor of Church History, University of Bonn. CLARENCE AUGUSTINE BECKWITH, D.D. GOTTLIEB NATHANAEL BONWETSCH, Th.D., Professor of Systematic Theology, Chicago Theological Seminary. Professor of Church History, University of Goettingen.. GEORG BEER, Ph.D., Th.,Lic., GUSTAV BOSSERT, Ph.D., Th.D. Extraordinary Professor of the Old Testament in the Evangelical Theological Faculty, University of Strasburg. Retired Pastor, Stuttgart. HENRY BEETS, FRIEDRICH HEINRICH BRANDES, Th.D., Stated Clerk of the Synod of the Christian Reformed Church, Editor-in-Chief of The Banner, Grand Rapids, Mich. Reformed Minister and Chaplain at Bueckeburg, Schaumburg-Lippe. KARL BENRATH, Ph.D., Th.D., EDUARD BRATKE (), Ph.D., Professor of Church History, University of Koenigsberg. Late Professor of Church History, University of Breslau. IMMANUEL GUSTAV ADOLF BENZINGER, Ph.D., Th.Lic., CHARLES AUGUSTUS BRIGGS, D.D., Litt.D., German Orientalist and Vice-Consul for Holland in Jerusalem. Professor of Theological Encyclopedia and Symbolics, Union Theological Seminary, New York. JOHN BROWN (), Late Pastor at Rentham, Suffolk Co., England. OSKAR GOTTLIEB RUDOLF BUDDENSIEG (), Ph.D., PAUL GOTTFRIED DREWS, Th.D., Late Director of the Teachers' Seminary in Dresden. Professor of Practical Theology, University of Halle. FRANTS PEDER WILLIAM BUHL, Ph.D.,Th.D., JAMES FRANCIS DRISCOLL, D.D., Professor of Semitic Languages, University of Copenhagen. Pastor of St. Gabriel's, New Rochelle, N. Y. KARL BURGER (), Th.D., EMIL EGLI (), Th.D., Late Supreme Consistorial Councilor in Munich. Late Professor of Church History, University of Zurich. JOHN KENNEDY CAMERON, M.A., CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH DAVID ERDMANN (), Ph.D., Th.D., Professor of Systematic Theology, Free Church College, Edinburgh. Late Professor of Church History, University of Breslau. HUBERT CARLETON, M.A., JOHN YOUNG EVANS, M.A., B.D., Editor of St. Andrew's Cross and General Secretary of the Brotherhood of St. Andrew, Boston. Professor in Trevecca College, Aberwystwyth, Wales. HEREWARD CARRINGTON, JOHN OLUF EVJEN, Ph.D., Writer on Psychical Research. Professor of Theology in Augsburg Theological Seminary, Minneapolis, Minn. HENRY KING CARROLL, LL.D., PAUL JOHANNES FICKER, Ph.D., Th.D., Secretary of Executive Committee of the Western Section for the Fourth Ecumenical Methodist Conference. Professor of Church History, Strasburg. WALTER AUGUST ANTON NATHAN CASPARI, Ph.D., Th.D., FRITZ FLEINER, Dr.Jur., University Preacher and Professor of Practical Theology, University of Erlangen. Professor of Law, University of Heidelberg. JACQUES EUGENE CHOISY, Th.D., ROBERT VERRELL FOSTER, D.D., LL.D., Pastor in Geneva. Professor of Systematic Theology, Cumberland Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Lebanon, Tenn. FERDINAND COHRS, Th.Lic., GUSTAV WILHELM FRANK (), Th.D., Consistorial Councilor, Ilfeld, Germany. Late Professor of Dogmatics, Symbolics. and Christian Ethics, University of Vienna. LEIGHTON COLEMAN (), D.D., FRANZ HERMANN FRANK (), Th.D., Late Protestant Episcopal Bishop of Delaware. Late Professor of Theology, University of Erlangen. WILLIAM RUSSELL COLLINS, D.D., EMIL ALBERT FRIEDBERG, Th.D., Dr.Jur., Professor of Liturgies and Ecclesiastical Polity Reformed Episcopal Theological Seminary, Philadephia. Professor of Ecclesiastical, Public, and German Law, University of Leipsic. EDWARD TANJORE CORWIN,D.D., WILHELM GERMANN (), Ph.D., Church Historian, New Brunswick, New Jersey. Late Superintendent in Schleusingen, Prussian Saxony. SAMUEL CRAMER, Th.D., GEORGE WILLIAM GILMORE, M.A., Professor of the History of Christianity,. University of Amsterdam, and Professor of Practical Theology, Mennonite Theological Seminary, Amsterdam. Formerly Lecturer on Comparative Religion Bangor Theological Seminary, Associate Editor of The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia. WILHELM CREIZENACH, Ph.D., FRANZ GOERRES, Ph.D., Professor of German Philology in the University of Cracow. Assistant Librarian, University of Bonn. HERMANN DALTON, Th.D., WILHELM GOETZ, Ph.D., Retired Consistorial Councilor, Berlin. Honorary Professor of Geography Technical High School, and Professor at Military Academy, Munich. WILLIAM JOHNSON DARBY, D.D., HERMANN FREIHERR VON DER, GOLTZ (), Th.D., Assistant Secretary of the Board of Education of the Presbyterian Church in the United States. Late Professor of Dogmatics, University of Berlin. EDWIN CHARLES DARGAN, D.D., LL.D., JAMES ISAAC GOOD, D.D., Pastor of the First Baptist Church, Macon, Georgia. Professor of Reformed Church History and Liturgics, Central Theological Seminary, Dayton, Ohio. JOHN D. DAVIS, D.D., LL.D., Ph.D., WILLIAM ELLIOT GRIFFIS, D.D., L.H.D., Professor of Oriental and Old Testament Literature, Princeton Theological Seminary. Author and Lecturer on Historical Subjects, Ithaca, N. Y. JULIUS DECKE, PAUL GRUENBERG, Th.D., Church Inspector, Breslau. Pastor in Strasburg. MORTON DEXTER () M.A., CARL VON GRUENEISEN (), D.D., Late Congregational Clergyman and Author. Boston. Late Court Preacher in Stuttgart. FRIEDRICH CARL OTTO DIBELIUS, Ph.D., Th.Lic., GEORG GRUETZMACHER, Ph.D., Th.Lic., Archdeacon at Crossen, Germany. Extraordinary Professor of Church History, University of Heidelberg. ERNST VON DOBSCHUETZ, Th.D., RICHARD HEINRICH GRUETZMACHER, Th.D., Professor of New-Testament Exegesis, University of Breslau. Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Rostock. LEONHARD ERNST DORN, HERMANN GUTHE, Th.D., Head Preacher, Noerdlingen, Bavaria. Professor of Old-Testament Exegesis, University of Leipsic. WILLIE KIRKPATRICK DOUGLAS, ARTHUR CRAWSHAY ALLISTON HALL, D.D., LL.D., Dean of Due West Female College, Due West, S.C. Protestant Episcopal Bishop of Vermont. ADOLF HARNACK, Ph.D., Th.D., Dr. Jur., M.D., THEODOR FRIEDRICH HERMANN KOLDE, Ph.D., Th.D., General Director of the Royal Library, Berlin. Professor of Church History, University of Erlangen. ALBERT HAUCK, Ph.D., Th.D., Dr.Jur., HERMANN GUSTAV EDUARD KRUEGER, Ph.D., Th.D., Professor of Church History, University of Leipsic, Editor-in-Chief of the Hauck-Herzog Realencyklopaedie. Professor of Church History, University of Giessen. JOHANNES HAUSSLEITER Ph.D., Th.D., JOHANNES WILHELM KUNZE, Ph.D., Th.D., Consistorial Councilor Professor of New-Testament Theology and Exegesis, University of Greifswald. Professor of Systematic and Practical Theology, University of Greifswald. CARL FRIEDRICH GEORG HEINRICI, Ph.D., Th.D., EUGEN LACHENMANN, Professor of New-Testament Exegesis, University of Leipsic. City Pastor, Leonberg, Wuerttemberg. MAX HEINZE (), Ph.D., Th.D., LUDWIG LEMME, Th.D., Late Professor of Philosophy, University of Leipsic. Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Heidelberg. LUDWIG THEODOR EDGAR HENNECKE, Ph.D., Th.Lic., ORLANDO FAULKLAND LEWIS, Pastor at Betheln, Hanover. Corresponding Secretary of the Prison Association and Secretary of the Finance Committee of the Charity Organisation Society, New York. WILHELM HERRMANN, Ph.D., Th.D., Dr.Jur., FRIEDRICH LEZIUS , Ph.D., Th.D., Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Marburg. Professor of Church History, University of Koenigsberg. JOHANN JAKOB HERZOG (), Ph.D., Th.D., FRIEDRICH LIST (), Ph.D., Late Professor of Reformed Theology, University of Erlangen. Late Studiendirektor, Munich. RICHARD MORSE HODGE, D.D., PAUL LOBSTEIN, Th.D., Lecturer in Biblical Literature, Teachers' College, New York City. Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Strasburg. GUSTAV HOENNICKE, Ph.D., Th.Lic., GEORG LOESCHE, Ph.D., Th.D., Privat-docent in New-Testament Exegesis, University of Berlin. Professor of Church History, Evangelical Theological Faculty, University of Vienna. OSWALD HOLDER-EGGER, Ph.D., FRIEDRICH ARMIN LOOFS, Ph.D., Th.D., Professor at Berlin and Director for the Publication of the Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Professor of Church History, University of Halle. WILHELM HOELSCHER, Th.D., WILLIAM JAMES LOWE, D.D., Pastor of St. Nicolaikirche, Leipsic. Clerk of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland. ERNST IDELER, JOHN LYND, D.D., Pastor at Ahrensdorf, near Potsdam. Professor of Hebrew and Biblical Criticism, Theological, Hall of the Reformed Presbyterian Synod, Belfast. JOHANN FRIEDRICH IKEN (), SAMUEL McCOMB, D.D., Late Pastor in Bremen. Pastor of Emmanuel Church, Boston, Mass. HEINRICH FRANZ JACOBSON (), Ph.D., JOHN McDONALD, M.A., D.D., Late Professor of Law, University of Koenigsberg. Clerk of the Reformed Presbyterian Synod in Scotland. FERDINAND FRIEDRICH WILHELM KATTENBUSCH, Ph.D., Th.D., GEORGE DUNCAN MATHEWS, Professor of Dogmatics, University of Halle. General Secretary of the Presbyterian Alliance, London. PETER GUSTAV KAWERAU, Th.D., PAUL MEHLHORN, Ph.D., Th.D., Consistorial Councilor, Professor of Practical Theology, and University Preacher, University of Breslau. Pastor of the Reformed Church, Leipsic. OTTO KIRN, Ph.D., Th.D., OTTO MEJER (), Ph.D., Th.D., Professor of Dogmatics, University of Leipsic. Late President of the Consistory, Hanover. RUDOLF KITTEL, Ph.D., Th.D., PHILIPP MEYER, Th.D., Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of Leipsic. Supreme Consistorial Councilor, Hanover. KARL RUDOLF KLOSE (), Th.D., CARL THEODOR MIRBT, Th.D., Late Secretary of the Library, Hamburg. Professor of Church History, University of Marburg. EDWARD HOOKER KNIGHT, D.D., ROBERT MORTON, Dean of the Hartford School of Religious Pedagogy, Hartford, Conn. Professor of Systematic Theology and Church History in Original Secession Theological Hall, Glasgow, Scotland. JUSTUS ADOLF KOEBERLE (), Th.D., ERNST FRIEDRICH KARL MUELLER, Th.D., Late Professor of the Old Testament, University of Rostock. Professor of Reformed Theology, University of Erlangen. HEINRICH ADOLF KOESTLIN (), Ph.D., Th.D., GEORG MUELLER, Ph.D., Th.D., Late Privy Councilor in Cannstadt, formerly Professor of Theology, University of Giessen. Inspector of Schools, Leipsic. CHRISTOPH FRIEDRICH ADOLF KOLB, Th.D., PEARSON M'ADAM MUIR, D.D., Prelate and Court Preacher, Ludwigsburg. Minister of Glasgow Cathedral, Glasgow, Scotland. HENRY SYLVESTER NASH, D.D., Professor of the Literature and Inyerpretation of the New Testament, Episcopal Theological School, Cambridge, Mass. CHRISTOF EBERHARD NESTLE, Ph.D., Th.D., Professor in the Theological Seminary, Maulbronn, Wuerttemberg. ALBERT HENRY NEWMAN, D.D., LL.D., EMIL SEHLING, Dr.Jur., Professor of Church History, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Fort Worth, Texas. Professor of Ecclesiastical and Commercial Law, University of Erlangen. FREDERICK KRISTIAN NIELSEN (), D.D., HENRY CLAY SHELDON, D.D., Late Bishop of Aarhus, Denmark. Professor of Systematic Theology, Boston University. CONRAD VON ORELLI, Ph.D., Th.D., FRIEDRICH ANTON EMIL SIEFFERT, Ph.D., Th.D., Professor of Old-Testament Exegesis and History of Religion, University of Basel. Professor of New-Testament Exegesis, University of Bonn. CARL PFENDER, JULIUS WILHELM SMEND, Th.D., Pastor of St. Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church, Paris. Professor of Systematic and Practical Theology in the Evangelical Theological Faculty, University of Strasburg. FERDINAND PHILIPPI (), Th.D., JOHN SOMERVILLE, D.D., Late Pastor in Hohenkirchen, Mecklenburg. Clerk of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada. FINIS HOMER PRENDERGAST, ROBERT MACGOWAN SOMMERVILLE, Attorney, Marshall, Texas. Editor of Olive Trees, New York City. ERWIN PREUSCHEN, Ph.D., Th.D., GEORG STEINDORFF, Ph.D., Pastor at Hirschhorn-on-the-Neckar, Germany. Professor of Egyptology, University of Leipsic. RICHARD CLARK REED, D.D., LL.D., ROBERT WILLIAM STEWART, B.Sc., B.D., Professor of Church History in Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Columbia, S. C. Glasgow, Scotland. JOSEPH REINKENS (), Ph.D., HERMANN LEBERECHT STRACK, Ph.D., Th.D., Late Professor in Cologne. Extraordinary Professor of Old-Testament Exegesis and Semitic Languages, University of Berlin. ROBERT THOMAS ROBERTS, D.D., ULRICH STUTZ, Dr.Jur., Pastor First Welsh Presbyterian Church, Wilkes-Barre, Pa. Professor of German and Ecclesiastical Law, University of Bonn. WILLIAM HENRY ROBERTS, D.D., LL.D., ROBERT BREWSTER TAGGART, Stated Clerk of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, U. S. A. Vineland, N. J. HENDRIX CORNELIS ROGGE (), Ph.D., CHARLES FRANKLIN THWING, LL.D., Late Professor of History, University of Haarlem. President of Western Reserve University and Adalbert College, Cleveland. ARNOLD RUeEGG, PAUL TSCHACKERT, Ph.D., Th.D., Pastor at Birmensdorf and Lecturer at the University of Zurich, Switzerland. Professor of Church History, University of Goettingen. CARL SCHAARSCHMIDT, SIETSE DOUWES VAN VEEN, Th.D., Honorary Professor of Philosophy, University of Bonn. Professor of Church History and Christian Archeology, University of Utrecht. ERICH SCHAEDER, Ph.D., Th.D., JULIUS AUGUST WAGENMANN (), Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Kiel. Late Consistorial Councilor, Goettingen. THEODOR SCHAEFER, Th.D., BENJAMIN BRECKINRIDGE WARFIELD, D.D., LL.D., Head of the Deaconess Institute, Altona. Professor of Didactic and Polemic Theology, Princeton Theological Seminary. DAVID SCHLEY SCHAFF, D.D., EDWARD ELIHU WHITFIELD, M.A., Professor of Church History, Western Theological Seminary, Pittsburg, Pa. Retired Public Schoolmaster, London. PHILIP SCHAFF (), D.D., LL.D., FRIEDRICH LUDWIG LEONHARD WIEGAND, Ph.D., Th.D., Late Professor of Church History, Union Theological Seminary, New York, and Editor of the Original Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia. Professor of Church History, University of Greifswald. MARTIN SCHIAN, Ph.D., Th.D., PAUL WOLFF (), Professor of Theology, University of Giessen. Late Pastor at Friedersdorf, Brandenburg, and Editor of the Evangelische Kirchenzeitung. REINHOLD SCHMID, Th.Lic., AUGUST WUENSCHE, Ph.D., Th.D., Pastor in Oberholzheim, Wuerttemberg. Retired Titular Professor in Dresden. MAXIMILIAN VICTOR SCHULTZE, Th.D., CLARENCE ANDREW YOUNG, Ph.D., Professor of Church History and Christian Archeology, University of Greifswald. Pastor, Third Reformed Presbyterian Church, Philadelphia, Pa. LUDWIG THEODOR SCHULZE, Ph.D., Th.D., FRANZ THEODOR RITTER VON ZAHN, Th.D., Litt.D., Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Rostock. Professor of New-Testament Exegesis and Introduction, University of Erlangen. JOHN CRAWFORD SCOULLER, D.D., OTTO ZOECKLER (), Ph.D., Th.D., Corresponding Secretary of Board of Ministerial Relief, United Presbyterian Church of North America. Late Professor of Church History and Apologetics, University of Greifswald. EMIL SECKEL, Dr.Jur., Professor of Law, University of Berlin. __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ BIBLIOGRAPHICAL APPENDIX--VOLS. I--IX __________________________________________________________________ The following list of books is supplementary to the bibliographies given at the end of the articles contained in volumes I.-IX., and brings the literature down to November, 1910. In this list each title entry is printed in capital letters. It is to be noted that, throughout the work, in the articles as a rule only first editions are given. In the bibliographies the aim is to give either the best or the latest edition, and in case the book is published both in America and in some other country, the American place of issue is usually given the preference. __________________________________________________________________ Abbot, L.: Seeking after God, New York, 1910. Altar: A. Hartel, Altars and Pulpits; a Series of Examples of Ecclesiastical Work in the Gothic Style, taken mostly from the famous German Cathedrals and Churches of the Middle Ages, 3d ed., New York, 1910. Ammianus Marcellinus: Rerum gestarum libri qui supersunt, ed. C.U. Clark, L. Traube, and G.Heraeus, vol. 1, libri XIV.-XXV., Berlin, 1910. Apologetics:, Die babylonische Kosmogonie und der biblische Schoepfungsbericht. Ein Beitrag zur Apologie des biblischen Gottesbegrifes, Muenster, 1910. A. R. Wells, Why we believe the Bible; Outlines of Christian. Evidences in Question and Answer Form, Boston, 1910. Armenia: M. Ormanian, L'Eglise armenienne, son histoire, sa doctrine, son regime, sa discipline, sa liturgie, sa litterature, son present, Paris, 1910. Athanasian Creed: T. N. Papaconstantinos, The Creed of Athanasius the Great, translated by H. C. J. Lingham, London, 1910. Atonement: J. B. Champion, The Living Atonement, Philadelphia, 1910. Avitus: H. Goelzer and A. Mey, Le Latin de Saint Avit eveque de Vienne (450-526), Paris, 1909. Babylonia: F. Delitzsch, Handel and Wandel in Altbabylonien, Stuttgart, 1910. D. W. Myhrman, Sumerian Administrative Documents, dated in the Reigns of the Kings of the second Dynasty of Ur, from the Temple Archives of Nippur, preserved in Philadelphia, Philadelphia, 1910. Bacher, W.: W. L. Blau, Bibliographie der Schriften Wilhelm Bachers nebst einem hebraeischen Sachund Ortsnamen Register zu seinem sechsbaendigen Agadwerke, Frankfort, 1910. Ballard, A., From Text to Talk, Boston, 1910. Bampton Lectures: W. Hobhouse, The Church and the World in Idea and in History, New York, 1910. Baptists: Seventh Day Baptists in Europe and America; a Series of Historical Papers written in Commemoration of the 100th Anniversary of the Organization of the Seventh Day Baptist General Conference, celebrated at Ashaway, Rhode Island, Aug. 20-26, 1902, 2 vols., Plainfield, N. J., 1910. Barnes, W. E.: Lex in Corde: Studies in the Psalter, London, 1910. Baur, F. C.: E. Schneider, F. C. Baur in seiner Bedeutung fuer die Theologie, Munich, 1909. Becket, T.: T. H. Hatton, Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, London, 1910. Bede: Lives of the First Five Abbots of Wearmouth and Yarrow, London, 1910. Bible Societies: A Popular Illustrated Report of the British and Foreign Bible Society, 1909-10, London,1910. Benedict XIV.: Add to bibliography Heroic Virtue; a Portion of the Treatise of Benedict XIV. on the Beatification and Canonization of the Servants of God, 3 vols., London, 1850. Bible Text: A. B. Ehrlich, Randglossen zur hebraeischen Bibel. Textkritisches, Sprachliches und Sachliches. Erster Band: Genesis und Exodus. Zweiter Band: Leviticus, Numeri, Deuteronomium, Leipsic, 1908-1909. H. H. Josten, New Studien zur Evangelienhandschrift. No. 18, Des heiligen Bernward Evangelienbuch im Domschatz zu Hildesheim, Strasburg, 1909. Agnes Smith Lewis, Old Syriac Gospels, or Evangelion Damepharreshe, London, 1910. H. F. von Soden, Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments in ihrer aeltesten erreichbaren Textgestalt hergestellt auf Grund ihrer Textgeschichte, Berlin, 1906-10. Bible Versions: W. J. Heaton, The Bible of the Reformation: its Translators and their Work, London, 1910. J. P. Hentz, History of the Lutheran version of the Bible, Dayton, O., 1910. S. McComb, The Making of the English Bible, London, 1910. Biblical Criticism: A. Duff, History of Old Testament Criticism, New York, 1910. T. Engert, Das Alte Testament im Lichte modernistisch-katholischer Wissenschaft, Munich, 1910. Biblical Introduction: A. C. Robinson, What about the Old Testament? Is it played out? London, 1910. Biblical Theology: E. von Dobschuetz, The Eschatology of the Gospels, London, 1910. P. Karge, Geschichte des Bundesgedankens im Alten Testament, Muenster, 1910. A. F. Loisy: see below. C. G. Montefiore, Some Elements of the Religious Teaching of Jesus According to the Synoptic Gospels (Jowett Lectures, 1910), London 1910. Biblical Theology: L. B. Paton, The Early Religion of Israel, Boston, 1910. A. Schlatter, Die Theologie des Neuen Testaments, vol. ii., Die Lehre der Apostel, Calw and Stuttgart, 1909-10. H. B. Swete, Studies in the Teachings of our Lord, London, 1910. Boniface: G. F. Browne, Boniface and his Companions, London, 1910. Brahmanism: The Parisistas of the Atharvaveda. Ed. G. M. Bolling and J. von Negelein, Leipsic, 1910. A. Roussel, La Religion vedique, Paris, 1910. Buddhism: Alphabetical List of the Titles of Works in the Chinese Buddhist Tripitaka (Archeological Dept. of India). Being an Index to Bunyin Nanjio's Catalogue and the 1905 Kioto Reprint of the Buddhist Canon. Prepared by E. Denison Ross, Bombay, 1910. H. Oldenburg, Aus dem alten Indien. 3 Aufsaetze ueber Buddhismus, alt-indische Dichtung and Geschichtschreibung, Berlin, 1910. Burma: A. Bunker, Sketches from the Karen Hills, New York, 1910. Shway Yor, The Burman, his Life and Notions, London, 1910. Canonization: Add to bibliograpby the work given above under Benedict XIV. Also A. Boudinhon, Les Proces de beatification et de canonisation, Paris, 1908. T. F. Macken, The Canonization of Saints, Dublin, 1910. China: China and the Gospel. An Illustrated Report of the China Inland Mission, London, 1910. E. Chavannes, Le T'ai Chan: Essai de monoaphie d'un cults chinois. Appendice: Le Dieu du sol dans la chine antique, Paris, 1910. E. H. Parker, Studies in Chinese Religion, London, 1910. Church: W. Hobhouse, The Church and the World in Idea and History, London, 1910. F. I. Paradise, The Church and the Individual, New York, 1910. Church History: J. Felten, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte oder Judentum and Heidentum zur Zeit Christi and der Apostel, 2 vols., Regensburg, 1910. F. X. Funk, A Manual of Church History, vol. ii., London, 1910. S. Lublinski, Der urchristliche Erdkreis und sein Mythos, Vol. i., Die Entstehung des Christentums aus der antiken Kultur, Jena, 1910. Clement of Alexandria: J. Gabrielseon, Ueber die Quellen des Clemens Alexandrinus, vol. ii., Zur genaueren Pruefung der Favorinushypothese, Leipsic, 1909. Cologne: W. Pelster, Stand and Herkunft der Bischoefe der Koelner Kirchenprovinz im Mittelalter, Weimar, 1909. Common Prayer, Book of: N. Dimock, The History of the Book of Common Prayer in its Bearing on Present Eucharistic Controversies, London and New York, 1910. Comparative Religion: E. S. Ames, The Psychology of Reliqious Experience, Boston, 1910. A. S. Bishop, The World's Altar-Stairs in the Religions of the World, London, 1910. C. C. Martindale, ed., Lectures on the History of Religions, St. Louis, 1910. R. M. Meyer, Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte, Leipsic, 1910. R. Quanter, Das Weib in den Religlonen der Voelker unter Beruecksichtigung der einzelnen Kulte. Mit vielen zeitgenossischen Illlustrationen, Berlin, 1910. J. H. Randall and J. G. Smith, The Unity of Religions; a popular Discussion of ancient and modern Beliefs, New York, 1910. J. Sehrijnen, Essays en etudien in vergelijkende Godsdienstgeschiedenis, Mythologie en Folklore, Venlao, 1910. Congregationalists: A. F. Beard, A Crusade of Brotherhood. History of the American Missionary Association, Boston, 1909. Coptic Church: E. A. W . Budge, Coptic Homilies in the Dialect of Upper Egypt, ed. from the Papyrus Codex Oriental 5001, in the British Museum, London, 1910. Councils and Synods: F. Sohulthess, Die syrischen Kanones der Synoden von Nicaea bis Chalcedon nebst einigen zugehoerigen Dokumenten, Berlin, 1908. Crusades: W. S. Durrant, Cross and Dagger: the Crusade of the Children, London, 1910. Curia: F. Russo, La curia romana nella sua organizzione e nel suo completo funzionamento a datare dal 3 novembre, 1908, Palermo, 1910. Dawson, W. J.: The Divine Challenge, New York and London, 1910. Deissmann, A.: Light from the Ancient East. The New Testament. Translation by L. R. M. Strachan, London, 1910. Doctrine, History of: P. Tschackert, Die Entstehung der lutherischen and der reformierten Kirchenlehre samst ihren inneren protestantischen Gegensaetzen, Goettingen, 1910. Dogma, Dogmatics: G. R. Montgomery, The Unexplored Self; an Introductory to Christian Doctrine for Teachers and Students, New York, 1910. Egypt: W. M. F. Petrie, Arts and Crafts of Ancient Egypt, Chicago, 1910. P. Virey, La Religion de l'Ancienne Egypte, Paris, 1910. Egyptian Exploration Fund: Thirtieth Memoir. The XI. Dynasty Temple at Deir-el Bahiri, Part 2 by E. Neville, London, 1910. England, Church of: C. S. Carter, The English Church in the Eighteenth Century, London and New York, 1910. F. W. Cornish, The English Church. in the 19th Century, 2 parts, London, 1910. F. A. Hibbert The Dissolution of the Monasteries, as Illustrated by the Suppression of the Religious Houses of Staffordshire, London, 1910. E. Stock, The English Church in the Nineteenth Century, London and New York, 1910. Epiklesis: P. M. Chains, La Consecration et l'epiclese dons le missal ethiopien, Rome, 1910. Episcopate: R. E. Thompson, The Historic Episcopate, Philadelphia, 1910. Erasmus: A. Meyer, Etude critique sur les relations d'Erasme et de Luther, Paris, 1909. Eschatology: See above, Biblical Theology. Ethics: T. C. Hall, History of Ethics within Organized Christianity, New York, 1910. Eudes, J.: M. Russell, The Life of Blessed John Eudes, London, 1910. Ezra and Nehemiah: G. Klamath, Ezras Leben und Wirken, Vienna, 1908. J. Heis, Geschichdiche and literaerkritische Fragen in Esra 1-6, Muenster, 1909. France: R. P. Lecanuet, L'Eglise de France sous la troisieme republique. Pontificat de Leon XIII. (1878-1908), Paris, 1910. Galilee: A. Resch, Das Galilaea bei Jerusalem. Eine biblische Studie, Leipsic, 1910. Galileo: E. Wohlwill, Galilei und sein Kampf fuer die copernicanische Lehre, Hamburg, 1909. Gnosticism: W. Schultz, Dokumente der Gnosis, Jena, 1910. God: J. A. Hall, The Nature of God, Philadelphia, 1910. Gospel: F. C. Burkitt, The Earliest Sources for the Life of Jesus, Boston, 1910. F. K. Feigel, Der Einschluss des Weissagungsbeweises und anderer Motive auf die Leidensgeschichte. Ein Beitrag zur Evengelienkritik, Tuebingen, 1910. W. M. F. Petrie, The Growth of the Gospels as shown by Scriptural Criticism , London, 1910. Gunkel, H.: Genesis, 3d ed., Goettingen, 1910. Hagenbach, K. R.: Ihr Briefwechsel aus den Jahren 1841 bis 1861, Basel, 1910. Hall, T. C.: See above, Ethics. Hannington, J.: C. D. Michael, James Hannington, Bishop and Martyr, London, 1910. Harmonies: A. R. Whitham, The Life of Our Blessed Lord. From the Revised Version of the Four Gospels. The Bible Text only. London, 1910. Hebrews: F. Dibelius, Der Verfasser des Hebraeerbriefes. Eine Untersuchung zur Geschichte des Urchristentums, Strasburg, 1910. Hellenism: P. Hauser, Les Grece et les semites dans l'histoire de l'humanite, Paris, 1910. Hellenistic Greek: G. Milligan, Selections from the Greek Papyri, ed. with Transl. and Notes, London, 1910. Hexateuch: See above, Gunkel. G. Hoberg, Die Genesis nach dem Literalsinn erklaert, Freiburg, 1908. Leviticus and Numbers. Introduction; in the Century Bible, ed. A. R. S. Kennedy, London, 1910. Hittites: J. Garatang, The Land of the Hittites; an Account of the recent Explorations and Discoveries in Asia Minor; Introduction by A. H. Sayce, New York, 1910. Holland, H. S.: Fibres of Faith, London, 1910. Holy Spirit: R. A. Torrey, The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit, London, 1910. Huss, J.: E. J. Kitts, Pope John the Twenty-third, and Master John Hus of Bohemia, London, 1910. Hymnology: J. Duncan, Popular Hymns, their Authors and Teaching, London, 1910. Idealism: E. W. Lyman, Theology and Human Problems; a comparative Study of absolute Idealism and Pragmatism as interpreters of Religion, New York, 1910. Immortality: S. H. Mellone, The Immortal Hope. Present Aspects of the Problem of Immortality, London, 1910. J. Paterson Smyth, The Gospel of the Hereafter, New York and Chicago, 1910. Indians of North America: David Zeisberger's History of Northern American Indians; ed, A. B. Hulbert and W. N. Schwarze, Columbus, 1910. Inspiration: W. J. Colville, Ancient Mysteries and Modern Revelations, New York, 1910. Ingram, A. F. W.: The Mysteries of God, London, 1910. Isaiah: M. G. Glazebrook, Studies in the Book of Isaiah, London, 1910. G. C. Morgan, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 2 vols., London, 1910. Israel, History of: A. Bertholet, Das Ende des juedischen Staatswesens, Tuebingen, 1910. I. Blum, The Jews of Baltimore; an historical Summary of their Progress and Status as Citizens of Baltimore from early Days to the Year nineteen hundred and ten, Baltimore, 1910. L. Lucas, Zur Geschichte der Juden im vierten Jahrhunderts, Berlin, 1910. S. Oppenheim, The Early History of the Jews in New York, 1664-1664, New York, 1910. Jainism: Manak Chand Jaini, Life of Mahavira, London, 1910. Jefferson, C. E.: The Building of the Church, New York, 1910. Jerome: The First Part of the Epistles, ed. I. Hilberg, in CSEL, vol. liv., Vienna, 1910. Jerusalem, Anglican-German Bishopric in: Add to the bibliography The Jerusalem Bishopric: Documents, with Translations relating thereto, published by Command of H. Frederick William IV., of Prussia, London, 1883. Jesus Christ: P. T. Forsyth, The Work of Christ, London, 1910. F. X. Steinmeyer, Die Geschichte der Geburt and Kindheit Christi and thr Verhaeltnis zur babylonischen Mythe, Muenster, 1910. J. Weiss, Jesus von Nazareth Mythus oder Geschichte? Tuebingen, 1910. John the Apostle: G. S. Barrett, The First Epistle General of St. John. A Devotional Commentary, London, 1910. Westminster New Testament. The Revelation and the Johannine Epistles. Introduction and Notes by Rev. A. Ramsay, London, 1910. M. Seisenberger, Erklaerung des Johannesevangeliums, Regensburg, 1910. John of Ephesus: Extracts from the Ecclesiastical History, ed. with grammatical, historical and geographical Notes by J. P. Margoliouth, Leyden, 1910. John XXIII.: See Huss, John, above. Kempis, Thomas a: Concordance to the Latin Original of the Four Books known as De imitatione Christi, Given to the World A.D. 1441 by Thomas `a Kempis. Comp. by R. Storr, London, 1910. Kierkegaard, S. A.: R. Hoffmann, Kierkegaard and die religioese Gewissheit, Goettingen, 1910. Locke, J.: E. Crous, Die religions-philosophischen Lehren Lockes and ihre Stellung zu dem Deismus seiner Zeit, Halle, 1910. Loisy, A. F.: The Religion of Israel, London, 1910. Loisy, M.: M. Lepin, Les Theories de M. Loisy, Paris, 1908. McFadyen, J. E.: The Way of Prayer, Boston, 1910. McGiffert, A. C.: History of Christian Thought from the Reformation to Kant, London, 1910. Manicheans: Chuastuanit, das Bussgebet der Manichaeer, ed. with German Transl. W. Radloff, Leipsic, 1910. Mathews, S.: A History of New Testament Times in Palestine, 175 B.C.-70 A.D., 2d ed., New York, 1910. Methodists: A. Leger, L'Angleterre religeuse et les origines du methodisme au xviii. siecle. La Jeunesse de Wesley, Paris, 1910. W. Platt, Methodism and the Republic; a View of the Home Field, present Conditions, Needs, and Possibilities, Philadelphia, 1910. W. J. Townsend, H. B. Workman, and G. Eayres, A New History of Methodism, 2 vols., London, 1909. Miracles: J. Wendland, Der Wunderglaube im Christentum, Goettingen, 1910. Missions: W. H. J. Gairdner, Edinburgh, 1910. An Account and Interpretation of the World Missionary Conference, London, 1910. H. C. Lees, St. Paul and his Converts, a Series of Studies in Typical New Testament Mission, London, 1910. J. J. MacDonald, The Redeemer's Reign. Foreign Missions and the Second Advent, ed. G. Smith, London, 1910. Winifred Heston, A Blue Stocking in India, London, 1910 (on medical missionary work). W. E. Strong, The Story of the American Board; an Account of the first hundred Years of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, Boston, 1910. Modernism: R. de Bary, Franciscan Days of Vigil a Narrative of personal Views and Developments, New York, 1910. D. Mercier (Cardinal), Modernism, London, 1910. Mohammed, Mohammedanism: C. Field, Mystics and Saints of Islam, London, 1910. M. T. Houtsma and A. Schaade, Encyklopaedie des Islam, Leyden and Leipsic, 1910. The Encyclopedia of Islam, part v., London, 1910. Zeitschrift fuer Geschichte and Kultur des islamischen Orients, ed. C. H. Becker, begun in Strasburg, 1910. Morgan, G. C.: The Study and Teaching of the English Bible, London, 1910. Mormons: S. W. Traum, Mormonism against itself, Cincinnati, 1910. Moulton, W. F. and Whitley, W. T.: Studies in Modern Christendom--A Series of Lectures Delivered in Connnexion with the Liverpool Board of Biblical Studies, Lent term, 1909, London, 1910. Mysticism: E. Lehmann, Mysticism in Heathendom and Christendom, London, 1910. The Call of Self-knowledge: seven early English mystical Treatises printed by H. Pepwell in 1521; ed. with an Introd. and Notes by E. G. Gardner, New York, 1910. A. Poulain, Die Fuelle der Gnaden. Ein Handbuch der Mystik, 2 parts, Freiburg, 1910. Mythology: P. Ehrenreich, Die allgemeine Mythologie and ihre ethnologischen Grundlagen, Leipsic, 1910. J. E. Hanauer, Folk-lore of the Holy Land, Moslem, Christian, and Jewish, ed. M.l, London, 1910. Naville, E.: See Egyptian Exploration Fund. Neoplatonism: K. S. Guthrie, The Philosophy of Plotinus; his Life, Times, and Philosophy (bound with this: Selections from Plotinus' Enneads), Philadelphia, 1910. Nestorians: Histoire Nestorienne (Chronique de Seert). Part I. Texte Arabe, ed. Addai Scher, traduit par P. Dib, Paris, 1910. Nestorius: L. Fendt, Die Christologie des Nestorius, Kempten, 1910. New Thought: Ella Wheeler Wilcox, New Thought Common Sense and What Life Means to Me, London, 1910. Nicholas I.: A. Greinacher, Die Anschauungen des Papstes Nikolaus I. ueber das Verhaeltnis von Staat and Kirche, Berlin, 1909. Nietzsche, F.: H. Belart, Friedrich Nietzsches Leben, Berlin, 1910. J. M. Kennedy, The Quintessence of Nietzsche, New York, 1910. A. M. Ludovici, Nietzsche: his Life and Works, London, 1910. Papyrus and Papryri: G. A. Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East: the New Testament and the new and recently discovered Manuscripts of the Graeco-Roman World, New York, 1910. Passover: C. Howard, The Passover: an Interpretation, New York, 1910. Pastoral Theology: C. Durand Pallot, La Cure d'ame moderne et ses bases religieuses et scientifiques, Paris, 1910. Paton, L. B.: See above, Biblical Theology. Paul the Apostle: H. Lietzmann, Die Briefe des Apostels Paulus. I., Die vier Hauptbriefe, Tuebingen, 1910. J. Strachan, The Captivity and Pastoral Epistles, New York and Chicago, 1910. A. L. Williams, Epistle to the Galatians, London, 1910. H. L. Yorke, The Law of the Spirit. Studies in the Epistle to the Philippians, London, 1910. Philo: L. Cohn, Die Werke Philos von Alexandria in deutscher Uebersetzung, Breslau, 1909. Polity: A. J. McLean, The Ancient Church Orders, London, 1910. Pragmatism: See above, Idealism. Pseudepigrapha: W. N. Steams, ed., Fragments from Grceco-Jewish Writers, Chicago, 1908. E. Fisserant, Ascension d'Isaie, Paris, 1909. L. Gry, Les Parabolas d'Henoch et leur Messianisme, Paris, 1910. Resch: See above, Galilee. __________________________________________________________________ BIOGRAPHICAL ADDENDA Choisy, J. E.: Became professor of church history in the University of Geneva, 1910. Dowden, J.: d. at Edinburgh Jan. 30, 1910. Eddy, M. B. G.: d. at Newton, Mass., Dec. 3, 1910. Faulhaber, M.: Made bishop of Speyer, 1910. Flint, R.: d. at Edinburgh Nov. 25, 1910. Friedberg, E.: d. at Leipsic Sept. 7, 1910 Giesebrecht, F.: d. at Stettin Aug. 21, 1910. Hoennicke, G.: Became extraordinary professor of the New Testament at Breslau, 1910. Hoyt, W.: d. at Salem, Mass., Sept. 27, 1910. Ince, W.: d. at Oxford Nov. 13, 1910. Juncker, A.: Became professor of the New Testament in Koenigsberg, 1910. Maclagan, W. D.: d. at London Sept. 19, 1910. __________________________________________________________________ ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA Vol i., p. 26 col. 2: Insert "Acre. See Phenicia, Vol. I.,S: 1" Vol i. p. 413, col. 1: Insert "Bacchus: Martyr of the fourth century. See Sergius and Bacchus." Vol. ii., p. 31, col. 1: Insert "Beirut. See Phenicia, I., S: 6." Vol. ii., p. 256, col. 2, line 21: Read "Beach" for "Reach." Vol. iii., p. 58, col. 2, line 19: Read "Paine" for "Payne. " Vol. iii., p. 279, col. 1: Insert "Coudrin, Pierre Marie Joseph. See Picpus, Congregation of." Vol. iv., p. 46, col. 2, line 11 from bottom: Read "Polycrates of Ephesus" for "Polycarp of Smyrna" (important). Vol. iv., p. 192, col. 2, line 20: Read "ideals" for "idols." Vol. v., p. 136, col. 2, line 28: Read "prologue" for "epilogue." Vol. v., p. 186, col. 2, line 10 from bottom: Read "next" for "text." Vol. v., p. 235, col. 2, line 14 from bottom: Read lxxi. for "lxvii.", and line 13 from bottom, read "lxxii.," for "lxvii.". Vol. v., p 322, col. 2, line 23: Read "Hansen" for "Hausen." Vol. v., p. 336, col. 2: Insert "Holyoake, George James. See Secularism." Vol. v., p. 412, col. 2, line 11: Read "i." for "xi." Vol. viii., p. 85, col. 2, line 17 from bottom: Read "Thomson" for "Thomas." Vol. viii., p. 151, col. 2, line 21: Read "at St. Johns, was erected into a diocese in 1847, and into an archdiocese and metropolitan see in 1904." Vol. viii., p. 231, col. 2, line 9: Omit "Canadian." Vol. viii., p. 272, col. 2, line 3: Read "new" for "later." Vol. viii., p. 300, col. 2, line 6 from bottom: Read "Ricker for "Rieker." Vol. viii., p. 358, col. 1, line 13 from bottom: Read "Clerum" for "larum." Vol. viii., p. 393, col. 1, line 3 from bottom: Read "81" for "72"; bottom line, read "Stuart" for "Stewart"; col. 2, line 2, read"1884" for 1881." Vol. viii., p. 426, col. 2, line 23 from bottom: Remove "the distinguished lexicographer." Vol. viii., p. 466, col. 1, lines 4-6: Omit all after "1879 sqq.)." Vol. viii., p. 489, col. 2, line 17 from bottom: Remove from signature. __________________________________________________________________ LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS __________________________________________________________________ [Abbreviations in common use or self-evident are not included here. For additional information concerning the works listed, see vol. i., pp. viii.-xx., and the appropriate articles in the body of the work.] ADB { Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, Leipsic, 1875 sqq., vol. 53, 1907 Adv. adversus, "against" AJP American Journal of Philology, Baltimore, 1880 sqq. AJT American Journal of Theology, Chicago, 1897 sqq. AKR { Archiv fuer katholisches Kirchenrecht, Innsbruck, 1857-61, Mainz, 1872 sqq. ALKG { Archiv fuer Litteratur-und Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters, Freiburg, 1885 sqq. Am. American AMA { Abhandlungen der Muenchener Akademie, Munich, 1763 sqq. ANF { Ante-Nicene Fathers, American edition by A. Cleveland Coxe, 8 vols., and index, Buffalo, 1887; vol. ix., ed. Allan Menzies, New York, 1897 Apoc. Apocrypha, apocryphal Apol. Apologia, Apology Arab. Arabic Aram. Aramaic art. article Art. Schmal. Schmalkald Articles ASB { Acta sanctorum, ed. J. Bolland and others, Antwerp, 1643 sqq. ASM { Acta sanctorum ordinis S. Benedicti, ed. J. Mabillon, 9 vols., Paris, 1668-1701 Assyr. Assyrian A. T. Altes Testament, "Old Testament" Augs. Con. Augsburg Confession A. V. Authorized Version (of the English Bible) AZ { Allgemeine Zeitung, Augsburg, Tuebingen, Stuttgart, and Tuebingen, 1798 sqq. Baldwin, Dictionary { J. M. Baldwin, Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology, 3 vols. in 4, New York, 1901-05 Bardenhewer, Geschichte { O. Bardenhewer, Geschichte der altkirchlichen Litteratur, 2 vols., Freiburg, 1902 Bardenhewer, Patrologie { O. Bardenhewer, Patrologie, 2nd ed., Freiburg, 1901 Bayle, Dictionary { The Dictionary Historical and Critical of Mr. Peter Bayle, 2nd ed., 5 vols., London, 1734-38 Benzinger, Archaeologie { I. Benzinger, Hebraeische Archaeologie, 2d ed., Freiburg, 1907 Bingham, Origines { J. Bingham, Origines ecclesiasticae, 10 vols., London, 1708-22; new ed., Oxford, 1855 Bouquet, Recueil { M. Bouquet, Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, continued by various hands, 23 vols., Paris, 1738-76 Bower, Popes { Archibald Bower, History of the Popes . . . to 1758, continued by S. H. Cox, 3 vols., Philadelphia, 1845-47 BQR Baptist Quarterly Review, Philadelphia, 1867 sqq. BRG See Jaffe Cant. Canticles, Song of Solomon cap. caput, "chapter" Ceillier, Auteurs sacres { R. Ceillier, Histoire des auteurs sacres et ecclesiastiques, 16 vols. in 17, Paris, 1858-69 Chron. Chronicon, "Chronicle" I Chron. I Chronicles II Chron. II Chronicles CIG Corpus inscriptionum Graecarum, Berlin, 1825 sqq. CIL Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum, Berlin, 1863 sqq. CIS Corpus inscriptionum Semiticarum, Paris, 1881 sqq. cod. { codex cod. Theod. codex Theodosianus Col. Epistle to the Colossians col., cols. column, columns Conf. Confessiones, "Confessions" I Cor. First Epistle to the Corinthians II Cor. Second Epistle to the Corinthians COT See Schrader CQR The Church Quarterly Review, London, 1875 sqq. CR { Corpus reformatorum, begun at Halle, 1834, vol. lxxxix., Berlin and Leipsic, 1905 sqq. Creighton, Papacy { M. Creighton, A History of the Papacy from the Great Schism to the Sack of Rome, new ed., 6 vols., New York and London, 1897 CSCO { Corpus scriptorum Christianorum orientalium, ed. J. B. Chabot, I. Guidi, and others, Paris and Leipsic, 1903 sqq. CSEL Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, Vienna, 1867 sqq. CSHB Corpus scriptorum historiae Byzantinae, 49 vols., Bonn, 1828-78 Currier, Religious Orders C. W. Currier, History of Religious Orders, New York, 1896 D. Deuteronomist Dan. Daniel DB { J. Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible, 4 vols. and extra vol., Edinburgh and New York, 1898-1904 DCA { W. Smith and S. Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, 2 vols., London, 1875-80 DCB { W. Smith and H. Wace, Dictionary of Christian Biography, 4 vols., Boston, 1877-87 Deut. Deuteronomy De vir. ill. De viris illustribus De Wette-Schrader, Einleitung { W. M. L. de Wette, Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung in die Bibel, ed. E. Schrader, Berlin, 1869 DGQ See Wattenbach DNB { L. Stephen and S. Lee, Dictionary of National Biography, 63 vols. and supplement 3 vols., London, 1885-1901 Driver, Introduction { S. R. Driver, Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, 10th ed., New York, 1910 E. Elohist EB { T. K. Cheyne and J. S. Black, Encyclopaedia Biblica, 4 vols., London and New York, 1899-1903 Eccl. Ecclesia, "Church"; ecclesiasticus, "ecclesiastical" Eccles. Ecclesiastes Ecclus. Ecclesiasticus ed. edition; edidit, "edited by" Eph. Epistle to the Ephesians Epist. Epistola, Epistolae, "Epistle," "Epistles" Ersch and Gruber, Encyklopaedie { J. S. Ersch and J. G. Gruber, Allgemeine Encyklopaedie der Wissenschaften und Kuenste, Leipsic, 1818 sqq. E. V. English versions (of the Bible) Ex. Exodus Ezek. Ezekiel fasc. fasciculus Friedrich, KD { J. Friedrich, Kirchengeshichte Deutschlands, 2 vols., Bamberg, 1867-69 Gal. Epistle to the Galatians Gama, Series espiscoporum { P. B. Gama, Series episcoporum ecclesiae Catholicae, Regensburg, 1873, and supplement, 1886 Gee and Hardy, Documents { H. Gee and W. J. Hardy, Documents Illustrative of English Church History, London, 1896 Germ. German GGA Goettingische gelehrte Anzeigen, Goettingen, 1824 sqq. Gibbon, Decline and Fall { E. Gibbon, History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ed. J. B. Bury, 7 vols., London, 1896-1900 Gk. Greek, Grecized Gross, Sources { C. Gross, The Sources and Literature of English History . . . to 1485, London, 1900 Hab. Habakkuk Haddan and Stubbs, Councils { A. W. Haddan and W. Stubbs, Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents Relating to Great Britain and Ireland, 3 vols., Oxford, 1869-78 Haer { Refers to patristic works on heresies or heretics, Tertullian's De praescriptione, the Pros haireseis of Irenaeus, the Panarion of Epiphanius, etc. Hag. Haggai Harduin, Concilia { J. Harduin, Conciliorum collectio regia maxima, 12 vols., Paris, 1715 Harnack, Dogma { A. Harnack, History of Dogma . . . from the 3d German edition, 7 vols., Boston, 1895-1900 Harnack, Litteratur { A. Harnack, Geschichte der altchristlichen Litteratur bis Eusebius; 2 vols. in 3, Leipsic, 1893-1904 Hauck, KD { A. Hauck, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, vol. i, Leipsic, 1904; vol. ii., 1900; vol. iii., 1906; vol. iv., 1903 Hauck-Herzog, RE { Realencyklopaedie fuer protestantische Theologie und Kirche, founded by J. J. Herzog, 3d ed. by A. Hauck, Leipsic, 1896-1909 Heb. Epistle to the Hebrews Hebr. Hebrew Hefele, Conciliengeschichte { C. J. von Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, continued by J. Hergenroether, vols. i-vi., viii.-ix., Freiburg, 1883-93 Heimbucher, Orden und Kongregationen { M. Heimbucher, Die Orden und Kongregationen der katholischen Kirche, 2d ed. 3 vols., Paderborn, 1907 Helyot, Ordres monastiques { P. Helyot, Histoire des ordres monastiques, religieux et militaires, 8 vols., Paris, 1714-19; new ed., 1839-42 Henderson, Documents { E. F. Henderson, Select Historical Documents of the Middle Ages, London, 1892 Hist. History, histoire, historia Hist. eccl. Historia ecclesiastica, ecclesiae, "Church History" Hom. Homilia, homiliai, "homily, homilies" Hos. Hosea Isa. Isaiah Ital. Italian J Jahvist (Yahwist) JA Journal Asiatique, Paris, 1822 sqq. Jacobus, Dictionary { A Standard Bible Dictionary, ed. M. W. Jacobus, . . . E. E. Nourse, . . . and A. C. Zenoe, New York and London, 1909 Jaffe, BRG P. Jaffe, Bibliotheca rerum Germanicarum, 6 vols., Berlin, 1864-73 Jaffe, Regesta { P. Jaffe, Regesta pontificum Romanorum . . . ad annum 1198, Berlin, 1851; 2d ed., Leipsic, 1881-88 JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society, New Haven, 1849 sqq. JBL { Journal of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, first appeared as Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, Middletown, 1882-88, then Boston, 1890 sqq. JE The Jewish Encyclopedia, 12 vols., New York, 1901-06 JE The combined narrative of the Jahvist (Yahwist) and Elohist Jer. Jeremiah Josephus, Ant. Flavius Josephus, "Antiquities of the Jews" Joesphus, Apion Flavius Josephus, "Against Apion" Josephus, Life Life of Flavius Josephus Josephus, War Flavius Josephus, "The Jewish War" Josh. Joshua JPT Jahrbuecher fuer protestantische Theologie, Leipsic, 1875 sqq. JQR The Jewish Quarterly Review, London, 1888 sqq. JTS Journal of Theological Studies, London, 1899 sqq. Julian, Hymnology { J. Julian, A Dictionary of Hymnology, revised edition, London, 1907 KAT See Schrader KB See Schrader KD See Friedrich Hauck, Rettberg KL { Wetzer und Welte's Kirchenlexikon, 2d ed., by J. Hergenroether and F. Kaulen, 12 vols., Freiburg, 1882-1903 Krueger, History { G. Krueger, History of Early Christian Literature in the First Three Centuries, New York, 1897. Krumbacher, Geschichte { K. Krumbacher, Geschichte der byzantinischen Litteratur, 2d ed., Munich, 1897 Labbe, Concilia { P. Labbe, Sacrorum concliorum nova et amplissima collectio. 31 vols., Florence and Venice, 1759-98 Lam. Lamentations Lanigan, Eccl. Hist. { J. Lanigan, Ecclesiastical History of Ireland to the 13th Century, 4 vols., Dublin, 1829. Lat. Latin, Latinized Leg. Leges, Legum Lev. Leviticus Lichtenberger, ESR { F. Lichtenberger, Encyclopedie des sciences religieuses, 13 vols., Paris, 1877-1882 Lorenz, DGQ { O. Lorenz, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter, 3d. ed., Berlin, 1887 LXX. The Septuagint I Macc. I Maccabees II Macc. II Maccabees Mai, Nova collectio { A. Mai, Scriptorum veterum nova collectio, 10 vols., Rome, 1825-38 Mal. Malachi Mann, Popes { R. C. Mann, Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, London, 1902 sqq. Mansi, Concilia { G. D. Mann, Sanctorum conciliorum collectio nova, 31 vols., Florence and Venice, 1728 Matt. Matthew MGH { Monumenta Germaniae historica, ed. G. H. Pertz and others, Hanover and Berlin. 1826 sqq. The following abbreviations are used for the sections and subsections of this work: Ant., Antiquitates, "Antiquities"; Auct. ant., Auctores antiquissimi, "Oldest Writers"; Chron. min., Chronica minora, "Lesser Chronicles"; Dip., Diplomata, "Diplomas, Documents"; Epist., Epistolae, "Letters"; Gest. pont. Rom., Gesta pontificum Romanorum, "Deeds of the Popes of Rome"; Leg., Leges, "Laws"; Lib. de lite, Libelli de lite inter regnum et sacerdotium saeculorum xi et xii conscripti, "Books concerning the Strife between the Civil and Ecclesiaetical Authorities in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries"; Nec., Necrologia Germania, "Necrology of Germany"; Poet. Lat. aevi Car., Poetae Latini aevi Carolini, "Latin Poets of the Caroline Time"; Poet. Lat. med. aevi, Poetae Latini medii aevi, "Latin Poets of the Middle Ages"; Script., Scriptores, "Writers"; Script. rer. Germ., Scriptores rerum Germanicarum, "Writers on German Subjects"; Script. rer. Langob., Scriptores rerum Langobardicarum et Italicarum, "Writers on Lombard and Italian Subjects"; Script. rer. Merov., Scriptores rerum Merovingicarum, "Writers on Merovingian Subjects" Mic. Micah Milman, Latin Christianity { H. H. Milman, History of Latin Christianity, Including that of the Popes to . . . Nicholas V., 8 vols., London, 1860-61 Mirbt, Quellen { C. Mirbt, Quellen sur Geschicte des Papsttums und des roemischen Katholicismus, Tuebingen, 1901 MPG { J. P. Migne, Patrologiae cursus completus, series Graeca, 162 vols., Paris, 1857-66 MPL { J. P. Migne, Patrologiae cursus completus, series Latina, 221 vols., Paris, 1844-64 MS., MSS. Manuscript, Manuscripts Muratori, Scriptores L. A. Muratori, Rerum Italicarum scriptores, 28 vols., 1723-51 NA { Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft fuer aeltere deutsche Geschichtskunde, Hanover, 1876 sqq. Nah. Nahum n.d. no date of publication Neander, Christian Church { A. Neander, General History of the Christian Religion and Church, 6 vols. and index, Boston, 1872-81 Neh. Nehemiah Niceron, Memoires. { R. P. Niceron, Memoires pour servir `a l'histoire des hommes illustres . . ., 43 vols., Paris, 1729-45 Nielsen, Papacy. { F. K. Nielsen, History of the Papacy in the Nineteenth Century, 2 vols., New York, 1906 Nippold, Papacy. { F. Nippold, The Papacy in the Nineteenth Century, New York, 1900 NKZ { Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift, Leipsic, 1890 sqq. Nowack, Archaeologie { W. Nowack, Lehrbuch der hebraeischen Archaeologie, 2 vols., Freiburg, 1894 n.p. no place of publication NPNF The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 1st series, 14 vols., New York, 1897-92; 2d series, 14 vols., New York, 1890-1900 N.T. { New Testament, Novum Testamentum, Nouveau Testament, Neues Testament Num. Numbers Ob. Obadiah O. S. B. { Ordo sancti Benedicti, "Order of St. Benedict" O. T. Old Testament OTJC See Smith P. Priestly document Pastor, Popes { L. Pastor, The History of the Popes from the Close of the Middle Ages, 8 vols., London, 1891-1908 PEA { Patres ecclesiae Anglicanae, ed, J. A. Giles, 34 vols., London, 1838-46 PEF Palestine Exploration Fund I Pet. First Epistle of Peter II Pet. Second Epistle of Peter Platina, Popes. { B. Platina, Lives of the Popes from . . . Gregory VII. to . . . Paul II., 2 vols., London, n.d. Pliny, Hist. nat. { Pliny, Historia naturalis Potthast, Wegweiser { A. Potthast, Bibliotheca historica medii aevi. Wegweiser durch die Geschichtewerke, Berlin, 1896 Prov. Proverbs Ps. Psalms PSBA { Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archeology, London, 1880 sqq. q.v., qq.v. quod (quae) vide, "which see" Ranke, Popes { L. von Ranke, History of the Popes, 3 vols., London, 1906 RDM Revue des deux mondes, Paris, 1831 sqq. RE See Hauck-Herzog Reich, Documents { E. Reich, Select Documents Illustrating Mediaeval and Modern History, London, 1905 REJ Revue des etudes Juives, Paris, 1880 sqq. Rettberg, KD { F. W. Rettberg, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, 2 vols., Goettingen, 1846-48 Rev. Book of Revelation RHR Revue de l'histoire des religions, Paris, 1880 sqq. Richardson, Encyclopaedia. { E. C. Richardson, Alphabetical Subject Index and Index Encyclopaedia to Peridodical Articles on Religion, 1890-99, New York, 1907 Richter, Kirchenrecht { A. L. Richter, Lehrbuch des katholischen und evangelischen Kirchenrechts, 8th ed. by W. Kahl, Leipsic, 1886 Robinson, Researches, and Later Researches { E. Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, Boston, 1841, and Later Biblical Researches in Palestine, 3d ed. of the whole, 3 vols., 1867 Robinson, European History { J. H. Robinson, Readings in European History, 2 vols., Boston, 1904-06 Robinson and Beard, Modern Europe. { J. H. Robinson, and C. A. Beard, Development of Modern Europe, 2 vols., Boston, 1907 Rom. Epistle to the Romans RTP Revue de theologie et de philosophie, Lausanne, 1873 R. V. Revised Version (of the English Bible) saec saeculum, "century" I Sam. I Samuel II Sam. II Samuel SBA { Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie, Berlin, 1882 sqq. SBE { F. Max Mueller and others, The Sacred Books of the East, Oxford, 1879 sqq., vol. xlviii., 1904 SBOT { Sacred Books of the Old Testament ("Rainbow Bible"), Leipsic, London, and Baltimore, 1894 sqq. Schaff, Christian Church { P. Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vols. i-iv., vi., vii., New York, 1882-92, vol. v., 2 parts, by D. S. Schaff, 1907-10 Schaff, Creeds { P. Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, 3 vols., New York, 1877-84 Schrader, COT { E. Schrader, Cuneiform Inscriptions and the Old Testament, 2 vols., London, 1885-88 Schrader, KAT { E. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament, 2 vols., Berlin, 1902-03 Schrader, KB { E. Schrader, Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, 6 vols., Berlin, 1889-1901 Schuerer, Geschichte { E. Schuerer, Geschichte des juedischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, 4th ed., 3 vols., Leipsic, 1902 sqq.; Eng. transl., 5 vols., New York, 1891 Script Scriptores, "writers" Scrivener, Introduction { F. H. A. Scrivener, Introduction to New Testament Criticism, 4th ed., London, 1894 Sent. Sententiae, "Sentences" S. J. Societas Jesu, "Society of Jesus" SMA { Sitzungsberichte der Muenchener Akademie, Munich, 1860 sqq. Smith, Kinship { W. R. Smith, Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia, London, 1903 Smith, OTJC { W. R. Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, London, 1892 Smith, Prophets { W. R. Smith, Prophets of Israel . . . to the Eighth Century, London, 1895 Smith, Rel. of. Sem. W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites, London, 1894 S. P. C. K. Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge S. P. G. Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts sqq. and following Strom. Stromata, "Miscellanies" s.v. sub voce, or sub verbo Swete, Introduction { H. B. Swete, Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, London, 1900 Syr. Syriac Thatcher and McNeal, Source Book { O. J. Thatcher and E. H. McNeal, A Source Book for Mediaeval History, New York, 1905 I Thess First Epistle to the Thessalonians II Thess Second Epistle to the Thessalonians ThT { Theologische Tijdschrift, Amsterdam and Leyden, 1867 sqq. Tillemont, Memoires { L. S. le Nain de Tillemont, Memoires . . . ecclesiastiques des six premiers siecles, 16 vols., Paris, 1693-1712 I Tim First Epistle to Timothy II Tim Second Epistle to Timothy TJB { Theologischer Jahresbericht, Leipsic, 1882-1887, Freiburg, 1888, Brunswick, 1889-1897, Berlin, 1898 sqq. Tob. Tobit TQ Theologische Quartalschrift, Tuebingen, 1819 sqq. TS J. A. Robinson, Texts and Studies, Cambridge, 1891 sqq. TSBA { Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, London, 1872 sqq. TSK Theologische Studien und Kritiken, Hamburg, 1826 sqq. TU { Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Litteratur, ed. O. von Gebhardt and A. Harnack, Leipsic 1882 sqq. Ugolini, Thesaurus { B. Ugolinus, Thesaurus antiquitatum sacrarum, 34 vols., Venice, 1744-69 V. T. Vetus Testamentum, Vieux Testament, "Old Testament" Wattenbach, DGQ { W. Wattenbach, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen, 5th ed., 2 vols., Berlin, 1885; 6th ed., 1893-94; 7th ed., 1904 sqq. Wellhausen, Heidentum J. Wellhausen, Reste arabischen Heidentums, Berlin, 1887 Wellhausen, Prolegomena { J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels, 6th ed., Berlin, 1905, Eng. transl., Edinburgh, 1885 ZA { Zeitschrift fuer Assyriologie, Leipsic, 1886-88, Berlin, 1889 sqq. Zahn, Einleitung { T. Zahn, Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 3d ed., Leipsic, 1907; Eng. transl., Introduction to the New Testament, 3 vols., Edinburgh, 1909 Zahn, Kanon { T. Zahn, Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1888-92 ZATW { Zeitschrift fuer die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, Giessen, 1881 sqq. ZDAL { Zeitschrift fuer deutsches Alterthum und deutsche Literatur, Berlin, 1876 sqq. ZDMG { Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlaendischen Gesellschaft, Leipsic, 1847 sqq. ZDP { Zeitschrift fuer deutsche Philologie, Halle, 1869 sqq. ZDPV Zeitschrift des deutschen Palaestina-Vereins, Leipsic, 1878 sqq. Zech. Zechariah Zeph. Zephaniah ZHT { Zeitschrift fuer die historische Theologie, published successively at Leipsic, Hamburg, and Gotha, 1832-75 ZKG { Zeitschrift fuer Kirchengeschichte, Gotha, 1876 sqq. ZKR { Zeitschrift fuer Kirchenrecht, Berlin, Tuebingen, Freiburg, 1861 sqq. ZKT { Zeitschrift fuer katholische Theologie, Innsbruck, 1877 sqq. ZKW { Zeitschrift fuer kirchliche Wissenschaft und kirchliches Leben, Leipsic, 1880-89 ZNTW { Zeitschrift fuer die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, Giessen, 1900 sqq. ZPK { Zeitschrift fuer Protestantismus und Kirche, Erlangen, 1838-76 ZWT { Zeitschrift fuer wissenschaftliche Theologie, Jena, 1858-60, Halle, 1861-67, Leipsic, 1868 sqq. __________________________________________________________________ SYSTEM OF TRANSLITERATION The following system of transliteration has been used for Hebrew: ' = ' or omitted at the z = z = beginning of a word. ch = h? p = p b = b t = t? ph = ph or p v = bh or b y = y ts = z? g = g k = k q = k? g = gh or g k = kh or k r = r d = d l = l s = s d = dh or d m = m s = sh h = h n = n t = t v = w s = s t = th or t The vowels are transcribed by a, e, i, o, u, without attempt to indicate quantity or quality. Arabic and other Semitic languages are transliterated according to the same system as Hebrew. Greek is written with Roman characters, the common equivalents being used. __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ KEY TO PRONUNCIATION When the pronunciation is self-evident the titles are not respelled; when by mere division and accentuation it can be shown sufficiently clearly the titles have been divided into syllables, and the accented syllables indicated. a? as in sofa o? ? as in not iu? ?? as in? duration a ?"?"? arm O? "? "? nor c = k? "? "? cat a ?"?"? at u ??"?"? full [1] ch? ? ?"?"? church a ?"?"? fare u ??"?"? rule cw =? qu as in queen e ?"?"? pen [2] U ??"?"? but dh (th) ?"?"? the e ?"?"? fate U ??"?"? burn f ????"?"? fancy i ?"?"? tin ai ??"?"? pine g (hard) "?"? go i ?"?"? machine au ??"?"? out H ???"?"? loch (Scotch) o ?"?"? obey ei ??"?"? oil hw (wh) "?"? why O ?"?"? no iu ??"?"? few j ????"?"? jaw __________________________________________________________________ [1] In German and French names ue approximates the sound of u in dune. [2] In accented syllables only; in unaccented syllables it approximates the sound of e in over. The letter n, with a dot beneath it, indicates the sound of n as in ink. Nasal n (as in French words) is rendered n. __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE __________________________________________________________________ Petri, Lars, and Olav (Olaus) PETRI, LARS, and OLAV (OLAUS)). See [1]Sweden. Petri, Ludwig Adolf PETRI, LUDWIG ADOLF: German Lutheran; b. at Lueethorst (a village of Hanover) Nov. 16, 1803; d. at Hanover Jan. 8, 1873. He was educated at the University of Goettingen (1824-27) and, after being a private tutor for some time, became, in 1829, "collaborator" at the Kreuzkirche in Hanover, where he was assistant pastor from 1837 until 1851, and senior pastor from 1851 until his death. During the years 1830-37 his convictions gradually changed from rationalistic to orthodox. His power as a preacher was especially shown by his Licht des Lebens (Hanover, 1858) and Salz der Erde (1864). For the improvement of the liturgy of his communion he wrote Beduerfnisse and Wuensche der protestantischen Kirche im Vaterland (Hanover, 1832); and still more important service was rendered by his edition of the Agende der hannoverschen Kirchenordnungen (1852). In behalf of religious instruction he wrote his Lehrbuch der Religion fur die oberen Klassen protestantischer Schulen (Hanover, 1839; 9th ed., 1888), and later collaborated on the ill-fated new catechism of 1862. He likewise conducted for many years the theological courses in the seminary for preachers at Hanover, and in 1837 founded in the same city an association for theological candidates, over which he presided until 1848. In 1845-47 he edited, together with Eduard Niemann, the periodical Segen der evangelischen Kirche, and in 1848-55 was editor of the Zeitblatt fur die Angelegenheiten der lutherischen Kirche. In 1842 he founded an annual conference of the Hanoverian Lutheran clergy; and in 1853, together with General Superintendent Steinmetz and August Friedrich Otto Muenchmeyer (q.v.), he established the well-known "Lutheran Poor-box" (see [2]Gotteskasten, Lutherischer). At the same time, Petri was firmly opposed to any amalgamation of the Lutheran and Reformed Churches, and was thus led to assume an unfavorable position even toward the Inner Mission (q.v.). In 1834 he helped to found the Hanoverian missionary society, of which he was first secretary and then president, while he materially aided the cause of foreign missions by his Die Mission and die Kirche (Hanover, 1841). His opposition to all movements in favor of a union of Lutherans and Reformed found renewed expression in his Beleuchtung der Goettinger Denkschrift zur Wahrung der evangelischen Lehrfreiheit (Hanover, 1854), an attack on the unionistic sympathies of the theological faculty of Goettingen. After this, Petri withdrew more and more from public life; and the only noteworthy work which he subsequently wrote was Der Glaube in kurzen Betrachtungen (4th ed., Hanover, 1875). Bibliography: E. Petri, L. A. Pitri, ein Lebenabild, 2 vols., Hanover, 1888-96; J. Freyteg, Zu Petris Gedaechtnis, ib. 1873. Petrie, William Mattew Flinders PETRIE, WILLIAM MATTHEW FLINDERS: English Egyptologist; b. in London June 3, 1853. He was educated privately, and in 1875-80 was engaged in surveying early British remains. Since 1880 he has carried on excavations of the utmost importance in Egypt, while since 1892 he has been professor of Egyptology in University College, London, and also in London University since 1907. In 1894 he founded the Egyptian Research Account (q.v.), which became the British School of Archeology in Egypt in 1905, of which he is honorary director; he is likewise on the committee of the Palestine Exploration Fund and the Royal Anthropological Institute. Among his works special mention may be made of the following: Stonehenge (London, 1880); Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh (1883); Tanis (2 parts, 1885-87); Naukratis (1886); A Season in Egypt (1888); Racial Portraits (1888); Historical Scarabs (1889); Hawara, Biahmu, and Arsinoe (1889); Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara (1890); Illahun, Kahun, and Gurob (1891); Tell el Hesy (1891); Medum (1892); Ten Years' Digging in Egypt (1893); Student's History of Egypt (3. parts, 1894-1905); Tell el Amarna (1895); Egyptian Tales (1895); Decorative Art in Egypt (1895); Naqada and Ballas (1896); Koptos (1896); Six Temples at Thebes (1897); Deshasheh (1897); Religion and Conscience iv. Egypt (1898); Syria and Egypt (2 vols., 1898); Dendereh (1900); Royal Tombs of the First Dynasty (1900); Diospolis Parva (1901); Royal Tombs of the Earliest Dynasties (1901); Abydos (2 parts, 1902-03); Ehnasya (1904); Methods and Aims in Archeology (1904); Researches in Sinai (1906); Hyksos and Israelite Cities (1906); Religion of Ancient Egypt (1906); Janus in Modern Life (1907); The Arts and Crafts of Ancient Egypt (1.309); and Personal Religion in Egypt before Christianity (1910). Petrikau, Synods of PETRIKAU, pe''tri-kau', SYNODS OF: Four Polish synods held at Petrikau (75 m. s.w. of Warsaw), Russian Poland, in 1551, 1555, 1562, and 1565. The Reformation early found welcome in Poland, especially in Posen and Cracow; and the first Protestant teachers were exclusively Lutheran. Calvinism was introduced during the reign of Sigismund August II. (1548-72), who stood in close relations to Calvin, and at the same time the Bohemian Brethren expelled from their own country took refuge in large numbers in Great Poland, especially in Posen. At the Synod of Kozminek in 1555 they united with the Calvinists, though the Roman Catholics, under the leadership of Stanislaus Hosius, bishop of Culm and Ermeland, did all in their power to obstruct the extension of the Protestant movement. At the first Synod of Petrikau in 1551, a Roman Catholic confession of faith was drawn up, expressly intended to answer the principles of the Augsburg Confession, and severe measures were taken against converts to the new teachings. The king and the nobility, however, strongly favored the Protestant party, and the former added his voice to the demand made by the second Synod of Petrikau (1555) that a national council be convened to settle the religious controversies. Sigismund also sent representatives to the pope, requiring the administration of the chalice, the celebration of mass in the vernacular, the abolition of clerical celibacy, and the abandonment of annates. The pope, however, refused to accede to these demands, and sent a nuncio, Bishop Lipomani of Verona, to Poland to repress the Protestant movement. He entirely failed, but the success of the Polish reformers was rendered impossible by their own divisions, as became clear at the third synod, held at Petrikau in 1562. There were constant difficulties between the Lutheran and Reformed parties, and the situation was made still more complicated by the appearance of a Polish antitrinitarian movement. All attempts to secure harmony failed, and the antitrinitarians were formally excluded from fellowship with Protestants at the fourth synod of Petrikau, held in 1565, though neither this nor a royal command banishing all Italian antitrinitarians (1654) was carried out. In the same year, at a diet convened at Petrikau, the antitrinitarian leaders secured the holding of a disputation with their opponents, though the Lutherans held aloof, and only the Reformed and the Bohemian Brethren accepted. At this disputation Gregor Pauli, a Cracow preacher and the leader of the antitrinitarians, alleged the impossibility of reconciling the Catholic creeds concerning the Persons of the Trinity with the teaching of the Scriptures; while the trinitarians insisted on the historic agreement between the Scriptures and the teaching of the whole Church. After fourteen days of debate the two parties were farther apart than ever. The antitrinitarian representatives, moreover, disagreed among themselves, some denying the preexistence of Christ and the personality of the Holy Spirit, others accepting the preexistence of Christ and the reality of the Holy Spirit, and yet others assuming three Persons in the Trinity, but ascribing different values to them. The final outcome of the matter was the exclusion of the antitrinitarians from the Reformed Church, so that henceforth they constituted a separate communion. (David Erdmann.) Bibliography: Besides the literature under [3]Poland, Christianity in, and the works of Dalton and Kruske named under [4]Lasco, Johannes A., consult: A. Regenvolscius (A. Wengierski), Systema historico-chronologicum ecclesiarum Slavonicarum, pp. 180 sqq., Utrecht, 1652; S. Lubenski, Historia reformationis Polonicae, pp. 144 sqq., 201 sqq., Freistadt, 1685; E. Borgius, Aus Posens und Polens kirchlicher Vergangenheit, pp. 14 sqq., Berlin, 1898; and G. Krause, Die Reformation and Gegenreformation in Polen, Posen, 1901. Petrobrussians PETROBRUSSIANS. See [5]Peter of Bruys. Petrus Mongus PETRUS MONGUS. See [6]Monophysites, S:S: 5 sqq. Peucer, Caspar PEUCER, poi'tser, CASPAR: Leader of the crypto-Calvinists (see [7]Philippists) in the electorate of Saxony; b. at Bautzen (31 m. e.n.e. of Dresden) Jan. 6, 1525; d. at Dessau (67 m. s.w. of Berlin) Sept. 2, 1602. He was educated at the University of Wittenberg, which he entered in 1540, and where he became professor of mathematics in 1554 and of medicine in 1560. Throughout the life of Melanchthon, whose son-in-law he was, he was his friend, counselor, physician, and companion, while after the Reformer's death he edited his collected works (Wittenberg, 1562-64), two books of his Epistolae (1570), the third and fourth volumes of his Selectae declamationes (Strasburg, 1557-58), etc. He likewise completed Melanchthon's revision of the Chronicon Carionis, which had extended only to Charlemagne, by two books bringing it down to the Leipsic disputation (2 parts, Wittenberg, 1562-65); while among his independent writings mention may be made of his De dimensione terrae (Wittenberg, 1550) and De praecipuis divinationum generibus (1553). Peucer was a favorite at the Dresden court, where he was appointed physician in 1570, though still retaining his Wittenberg professorship. At his instance Melanchthon's Corpus doctrinae was officially introduced in 1564, thus marking the rise of Philippism; and vacancies in the university were filled with strict followers of Melanchthon. In 1571 he collaborated in a school abridgment of the Corpus doctrinae which sharply denied Luther's teaching of Ubiquity (q.v.), and with the death of Paul Eber (q.v.) in 1569 approximation to Calvinism became still easier. At the same time, the strict Lutheran party continued to have much influence at court because their side was taken by the elector's wife, a Danish princess. Considerations of foreign policy, however, finally induced the elector to dismiss his favorite physician, especially as he was accused, though wrongly, of having a part in a Calvinistic exposition of the faith, Exegesis perspicua, published by Joachim Cureus in 1574. Peucer's correspondence was searched, and evidence was found which was construed as expressing his intention to try to introduce the Calvinistic theory of the Lord's Supper into the Saxon Church. He acknowledged his fault when tried before the Saxon diet at Torgau, and was directed to restrict his interest to medicine. But the Elector August was not contented and had Peucer, whom he suspected of working to introduce the rival ducal house into Saxony, taken to Rochlitz. In 1576 Peucer was imprisoned in the Pleissenburg in Leipsic, where he suffered much hardship, but determinedly resisted all attempts to convert him, refusing to make any concessions contrary to Calvinism. Finally, when the Danish princess died, and the elector married a second time (Jan. 3, 1586), his father-in-law, Prince Joachim Ernest of Anhalt successfully pleaded for Peucer's release. This took place on Feb. 8, 1586, a few days before the death of August. Peucer now went to Dessau, where he was appointed physician in ordinary and councilor to the prince. The remaining years of his life were peaceful, spent partly in Dessau, partly in Cassel and the Palatinate, and partly in travels, and he was honored by all. To the last he adhered to Melanchthon's theology, and he was likewise busy with his pen. During his imprisonment he began his Historia carcerum et liberationis divinae (ed. after the author's death by Christoph Pezel, Zurich, 1605); and he also wrote in prison his Tractatus historicus de Philippi Melanchthonis sententia de controversia coenae Domini (Amberg, 1596), as well as a poetical Idyllium, patria seu historia Lusatiae superioris (Bautzen, 1594). (G. Kawerau.) Bibliography: For Peucers letters consult CR, vols. vii. and ix.; J. Voigt, Briefwechsel der beruehmtesten Gelehrten, pp. 497 sqq., Koenigsberg, 1841; and Zeitschrift fuer preussische Geschichte, xiv (1877), 90 sqq., 145 sqq. Early sources are the funeral sermon by J. Brendel, Zerbat, 1603; a memorial oration by S. Stenius, ib. 1603; and A. van de Corput, Het Leven ende Dood van . . . P. Melanchton Mitagaders de . . . gevangenisse van . . . Caspar Peucerus, Amsterdam, 1662. Biographies or sketches are by: J. C. Leupold, Budissin, 1745; H. C. A. Eichstaedt, Jena, 1841; E. A. H. Heimburg Jena, 1842; F. Coch, Marburg, 1850; E. L. T. Henke, Marburg, 1865. Consult further: R. Calinich, Kampf and Untergang des Melanchthonismus in Kursachaen, Leipsic, 1866; J. W. Richard, Philip Melanchton, New York, 1898; J. Janssen, Hist. of the German People, vols. vii.-viii., St. Louis, 1905; N. Mueller, Melanchthons letzte Lebenstage, 1910; Ersch and Gruber, Encyklopaedie, III., xix. 435-460; ADB, xxv. 552 sqq.; and the literature under [8]Philippists. Pew PEW: Ecclesiastically, an enclosed seat in a church (not, in the modern sense, an open bench). The term (Old Fr. pui, puy, puye, poi, peu, "an elevated place," "seat"; Lat. podium, " balcony") in early English use meant a more or less elevated enclosure for business in a public place; this use was probably prior to its employment as the name for an enclosed seat for worshipers in a church. Indeed, the pew might be even a box in a theater. The pew is not, then, an original or primitive part of the church edifice, the floor of the structure being in early times open and unobstructed, though in the chancel there came to be seats for the clergy and choir. This tradition is continued in modern times in Roman and Greek cathedrals in Europe, which are usually without pews, portable benches or chairs being furnished instead. In early times the attitude of worshipers was standing (or kneeling), and the provision of stools or benches probably does not date back of the fourteenth century, though some English churches had stone benches along the walls and around pillars. The earliest known examples of regular benching is probably that of the church at Soest (34 m. s.e. of Muenster, Westphalia) in the early fifteenth century. The church at Swaffham (25 m. w. of Norwich), England, was in 1454 provided with pews by private benefaction, and this was almost certainly not the first instance in England. The records of St. Michael's, Cornhill, London, prove the existence of pews in that church in 1457, the doors of some of which, at least, had locks, a fact which implies private ownership. It seems certain, however, that at first only parts of the edifice were provided with pews. The shape of these does not seem to have been uniform. While the oblong pew was naturally the most common, the seat facing the altar, other pews were square with the seats placed around three or all four sides, leaving space only for the door. These latter were often private, appropriated to the use of the lord of the manor or to a family an early member of which had in some way acquired a perpetual interest. In England the right to occupy a certain pew sometimes goes with the occupancy of a certain house in the parish. The acquisition of property-right in a pew is not confined to England; in quite a number of churches in the United States pews are held by families and may figure as property in valuation of assets. But the tendency is decidedly against this exclusive right, and where such cases exist, the policy of the church is usually to redeem the pew from private ownership. It is not certain at what period pews were made a means of income to the parish. In St. Margaret's, Westminster, the records show payment of pew rents as early as the first part of the sixteenth century. The law of England gives to every parishioner a right to a sitting in the parish church if it was built before 1818, and this right is enforceable by civil procedure. In the United States custom varies greatly. Almost general is the practise of using the pews as a means of raising revenue for church purposes. In a considerable number of churches the pew rents provide the principal means of income, pews being rented by the year. In a large number of churches, however, the feeling exists that this is a limitation upon the "freedom of the Gospel," and the sittings are all free, the income being derived from collections or pledges of free-will offerings. Bibliography: J. M. Beale, Hist. of Pews, Cambridge, 1841; J. C. Fowler, Church Pews, their Origin and Legal Incidents, London, 1844; G. H. H. Oliphant, The Law of Pews in Churches and Chapels, ib. 1850; A. Heales, Hist. and Law of Church Seats or Pews, 2 vols., ib. 1872. Pezel, Christoph PEZEL, pe'tsel, CHRISTOPH: German crypto-Calvinist; b. at Plauen (61 m. s.w. of Leipsic) Mar. 5, 1539; d. at Bremen Feb. 25, 1604. He was educated at the universities of Jena and Wittenberg, his studies at the latter institution being interrupted by his teaching for several years. In 1557 he was appointed professor in the philosophical faculty and in 1569 was ordained preacher at the Schlosskirche in Wittenberg. In the same year he entered the theological faculty, where he soon became involved in the disputes between the followers of Melanchthon and Luther, writing the Apologia verae doctrinae de definitione Evangelii (Wittenberg, 1571) and being the chief author of the Wittenberg catechism of 1571. He soon took a leading position as a zealous Philippist, but in 1574 he and his colleagues were summoned to Torgau and required to give up the Calvinistic theory of the Lord's Supper. As they refused to subscribe to the articles presented to them, they were placed under surveillance in their own houses and forbidden to discuss or to print anything on the questions in dispute. They were afterward deposed from their professorships, and in 1576 were banished. Pezel, who had hitherto been at Zeitz, now went to Eger; but in 1577, like his fellow exiles, received a position from Count John of Nassau, first at the school in Siegen and later at Dillingen. Pezel then definitely accepted Calvinism, and the Church in Dillenburg was united to the Calvinistic body. In 1578 he became pastor at Herborn, and in 1580 was permitted by Count John to go for a few weeks to Bremen to try to reconcile the Church difficulties between the Calvinists and Lutherans. His task was difficult, however, since the Lutheran Jodocus Glanaeus refused to meet him in open debate. The civil authorities, construing this as contumacy, deposed Glanaeus, and Pezel preached in his place. He soon returned to Nassau, but in 1581 was permanently appointed the successor of Glanaeus at Bremen, where, four years later, he was made superintendent of the churches and schools. At the same time he became pastor of the Liebfrauenkirche, though he also retained his pastorate at the Ansgariikirche till 1598. He took an active part in improving and extending the work at the Bremen gymnasium, where he was professor of theology, moral philosophy, and history, being also the leader in all the theological controversies in which the Bremen church became involved. Pezel did away with Luther's Catechism, substituting for it his own Bremen catechism, which remained in force until the eighteenth century, removed images and pictures from the churches, formed a ministerium which united the clergy, and, by his Consensus ministerii Bremensis ecclesiae of 1595, prepared the way for the complete acceptance of Calvinistic doctrine. Pezel was the editor Of many theological writings, of which the most important were the Loci theologici of his teacher, Victorinus Strigel (4 parts, Neustadt, 1581-84); Philip Melanchthon's Consilia (1600); and Caspar Peucer's Historia carcerum et liberationis divinae (Zurich, 1605); while among his independent works special mention may be made of the following: Argumenta et objectiones de praecipuis articulis doctrinae Christianae (Neustadt, 1580-89); Libellus precationum (1585); and Mellificium historicum, complectens historiam trium monarchiarum, Chaldaicae, Persicae, Graecae (1592). He is particularly interesting as showing the evolution from Melanchthon's attitude toward predestination to the complete determinism of the Calvinistic concept of the dogma. (G. Kawerau.) Bibliography: Autobiographic material is contained in Pezel's Widerholte warhaffte . . . Erzehlung, Bremen, 1582, in Wittemberger Ordiniertenbuch ii (1895), 117. Consult: J. H. Steubing, Nassauische Kirchen- and Reformationgeschichte, Hadamar, 1804; ZHT, 1866, pp. 382 sqq., 1873, 179 sqq; Iken, in Bremisches Jahrbuch, ix (1877), 1 sqq., x (1878), 34 sqq.; E. Jacobs, Juliana Von Stolberg, pp. 286 sqq., Wernigerode, 1889; W. von Bippen, Geschichte der Stadt Bremen, ii. 199, Bremen, 1898; Ersch and Gruber, Encyklopaedie, III, xx. 63 sqq.; ADB, xxv. 575 sqq. Pfaff, Christoph Matthaeus PFAFF, pfaf, CHRISTOPH MATTHAEUS: German Lutheran; b. at Stuttgart Dec. 24, 1686; d. at Giessen Nov. 19, 1760. He was educated at the University of Tuebingen (1699-1702), and became lecturer in 1705, but in the following year, at the command of the duke of Wuerttemberg, traveled extensively in Germany, Denmark, Holland, and England, with special attention to the study of Semitic languages. Almost immediately on his return he was directed to proceed to Italy with the heir apparent, with whom he spent three years in Turin. Here, as elsewhere, he was unwearied in searching through libraries, and was rewarded by the discovery of many fragments hitherto unknown, as of sermons of Chrysostom and portions of Hippolytus. In this way he also found the epitome of the "Institutes" of Lactantius, which he edited at Paris in 1712; and he aroused wide interest by the alleged discovery of four fragments of Ignatius which he published, with voluminous dissertations, at The Hague in 1715. Over these fragments an animated controversy was long waged. It is now generally held that they are not to be ascribed to Ignatius; though the question remains whether they were a forgery of Pfaff 's, or whether they were cut out of some Turin catena manuscript. Both contingencies were possible in the case of Pfaff, who is known to have mutilated a Turin manuscript of Hippolytus, and to have forged a document to establish the claim of the house of Savoy to the titular kingdom of Cyprus. In 1712 Pfaff returned to Germany and remained a year at Stuttgart, after which he visited Holland and France with the heir apparent, returning permanently to Germany in 1716. Despite his youth, Pfaff was then appointed professor of theology at Tuebingen, where he rose steadily, becoming chancellor of the university at the age of thirty-four, and retaining this dignity for thirty-six years. He was a man of great versatility and of encyclopedic learning, and at the same time was indefatigable as an author. He wrote a large number of dissertations, of which the De originibus juris ecclesiastici ejusdem indole (Tuebingen, 1719) marked the beginning of a new epoch in its field, for in it, and in the Akademische Reden ueber das sowohl allgemeine als auch teutsche protestantische Kirchenrecht (1742), he for the first time carried to its logical results the doctrine of Collegialism (q.v.). In the sphere of theology he wrote Constitutiones theologiae dogmaticae et moralis (Tuebingen, 1719); Introductio in historiam theologiae literariam (1720); Institutiones historiae ecclesiasticae (1721); and Notae exegeticae in evangelium Matthaei (1721); while his pietistic sympathies found expression in such works as his Kurtzer Abriss vom wahren Christentum (Tuebingen, 1720) and Hertzens-Katechismus (1720), and his general Biblical scholarship was evinced by his collaboration with Johann Christian Klemm in the preparation of the "Tuebingen Bible" of 1730 (see [9]Bibles, Annotated, I., S: 1). Pfaff was chiefly active, however, in endeavoring to unite the Protestant churches, and to this end he composed a long series of monographs which were collected in German translation under the title of Gesammelte Schriften, so zur Vereinigung der Protestierenden abzielen (Halle, 1723). Here again he was no innovator, and though his proposals attracted wide attention, Lutheran opposition rendered them fruitless. Henceforth Pfaff frittered away his energies, producing work more remarkable for quantity than quality, and plunging into countless trivial literary controversies: He lost his popularity and influence in the university, forfeited the interest of the students, and in 1756 resigned from the chancellorship. His departure from Tuebingen was unmourned, but his intention of spending the remainder of his life in retirement at Frankfort was frustrated by a call to Giessen, where he became chancellor, superintendent, and director of the theological faculty. Here he remained until his death, four years later, though here, too, the faults which dimmed his great talents gained him general enmity. (Erwin Preuschen.) Bibliography: The short Vita in Gesammelte Schrifften, ut sup., ii. 1-9, was used by C. P. Leporin for his Verbesserte Nachricht von . . . C. M. Pfaffens Leben, Leipsic, 1726, and this in turn was the basis of the account in Zedler's Universallexicon, xxvii. 1198, ib. 1741 and other narratives in biographical works. Consult F. W. Strieder, Hessiche Gelehrtengeschichte, x. 322 sqq., 21 vols., Goettingen, 1781-1868; A. F. Buesching, Beytraege zu der Lebensgeshichte denkwuerdiger Personen, iii. 170-171, 287-288, 6 parts, Halle, 1783-89; J. M. H. DOring, Gelehrte Theologen im 18. Jahrhundert, iii. 249 sqq., 4 vols., Neustadt, 1831-1835; W. Gass, Geschichte der protestantischen Dogmatik, iii. 74 sqq., 4 vols., Berlin, 1854-57; C. Weizsaecker, Lehrer und Unterricht von dem evangelischen Fakultaet, pp. 97 sqq., in Tuebinger Festschrift, 1877; A. Ritschl, Geschichte des Pietismus, iii. 42 sqq., Bonn, 1886; Ersch and Gruber, Encyklopaedie, III., xx. 101 sqq.; ADB, xxv. 587 sqq. Pfaffenbrief PFAFFENBRIEF, pfaf''en-brif': A compact, dated Oct. 7, 1370, whereby the cantons of Zurich, Lucerne, Zug, Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden united to oppose foreign spiritual and secular jurisdiction and to preserve national peace. The immediate cause of the compact was the attack upon and imprisonment of Peter of Gundoldingen, head of Zurich's ally, Lucerne, and his party by Bruno Brun, provost of the cathedral of Zurich (Sept. 13, 1370). The aggressor, an adherent of the Austrian party, refused to recognize the jurisdiction of a secular court, and was accordingly banished, while his prisoner was released. Such, however, was the fear that Brun might appeal to foreign, imperial, or ecclesiastical courts that, to avoid any such contingency in future, the Pfaffenbrief was drawn up. This document merely emphasized and guaranteed existing rights. It laid down two principles: all cases within the confederation, except matrimonial and ecclesiastical, must be tried before the local judge, who had jurisdiction even over aliens (thus ignoring both the imperial courts and foreign spiritual courts); it contained resolutions relating to the public peace, and forbade waging wars without the consent of the government. At the same time, ecclesiastical jurisdiction was not annulled, and cases in which one of the clergy was defendant were usually tried in the episcopal courts. By requiring the oath of allegiance from the clergy, moreover, the Pfaffenbrief indirectly tended to subordinate the clergy to the State in matters applying equally to clergy and laity. By thus delimiting, in an important sphere of law, what appertained to the State and what to the Church, and by favoring the claims of the former rather than of the latter, the Pfaffenbrief marked the first real and successful Swiss attempt to restrict by means of the secular law the unlimited extension of ecclesiastical power. (F. Fleiner.) Bibliography: A. P. von Segesser, Rechtsgeschichte der Stadt . . . Luzern, vols. i.-ii., passim, Lucerne, 1850-58; J. C. Bluntschli, Staats- and Rechtsgeschichte . . . Zurich, i. 385 sqq., Zurich, 1838; idem, Geschichte des schweizerischen Bundesrechts, i. 122 sqq., Stuttgart, 1875; T. von Leibenau, in Anzeiger fuer schweizerische Geschichte, 1882, p. 60; W. Oechsli, in Politisches Jahrbuch der schweiz. Eidgenossenschaft, v (1890), 359-365; idem, Quellenbuch der Schweizergeshichte, Zurich, 1901; J. Dierauer, Geschichte der schweiz. Eidgenossenschaft, i. 282 sqq., Gotha, 1887; K. Daendliker, Geschichte der Schweiz, i. 545 sqq., 632 sqq., Zurich, 1900; J. Huerbin, Handbuch der Schweizergeschichte, i. 197, Stans, 1900; Die Bundesbriefe der alter Eidgenossen, 1291-1513, Zurich, 1904. Pfander, Karl Gottlieb PFANDER, pfan'der, KARL GOTTLIEB: Missionary to the Mohammedans; b. at Waiblingen (7 m. n.e. of Stuttgart), Germany, Nov. 3, 1803; d. at Richmond (8 m. w.s.w. of London) Dec. 1, 1865. His father was a baker, who, perceiving his aptitude for study and sharing his ambitions, sent him first to the Latin school in the town, then to Kornthal (q.v.), and finally to the missionary institute at Basel, where he studied from 1820 to 1825. He was a remarkable linguist and of indefatigable energy, and spent his life in the effort to convert Mohammedans. From 1825 to 1829 he labored in Shusha, in Transcaucasia, and neighboring lands; from 1829 to 1831 he was with Anthony Norris Groves (q.v.) in Bagdad; from Mar. to Sept., 1831, in Persia, but then returned to Shusha. In 1835 the Russian government forbade all missionary operations except those of the Greek Church; consequently he had to leave Shusha. He went first to Constantinople, in 1836 was back in Shusha, but in 1837 started for India by way of Persia, and arrived in Calcutta Oct. 1, 1838. As it seemed most promising to work henceforth under English auspices he, with the full consent of the Basel Society, became a missionary of the Church Missionary Society, Feb. 12, 1840. He was in Agra from 1841 to 1855, in Peshawar from 1855 to 1857, and in Constantinople from 1858 to 1865. His death occurred while on his furlough. He married first Sophia Reuss, a German, in Moscow, July 11, 1834, who died in childbed in Shusha, May 12, 1835; second, Emily Swinburne, an Englishwoman, in Calcutta, Jan. 19, 1841, who bore him three boys and three girls, and survived him fifteen years. He wrote few books, and most of them in oriental languages. One that is in English was his Remarks on the Nature of Muhammedanism, Calcutta, 1840. But one of his books is a missionary classic. He drafted it in German in May, 1829, while in Shusha, then he expanded and perfected it. It bears in German the title Mizan ul Hakk oder die Wage der Wahrheit, translations have been made of it into Armenian, Turkish, Persian, and Ordu, and it has been widely circulated among Mohammedans of many lands. There is an English translation of it under the title, The Mizan ul Haqq; or Balance [should be Balances] of Truth (London, 1867, new ed., 1910). It is a cogent and incisive attack on Mohammedanism and an explanation and application of Christianity, written in simple language but with deep conviction and ample knowledge. In recognition of the service he had thus rendered, the archbishop of Canterbury (John Bird Sumner) made him a doctor of divinity in 1857. Bibliography: C. F. Eppler, D. Karl Gottlieb Pfander, Basel, 1888; Emily Headland, Sketches of Church Missionary Society Workers, London, 1897. Pfeffinger, Johann PFEFFINGER, pfef'ing-er, JOHANN: Saxon Reformer; b. at Wasserburg (31 m. e.s.e. of Munich), Upper Bavaria, Dec. 27, 1493; d. at Leipsic Jan. 1, 1573. Devoting himself to the religious life, he became an acolyte at Salzburg in 1515, and soon afterward was made subdeacon and deacon. Receiving a dispensation from the regulations concerning canonical age, he was ordained priest and stationed at Reichenhall, Saalfelden, and Passau, where his clerical activity soon found great approbation. Suspected of Lutheran heresy, he went to Wittenberg in 1523, where he was cordially welcomed by Luther, Melanchthon, and Bugenhagen. In 1527 he went as parish priest to Sonnenwalde; and in 1530, when expelled by the bishop of Meissen, he removed to the monastery of Eicha, near Leipsic, where his services were attended by many outside the parish. In 1532 he went to Belgern, whence he was delegated, in 1539, to complete the Reformation in Leipsic. In 1540, he was permanently vested with the office of superintendent. He declined calls to Halle and Breslau, though he took part in completing the work of the Reformation at Glauchau in 1542. In his capacity of censor he prevented further printing of Schenk's postilla. In 1543 he was graduated as the first Protestant doctor of theology, and became a professor of theology in the following year. In 1548 he was made a canon of Meissen. Duke Maurice of Saxony drew him into the negotiations regarding the introduction of a Protestant church constitution and liturgy. Having been appointed assessor in the Leipsic consistory in 1543, he participated, in 1545, in the consecration of a bishop of Merseburg as one of the ordaining clergy. In the following year he negotiated at Dresden with Anton Musa and Daniel Greser, and took part in the deliberations concerning the Interim at the Diet of Meissen (July, 1548), at Torgau (Oct. 18), at Altzella (Nov.), and at the Leipsic Saxon Diet (Dec. 22). The Elector August likewise sought formal expressions of opinion from Pfeffinger; and in this connection, in 1555, he proposed, with a view to securing religious uniformity, that the Interim liturgy of 1549 should again be used. Melanchthon, however, opposed this suggestion, holding that, were it adopted, additional religious disunion would follow. Pfeffinger also took part in the deliberative proceedings of the delegates of the three consistories in 1556, as well as in the Dresden convention of 1571. Pfeffinger's writings were ethical, ascetic, and polemic. His Propositiones de libero arbitrio (1555) occasioned the outbreak of the synergistic strife (see [10]Synergism). Against Nikolaus von Amsdorf he wrote his Antwort (Wittenberg, 1558), Demonstratio mendacii (1558), and Nochmals gruendlicher Bericht; while he opposed Matthias Flacius in his Verantwortung. He embodied his tenets in five articles of the Formula der Bekendnus of June 3, 1556, which he also submitted, in amplified form, to the Wittenberg theologians. Georg Mueller. Bibliography: B. Sartorius, Einfeltiger . . . Bericht von dem Leben . . . J. Pfeffingers, Leipsic, 1573; F. Seifert, in heft iv. of Beitraege zur saechsischen Kirchengeschichte, Leipsic, 1888; G. Mueller, in heft ix. of the same, pp. 98, 118, 165, 181, and x. 210; ADB, xxv. 624-630. Pfeilschifter, Georg PFEILSCHIFTER, pfail'shift-er, GEORG: German Roman Catholic; b. at Mering (7 m. s.e. of Augsburg), Upper Bavaria, May 13, 1870. He was educated at the universities of Munich (1889-93, 1894-99; D.D., 1897) and Vienna (1899), interrupting his studies to make a five months' tour of Italy in 1897. In 1900 he became privat-docent for church history at the University of Munich, but in the same year accepted a call to the Lyceum of Freising as associate professor of church history and patristics. Since 1903 he has been professor of church history in the University of Freiburg. He has written Der Ostgotenkoenig Theoderich der Grosse und die katholische Kirche (Muenster, 1896); Die authentische Ausgabe der vierzig Evangelienhomilien Gregors des Grossen, ein erster Beitrag zur Geschichte der Ueberlieferung (Munich, 1900); and Zur Entstehung der Allegorie room mystischen Gotteswagen bei Dante Purgatorio (Freiburg, 1904). Pfender, Charle Leberecht PFENDER, pfen'der or [F.] fan''dar', CHARLES LEBERECHT: French Lutheran; b. at Hatten in Alsace Oct. 26, 1834. He pursued his studies at Wittenberg, the College de Pont-a-Mousson (B.Litt., 1853), under the faculty of theology at Strasburg (B.Th., 1859), and at the universities of Heidelberg, Goettingen, and Berlin; he became vicar at Wittenberg in 1860; at Paris, 1865; pastor of the Eglise du Batignolles, Paris, 1868, and of the Eglise Saint-Paul, same city, in 1874. He describes himself as theologically a confessional Lutheran. He is the author of La Confession d'Augsbourg. Traduction revue d'apres Ie texte le plus autorise. Precedee d'une introduction (Paris, 1872); L'Agneau de Dieu, Recit de la passion et de la resurrection du Seigneur d'apres les quatre evangelistes. Suivi de meditations, de prieres, et de cantiques pour la semaine saints (1873); Vie de Martin Luther, publiee a l'occasion du quatrieme centenaire de sa naissance (1883). He is a contributor to the present work, and has written much for other standard publications. Pfleiderer, Otto PFLEIDERER, pflai'der-er, OTTO: German Protestant; b. at Stetten (a village near Cannstadt, 4 m. n.e. of Stuttgart), Wuerttemberg, Sept. 1, 1839; d. at Grosslichterfelde, Berlin, July 19, 1908. He was educated at the University of Tuebingen from 1857 to 1861, and after being for a short time vicar at Eningen, a village near Reutlingen, traveled extensively in North Germany, England, and Scotland until 1864. He was then lecturer and privat-docent at Tuebingen until 1868, after which he was a pastor at Heilbronn till 1870, when he went to Jena as chief pastor and university preacher. In 1870 he was appointed professor of theology at the University of Jena, and from 1875 till his death he was professor of practical theology at the University of Berlin. He was one of the most learned and vigorous defenders of the non-miraculous origin of Christianity. He lectured in England on both the Hibbert (1885) and the Gifford (1892-93) foundations. He wrote Die Religion, ihr Wesen and ihre Geschichte (2 vols., Leipsic, 1869); Moral and Religion (Haarlem, 1870); Der Paulinismus (Leipsic, 1873; Eng. transl. by E. Peters, Paulinism, 2 vols., London, 1877); F. G. Fichte, Lebensbild eines deutschen Denkers and Patrioten (Stuttgart, 1877); Religionsphilosophie auf geschichtlicher Grundlage (Berlin, 1878; 2d ed., 2 vols., 1883-84; Eng. transl. by A. Stewart and A. Menzies, Philosophy of Religion, 4 vols., London, 1886-88); Zur religioesen Verstandigung (1879); Grundriss der christlichen Glaubens and Sittenlehre (1880); The Influence of the Apostle Paul on the Development of Christianity (Hibbert lectures; London, 1885); Das Urchristentum, seine Schriften and Lehren (Berlin, 1885; 2d ed., 1902; Eng. transl., Primitive Christianity. Its Writings and Teachings, 2 vols., New York, 1906-09); The Development of Theology in Germany since Kant, and its Progress in Great Britain since 1825 (London, 1890; German ed., Der Entwickelung der protestantischen Theologie in Deutschland seit Kant und in Grossbritannien seit 1825, Freiburg, 1891); Die Ritschlsche Theologie kritisch beleuchtet (Brunswick, 1891); The Philosophy and Development of Religion (Gifford lectures; 2 vols., Edinburgh, 1894); Evolution and Theology, and other Essays (New York, 1900); Das Christusbild das urchristlichen Glaubens (Berlin, 1903; Eng. transl., The Early Christian Conception of Christ: Its Value and Significance in the History of Religion, London, 1905); Die Entstehung des Christentums (Munich, 1905; Eng. transl., Christian Origins, London,1906); Religion und Religionen (1906; Eng. transl., Religion and Historic Faiths, London, 1907); and Die Entwicklung des Christentums (1907; Eng. transl., The Development of Christianity, London, 1910). Pflug, Julius PFLUG, pflug, JULIUS: Roman Catholic bishop of Naumburg; b. at Eytra (a village near Zwenkau, 9 m. s.s.w. of Leipsic) 1499; d. at Zeitz (23 m. s.w. of Leipsic) Sept. 3, 1564. He studied at the universities of Leipsic (1510-17) and Bologna (1517-19), and returned to Germany in 1519 to become canon in Meissen. Disturbed by the religious controversies at home, he returned to Bologna, whence he went to Padua, but in 1521, induced by offers of preferment from Duke George, he returned to his native state, first of all to Dresden, and then to Leipsic, where he still continued to devote himself chiefly to humanistic interests. In 1528-29 he was again in Italy, and in 1530 he accompanied Duke George to the Diet of Augsburg. At this time he became a correspondent of Erasmus, and in his letters to him unfolded his plan for restoring religious peace to Germany. Everything could be done, he thought, by the influence of moderate men like Erasmus and Melanchthon. Erasmus replied that things had gone so far that even a council could be of no help; one party wanted revolution, the other would tolerate no reform. In 1532 Pflug became dean of Zeitz, where he had to grapple with the practical question of the Reformation, since not only was the bishop, who was also diocesan of Freising, continually absent, but the neighboring Protestant elector of Saxony was alleging claims of jurisdiction over the see. Pflug was in favor of lay communion under both kinds, the marriage of the priesthood, and general moral reform. He took part in the Leipsic colloquy in 1534, and as dean of Meissen prepared for the clergy of the diocese the constitutions reprinted in the Leges seu constitutiones ecclesiae Budissinensis (1573). As one of the envoys of John of Meissen, Pflug endeavored, in 1539, to secure from the papal nuncio, Alexander, who was then at Vienna, adhesion to his project for a reform of Roman Catholicism along the lines already indicated, only to be obliged to wait for the decision of the pope. The Reformation was now carried through in Meissen, and Pflug took refuge in Zeitz, later retiring to his canonry at Maintz, and thus rendering Zeitz more accessible to the Protestant movement. In 1541 he was appointed bishop of Naumburg, but John Frederick, the elector of Saxony, hating all men of moderation, forbade him to occupy his see. Pflug was uncertain whether he would accept the nomination or not; and meanwhile the elector, after vainly urging the chapter to nominate another bishop, turned the cathedral of Naumburg over to Protestant services and proposed to provide for the election of a bishop according to his liking. The elector's theologians, though exceedingly dubious regarding his course, finally yielded, and John Frederick selected Nikolaus von Amsdorf (q.v.) for the place and had him ordained by Luther. On Jan. 15, 1542, however, Pflug accepted his election to the bishopric, and sought to have his rights protected by the diets of Speyer (1542, 1544), Nuremberg (1543), and Worms (1545). At the latter diet the emperor directed the elector to admit Pflug to his bishopric, and to repudiate Amsdorf and the secular directors of the chapter. John Frederick refused, however, and the question was settled only by the Schmalkald War. Hitherto Pflug had been in favor of a Roman Catholic reform of a far-reaching character, as was shown by his part at the Regensburg Conference of 1541 (see [11]Regensburg, Conference of); but political conditions and his troubles with the elector of Saxony now made him a bitter opponent of the Reformation. In 1547, when the Schmalkald War closed, Pflug took possession of his bishopric under imperial protection. He was a prominent factor in the negotiations which resulted in the Interim (q.v.), the basis of which was formed by the revision of his Formula sacrorum emendandorum (ed. C. G. Mueller, Leipsic, 1803) by himself, Michael Helding, Johannes Agricola, Domingo de Soto, and Pedro de Malvenda. Pflug now entertained still higher hopes of realizing his reform of Roman Catholicism. He took part in negotiations in Pegau, continuing them in a secret correspondence with Melanchthon to induce him and Prince George of Anhalt to accept a modified sacrificial theory of the mass; and he was also concerned in the deliberations between Maurice and Joachim II. and their theologians at Jueterboch. The result was the first draft of the Leipsic Interim, which was submitted to the national diet in his presence. In his own diocese Pflug refrained from disturbing the Lutherans, restoring Roman Catholic worship only in the chief church in Zeitz and the cathedral of Naumburg, and even permitting Protestant services to be held in the latter. There was almost an entire dearth of Roman Catholic clergy, nor could the he secure a sufficient number from other dioceses. He was accordingly forced to allow the married ministers whom Amsdorf had placed in office to retain their positions, though without Roman Catholic ordination. In Nov., 1551, he was present for a short time at the Council of Trent. Even after the final success of the Protestants in 1552, he remained in undisturbed possession of his see, thanks to his popularity and moderation; and after the abdication of Charles V., he urged the best interests of Germany in his Oratio de ordinanda republica Germaniae (Cologne, 1562). In 1557 he presided at the religious conference at Worms, but was unable to prevent the Flacians from wrecking negotiations. To the last, however, he hoped that, when the Council of Trent reassembled, his moderate program would be successful in restoring religious peace. (G. Kawerau.) Bibliography: The earlier biographies are superseded by that of A. Jansen, in New Mittheilungen aus dem Gebiet histor.-antiq. Forschungen, x (1863), parts 1 and 2. Consult further: A. von Druffel Briefe und Akten zur Geschichte des 16. Jahrhunderts Munich, 1873 sqq.; L. Pastor, Die kirchlichen Reunionabestrebungen, Freiburg, 1879; Sixtus Braun, Naumburger Annalen, pp, 280 sqq., Naumburg, 1892; Rosenfeld, in ZKG, xix (1898), 155 sqq.; E. Hoffmann, Naumburg im Zeitalter der Reformation, Leipsic, 1901; J. Janssen, Hist. of the German People. 147, 182-187, 248, 366, 396 sqq , St. Louis, 1903. Scattering notices of his activity will be found in many works dealing with the Reformation. Pharaoh PHARAOH. See [12]Egypt, I., 2, S: 4. Pharisees and Saducees PHARISEES AND SADDUCEES. [13]Importance; Sources of Knowledge (S: 1). [14]Derivation of "Pharisee" (S: 2). [15]Derivation of "Sadducee"(S: 3). [16]Date of Origin (S: 4). [17]Relations of Pharisees and Scribes (S: 5). [18]Sadducees as Aristocrats (S: 6). [19]Relation of Pharisees to Jewish Nationalism (S: 7). [20]Relation of Sadducees to Nationalism (S: 8). [21]Religious Characteristics (S: 9). [22]Theological Differences (S: 10). [23]Legal and Dogmatic Differences (S: 11). [24]Relation of Pharisaism to Religion (S: 12). 1. Importance; Sources of Knowledge. The great importance of a proper understanding of the two parties thus named for the history of the later Judaism and of Primitive Christianity is not to be misconceived. The entire history of the Jews and of their literature from the Maccabean wars until the destruction of Jerusalem is dominated by this partizan antithesis. The history of Jesus himself and of the original Church are largely thereby conditioned, since it was particularly in conflict with the Pharisees that the doctrine, self-witness and whole active career of Jesus took shape as they did, while over against a Pharisaism which pushed its way even into Christianity the Apostle Paul had to defend the right of his mission to the gentiles, and the universality of Christian salvation. All the more serious, then, that the sources toward knowledge of those parties can be utilized only under difficulties. The Old-Testament books of Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicles, Esther, and Daniel, are pertinent merely in relation to the preliminary history of the, same. And only in sparing measure can even Old-Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha (qq.v.) be employed; among the latter, chiefly the Psalms of Solomon (see [25]Pseudepigrapha, II., 1). In the Gospels and in Acts a few dogmatic differences are mentioned as between Pharisees and Sadducees; but this allows no certain deduction respecting the fundamental and distinctive character of either party. Even the invectives of Jesus against the Pharisees have had reference to out growths of their trend, and are not to influence a judgment of their actual essence. What data Acts and the Pauline epistles contain by way of defining the Pharisaical anti-Pauline Jewish Christians, warrant only slight a posteriori deductions regarding Pharisaism. Doubtless the most valuable intelligence concerning the Pharisees and Sadducees is given by Josephus, whose data are appreciably colored cf. Baumgarten, Jahrbuecher fur deutsche Theologie, IX., 616 sqq.; Paret, in TSK, 1856, pp. 809 sqq) by his own attenuated Pharisaism and by his effort to present Jewish conditions in the most favorable light before the Greek ans Roman world. Patristic data are strongly dependent on Josephus, and are, furthermore, untrustworthy. The Jewish talmudic literature is of great significance in the study of Pharisaism since it is itself elicited by the Pharisaic spirit. Yet its anecdotal details about the history of the Pharisees and Sadducees are almost wholly valueless, being conceived from the standpoint of the later Jewish scholasticism. Yet despite this dearth of sources, they still afford a fairly distinct portraiture of the two parties. 2. Derivation of "Pharisee." The names of the two parties throw some light on the origin and character of both parties. Touching the meaning of the name "Pharisee" there can exist no doubt. The Pharisees are certainly designated as the "separated" (cf. the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan on Deut. xxxiii. 16; Josh. iii. 5)--those who by their prescriptive and ascetic sanctity hedged themselves apart from not only heathenism but also from the rest of Judaism. This explanation occurs even so early as in Suidas, in the Homilies of Clement (xi. 28), in Epiphanius (Haer., xvi. 1), and Pseudo-Tertullian (Haer., i.). The same is borne out by the abstract Perishuth, in Talmudic writings, in the signification of abstemiousness or exclusive ascetic piety; and by the Talmudic use of the term Perischin, in the reproachful sense of separatists. From the latter use and the avoidance of the term Pharisees the thoroughly Pharisaic II Maccabees one may infer that the name arose in hostile circles. 3. Derivation of "Sadducees." The same is also probably true of the name "Sadducees." It is a mistake to derive the same from the Stoics (Koester, TSK, 1837, p. 164); more plausible is it to explain the Sadducees as Z?addik?im "the just," from their stress upon the simple law in contrast with Pharisaical traditions (Derenbourg); or their strictness in dealing penal sentences (Reville). Only on linguistic grounds, again, is there warrant for deriving the term (Gk. Saddoukaios, Heb. Z?adduk?i), from a personal name of which no trace exists after the exile. Such a gratuitous hypothesis (Graetz, Montet, Legarde) can be justified only by extreme embarrassment. There is, on the other hand, great probability in favor of the hypothesis (Geiger), whereby the name is traced to that Zadok who was high priest in the time of David and Solomon, in whose line the high-priestly dignity continued during nearly the entire dominion of David's royal house (II Sam. viii. 17; 1 Kings i. 32; Ezek. xl. 46; Josephus, Ant., X., viii. 6). In the period after the exile, not only the high priest Joshua (Neh. xl. 11; cf. I Chron vi.; Josephus, Ant., X., viii. 6), but also, according to Josephus, all the high priests descending from him down to Menelaus, hence also all the high-priestly families of their lineage--belonged to the house of Zadok. According to this view the name "Sadducees" denotes the descendants of the high priest Zadok, together with their adherents. Which theory is also favored by analogy of the "Boethusians," who in the Talmudic writings appear as an offshoot of the Sadducees; or as a sect akin to them. For the "Boethusians" can be named Sadducees only through the circumstance that Herod the Great adopted the line of the Alexandrine Boethos, whose granddaughter he married, into the succession of the high-priestly families (Josephus, Ant., XV., ix. 3). If the name Sadducees denotes the Zadokites, it is impossible to deny all actual connection with the Zadokite high-priestly families, and to identify them with the Maccabean princes and their following, who had obtained that name only by way of reproach (Wellhausen). It is probable that the name Zadokites was given to the party by their enemies; but this was possible only in case the real Zadokite high priests formed the stock of the party; so that a partizan following could then readily join the same. In this light, the two party names of Pharisees and Sadducees are distinct in so far as that the former has reference to religious aims, the latter to connection with the high-priestly nobility. This does not controvert the correctness of the given derivation; indeed, the point becomes thereby more prominent that the Pharisaical party structure took its departure from religious motives; the Sadducean, predominantly from aristocratic interests. 4. Date of Origin. Partizan opposition between Pharisees and Sadducees probably arose in the first decades of the Maccabean era. A Jewish tradition (in the Baraitha to Rabbi Nathan's Aboth), respecting the founding of the Sadducees' party through two pupils of Antigonus of Socho, would carry the origins back to the close of the second century B.C. But apart from other improbabilities in this account, which dates only from the Middle Ages, its chronological correctness is precluded by the certified existence of the Sadducees' cause at a considerably earlier period. According to Josephus (Ant., XIII., x. 6), an open conflict between Pharisees and Sadducees broke out as early as toward the close of the administration of Hyrcanus, about 115 B.C. But this presupposes an antecedent and quiet development of both parties, and Hyrcanus himself was brought up in the Pharisaic doctrine (Josephus, Ant., XIII., x. 5). Essentially opposite is the incidental remark of Josephus in his narrative of the last executive years of Jonathan (Ant., XIII., v. 9), that about that time there were three "sects" among the Jews: Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. The origin of the Pharisees and Sadducees falls, therefore, at its latest, during the rule of Jonathan; but it can not be set back much further, since no trace of their names appears earlier to show that the parties were forming. The assumption is forbidden that they arose before the Maccabean insurrection. Nor may appeal be made to the presence of the Hasideans (see [26]Hasmoneans, S: 1) in the pre-Maccabean period. For the Pharisees are not to be identified with these. While one can date the Pharisees and Sadducees as parties back to the beginning of the post exilic period (A. Geiger, Ursprung and Uebersetzung der Bibel, pp. 26 sqq., 56 sqq., Breslau, 1857) only by resting upon conjecture, it is possible that the partizan antithesis but continued an older contention, such as might have taken shape prior to the Maccabean uprising; indeed, opposition of interests similar to these appeared in the pre-Maccabean era. 5. Relations of Pharisees and Scribes. This first of all appears in the class distinction between the Pharisees and Sadducees. Soon after the return, there began to develop an opposition between the scribes, who insisted upon an absolutely strict prescriptive life, and the adherents of the aristocratic Pharisees high-priestly lines, who favored the gentiles. This antithesis accentuated itself in the Syrian and Hellenistic era, and led to the formation of parties during the rule of Antiochus Epiphanes. At that time the rising party of radical Hellenism, which sought to supplant Mosaic Judaism by Greek manners and customs, was withstood by the coterie of the Hasideans, who determined to adhere with the utmost rigor to the Jewish law as the unconditional norm of life. At that time the leaders of the former party were the high-priestly aristocrats; those of the second, the scribes. A similar class distinction formed the basis of the conflict between Pharisees and Sadducees. True, the Pharisees are not identical with the scribes. From Acts xxiii. 9, it appears that in the apostolic age not all scribes were Pharisees, but that there were also Sadducee or neutral scribes; and only a portion of the Pharisees consisted of scribes (Mark ii. 16; Luke v. 30). Indeed, a characteristic distinction comes forth in the very use of the two terms in the gospels. Quite often they speak of the Pharisees, where only individuals of that sect are meant (Matt. ix. 19-34, etc.). On the other hand, where the matter turns on particular scribes, the text mentions "certain of the scribes" (Matt. ix. 3, xii. 38, etc.). Only where the scribes are named in conjunction with the Pharisees is the general expression used for the former with reference to individuals (Mark ii. 16; Luke v. 30, etc.). On the contrary, "the scribes," without other qualification, is never used of individuals, but everywhere only of the entire category (Matt. vii. 29, xvii. 10, etc.). Hence the scribes are conceived as a class; the Pharisees as a compact party, such as is represented even in the case of individual members. Occasionally in the addresses of Jesus to the scribes and Pharisees there is to be remarked the distinctive reference to the learned legal science of the former and the prescriptive manner of life advanced by the latter. So the scribes appear as theorists in contrast with the Pharisees as practitioners. For the most part, however, the two were likely to be united in one and the same person. This close affinity between Pharisees and scribes crops out alike in Josephus, in the New Testament, and in the Talmud. Where Josephus speaks of Jewish scribes, he generally implies that they are adherents of the Pharisaic school (War, I., xxxiii. 2-3, II., xvii. 8; Ant., XVII, vi. 2). Conversely, where he brings the Pharisees into his narrative, he assumes that they make disciples and give instruction in the law, hence are scribes (Ant., XIII., x. 6). Again, certain scribes, well known and eminent in Talmudic sources, he designates as Pharisees (Ant., XV., i. 1, x. 4; Life, xxxviii.). In the New Testament, the scribes and Pharisees are now grouped together in the discourses of Jesus (Matt. v. 20, xxiii. 2 sqq.; cf. Luke vii. 30), and are introduced as acting in common (Matt. xii. 38, and elsewhere). Moreover, the two designations often vary in parallel passages, as well as in the relation of the same Gospel. Lastly, the post-Maccabean scribes of the Mishna speak of one another as the "Learned" (h?akamim); whereas in the controversial objections of the Sadducees they are termed "Pharisees" (Judaim, iv. 6, 7, 8) and advocate Pharisaic views. From all this it is to be assumed that the Pharisees were composed of the leading scribes and their following, and were the practical exponents of the theoretical knowledge of the law. 6. Sadducees as Aristocrats. On the contrary, the Sadducees, like the Hellenists of the pre-Maccabean era, had their nucleus in the Jewish aristocracy. Those magnates ("mighty ones"; Josephus, Ant., II., vi. 2; cf. War., I., v. 3), who as counselors of Alexander Jannaeus were by him endowed with as the highest honors, but were thrust aside by Queen Salome Alexandra, were undoubtedly Sadducees. For their persecution took place under the Pharisees' rule of terror. In his general depiction of the Sadducees, Josephus says expressly that they had only the rich on their side, but not the common people (Ant., XIII., x. 6), that this doctrine won but few, but they the first in dignity (Ant., XVIII., i. 4). And in the Psalms of Solomon, wherein the joy of the Pharisaic circles over the downfall of the Sadducees in the year 69 B.C. finds distinct vent, the latter are described as eye-serving courtiers and unjust judges (iv. 1-10, ii. 3-5). Hence the Sadducees' aristocratic character is distinctive and proper. But if Josephus (Life, i.) designates the priests in general as the nobility of the Jewish people, at all events this does not apply in a social connection. And it is erroneous (Geiger, Hausrath, Montet) to suppose that the Sadducees represented the interests of the priesthood on a preponderant scale; there lay no intrinsic objection in the nature of Pharisaism to the priesthood as such, and there appear to have been not a few priestly Pharisees (cf. Josephus, Life, i.-ii., xxxix.; Mishna Eduyoth, ii. 6-7, viii. 2; Aboth, ii. 8, iii. 2; Shek?alim, iv: 4, vi. 1). It was rather the high-priestly families that offset the rest of the priesthood in the manner of a distinctive aristocracy. Under the Maccabean Simon, the adherents thereof effected their reception into the senate; while in the time of Pompey, they sat and voted in the sanhedrim (Ps. of Sol., iv. 2), which had grown out of the earlier senate, and represented a remnant of political independence, while their influence here was limited by the unaristocratic assessors of the scribes' class, yet in a certain measure it was secured by the fact that the high priests, who now constantly belonged to their circles, held the presidency in the sanhedrim. These " chief priests," as the officiating and former high priests, together with their kindred, are called in the New Testament (Schuerer, in TSK, 1872, pp. 614 sqq.), are therefore at once the most important element of the Jewish aristocracy, and the proper nucleus of the Sadducean party. Josephus mentions only incidentally of Ananus that he belonged to the Sadducees (Ant., XX., ix. 1). In the Psalms of Solomon the Sadducee members of the sanhedrim appear as unworthy directors of the temple worship (i. 8, ii. 1-5, viii. 12). In Acts the Sadducees are expressly designated as those empowered with dispensing penal correction (iv. 1-3), as also the high priest's party (v. 17). Certain reminders of the Sadducaic complexion of the high priest's retinue occur in talmudic sources (cf. Geiger, ut sup., pp. 109 sqq.). 7. Relation of Pharisees to Jewish Nationalism. In keeping with this class distinction between Pharisees and Sadducees is the national attitude of the two parties. One may not think of the Sadducees as the national and patriotic party; of the Pharisees, on the contrary, as an unattached, international society. To the Pharisees might better be applied the term "national"; they were more frequently the opposers of the oppressors of the people. It is to the Pharisees that Rabbi Hillel's word applies: "Do not separate thyself from the congregation," (Pirke Aboth, ii. 4); and they desired that the benefits of the theocracy should benefit all, without exception (II Macc. ii. 17). Hence the Pharisees had not only the women on their side (Josephus, Ant., XVII., ii. 4), but the masses generally (Ant., XIII., x. 6). Yet on another side one may not perceive in them the healthy citizenship, the true kernel of the people, the truly national party. As a faction of the scribes, they pursued only distinctively religious aims. It was merely in a religious connection that they desired the welfare of the people and the maintenance of what was peculiarly Jewish. And if they sought to extend their leadership over all other spheres of life, their sole motive was that these might thus become dominated by the thoroughly prescriptive form of their religious aims. There resulted an externally theocratic trend of policy, and this was naturally contradicted by a totally non-Jewish government; so that, theoretically, the Pharisees did not concede the legality of tribute to such a regime (Matt. xxii. 17). They endured government by a heathen power as brought about by the divine providence, but only in the expectation of its future downfall. And the hatred latent in such an attitude easily converted itself into fanatical deeds. But yet again, they could sacrifice the theocratical idea to an untheocratical Jewish prince like Alexander Jannaeus. Furthermore, how little the Pharisees were disposed to bridge the gap between priesthood and people appears from their especially strict precepts regarding the tithe and other dues in favor of priests and Temple. Indeed, they set themselves over against the people with the utmost exclusiveness as a spiritual aristocracy, from which arose their party name, "the separated," the haughty behavior charged to their reproach by Jesus (Matt. xxiii. 5 sqq.), and the contempt with which they looked down upon the rest of the people as ignorant, not knowing the law, and unclean (John vii. 49; cf. the "Letter of Aristeas," dating from the time of Herod, in E. Kautsch, Apokryphen, ii. 67, 140 sqq., Tuebingen, 1900). So the Pharisees' popularity among the common people had yet its limits. 8. Relation of Sadducees to Nationalism. Still less, however, is a national and patriotic attitude to be discerned in the case of the Sadducees. Their connection with the Hasmoneans (q.v.) came about only as the administration of the same lost its incipiently Jewish national character. The goal of their political action was, first of all, the strengthening of their aristocratic caste. Only as dictated to them through this class interest, did they stand on the national side. The circumstance that the first Hasmonean who ruled after the transition of Hyrcanus to the Sadducees' party, Aristobulus I., was surnamed the " Philhellene," throws light on their Hellenistic tendency. Subsequently, they became servile friends of the Romans. All the more overbearing and hard-hearted were they at that time in regard to the common people (Josephus, War, II., viii. 14; Ant., XX., ix. 1). Hence their unpopularity was so great that, in order to "make themselves possible" at all, they had to govern, in the administration of their offices, according to Pharisaic principles (Josephus, Ant., XVIII., i. 4). Nevertheless, neither Pharisees nor Sadducees were of an antinational character directly. The Pharisees did not manifest that purely separatistic demeanor of the Hasideans or of the Essenes. Neither were the Sadducees willing, like the radical Hellenists of the pre-Maccabean era, to surrender the people's national existence, its faith and its law. Obviously, then, after the founding of the legally national Maccabean state, the extreme elements of both the previously existing tendencies were eliminated. The most partizan among the Hasideans receded into small groups, which led eventually to the formation of the Essenes' order. And the radical Hellenists perished in the conflicts with the Maccabeans. Thus the more moderate elements were left over, and they merged, in turn, into the broad stream of the popular life whence they had originally issued. 9. Religious Characteristics. With this alteration of parties, however, the fundamental religious trend persisted. The Pharisees, like the pre-Maccabean party of scribes, assiduously cultivated a strictly legalistic piety, holding themselves aloof from the world (Josephus, War, II., viii. 14; Ant., XVII, ii. 4; Life, xxxviii.; Acts xxiii. 3, xxvi. 5; Phil. iii. 5). Religion determined all their aims. But they set the essence of religion in the knowledge and fulfilment of the law. From this one-sided and legal drift of their piety there emerged all the defects and excesses of the same, such as are exhibited quite sharply in the New Testament. They built or garnished the sepulchers of the prophets (Matt. xxiii. 29 sqq.), but had none of their spirit; they zealously disputed over their prophecies (Luke xvii. 20), but their belief in the same simply sanctified their venality. They labored zealously for the propagation of their faith (Matt. xxiii. 15), but only in behalf of outward results (cf. Sieffert, Die Heidenbekehrung im Alten Testament and im Judenthum, pp. 43 sqq., 1908; see [27]Proselytes). Their faith was no inwardly liberating power, so that for them the law was but an enslaving yoke (John viii. 32; cf. Gal. v. 1). Out of this came the minute and anxious manner of fulfilling the law (Matt. xxiii. 23), the externalizing of the entire religious and moral life, the mechanicalism of their prayer (Matt. vi. 5 sqq.), the stress upon fasting (Matt. ix. 14); valuation of conspicuous borders to their garments, and broad phylacteries (Matt. xxiii. 5), the literalness of service in observing the sabbath (Matt. xii. 2, 9-13; Luke xiii. 10 sqq., xiv. 4 sqq.; John v. 1 sqq., ix. 14 sqq.). From this source arose their prescriptions of cleanliness (Matt. xv. 2, xxiii. 25; Mark vii. 2 sqq.; Luke xi. 38 sqq.), their preference for external acts of devotion above the plainest duties (Matt. xv. 5; Mark vii. 11 sqq.). This was indeed a straining at gnats and swallowing of camels (Matt. xxiii. 24). Of course, it was possible to practise all this in good faith and with honest sentiments. This is evidenced by the examples of Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, and in particular, too, by that of Paul, who even though recalling his bygone disquietude with aversion (Rom. vii. 7 sqq.), yet thinks back without shame to his Pharisaic past (Phil. iii. 5 sqq.; Acts xxiii. 6, xxvi. 5). Only often enough that emphasis upon external acts led to complete self-satisfaction (Matt. xix. 16 sqq.; Luke xviii. 10) and to ostentation of piety (Matt. vi. 5 sqq., 16, xv. 7 sqq.; Mark vii. 6, xii. 40; Luke xx. 47), extending even to the endeavor to conceal the lack of inner moral integrity by means of the outward show of devout deportment (Matt. xxiii. 25 sqq.; Luke xi. 39 sqq.). In the Talmud, besides, there occur not a few beautiful sentences, urging toward right thinking and true humanity (especially in Pirke Aboth). But they stand isolated in a wilderness of external precepts which smother the spirit of the law in their casuistical forcing of its letter. In distinction from all this, the Sadducees evinced a strong inclination toward other than Jewish manners; and, consistently with this trait, they were fain to guard the advantages of their social standing, their culture and possessions, from prejudice in the way of a troublesome piety. They were charged with leading an effeminate mode of life (Josephus, Ant., XVIII., i. 3). The fourth of the Psalms of Solomon gives a picture, inspired by Pharisaism, of the worldly, even dissolute, life of the Sadducees and of their hypocritical show of pious ardor. And a late rabbinical tradition (Aboth of Rabbi Nathan) tells of their luxury in the article on tableware, and their scoffing at the economy of the worrying Pharisees. 10 Theological Differences. This also affords a ready key to the particular theological disputes between the Pharisees and Sadducees. From the different fundamental religious trend of the two parties there most immediately results their antithetical relation toward that oral tradition which had been early created by the scribes of the past age, through exposition and application of the law, for a sort of hedge to the same (Josephus, Ant., XIII., xvi. 2; Matt. xv. 2; Mark vii. 3). This tradition was made of binding force by the Pharisees; by the Sadducees it was rejected (Josephus, Ant., XIII., x. 6). Through their endeavor to regulate the whole of human life, down to every detail, by means of the law, the Pharisees were led to lay great stress on enlarging the scope of the same by tradition, even to ascribe a paramount importance to the latter in comparison with the less exactly defined law (Mishnah, Sanhedrin, xi. 3). Ultimately, therefore, tradition, like the law, came to be traced back to Moses (Pirke Aboth, i. 11 sqq.), and so came the possibility of invalidating a legal provision by virtue of a traditional precept (cf. Mark vii. 11). Moreover, the Sadducees did not altogether avoid developing an exegetical school tradition, partly diverging from the tradition of the Pharisees (Megillath Taanit, 10); partly, indeed, accordant with it (Sandehrin, xxxiii. 6. Horayoth 4a). But while they admitted no authority transcending the law, they so emphasized independence of judgment that they made it a boast to contradict their teachers themselves as far as possible (Josephus, Ant., XVIII., i. 4). But their principled rejection of legal tradition resulted partly from their opposition to the Pharisaic scribes, partly from their desire to be constrained as little as possible through legal regulations. Hence they repudiated all refining deductions from the law, and appealed simply to the letter thereof, which was easier to circumvent. Thus the letter of the law became for them their only categorical religious principle. Sometimes, again, they enforced the strictness of the letter, in contrast with its attenuation; particularly in imposing penal sentences they were "more hard-hearted than all other Jews" (Josephus, Ant., XX., ix. 1). Jesus himself experienced this hard-heartedness on the part of his Sadducee judges. 11. Legal and Dogmatic Differences. This divergent attitude of the Pharisees and Sadducees in respect to the letter of the law and to tradition, also explains a number of the particular legal disputes which are attributed to them in Talmudic sources, many of which are historical. In certain cases the Sadducees, as it appears, represented the priesthood; in the rest, a definite principle of opposition is not to be ascertained. To be noted also are some dogmatic differences, among which the most important was the one touching the doctrine of resurrection; not, as Josephus presents it in Hellenizing fashion (War, II., viii. 14; Ant., XVIII., i. 3, 4), the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. If the Sadducees rejected the doctrine in question, they advocated the older position of Judaism. For the like doctrine was not at all proposed in the earlier Old Testament Scriptures, and not with complete distinctness before its appearance in the Book of Daniel. The Sadducees' position was reinforced by their directly practical contemplation of earthly conditions. On the other hand, the fact that the Pharisees decidedly espoused the doctrine of resurrection was quite in accord with their very diligent fostering of hopes in the Messiah, which hopes, like their doctrine itself, on account of their avaricious temperament, assumed a strongly sensual cast. In like manner the doctrine concerning angels, which had been elaborated by the Pharisaic scribes on the basis of the Old Testament, was rejected by the Sadducees (Acts xxiii. 8) consistently with their preoccupation with mundane affairs. According to Josephus the Pharisees and Sadducees also diverged in their conception as to the relation between destiny and human free-will (War, II, viii. 14; Ant., XIII., v. 9, XVIII., i. 3). This seems to indicate that the Pharisees, in their religious decisiveness, made everything dependent on divine providence; whereas the Sadducees, as men of practical affairs, deducted the elements of welfare and calamity from human transactions. 12 Relationship of Pharisaism to Religion. The further development of the religious life could not attach itself to the materialistic and worldly bent of the Sadducees, but only to Pharisaism, which, however legalistic, traditional, and mercenary, was yet distinguished by a certain religious Pharisaism potentiality, as appears from the relation of primitive Christianity to both parties. The contact between Christianity and the Sadducees' party was but slight and external. Enraged at the Christian revival of the hope of resurrection, and threatened in their hierarchical position by the. Messianic claims of Jesus and the accordant expectations of the Apostolic Church, the Sadducees persecuted both those teachings with scorn and violence. With Pharisaism, however, Christianity had to reach an understanding on inward grounds quite from the start. Proceeding from the common platform of the law and the Messianic hopes, Jesus attacked the formalism of the Pharisees and their entire externalizing of the moral and religious life in that he coupled the profoundest vitalization of the same with the renovating forces which emanated from his own person. The hatred that he thereby brought upon himself on the part of the Pharisees also frenzied the popular masses. But when afterward in the apostolic congregation the proclaiming of Christ's resurrection pushed to the foreground, over shadowing, in a manner, the content of his own preaching, Pharisaism's antithesis to Christianity receded so far behind the vehement persecution of the same through the Sadducees, that it now be came feasible for Pharisaic elements to make their way into the Christian assembly (Acts xv. 1 sqq.). It was only where the logical issues of Christianity became voiced in direct opposition to an absolute enforcement of the law (somewhat reservedly, at first, by the deacon Stephen, afterward more vigorously and with practical application by the Apostle Paul) that the Pharisaic enmity awoke, in utter bitterness. However, it was precisely his own Pharisaic training in youth that moved the Apostle Paul, after his radical breach with his past, to engage in a conflict with the Pharisaic party, not only outside, but especially within Christianity; wherein he prevailed to illustrate the peculiar principles of Christianity in contrast with the legal religion of the Old Testament, in a degree equaled by no other apostle. F. Sieffert. Bibliography: J. Wellhausen, Die Pharisaeer and die Sadducaeer, Greifswald, 1874; A. Geiger, Sadducaeer und Pharisaeer, Breslau, 1863; idem, in Juedische Zeitschrift, ii (1863), 11-54; M. Friedlaender, Die religioesen Bewegungen innerhalb des Judentums im Zeitalter Jesu, Berlin, 1905. Consult further: Grossmann, De Judaeorum disciplina arcani, Leipsic, 1833-41; idem, De philosophia Sadducaeorum. ib. 1836-38; De Pharisaeismo Judaeorum Alexandrino, ib. 1846-50; De collegio Pharisaeorum, ib. 1851; A. F. Gfroerer, Das Jahrhundert des Heils, i. 309 sqq.. Stuttgart, 1838; J. A. B. Lutterbeek, Die neutestamentlichen Lehrbegriffe, i. 157-222, Mainz, 1852; I. M. Jost, Geschichte des Judenthums und seiner Secten, i. 197 sqq., 216 sqq., Leipsic; 1857-59; A. Mueller, in the Sitzungsberichte of the Vienna Academy, philosoph.-historical class, xxxiv (1860), 95-164; J. Derenbourg, Hist. de la Palestine, pp. 75-78, 119-144, 452-456, Paris, 1867; Hanne, in ZWT, 1867, pp. 131-179, 239-263; A. Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, i. 129 sqq., Heidelberg, 1868, Eng. transl., Hist.of the N. T. Times, 4 vols., London, 1895; A. Kuenen, De Godsdienst van Israel, ii. 338-371, 456 sqq., 2 vols., Haarlem, 1869-70; J. Cohen, Les Pharisiens, 2 vols., Paris, 1877; A. M. Fairbairn, Studies in the Life of Christ, pp. 165 sqq., London, 1881; Baneth, in Magazin fuer die Wissenschaft des Judentums, ix (1882), 1-37, 61-95; J. Hamburger, Real-encyclopaedie fuer Bibel and Talmud, ii. 1038 sqq., Strelitz, 1882; E. Montet, Essai sur les origines des parties saduceen et pharisien. Paris, 1883; idem, in JA, 1887, pp. 415-423; R. Mackintosh Christ and the Jewish Law, pp. 39 sqq., London, 1885; F. Weber, Die Lehren des Talmud, Leipsic, 1886; idem, Juedische Theologie auf Grund des Talmud und verwandter Schriften, pp. 10-14, 44-46, ib. 1897; E. Davaine, Le Sadduceisme, Montauban, 1888; A. Juelicher, Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, ii. 54 sqq., 549 sqq., Freiburg, 1888-89; A. B. Bruce, Kingdom of God, pp. 187 sqq., Edinburgh, 1889; J. L. Narbel, Etude sur Ie parti pharisien, Lausanne, 1891; H. E. Ryle, and M. R. James, Psalms of Solomon, pp. xlviii.-lii., Cambridge, 1891; J. F. W. Bousset, Jeau Predigt in ihrem Gegensatz zum Judentum, Goettingen, 1892; idem, Die Religion des Judentums im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter, pp. 161-168, Berlin; 1903; Krueger, in TQ, lxxxv (1894), 431-496; O. Holtzmann, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, pp. 158 sqq., Freiburg, 1895; A. Bertholet, Die Stellung der Israeliten und der Juden zu den Fremden, pp. 123-256, Tuebingen, 1896; I. Elbogen, Die Religionsanschauung der Pharisaeer, Berlin, 1904; S. Schechter, Die Chassidim, Berlin, 1904; G. Hoelscher, Der Sadduzaeismus, Eine kritische Untersuchung zur spaeteren Judenreligionsgeschichte, Leipsic, 1906; S. Bamberger. Sadducaeer in ihren Beziehungen zu Alexander Jannai and Salome, Frankfort, 1907; Schuerer, Geschichte, ii. 380-419, Eng. transl., II., ii. 1-43 (contains bibliography); DB, iii. 821-829, iv. 349-352; EB, iv. 4234-40, 4321-29; JE, ix. 661-666, x. 630-633; KL, ix. 1990-96; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, part xxxi., pp. 206-218; Jacobus, Dictionary, pp. 666-668, 760-761. Magazine literature is indicated in Richardson, Encyclopaedia, pp. 848, 969; the subject is treated also in the more important works on the life of Christ, such as those of Farrar (Excursuses IX.-XIV.), Edersheim, and Keim, and in those on the history of the Jews, as in Ewald and Graetz. Pharmakides, Theoklitos PHARMAKIDES, THEOKLITOS: Modern Greek theologian and ecclesiastical statesman; b. at Larissa, Thessaly, Jan. 25, 1784; d. at Athens Apr. 21, 1860. With but meager education, he was ordained deacon at Larissa in 1802 and priest at Bucharest in 1811, after which he was in charge of the Greek church in Vienna for some eight years. Here he was brought into contact not only with his compatriots who were interested in the revival of the Greek nation, but also with the philhellene Frederick North, fifth earl of Guilford, who wished him to accept a theological professorship in the projected university of Corfu. Pharmakides accordingly studied for two years at Goettingen, but returned to Greece on the outbreak of the Greek war for independence. Here he was active until his death in the reorganization of the national church and the establishment of an educational system. Circumstances, however, hampered his efforts until 1833 when the Bavarian regency made him president of the committee to investigate the condition of the Greek Church. As secretary of the Synod of Nauplia, he was the main factor in securing the declaration of independence of the Greek Church in the same year. The conservative influence was, however, too strong for him, and after writing, his "On Zechariah, son of Berechiah" (Athens, 1838), "The Pseudonymous German" (1838), and "On the Oath" (1840), he was removed from his secretariate in 1839 and appointed professor of philology. He now published in his own defense his "Apology" (Athens, 1840), and unremittingly continued the struggle for the freedom of the Greek Church. His program was finally carried out, aided largely by his "The Synodic Volume: or, Concerning Truth" (Athens, 1852), when, in 1852, the Greek Church was made entirely independent except for ecclesiastical prerogatives of honor accorded to the patriarch of Constantinople. After this last work, Pharmakides appeared little in public. At the time of his death he was working on a large historical polemic against the Roman Catholic Church. Among his earlier publications mention may be made of his commentary on the New Testament (7 vols., Athens, 1844). (Philipp Meyer.) Bibliography: Biographical matter is found in the "Apology," ut sup. Consult: "Evangelical Herald," pp. 203-216, Athens, 1860; G. L. von Maurer, Das griechische Volk, vol. ii., Heidelberg, 1835; C. A. Brandis, Mitteilungen ueber Griechenland, vol. iii., Leipsic, 1842; R. Nicolai, Geschichte der neugriechischen Literatur , ib. 1876; G. F. Hertzberg, Geschichte Griechenlands, vols. iii.-iv., Gotha, 1878; TSK, 1841, pp. 7-53. Phelonion PHELONION: [28]See Vestments and Insignia, Ecclesiastical. Phelps, Austin PHELPS, AUSTIN: American Congregationalist; b. at West Brookfield, Mass., Jan. 7, 1820; d. at Bar Harbor, Me., Oct. 13, 1890. He graduated at the University of Pennsylvania in 1837, and studied at Andover and Union Theological seminaries; was pastor of Pine Street Church, Boston, 1842-48, and professor of sacred rhetoric at Andover Theological Seminary, 1848-79, and president from 1869. He was a master of English, and distinguished in his teaching and writing. He published The Still Hour (Boston, 1859); Hymns and Choirs (Andover, 1860); Boston, 1867); Sabbath Hours (1870); Studies of the Old Testament (1879); The Theory of Preaching (1881); Men and Books (1882); My Portfolio (1882); English Style (1883); My Study (1885); and My Note Book (1890). Bibliography: E. S. Phelps, Austin Phelps; a Memoir, New York, 1891; D. L. Furber, in Bibliotheca Sacra, xlviii (1891). 545-585. Phenicia, Phenicians PHENICIA, PHENICIANS [29]I. Geography and Topography. [30]General Description; Acre, Achzib (S: 1). [31]Region South of Tyre (S: 2). [32]Tyre (S: 3). [33]Region between Tyre and Sidon (S: 4). [34]Sidon (S: 5). [35]Sidon to Beirut (S: 6). [36]Beirut to al-Shakkai (S: 7). [37]Tripolis and Environs (S: 8). [38]Extreme Northern Phenicia (S: 9). [39]II. Names and Ethnology. [40]Names (S: 1). [41]Ethnology (S: 2). [42]III. Religion. [43]Deities (S: 1). [44]Cult S: 2). [45]IV. History. [46]Till the Assyrian Period (S: 1). [47]Assyrian to the Roman Period (S: 2). [48]Trade and Discovery (S: 3). I. Geography and Topography. 1. General Description; Acre, Achzib. The term Sidonions or Sidonians is employed in the Old Testament to denote the Phenicians (cf. I Kings v. 6, xvi. 31), though their country is called Phenicia or Phenice (I Esd. ii. 17 sqq.; II Macc. iii. 5, etc.; Acts xi. 19, xv. 3, xxi. 2). The boundaries of the country can not be determined definitely, for the scanty allusions to the Phenicians do not tell how far inland their domains extended. That they did extend inland is certain (cf. I Kings v. 9), and Josephus states (Ant., XIII., v. 6; War, II., xviii. 1, IV., ii. 3) that the city of Cedasa or Cydyssa was a Tyrian stronghold on the border of Galilee. The Phenician coast falls into three natural divisions: southern Phenicia, from Ras al-Abjad? to the Nahr al-Awali, north of Sidon; central Phenicia, from the Nahr al-Awali to al-Shakkai; and northern Phenicia, from al-Shakkai to Ras ibn Hani or to Ras al-Basit. In ancient history the southern and the northern divisions are alone important. The Philistine conquests permanently separated the southern cities from association with the Phenicians, and deprived them of such cities as Joppa and Dor; not until the Persian rule did the Phenicians again control these regions. Before discussing Phenicia proper brief mention should be made of two cities, Acre and Achzib. The former lies on a steep promontory extending southward into the sea and forming a natural haven of medium size with the eastern edge of St. George's Bay. Owing to deposits of silt the harbor is deserted, and trade is diverted to the neighboring Haifa. In ancient times this city was of importance because of its haven and the roads connecting it with the interior, especially the "way of the sea" (Isa. ix. 1). The city is mentioned by Sethos I. under the name of Aka about 1320 B.C., and about 380 Artaxerxes Mnemon made it his base in his expedition against Egypt. Ptolemy II. Philadelphus refounded the city and named it Ptolemais. It passed into the possession of the Seleucids in 198 B.C., and was an important military center in the Maccabean wars. In 65 B.C. Pompey brought it under the Romans, for whom it constituted the most important harbor of Palestine. In 1103 A.D. it was taken by Baldwin I., given to Saladin in 1187, retaken by the crusaders in 1189, and destroyed by Sultan Malik al-Ashraf in 1291. Rebuilt in 1749, the city has slowly increased, despite the attack of Napoleon in 1799 and the bombardment of the united English, Austrian, and Turkish fleet in 1840, until it now contains a population of about 11,000. Some nine miles to the north, and not far from the coast, lies the small village al-Zib, representing the Achzib of Judges xix. 29. A quarter of an hour to the north is the spring of Ain al-Mashairfah, which has been compared with the Misrephoth-maim of Josh. xi. 8, xiii. 6. 2. Region South of Tyre. Here the Jabal al-Mushak?k?ah? approaches the coast, and the ascent to the promontory of Ras al-Nakurah brings the traveler to Phenicia proper. To the north of the road stretches a small stony strip of coast in the form of a crescent to the second promontory, the Ras al-Abjad?, or "White Promontory." The valley between the two promontories shows ruins of two ancient sites, Umm al-Amud and Iskandarunah, the former perhaps being the ancient Ramantha or Ramitha, the Greek Leuke Akte, later called Laodicea, and the latter dating back, at least in name, to the Roman Emperor Alexander Severus (222-235). In 1116 A.D. Iskandarunah was rebuilt by Baldwin I. as a base of operations against Tyre. The ancient road over the White Promontory runs for about forty minutes close to the declivity. In the course of centuries portions of it have been hewn in the rocks, and in especially steep places stone stairs have been cut, so that Josephus and the Talmud give as the ancient name of this road the " Tyrian Stairs." North of the Ras al-Abjad a small plain extends between the shores and the foot of the mountains of Galilee. The streams are shallow and have little water, though good springs are occasionally found, especially about an hour south of Tyre in the Ras al-Ain and ten minutes to the north, both about a quarter of an hour from the shore. Three other wells and an aqueduct, the latter apparently of Roman architecture, are found about fifteen minutes north of Ras al-Ain. It was doubtless the springs of this promontory which first attracted the Phenicians, which they also used for their city. 3. Tyre. The distance from Ras al-Ain to Tyre is an hour, and the plain with its sandy coast is one and a half miles broad. Modern Tyre, a town of some 6,000 inhabitants, lies on the northern side of a peninsula, while the ancient Phenician city was situated on an island. The prophet Ezekiel, like the Assyrian King Asahurbanipal, describes Tyre as built "in the midst of the seas" ( xxviii. 2, cf. xxvii. 3-4, xxvi. 4), and the name itself means "rock." The island on which Tyre lay would seem to be the present peninsula where the modern town is situated. Of the buildings of the ancient city little is known. According to Menander of Ephesus (cf. Josephus, Apion, i. 18; Ant., VIII., v. 3), Hiram I., the contemporary of Solomon, rebuilt the old temples. Special mention is made of the temple of Heracles (Melkarth) and Astarte, while Herodotus (ii. 44) refers to the temple of Thasian Heracles, which is probably identical with the Agenorium of Arrian (Anabasis, ii. 25-26). According to Menander and Dius, Hiram extended the city to the east and there constructed the great square, or Eurychorum. The ancient city had two harbors, the Sidonian to the north, and the Egyptian to the south. The former is now choked with sand, and the latter has entirely disappeared. On the main land opposite the island lay a city called Old Tyre by Menander, Strabo, Pliny, and others. It would seem, however, that the city in question was really called Ushu, a name occurring in the Amarna Tablets and the Assyrian inscriptions, and probably in the Authu of Egyptian monuments. The patron deity of the city was Usoos, who was said to have been the first to sail the sea on a tree trunk, while his brother, Samemrumus, built huts of reed in Tyre (see [49]Sanchuniathon). This legend seems to imply that the island city of Tyre was settled from the mainland. The accounts of "Old Tyre" vary so widely that it is uncertain whether one or more places are meant, or whether sites are referred to which belong to different periods. Ancient Tyre, which seems to have had an important suburb at Ras al-Mashut, ceased to be an island city in consequence of the siege by Alexander the Great in 332, when he constructed a vast mole, four stadia long and two plethra wide, from the mainland to the eastern side of the island (cf. Arrian, Anabasis, ii. 17 sqq.; Diodorus Siculus, xvii. 40). The walls, said to be over 150 feet high, rendered the mole useless at first, but the Greek fleet bottled up the Tyrian ships in the harbors, whereupon the troops of Alexander were able to storm the relatively weaker ramparts on the south. In the taking of the city Arrian states that 8,000 fell, while 30,000 were sold as slaves, figures which imply a dense population. Tyre was not wholly destroyed, however, by the Greek conqueror, and in 316-315 it was besieged in vain by Antigonus for fourteen months. Coming under Seleucid control in 198, it apparently bought its autonomy in 126, later restricted by Augustus. On his journey from Miletus to Jerusalem Paul found Christians at Tyre (Acts xxi. 3-6), and a bishop of Tyre, Cassius, is mentioned at the Synod of Caesarea toward the end of the second century. The crusaders were in possession of the city 1124-91 A.D., after which the Sultan Malik al-Ashraf occupied the place. The history of modern Tyre begins in 1766, when a sheik named Hanzar settled in the ruins and rebuilt them. After the destructive earthquake of 1837 the buildings were reconstructed by Ibrahim Pasha. 4. The Region Between Tyre and Sidon. The coast north of Tyre resembles that of the southern vicinity of the city. First the sandy shore, then a level plain stretching inland for about a mile, and then the beginning of the plateau of Galilee. Almost two hours between north of Tyre is the mouth of the Nahr al-K?asimiyah, after which the strip of coast narrows, while the foothills are rich in tombs of various periods. At the foot of the range are traces of the old Roman road from Tyre to Sidon. North of the Wadi abu'l Aswad is a ruined site called Adlun, apparently the town of Ornithopolis, mentioned by Strabo as a Sidonian colony. An hour farther north a promontory and a village bear the name of Z?arafand, the Zarephath of the Bible (I Kings xvii. 9-10; Obadiah 20; Sarepta, Luke iv. 26). The Crusaders made Zarephath an episcopal see, and the Wali al Khidr is held to mark the abode of the prophet Elijah. From Zarafand the coast bends westward, the first great rivers from the western slope of the Lebanon being found in the Nahr al-Zaharani and the Nahr Sanik. The gardens now begin, and become more numerous and more beautiful the closer the traveler approaches Z?aida, the ancient Sidon. 5. Sidon. The modern city of Z?aida is situated on a flat promontory between 200 and 300 yards wide, with a small rocky peninsula, 600 yards long. The northern quarter and a series of reefs and islands protect the inner harbor, while to the eastward stretches the outer harbor, which was used as an anchorage in summer. The peninsula bears the remains of ancient walls, and similar ruins are found on an island to the north of the harbor and on other reefs. The Phenician Sidon extended some 700 yards farther east than the modern town. The basalt sarcophagus of King Eshmunazar was discovered in 1855 ten minutes southeast of the city; in 1887, near the village of al-Halaliyah, seventeen magnificent Phenician and Greek sarcophagi were found, among them those of Tabnit, father of Eshmunazar, and the alleged sarcophagus of Alexander the Great. Excavations since 1900 have revealed a temple of Eshmun on the Nahr al-Awali, also ancient aqueducts. In the Old Testament a "Great Sidon" is mentioned (Josh. xi. 8, xix. 28). This phrase is repeated on the Taylor cylinder with the words "Little Sidon" beside it, though the basis of the distinction is as yet unknown. The ancient city of Sidon was destroyed by Artaxerxes Ochus in 348 B.C. Yet after Alexander and during the Roman period Sidon remained an important city. Paul, on his way to Rome, found Christians there (Acts xxvii. 3), and the bishop of Sidon attended the Nicene Council of 325. Later the city declined and in 637-638 surrendered to the Mohammedans without resistance. During the crusades it was repeatedly taken and refortified, last by Louis IX. of France in 1253. Seven years later it was sacked by the Mongols, and in 1291 came under the control of Malik al-Ashraf. Early in the seventeenth century Sidon was revived by the Druse Prince Fakhr al-Din. It likewise enjoyed the protection of Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt, but in 1840 was attacked by the fleet of the European allies. 6. Sidon to Beirut. The little plain about Sidon stretches to the north about to the Nahr al-Awali, from the north side of which, about a half-hour from the city, the district of the Lebanon comprises the coast until near Tarabulus, or Tripolis, with the exception of Beirut and its immediate vicinity. This valley and the comparatively low passes near by were doubtless used in antiquity as the shortest road from Sidon to Damascus. The coast now becomes more stony, with no coast plain. Between the Ras Jedrah and the Ras al-Damur the towns of Platanus (or Platana) and Porphyreum must have lain, where Antiochus the Great defeated the general of Ptolemy IV. Philopator in 218 B.C. North of the Ras al Damur is the mouth of the Nahr al-Damur, the Damuras, Demarus, or Tamyras of the ancients. A conspicuous point on the coast is the promontory of Beirut (Ras Bairut), with the city of the same name at its foot. To the east is a small well-populated plain on the banks of the Nahr Bairut, the ancient Magoras, as well as on the coast, which runs about six miles to the east and forms St. George's Bay. The background is formed by the steep terraces of Lebanon with green valleys, neat farm houses, and small villages on the lower slopes, higher up remnants of the once famous forests, and at the summit a bare sharp ridge. In ancient Phenicia the city was of no importance, though its name, which apparently means "wells," occurs in the Amarna Tablets, which designate the place as the seat of the Egyptian vassal Ammunira. Beirut attained prominence as the Roman Colonia Julia Augusta Felix Berytus. It was famed for its school of law and for its silk-weaving until it was damaged by the earthquake of 529. Its second period of prosperity began when the Druse Prince Fakhr al-Din (1595-1634) made it his chief residence. It is now the center of trade and commerce for the entire Syrian coast, especially as it has been connected with Damascus since 1895 by a railway. The city is the center of Syrian Christian culture, represented by American Presbyterian (The Syrian Protestant College) and Jesuit institutions of learning, and by German Protestant benevolent organizations. The British Syrian mission also maintains a series of schools, the Scotch mission works chiefly among Jews, Mohammedans, and Druses, while various French religious orders labor for the education of the natives and the care of the sick. This activity has spurred the non-Christian Syrians to establish schools. Beirut is the seat of a wali and contains about 120,000 inhabitants. 7. Beirut to al-Shakkai. Some two and a half miles east of Beirut the coast resumes its northerly course and soon reaches the mouth of the Nahr al-Kalb, the Lycus of the classics. The mountains here touch the water, and are crossed by the coast roads. The present road and railway from Beirut to the north is the closest to the sea level. Some ninety feet higher is the Roman road constructed by Marcus Aurelius about 176-180 A.D. Higher still three Egyptian and six Assyrian inscriptions or sculptures show that armies were led across this promontory over a much steeper, but more accessible road, by Rameses II. about 1300, Tiglath-Pileser I. about 1140, Shalmaneser II. about 850, Sennacherib in 702, and Esarhaddon in 670 (see [50]Assyria, VI., 3, S:S: 3, [51]7, [52]13). Later still, Greek, Roman, crusading, and Mohammedan armies passed over these roads, and finally the soldiers of the French expedition of 1860. The railway runs along the road to Maamiltain on the Bay of Juniyah. From this point the old road again follows the coast, and at the northern end of the bay is hewn through the rock. An hour and a half farther to the north is the Nahr Ibrahim, the classical Adonis, closely associated with the Aphrodite legend. This goddess, the Astarte (q.v.) of the Phenicians, had her famous temple near the source of the river, which issues from a cavern under the steep high wall of the Jabal al Munait?irah. The ruins of the fane, 90 feet long and fifty-five feet wide, may still be seen, and probably represent the temple of Venus of Aphaka, destroyed by Constantine the Great in the fourth century. The modern village of Afk?a is situated fifteen minutes above the source. Near the village of al-Ghinah, on the southern bank of the river, sculptures were found by Renan representing the leaping goddess and the death of Adonis. The center of the Adonis cult, the Byblos of the Greeks and the Gebal of the Phenicians, the modern Jabail with about a thousand inhabitants, lies an hour and a half north of the mouth of the Nahr Ibrar him (see [53]Gebal). The rocky road along the coast leads to the town of Batrun, the ancient Botrys. North of the Nahr al-Jauz rises a broad promontory now called al-Shakkai, but called by the Greeks "face of God," apparently translating its Phenician name (cf. Gen. xxxii. 30; I Kings xii. 25). 8. Tripolis and Environs. At al-Shakkai central Phenicia ends. The road along the coast now crosses some small promontories, and then enters the plain of Tripolis, which spreads out at the mouth of the Nahr abu Ali, or the Nahr K?adisha. The modem Tripolis consists of the court of al-Mina on the northern edge of a low but rocky promontory, with a series of small islands enclosing the harbor, and the city proper, now called Tarabulus. The latter is situated on both banks of the Nahr abu Ali, about two miles from al-Mina. It owes its existence to the Mohammedans, who destroyed the former city on the coast in 1289. The city of the Phenicians and the crusaders, which probably occupied the site of the present al-Mina, had three distinct quarters occupied by Tyrians, Sidonians, and Aradians respectively. Before the Persian period, however, the city is not mentioned, its origin being obscure. From Tarabulus the coast bends westward, the resulting bay being called Jun Akkar. The coast is less rugged, especially where the Nahr al-Kabir or Nahr Laftara (the Eleutherus of the Greeks) approaches the sea. Through the broad plain thus formed the road leads to Emesa and Hamath in the valley of the Orontes. Between Tripolis and the Nahr al-Kabir a number of ancient cities were located. On the southern bank of the Nahr al-Barid was Orthosia, the Arab Artusiah or Artusi; and on the north bank of the Nahr Arka was Arka, or Arke, the Roman Caesarea Libani, where Alexander Severus was born (now called Tell Ark?a). The site is also brought into connection with the Canaanitic Arkites (Gen. x. 17). Scarcely half a mile north of the Nahr Arka a village Syn existed in the fifteenth century, and this has been connected with the Sinites of Gen. x. 17; cuneiform inscriptions mention a site Sianu near Z?imira and Arz?a. North of the Nahr al-Kabir rises the Jabal al-Anzariyah, receiving its name from the Shi'ite sect of the Nuz?airi, who live chiefly on this mountain. 9. Extreme Northern Phenicia. The coast of northern Phenicia is, in general, milder and more attractive than in the southern and central portions, so that its cities were numerous. The first is Simyra or Simyrus, the Z?umur of the Amarna letters, probably to be identified with the modern Z?umrah between the Nahr al-Kabir and the Nahr al-Abrash. Two or three hours later the district of the ancient Aradians is reached, where, between the Nahr al-K?iblah and the Nahr Amrit, are extensive remains of the city of Marat, the Marathus of the Greeks, important during the Persian period, but destroyed in the struggles following the downfall of the Seleucids. On the coast, an hour farther north, is T?art?us, the medieval Tortosa and the ancient Antaradus, first mentioned by Ptolemy in the second century A.D. The Phenician center on this part of the coast was the island city of Aradus (the Arvad of Ezek. xxvii. 8, 11, the modern Ru'ad or Arwad), situated between Amrit and T?art?us on an irregular rock some 800 yards long by 500 wide. Of the ancient city little remains. The present inhabitants, between 2,000 and 3,000 in number, are expert boatmen (cf. Ezek. xxvii. 8). Arvad is mentioned as a Phenician city about 1500 B.C., and on its ships Tiglath-Pileser sailed the Mediterranean. Later it is repeatedly mentioned in Assyrian inscriptions as a place "in the midst of the sea." The nearest port on the mainland was Carne or Carnus, the modern K?arnun, an hour north of T?art?us, where ruins of fortifications are still visible. Other harbors reckoned to Arvad were Balanias or Leucas (the modern Baniyas), Paltus (the modern Baldah), and Gabala (the modern Jablah). probably the population of this northern district was not exclusively Phenician, and Phenicians hardly had centers beyond it. North of the promontory of Ras ibn Hani was a Heraclea, the name of which suggests Phenician origin; and the city of Rhosus (the modern Arsuz) north of the Ras al-Khanzir, and the city of Myriandrus (Myriandus) are expressly said to have been in the hands of the Phenicians. the latter place was the predecessor of the modern Alexandretta or Iskandarun, but probably lay somewhat farther to the south. II. Names and Ethnology. 1. Names. The name Phenicia is derived from the Greek, occurring as early as Homer (Odyssey, xiv. 288, xv. 419) and Herodotus (i. 1-8, etc.). From this is derived the name of the country, Phenice (Odyssey, iv. 83, xiv. 291; Herodotus, ii. 44 sqq.), the form Phenicia being later. The meaning is uncertain. In the twelfth century Eustathius of Thessalonica, with probable correctness, advanced the view that it denoted "red," and referred to the color of the people. Movers derived Phenice from the Greek phoinix, "date palm," but this tree is seldom found in Phenicia, and is of inferior quality there. Nor is there any reason to suppose that the name of the country is derived from the Egyptian Fenkhu; about 1500 B.C. the Egyptians termed the Phenician coast from Acre to Arvad Zahi or Zahe. The Babylonians reckoned Phenicia in the land of Amurru; and after Tiglath-Pileser III. Syria and Palestine were also called the "land of the Hittites." A special name for Phenicia does not occur. Late Greek writers state that the Phenicians named themselves Canaanites (see [54]Canaan). The Phenicians seem to have called themselves after the names of their cities, Tyrians, Sidonians, etc. In the Old Testament, therefore, the name "Sidon" (Zidon) and "Sidonians," when not shown by the context to refer expressly to the city and its inhabitants (as in Gen. x. 19; Judges i. 31; II Sam. xxiv. 6; I Kings xvii. 9 (cf. Luke iv. 26]; Isa. xxiii. 2, 4, 12; Ezek. xxviii. 21-22), must be understood to connote Phenicia and the Phenicians in general (e.g., Deut. xiii. 9; Josh. xiii. 4, 6; Judges iii. 3; I Kings v. 6; Ezek. xxxii. 30). This linguistic usage, found current and continued by the Israelites, implies that Sidon was then the most important city of Phenicia. Later this usage disappeared, so that Herodotus ("History," i. 1) uses "Phenicians" to denote the population of the country. In later passages of the Old Testament (as Jer. xxv. 22; Joel iv. 4; Zech. ix. 2; I Macc. v. 15), as well as in the New Testament (Matt. xi. 21-22; Mark iii. 8; Luke vi. 17; Acts xii. 20), the formal phrase "Tyre and Sidon" denotes the Phenicians in general. 2. Ethnology. The inhabitants of the Phenician coast can not be separated from the pre-Israelitic population of Canaan. This is shown, in the first place, by community of language as evinced in inscriptions, proper names, individual words cited by classic writers, and the sentences placed in the mouth of the Carthaginian Hanno in the Poenulus of Plautus, which show that the Phenician language was essentially identical with Hebrew. Though this linguistic affinity does not prove ethnological unity, the absence of opposing data renders it probable. In view of the natural contour of Canaan it would seem that the coast was settled from the southern mountain-district northward. The problem whether the Phenicians were indigenous in Syria is a part of the broader question of the original home of the pre-Israelitic population of Canaan. The most plausible answer seems to be that given by Herodotus (i. 1, vii. 80), who affirms that the Phenicians formerly dwelt by the Red Sea, whence they journeyed across Syria to the Mediterranean, thus implying an original home in Arabia and conforming with the general trend of Semitic migrations. Winckler (Geschichte Israels, i. 126-132, Leipsic, 1895) has advanced the hypothesis that the Phenician and Canaanitic migration was the second to take place from Arabia, probably between 2800 and 1800 B.C. While there are thus no ethnological or linguistic reasons for regarding the Phenicians as a separate people, the events of history render it possible to speak of them as a nation. In their home, between the open sea and the almost impassable mountains, they became navigators and merchants, rather than an agricultural or pastoral people. Thus, on the one hand, their coherence with the Canaanites became ever more loose; and, on the other hand, their commercial interests developed a fresh bond of union. In Syria they never unfolded a strict nationality, for there was always a number of central points, consisting of the larger cities. The Phenicians accordingly called themselves Sidonians, Giblites, Carthaginians, and the like. To foreigners, however, they all seemed to be of one type, bold seamen, cunning and conscienceless traders. Through their enterprise and good fortune they brought the treasures of Babylonia and Egypt to the west, and thus essentially furthered the subsequent civilization of the Mediterranean lands. III Religion. The sources for a knowledge of Phenician religion and cult are scanty. The inscriptions contain little but names of gods whose pronunciation is often uncertain, and many formulas the meaning of which is obscure. The euhemeristic treatise on the cosmogony and theogony of the Phenicians, the "Phenician history" of Sanchuniathon (q.v.), can be used only with caution, if at all, for the older period. It is remarkable that in so maritime a people the cult of sea-gods was so slightly emphasized. Hesychius mentions a "Zeus of the sea," and at Beirut the eight Kabirs ("great ones, mighty ones") were held to be the discoverers and patrons of navigation. The fact that in the names of the gods thus far known no allusions to trade or navigation appear seems to imply that the Phenicians developed their religion not on the coast or as seafarers, but in another region where their life was not unlike that of the other Canaanites to whom they were akin. 1. Deities. The Phenician divinities were primarily local gods. Besides the gods of the cities, there were gods of the mountains. As possessors they were called baal; as lords, adon; as rulers, melekh (see [55]Moloch, Molech). Their worshipers were gerim, "proteges," or abhadhim, "servants." Sexual antitheses were prominent in their religious system. The divinities were usually named after the place where they were honored: Baal Z?or, the god of Tyre; Baal Z?idon, the god of Sidon; Baalath Gebal, the goddess of Byblus. When the Phenicians founded a new colony, they established there a new seat for the cult of their native gods, whose authority did not transcend the limits of the new settlement. In common parlance the Phenicians spoke of a baal or baalath without any qualifying phrase (cf. I Kings xviii. 19 sqq.), but there was no divinity so named. The feminine form baatath was relatively rare, its place being taken by ashtart, so that Astarte, or Ashtoreth, appears in the Old Testament as the goddess par excellence of the Sidonians (i.e., Phenicians; cf. I Kings xi. 5, 33, xxiii. 13; see [56]Astarte; [57]Ashera; [58]Baal). Few Phenician gods are known by specific names. The one most frequently mentioned was Melkarth (Hercules), the "King of the City (of Tyre)." Eshmun, greatly honored in Sidon, and compared with AEsculapius, seems to have been a god of health and healing. Proper names often contain the divine names Zd ("Hunter, Fisher" [?]; possibly connected with the name Sidon), Skn, Pmy, and Pm, as well as a goddess Tnt (usually pronounced Tanith). Among the foreign gods were the Egyptian Isis, Osiris, Horus, Bast, and Thoth; the Syrian Resheph and Anat; and the Babylonian Tammuz, Hadad, and Dagon. The Phenicians, like the Canaanites, were accustomed to place by the altars sacred stones as the abode of the deity, pillars being substituted later for natural stones. Such pillars were called maz?z?eba, naz?ib, or h?ammanim (see [59]Memorials and Sacred Stones), and were regarded as animate. In the cult of female divinities, the sacred stone was replaced by the sacred post (representing the sacred tree), called Asherah (q.v.). The two pillars in the temple of Melkarth at Tyre (Herodotus, ii. 44; Josephus, Apion, i. 18) doubtless connoted the dualism found in nature. Still other sacred sites had groups of three pillars, apparently typifying a threefold phenomenon of nature. 2. Cult. The narrow local cults were later transcended by the widely worshiped Baad Shamem, or "Lord of Heaven," with his "goddess of the heaven of Baal" (cf. Herodotus, i. 105), who may be compared with the "queen of heaven" of Jer. vii. 18, and with the Carthaginian Caelestis. The Signification of the divinity El is uncertain. He seems to have been first honored in Byblus, and was equated with Kronos by the Greeks, who said that he was worshiped with sacrifices of children in Phenicia, Carthage, and Sardinia (see [60]Moloch, Molech). An important list of Carthaginian divinities is given in the deities invoked by Hannibal to witness his treaty with Philip of Macedon (Polybius, vii. 9). In Phenician cult there was nothing to distinguish them from other Canaanites. Sacred enclosures with altars, stones, and trees (posts), a cell or larger house for the image of the divinity (the architecture strongly influenced by Egypt), the firstlings of all productions for the deity, animal sacrifices, sacred dances, "votaries," priests, ablutions, and circumcision--all were present. The cosmogony presupposed a tripartite division into heaven, earth, and sea. IV. History. 1. Till the Assyrian Period. The earliest mention of the Phenician coast thus far known refers to its conquest by Sargon, king of Agade, in the middle of the third millennium B.C. Whether, however, this means the Phenicians proper is a problem, and Winckler holds that the campaign was waged against the pre-Phenician inhabitants, whose commercial activity and culture were later adopted by the Phenicians from the Arabian desert. About 1400 B.C. the Egyptian power, to which Thothmes III. had subjected the Phenicians a century previous, was waning, the Hittites were entering the country and the kings of the Amorites, Abdashirtu and Aziru, were attacking the Phenician cities, whose kings wrote in vain to Egypt for aid. Sethos I. and Rameses II. restored the Egyptian power, at least for the southern portion of Syria; but the supremacy of the Pharaohs came to an end, and the Philistines definitely settled in the land. The first prosperity of the Phenician cities began about 1000 B.C. Tyre became predominant, the supremacy of Sidon apparently being religious and civilizing rather than political. Hiram I. of Tyre, after receiving a gift of twenty Israelitic cities from Solomon, engaged in trade with him (see [61]Ophir; [62]Tarshish) and founded the colony of Citium in Cyprus, naming the town K?arta H?adasht, or "new city" (Carthage). Under King Pygmalion the famous colony of Carthage is said to have been founded from Tyre, when what was probably an existing city received a new lord, a new cult, and a new name. Winckler holds that the impulse to migration which led the Phenicians to Canaan sent other emigrants from Arabia along the northern coast of Africa, and possibly into southern Europe, so that the "foundation" of Carthage was, in reality, merely its subjugation by Tyre. However this may be, the subordination of Carthage to Tyre led to the supremacy in the western Mediterranean of Tyre, which seems to have extended its sway over a number of Syrian cities also. While Hiram I. is always termed "king of Tyre" (II Sam. v. 11; I Kings v. 15, ix. 10), Ethbaal is called "king of the Zidonians" (I Kings xvi. 31), thus implying that Tyre and Sidon had meanwhile been united under the hegemony of the former. This is confirmed by the statement of Menander (cited by Josephus, Ant., VIII., xiii. 2) that Ethbaal founded Botrys (and also Auza in Lybia). The northern cities around Aradus, however, were unaffected by this predominance of Tyre. 2. Assyrian to the Roman Period. The invasions of the Assyrian kings Asshurbanipal and Shalmaneser II. in the ninth century were averted by the payment of tribute; but in 738 Tiglath-Pileser III. formed the Assyrian province of Simyra from the cities in the Eleutherus valley. Sennacherib vainly besieged Tyre five years (701-696), though it lost its possessions on the mainland, while Sidon became tributary and received a new king from Sennacherib. Later Sidon revolted against Esarhaddon, only to be destroyed in 675 and replaced by an Assyrian city. Later still, Tyre was attacked and, with Aradus, forced to make peace with the Assyrians. The decline of the Assyrian power was probably favorable to the Phenician cities, and Egyptian attempts to regain supremacy were unsuccessful. The Egyptians were driven from Syria by the Babylonians under Nebuchadrezzar II., who beleaguered Tyre in vain (585-573). But internal strife broke out in Tyre, and after rule by suffetes, or "judges," the city was forced to ask Babylon for a king. Under Persian rule, which was accepted unresistingly by the Phenicians, Sidon became predominant. In the days of Herodotus, Sidon, Tyre, and Aradus made the "Three Cities" (Tripolis), but in the reign of Alexander the Great the chief Phenician centers were Tyre, Sidon, Byblus, and Aradus. In the Persian period, Aradus extended its power along the coast farther than before; in the south Acre, Ashdod, Ashkelon, and Carmel belonged to Tyre; Dor and Joppa to Sidon; and the entire coast to the fifth Persian satrapy. With the connivance of Nectanebo of Egypt, the Phenician cities, under Tennes of Sidon, revolted against Persia in 350, but were ruthlessly suppressed by Artaxerxes III. Alexander the Great found resistance only at Tyre, which he succeeded in reducing (see above). On the emergence of the Ptolemies and Seleucids from the confusion ensuing on the death of Alexander the Great, the Phenician cities came under Seleucus I. His successors also held Aradus and its vicinity, while the cities south of the Eleutherus were under the Ptolemies from 281 to 198. The kings of Sidon in the third century seem to have included Eshmunazar I., Tabnit, and Eshmunazar II., but on the death of the last-named Sidon apparently adopted a republican form of government, as Tyre did in 274. The other Phenician cities secured autonomy from the Seleucids, and these privileges were generally confirmed by the Romans. The Phenician language, however, was superseded by Aramaic, while the higher classes prided themselves on Greek or Roman culture. 3. Trade and Discovery. Phenician trade was carried on both by land and sea. Land traffic brought the products and treasures of Arabia, Babylonia, and Armenia, and later of Persia and India, to the Mediterranean. Commerce with Egypt was probably carried on chiefly by water, though the maritime commerce of Phenicia was scarcely as extensive as is commonly supposed. Colonies proper were to be found only in Cyprus and northern Africa, Gades in southern Spain probably being settled originally from Africa. The Phenician commercial settlements or factories along the shores of the Mediterranean do not deserve the name of colonies. The Phenicians were primarily merchants, ever eager to adorn their markets with the best and newest (cf. Ezek. xxvii.). Such a people would not be likely to develop an individual art, and Phenician remains, dating at the earliest from the Persian period, show a mixture of Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, and Greek elements. The Phenician coins were struck on Greek models, but in Aradus Persian weights were used, and Phenician in Byblus, Sidon, and Tyre. In architecture the Phenicians received their inspiration from the Egyptians, but they developed a marked individuality in the treatment of stone. The Phenicians were skilled in constructing aqueducts, as is shown by the stone pipes through which the island of Tyre was supplied with water. Their ability in building ships was famed in antiquity (cf. Ezek. xxvii.; Herodotus, vii. 96, 128). Their moral reputation, however, was indifferent, as the allusions of the Odyssey to their knavery amply prove. The Phenicians have won much unmerited fame as discoverers through the attribution to them by the Greeks of the invention of things which they merely transmitted. In Rome purple fabrics were called sarranus (from Sarra, "Tyre"), and the Tyrians are described as the best skilled in dyeing in purple. The art, however, was perhaps Babylonian. In like manner the Greeks thought that the alphabet originated in Tyre, especially in view of the power of the city about 1000 B.C. As a matter of fact Phenicia merely transmitted the alphabet, which probably originated in Babylonia like the cuneiform writing. And finally it may be noted that glass and faience, the invention of which was popularly ascribed to the Phenicians, were known in Egypt earlier than in Phenicia. (H. Guthe.) Bibliography: The articles in the dictionaries are general, covering the whole topic. The best are: DB, iii. 683-685, 855-862, 823-825, 980-981; EB, iii. 3730-65; JE, ix. 667-870; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, part xxxi. 228-247; Jacobus, Dictionary, pp. 674-676. On the geography consult: V. Guerin, Description de la Palestine, III., Galilee, part 2, Paris, 1880; Survey of Western Palestine, Memoirs, vol. i., Galilee, London, 1881; G. Ebers and H. Guthe, Paelestina in Bild and Wort, vol. ii., Stuttgart, 1884. On the art, language, and inscriptions: Inscriptions are collected in the CIS, part 1, vols., i-ii., Paris, 1881-89. Consult: G. Perrot and C. Chipies, Histoire de l'art dans l'antiquite, vol. 3, Phenicie, Paris, 1885, Eng. transl., Hist. of Art in Phaenicia, 2 vols., London, 1885; W. Gesenius, Scripturae linguaeque Phaenicia monumenta, Leipsic, 1857; P. Schroeder, Die phoenizische Sprache, Halle, 1869 (grammar); B. Stade, Morgenlaendische Forschungen, pp. 167 sqq., Leipsic, 1875; C. Clermont-Ganneau; Sceaux et cachets pheniciens, Paris, 1883; E. Ledrain, Notice des monuments pheniciens (i.e., in the Louvre), Paris, 1888; A. Bloch, Phoenicische's Glossar, Berlin, 1890; J. G. E. Hoffmann, Ueber einige phoenikische Inschriften, Goettingen, 1890; A. Pellegrini, Studii d'Epigrafia fenicia, Palermo, 1891; O. Hamdi, Une Necropole royale `a Sidon, Paris, 1892-96; M. Lidzbarski, Handbuch der nordsemitischen Epigraphik, Weimar, 1898; idem, Ephemeris fuer semitische Epigraphik, Giessen, 1900 sqq.; A. Mayr, Aus den phoenizischen Nekropolen von Malta, Munich, 1905; Schrader, KAT, pp. 126 sqq., et passim; W. F. von Landau, Die phoenizischen Inschriften, Leipsic, 1907. On the alphabet: E. de Rouge, Memoires sur l'origine egyptienne de l'alphabet phenicien, Paris, 1874; Deecke, in ZDMG, xxxi (1877), 102 sqq.; P. Berger, Hist. de l'ecreture dans l'antiquite, Paris, 1892; Ball, in PSBA, 1893, pp. 392-408; C. R. Condor, Bible and the East, pp. 74 sqq., Edinburgh, 1896; H. Zimmern, in ZDMG, 1 (1896), 667 sqq.; J. Alvarez de Peralta, Iconografia de los Alfabetos fenicio y hebraico, Madrid, 1898. On the history: R. Pietschmann, Geschichte der Phoenizier, Berlin, 1889; G. Rawlinson, Hist. of Phoenicia, London, 1889; idem, Phoenicia, ib. 1889; F. C. Movers, Die Phoenizier, Bonn, 1841-56; J. Kenrick, Hist. of Phoenicia, London, 1855; E. Renan, Mission de Phenicie, Paris, 1864; G. Maspero, Hist. ancienne des peuples de l'orient, Paris, 1875; idem, Struggle of the Nations, London, 1896; H. Prutz, Aus Phoenizien, Leipsic, 1876; F. Bovet, Egypt, Palestine, and Phoenicia, London, 1882; E. Oberhummer, Phoenizier in Akarnanien, Munich, 1882; E. Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums, vol. i., Stuttgart, 1884; A. von Gutschmid, in Encyclopaedia Britannica, Germ. trans., in his Kleine Schriften, ii. 36-80, Leipsic, 1889; W. M. Mueller, Asien und Europe, Leipsic, 1893; C. Peters, Das goldene Ophir Salomo's. Eine Studie sur Geschichte der phoenikischen Weltpolitik, Munich, 1895; H. Winckler, Altorientalische Forschungen, i. 5 (1897), 421 sqq., ii. 1 (1898), 65-70, ii. 2 (1899), 295 sqq.; idem, Geschichte lsraels, i. 104 sqq., Leipsic, 1895; W. von Landau, Die Phoenizier, Leipsic, 1901; idem, Die Bedeutung der Phoenizier im Voelkerleben, ib. 1905; V. Berard, Les Pheniciens et l'Odyssee, 2 vols., Paris, 1902--03; idem, in RHR, xxxix. 173-228, 419-460; C. A. Bruston, Etudes pheniciennes, Paris, 1903; W. M. Muelller, Neue Darstellungen "mykenischer" Gesandter and phoenizischer Schiffe in altaegyptischen Wandgemaelden, Berlin, 1904; A. D. Mordtmann, Historische Bilder vom Bosporus, part 2, Constantinople, 1907; F. C. Eiseler, Sidon: a Study in Oriental History, New York, 1907. On the religion: C. and T. Muller, Fragmenta historicum Graecorum, iii. 560 sqq., 4 vols., Paris, 1841-51; W. von Baudissin, Studien zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte, Leipsic, 1878; F. Baethgen, Beitraege zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte, Berlin, 1888; P. D. Chantepie de la Saussaye, Lehrbuch der Religionsgeschichte, i. 348-383, Tuebingen, 1905; Smith, Rel. of Sem. Consult also the article [63]Sanchuniathon and the literature given there. Philadelphia PHILADELPHA. See [64]Asia Minor, IV. Philadephian Society PHILADELPHIAN SOCIETY. See [65]Lead, Jane. Philanthropy PHILANTHROPY. See [66]Social Service of the Church. Philaret PHILARET, fi''la-ret' (VASILY MIKHAILOVICH DROZDOV): Russian prelate; b. at Kolomna (58 m. s.s.e. of Moscow) 1782; d. at Moscow Dec. 1, 1867. He was educated at the seminaries of Kolomna and St. Sergius Lavra, and on the completion of his studies was at once appointed professor in the latter. He became preacher at the monastery of St. Sergius at Troitsk in 1806, and four years later was appointed professor of theology in the ecclesiastical academy of Alexander Nevski in St. Petersburg, becoming archimandrite in 1811 and director in 1812. He took monastic vows in 1817, and after being bishop of Reval and episcopal vicar of St. Petersburg, became, in 1819, archbishop of Tver and a member of the Holy Synod. In the following year he was archbishop of Yaroslav, and in 1821 was translated to Moscow, also becoming metropolitan in 1826. His daring utterances, however, brought him into imperial disfavor, and from 1845 until the accession of Alexander II. in 1855 he was restricted to the limits of his diocese. He is said to have prepared Alexander's proclamation freeing the serfs (Mar. 19, 1861), and he enjoyed the reputation of being one of the leading pulpit orators of his time and country. He was a prominent figure in preparing a Russian translation of the Bible (see [67]Bible Versions, B, XVI., S: 2), and wrote "Colloquy between a Believer and a Skeptic on the True Doctrine of the Greco-Russian Church " (St. Petersburg, 1815); "Compend of Sacred History" (1816); "Commentary on Genesis" (1816); "Attempt to Explain Psalm lxvii." (1818); "Sermons delivered at Various Times" (1820); "Extracts from the Four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles for Use in Lay Schools" (1820); "Christian Catechism" (1823; Eng. transl. by R. W. Blackmore in his Doctrine of the Russian Church, Aberdeen, 1845; reprinted in Schaff, Creeds, ii. 445-542); "Extracts from the Historical Books of the Old Testament" (1828-30); "Principles of Religious Instruction" (1828); and "New Collection of Sermons" (1830-36). An English version of some of his sermons was published at London in 1873 under the title "Select Sermons by the late Metropolitan of Moscow, Philaret," together with a brief biographical sketch. Bibliography: Biographie universelle, xxxiii. 45-46; La Grande Encyclopedie, xxvi. 645. Philaster PHILASTER, fi-las'ter (PHILASTRIUS): Bishop of Brescia and ecclesiastical writer; b. possibly in Egypt in the first half of the fourth century; d. before 397. He had been consecrated before 381, for in that year he took part in the Synod of Aquileia. Augustine knew him while at Milan; and his, successor Gaudentius, who became bishop of Brescia before 397, praised his orthodoxy and learning (MPL, xx. 957). According to the tradition current at Brescia, he died on July 18; but the Sermo de vita et obitu Philastri (MPL, xx. 1002), ascribed to Gaudentius, seems to date rather from the eighth or ninth century. About 383 Philaster wrote his Diversarum haereseOn liber (ed. J. Sichard, Basel, 1528; also in MPL, xii.; CSEL, xxxviii.), a catalogue containing twenty-eight pre-Christian and 128 Christian heresies. The style shows lack of education, and the matter lack of intellectual training. It is fanciful and artificial, especially in its divisions of distinction. His source for heresies previous to Noetus was probably the lost Syntagma adversus omnes haereses of Hippolytus, and for the Manicheans the Acta Archelai. The intrinsic value of the work is small. He was, however, cited by Augustine, and thus gained importance in the Middle Ages, and he is of some interest in tracing the history of the New-Testament canon, especially for the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the Letter to the Laodiceans. (R. Schmid.) BlBLIOGRAPHY: R. A. Lipsius, Zur Quellenkritik des Epiphanios, Vienna, 1865; idem. Die Quellen der aeltesten Ketzergeschichte, Leipsic, 1875; A. Harnack, Quellenkritik der Geschichte des Gnostismus, Leipsic, 1874; idem, Litteratur, i. 150; J. Kunze, De historiae gnosticismi fontibus, Leipsic, 1894; Krueger, History, passim; Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 931; Ceillier, Auteurs sacres, v. 171-178, viii. 42-43; DCB, iv. 351-353. Phileas PHILEAS, fi-le'as: Bishop of Thmuis (the modern Tmai, between the Tanite and Mendesian branches of the Nile) and martyr; d. at Alexandria 305. According to Eusebius, he was distinguished for his wealth, noble birth, honorable rank, and philosophical training, and the same church historian also gives a fragment of a letter written by Phileas from his prison in Alexandria to his diocese at Thmuis (Hist. eccl., VIII., x. 2-10; Eng. transl., NPNF, 1 ser., i. 330-331), holding up the example of the Alexandrian martyrs. Together with three other bishops imprisoned with him, Phileas wrote to Meletius of Lycopolis (q.v.), charging him with violating the rules of the Church by appointing other bishops in their places. The acts of Phileas, which are extant both in Greek and Latin, seem to have been known to Eusebius and to Jerome; and Rufinus (Hist, eccl., viii. 10) states that they were written by a Christian named Gregorius. The official who presided at the martyrdom of Phileas was Culcianus, who was succeeded by Hierocles apparently in 306, and at latest by 308. (N. Bonwetsch.) Bibliography: The letter is also in M. J. Routh, Reliquiae sacrae, 5 vols., Oxford. 1846-48; Eng. trans. with introduction and notes is in ANF, vi. 161-164. The Acts of his Martyrdom are in ASB, Feb., i. 459 sqq. (with commentary); R. Knopff, Ausgewaehlte Maertyrakten, pp. 102 sqq., Freiburg, 1901; F. Combefis, Illustrium Christi martyrum lecti triumphi, pp. 145 sqq., Paris, 1660 (the Greek text). The older literature is given in ANF, Bibliography, p. 71. Consult: Jerome, De vir. ill., lxxviii.; N. Lardner, Credibility of Gospel History, in Works, iii. 234-237, London, 1838; J. M. Neale, Hist. of the Holy Eastern Church, i. 97, 99-101, London, 1847; E. le Blaut, Les Persecuteurs et les martyrs aux premiere siecles, pp. 226-227, Paris, 1893; Harnack, Litteratur, i. 441-442, ii. 2, pp. 69-72, 74, 83; C. Schmidt, in TU, v. 4b (1901); O. Bardenhewer, Geschichte der altkirchlichen Litteratur, ii. 211-212, Freiburg, 1903; Krueger, History, p. 219; DCB, iv. 353; KL, ix. 1998. Philemon, Epistle to PHILEMON, EPISTLE TO. See [68]Paul, the Apostle, II. Philip II PHILIP II.: King of Spain, son of the Emperor Charles V. and Isabella of Portugal; b. at Valladolid May 21, 1527; d. at Madrid Sept. 13, 1598. Educated under Dominican rather than Jesuit influence, he perpetuated the Spanish idea of Roman Catholicism that underlay the policy of Ferdinand and Isabella and Cardinal Ximenes, which regarded Roman Catholicism as the only tolerable form of Christianity and as absolutely essential to the political power of Spain. He had no sympathy with the humanistic popes and Curia, and would brook no interference of the papacy with Spanish administration; on the other hand, he insisted upon controlling papal policy. The policy of compromise by which Charles V. had sought to reunify religion throughout his realm had been recognized by himself as ineffective. Two Chief Aims; Failure in England. Philip began his reign with the fixed resolve to exterminate Protestantism at whatever cost from every foot of territory that he controlled. Closely connected with this aspect of his policy was a determination to make his own will supreme throughout his vast realm. Protestantism had never been allowed to gain much headway in Spain and he spared no effort or expense to remove every vestige of anticatholicism. With equal severity he dealt with the Moriscoes (professed Moorish converts still Mohammedan at heart) and with converts from Judaism whose sincere devotion to Roman Catholicism was suspected. He married Mary of England (1554) with the twofold object of bringing England under the domination of Spain and of exterminating heresy in the British Isles. He even sought to ingratiate himself with the English people by putting aside his customary moroseness and reserve and assuming an air of friendliness and suavity. His failure to win the hearts of the English, Mary's dissatisfaction with his private life, and the urgent need of his presence at home led to his leaving England forever (Sept., 1555). In 1556 by the abdication of Charles V. he became master of Spain, the Sicilies, the Milanese territory, Franche Comte, the Netherlands, Mexico, and Peru, thus becoming the greatest potentate on earth with seemingly unlimited resources. His Wars. He was impatient to begin a crusade against Protestantism in which he sought to enlist all the Roman Catholic sovereigns of Europe, but was shocked by the discovery that the pope had formed an alliance with the king of France and the sultan to deprive him of his Italian possessions. He scrupled at going to war with the pope, but self-interest soon triumphed and he sent the duke of Alva to drive French and papal forces from Sicily and to seize the papal possessions, while he himself administered a severe chastisement to the French at St. Quentin (Aug. 10, 1557) and at Gravelines (Apr. 2, 1559). After the death of Mary of England he sought once more to gain a foothold in England by proposing to marry Elizabeth, her sister and successor. Failing in this project he married Isabella of France, daughter of Catharine de Medici, his main object being to bring his influence in favor of Roman Catholicism more powerfully to bear upon France for the destruction of the Huguenots and to prevent French interference with his measures against Evangelical Christianity in the Netherlands. As a preparation for the crusade against Protestantism, which he foresaw to be an undertaking of vast proportions, he began to gather rapidly into the treasury the wealth of his domain, ignoring completely the customary and legal rights of the people. The revolt of the Netherlands and his unsuccessful efforts to suppress it depleted the well-filled treasury and led to extortionate and destructive taxation in Spain, including ecclesiastical foundations. Portugal became his through failure of the direct male line of succession and through a successful military invasion (1580). The pope having bestowed England upon Philip, he undertook to take possession (1588) by sending the armada, a fleet of 131 vessels with 19,000 marines and 8,000 sailors, against a far inferior English fleet. Favoring winds and superior seamanship gave the victory to the English, and Spain was well-nigh swept off the sea. Philip promoted and rejoiced in the massacre of St. Bartholomew's day in France (1572) and, when Henry of Navarre became heir apparent and was contending for the crown, Philip joined forces with the Guises. In the war that followed Philip was worsted and was obliged to sign the treaty of Vervins (May, 1598). By forty years of aggressive warfare, for the destruction of the political enemies of Spain and of the enemies of the Roman Catholic Church, he lost a large part of his hereditary possessions, impoverished and degraded what remained, and at his death (1598) left Spain a secondary power and its people far behind the age in free institutions and in civilization. The inquisition of heresy was with him a favorite occupation, and it was carried on with the utmost cruelty wherever his authority prevailed. Attitude toward the Papacy. While he regarded Roman Catholicism as the only valid form of Christianity and was convinced that the toleration of any other form of religion tended toward anarchy or at least toward destruction of monarchy, he was strenuous in resisting anything in papal or conciliar action that could be construed as infringement upon the prerogatives of the Spanish crown. His control of the Inquisition, his right to nominate bishops not only for Spain but also for the Netherlands, the regium exequatur (involving the right of the king to pass upon all papal bulls and briefs before their promulgation in his domains; see [69]Placet), the right of the king to administer and control the affairs of the Hospitalers and other endowed ecclesiastical institutions, he persistently maintained. He exercised a controlling influence over the Council of Trent (1556 onward) and his representatives were keen to detect and mighty to defeat any ordinance that trenched upon the rights of the Spanish crown. The conciliar provision for episcopal visitation of the chapters of the monastic orders he resolutely and effectively opposed, as well as the council's proposed arrangement for provincial and diocesan synods. He greatly promoted the progress of the monastic orders, especially the Dominicans, Franciscans, the order founded by St. Peter Nolasco (see [70]Nolasco), and Jesuits, and encouraged the multiplication of their establishments in Spain and the colonies. He took the keenest interest in papal elections and virtually insisted upon his right to nominate to the papal office or at least to defeat all candidates whom he disapproved. He promoted the Jesuit school at Douai for the education of Roman Catholic missionaries for England. Apart from his single-minded devotion to the maintenance and extension of the authority of the Spanish crown and the universal prevalence of the Roman Catholic religion, Philip had few of the qualities that mark a great ruler or statesman. He was egoistic, unsympathetic, cruel (the loss of tens of thousands of troops seems to have affected him only as a diminution of the resources available for the accomplishment of his purposes, and he frequently was present in person at the burning of heretics), taciturn, morose, distrustful, and reserved. A. H. Newman. Bibliography: A rich list of literature is furnished in the British Museum Catalogue. For English readers the best works directly on the subject are: W. H. Prescott, Hist. of the Reign of Philip II., many editions, e.g., in his Complete Works, Boston, 1905 (a classic); M. A. S. Hume, Philip II. of Spain, London, 1897; idem, Spain, its Greatness and Decay, ib. 1898; idem, Two English Queens and Philip, ib. 1908. Further accounts of the life and reign of Philip are: C. Campana, 2 parts, Venice, 1605-09; G. Leti, 2 parts, Coligni, 1679; Robert Watson, 2 vols., London, 1808; A. Dumesnil, Hist. de Philippe II., Paris, 1822; E. San Miguel y Valledor, 4 vols., Madrid, 1844-1847; F. A. M. Mignet, Antonio Perez and Philip II., London, 1846; C. Gayarre, New York, 1866; R. Baumstark, Freiburg, 1875; V. Gomez, Madrid, 1879; H. Forneron, 4 vols., Paris, 1881-82; W. W. Norman, New York, 1898. Consult also more general works, such as: Cambridge Modern History, vol. iii., London and New York, 1905; S. A. Durham, Hist. of Spain and Portugal, 5 vols., London, 1832 (the best general history in English); M. W. Freer, Elizabeth de Valois, 2 vols., London, 1857; F. W. Schirrmacher, Geschichte von Spanien, 6 vols.. Gotha, 1893; H. Watts, Spain, New York, 1893; C. A. Wilkens, Spanish Protestants in the 16th Century, New York, 1897; J. L. Motley, The Rise of the Dutch Republic, ed. Bell, London, 1904; H. C. Lea, Hist. of the Inquisition of Spain, 4 vols., New York, 1906-07; Robinson, European History, ii. 168 sqq. Illustrative original documents are cited in Reich, Documents, pp. 593 sqq., and in Gee and Hardy, Documents, pp. 384 sqq. Philip IV (Le Bel, 'The Fair) PHILIP IV. (LE BEL, "THE FAIR "): King of France (1285-1314), son of Philip III.; b. at Fontainebleau (37 m. s.s.e. of Paris) 1268; d. Nov. 29, 1314. A contemporary Flemish monkish chronicler, having in mind his persistent and unscrupulous efforts to subjugate Flanders, speaks of him as "a certain king of France . . . eaten up by the fever of avarice and cupidity." Guizot, quoting with approval this medieval characterization, adds: "And that was not the only fever inherent in Philip IV. . . . ; he was a prey also to that of ambition and, above all, to that of power. When he mounted the throne, at seventeen years of age, he was handsome, as his nickname tells us, cold, taciturn, hash, and brave at need, but without fire or dash, able in the formation of his designs and obstinate in prosecuting them by craft or violence, bribery or cruelty, with wit to choose and support his servants, passionately vindictive against his enemies, and faithless and unsympathetic toward his subjects, but from time to time taking care to conciliate them either by calling them to his aid in his difficulties or dangers, or by giving them protection against their opposers. Never, perhaps, was king better served by circumstances or more successful in his enterprises; but . . . he had a scandalous contempt for rights, abused success, and thrust the kingship in France upon the high-road of that arrogant and reckless egotism which is sometimes compatible with ability and glory, but which carries with it in germ . . . the native vices and fatal consequences of arbitrary and absolute power" (Hist. of France, i. 457, New York, 1884). His political success was scarcely as real as this characterization implies; for while he was able to rob England of Guienne he was ultimately compelled to restore it, and while for a time he dominated and oppressed Flanders, his victory was followed by humiliating defeat. By his marriage to Johanna of Navarre (1284) he added Navarre, Champagne, and Brie to the royal possessions. Lyons was later (1312) subjected to the crown. In ecclesiastical matters his success was more marked and permanent; but even when he contended most effectively against papal usurpations he manifested no higher qualities or motives than those set forth above. His refusal to yield to the demand of Boniface VIII. (q.v.) that he make peace with the king of England was due not to a clearly defined view of the proper relations of Church and State, but to his determination to have his own way and his willingness to defy what he must have recognized as the highest spiritual authority on earth. The same may be said of his successful retaliatory measures in response to Boniface's bull Clericis laicos (Feb. 25, 1296). He had gained so large a measure of authority in France that the French clergy, whether they sympathized with his defiance of the pope or not, dared not antagonize him, paid to the king the war subsidies demanded in spite of papal prohibition, and obeyed the king in withholding all papal dues. That Boniface deserved to be chastised for his arrogance does not make of Philip a heroic champion of civil liberty in administering the discipline. This is true also of his defiant treatment of the bull Unam sanctum (q.v.). His burning of this most arrogant papal pronouncement, his confiscation of the estates of prelates who sided with the pope, and his response to the pope's bull of excommunication by throwing the pope into prison, furnish no proof that he was a reformer. The fact is that he regarded neither God nor man when his own supposed interests were at stake. He manifested the same spirit in manipulating the college of cardinals so as to secure the election of a pope (Clement V.) committed to the interests of France and pledged to remove the papal capital to Avignon. He secured the removal of the papal seat to French territory not in order that, he might bring about a reformation in the papal administration, but that he might prevent other sovereigns from using the organized power of the papacy against himself and might be assured of papal and curial cooperation for the aggrandizement of the French monarchy. He compelled the captive pope and Curia to cooperate with him in the destruction of the Templars (q.v.), not because he believed that the order had become scandalously immoral and blasphemously and diabolically irreligious, as members of the order were tortured into confessing, but because he was jealous of their political power and lack of subserviency, and covetous of their vast wealth. He persecuted the Jews not chiefly because he wanted them to become Christians, but as a means of appropriating their wealth. His avarice was also manifested in his debasing of the coinage of the realm. It is not to be supposed that the well conceived and well executed measures for consolidating and increasing the authority of the crown, overcoming civil and ecclesiastical opposition, and enriching the royal exchequer were the product of his own independent thinking. He was surrounded with able and unscrupulous counselors (such as William of Nogaret), who subserviently ministered to his consuming desire for power and glory and who profited personally by his successful exploitations. See [71]Boniface VIII.; and [72]Clement V. A. H. Newman. Bibliography: Important sources are: Codex diplomaticus Flandriae 1296-1325, ed. T. de L. Stirum, Bruges, 1879 sqq.; and Lettres inedites de Philippe Ie Bel, Toulouse, 1887. Discussions, besides those in the church histories dealing with the period, are: A. Baillet, Hist. des demeles du Pape Boniface VIII. avec Philippe Ie Bel, 2 parts, Paris, 1718; M. Bouquet, Recueil des historiens des Gaules, vol. xxi., 23 vols., ib. 1738-76; J. Jolly, Philippe le Bel, ses desseins, ses actes, son influence, ib. 1869; Milman, Latin Christianity, vol. vi.; Pastor, Popes, i. 57 sqq.; and the literature under [73]Boniface VIII. and [74]Clement V. Philip, the Apostle PHILIP THE APOSTLE: One of the twelve, usually named fifth in order in the lists of the apostles. Excepting in these lists, he is not mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels. In the narrative of the Fourth Gospel he occasionally appears individually (John i. 14 sqq., vi. 5 sqq., xii. 21 sqq., xiv. 8 sqq.). He "was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter" (John i. 44), after whom, and probably owing to their common following of John the Baptist, Philip became acquainted with Jesus (John i. 14 sqq.), to whom he then brought Nathanael. According to John vi. 5-8, xii. 22 (cf. Mark iii. 18), he appears to have stood close to his fellow countryman Andrew; and John vi. 7, xii. 22, indicate that he possessed a reserved and circumspect disposition. But neither his Greek name nor John xii. 22 warrants the inference that Philip was of Greek education. On another side, to explain this whole Johannine portraiture of the Apostle Philip as purely ideal (e.g., Holtzmann) is opposed by the very simplicity of the data. The patristic statements (Clement of Alexandria, Strom., iii. 4; Eusebius, Hist. eccl., III., xxxi., Eng. transl., NPNF, 1 ser., 162) that the unnamed disciple of Jesus in Luke ix. 60; Matt. viii. 22, was Philip rests probably on a confusion with the evangelist of this name. This mistake, however, has both possible and rational explanation, in case the apostle and the evangelist alike sojourned in Asia Minor (see [75]Philip the Evangelist). F. Sieffert. Bibliography: Consult in general: The commentaries on the Gospels and Acts, and works on the apostolic age. Also A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, Edinburgh, 1871; J. B. Lightfoot, Commentary on Colossians, pp. 45-46. London. 1879; idem, Cambridge Sermons, pp. 129 sqq., ib. 1890; G. Milligan, The Twelve Apostles, London, 1904; DB, iii 834-836; EB, iii. 3697-3701; DCG, ii. 359-360; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, part xxxi., cols. 267-270. For the apocryphal history consult: C. Tischendorf, Acta apostalorum apocrypha, pp. xxxi.-xl., 75-104, Leipsic, 1851; W. Wright, Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, ii. 69 sqq., London, 1871; Apocryphal Gospels, Acts, and Revelations, Eng. transl. by A. Walker, pp. 301-324, Edinburgh, 1873; R. A. Lipsius, Die apokryphen Apostelgeschichten und Apostellegenden, ii. 2, pp. 1-53, Brunswick, 1884; Analecta Bollandiana, ix (1890), 204-249; T. Zahn, Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons, ii. 761-768, Leipsic, 1890; Stoelten, in JPT, 1891, pp. 149-160; Apocrypha Anecdota, in TU, ii. 3 (1893); A. S. Lewis, Mythological Acts of the Apostles, in Horae Semiticae, iv., London, 1904; Harnack. Litteratur, i. 138. Philip the Arabian PHILIP THE ARABIAN (MARCUS JULIUS PHILIPPUS ARABS): Roman emperor 244-249; b. at Bostra (119 m. s. of Damascus) in the Roman province of Arabia Petraea (whence his epithet of "the Arabian"); killed in battle near Verona, Italy, in the autumn of 249. Elevated to the purple by the murder of his predecessor, Gordianus III., he was able, during his reign, to subdue the Carpi who had ravaged Dacia, and, in 248, to celebrate the millennial of the founding of Rome, but was, on the other hand, obliged to conclude a humiliating peace with the Persians. In 249 Philip became involved in civil war with his rival Decius, by whom he was defeated and slain, his young son, whom he had made coregent at the age of seven, being murdered by the Pretorian Guard at Rome. Philip the Arabian, whose high moral ideal is evinced by his earnest, though unavailing, efforts to suppress the practise of unnatural vice, is of interest theologically chiefly because of an ancient and wide-spread tradition which makes him the first Christian emperor of Rome. This tradition appears earliest in Eusebius (Hist. eccl., vi. 34), who states that, according to report, Philip had desired to attend divine service on Easter, but had been obliged to perform penance. Vincent of Lerins (fifth century), Dionysius of Alexandria, Chrysostom, Jerome, the first Valesian Fragment, and Orosius likewise either explicitly state or at least imply that Philip was the first Christian emperor. It is plain, however, simply from the coins and medals struck by him that he was a worshiper of the Olympic gods and that he was himself pontifex maximus. But though Philip was not a Christian, he was remarkably friendly to the new religion, and the tradition that he himself was an adherent of it was doubtless due, at least in part, to his tolerant attitude toward it. During his reign Origen could refute Celsus, and conversions could be made en masse; but he could not prevent Christians from falling victims to mob violence in Alexandria. (FRANZ GOeRRES.) Bibliography: Sources are: Zosimus, Hist., i. 17-22; Julius Capitolinus, Gordiani tres, chaps. xxii., xxvi.-xxx., ed. H. Peter, Leipsic, 1865; Sextus Aurelius Victor, De Caesaribus, ed. J. F. Gruner, pp. 308-313, 429-430, Erlangen, 1787. Consult in general the history of the period in works on the Roman Empire, and in particular: B. Aube, Les Chretiens dans l'empire romain, pp. 467 sqq., Paris, 1881; P. Allard, Hist. des persecutions, ii. 215-256, 474-478, Paris, 1886; K. J. Neumann, Der roemische Staat und die allgemeine Kirche bis auf Diokletian, i. 231-254, 330-331, Leipsic, 1890; Gibbon, Decline and Fall, chaps. vii., x., xvi.; DCB, iv. 355; KL, ix. 2008-09; Neander, Christian Church, vol. i., passim. Philip the Evangelist PHILIP THE EVANGELIST: One of the seven named in Acts vi. 5 as chosen to direct the care of the poor, to "serve tables," and possibly to direct outward concerns generally. Their office was probably different from the later diaconate (see [76]Deacon), being, in any case, dissolved with the persecution and dispersion of the congregation (Acts viii.) and later supplanted by the more comprehensive office of presbyter (Acts xi. 30, xv. 29). Since that earlier office was instituted because the Grecian members of the primitive congregation complained that their widows were neglected, it may be assumed that at least a contingent of the seven was chosen from the Hellenist members themselves, and probably one of these was Philip. Philip, like Stephen (Acts vi. 13), took a comparatively liberal stand in relation to the Jewish law and worship, and evolved from that liberal mode of teaching its practical sequel, in that after his flight from Jerusalem he began an eventful missionary activity among the Samaritans (Acts viii. 5 sqq.), who were accounted nearly the same as heathen. Moreover, he baptized an uncircumcised half-proselyte, the queen of Ethiopia's eunuch (Acts viii. 26 sqq.). Next he journeyed, preaching the Gospel, "till he came to Caesarea." Here Paul took up his abode with him, together with his fellow travelers, on Paul's final journey (Acts, xxi. 8). And as this incident is related in Acts, Philip is designated not only with reference to his former office as "one of the seven," but also with reference to his missionary activity as "the evangelist" and as the father of "four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy" (xxi. 9). This is the last notice of him in the New Testament. The patristic tradition in regard to the subsequent fortunes of Philip is of impaired value for the reason that he has been confused with the apostle of like name, as in Polycrates of Ephesus, who reports of the Apostle Philip (Eusebius, Hist. eccl., III., xxxi. 3, V., xxiv. 2), that he rests in Hierapolis, as do two of his daughters, who grew old as virgins; whereas his third daughter, whose "walk and conversation were in the Spirit," lies buried in Ephesus. These family particulars so closely resemble what is reported in Acts xxi. 9 of the evangelist that it is hardly tenable to think of two different men of the same name in this connection. Error in the Book of Acts is the less likely since it is precisely there that the reports are from an eyewitness. It is evident that Polycrates erroneously held the Philip of Hierapolis to be the apostle, though this does not exclude the proposition that his particulars in regard to the Evangelist Philip are correct. In comparison with these details the statements of Caius of Rome (Eusebius, Hist. eccl., III., xxxi.) are not so exact. It is probably due to a confusion of the two named Philip that Clement of Rome (Eusebius, Hist. eccl., III., xxx. 1) asserts that the Apostles Peter and Philip had begotten children, and that Philip had given his daughters in second marriage. Neither are those communications of Eusebius himself quite clear (III., xxxi.) which have arisen from a combination of what is stated by Polycrates and by Caius. Confusion of the apostle with the evangelist may have been easier because of the possibility that the two lived at the same time in Asia Minor. The later tradition was that the evangelist died as bishop at Tralles; that the apostle died and was buried in Ephesus. F. Sieffert. Bibliography: Because of the confusion noted in the text, the literature named under [77]Philip the Apostle covers in large part the subject of this article. Consult the commentaries on Acts (e.g.. G. T. Stokes, in Expositor's Bible, vol. i., chaps. xvii., xx., London and New York, 1891), and the works on the apostolic age (e.g., A. C. McGiffert, pp. 73-74, 95, 340, 424, New York, 1897); T. Zahn, in Forschungen zur Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons, vi (1900), 158 sqq.; DB, iii. 836-837; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, part xxxi., cols. 270-272; ASB for June 6; Harnack, Litteratur, ii. 1, pp. 357-358, 368, 669. Philip of Gortyna PHILIP OF GORTYNA: Christian apologist; flourished in the last half of the second century. He is mentioned with praise in the letter of Dionysius of Corinth to the Christian community at Gortyna (Eusebius, Hist. eccl., IV., xxiii. 5; Eng. transl., NPNF, 2 ser., i. 201); and wrote in the time of Marcus Aurelius a reply to Marcion (mentioned only by Eusebius, IV., xxv., NPNF, ut sup., p. 203). Jerome (De vir. ill., xxx.) is dependent upon Eusebius. (G. Krueger.) Bibliography: The sources are indicated in the text. Consult further: Harnack, Litteratur, i. 237; DCB, iv. 355; C. A. Bernoulli, Der Sehriftstellerkatolog des Hieronymus, p. 334 et passim, Freiburg, 1895. Philip of Hesse PHILIP OF HESSE. [78]Early Life and Embracing of Protestantism (S: 1). [79]Introduction of the Reformation in Hesse (S: 2). [80]Suspected of Zwinglianism (S: 3). [81]Leader of the Schmalkald League (S: 4). [82]Bigamous Marriage (S: 5). [83]Overtures to the Emperor (S: 6). [84]Resumption of Hostility to Charles (S: 7). [85]Imprisonment of Philip and Interim in Hesse (S: 8). [86]Closing Years. (S: 9). 1. Early Life and Embracing of Protestantism. Philip of Hesse, or Philip the Magnanimous, landgrave of Hesse from 1509 to 1567 and one of the most powerful promoters of the Protestant Reformation, was born at Marburg Nov. 13, 1504; d. at Cassel Mar. 31, 1567. His father died when Philip was five years old, and in 1514 his mother, Anna of Mecklenburg, after a series of struggles with the estates of Hesse, succeeded in becoming regent for him. The controversies still continued, however, so that, to put an end to them, Philip was declared to have attained his majority in 1518, his actual assumption of power beginning in the following year. The power of the estates had been broken by his mother, but he owed her little else. His education had been very imperfect, and his moral and religious training had been neglected. Despite all this, he developed rapidly as a statesman, and soon began to take steps to increase his personal authority as a ruler. The first meeting of Philip of Hesse with Luther was in 1521 at the Diet of Worms, where he was attracted by the Reformer's personality, though he had at first little interest in the religious elements of the situation. It was only after his marriage with Christina, the daughter of George of Saxony, early in 1524, that he began to take an active part in forwarding the cause of the Reformation. The impulse to this activity came from his reading Luther's translation of the Bible, and his nascent Protestantism was fostered by meeting Melanchthon in the spring of 1527. As early as 1524 he had encouraged the spread of the new doctrines in his territories and he now professed open adherence to the tenets of Luther, refusing to follow the counsel of the clergy, his mother, or his father-in-law, all of whom urged him to repress the spread of the new teaching by force. He openly approved of Luther's position in the Peasant War, declaring that it was not the result of the Protestant movement; he refused to be drawn into the anti-Lutheran league of George of Saxony in 1525; and by his alliance with the Elector John of Saxony, concluded at Gotha Feb. 27, 1526, showed that he was already taking steps to organize a protective alliance of all Protestant princes and powers. At the same time he united political motives with his religious policy, aiming, as early as the spring of 1526, to prevent the election of Archduke Ferdinand as emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. At the Diet of Speyer (1526) Philip openly championed the Protestant cause, rendering it possible for Protestant preachers to propagate their views while the Diet was in session, and, like his followers, openly disregarding ordinary Roman Catholic ecclesiastical usages. 2. Introduction of the Reformation in Hesse. Although there was no strong popular movement for reforming Hesse, Philip determined to organize the church there according to Protestant principles. In this he was aided tion of the not only by his chancellor, the humanistic Feige (Ficinus) of Lichtenau, and his chaplain, Adam Krafft (q.v.), but also by the ex-Franciscan Franc,ois Lambert (q.v.), a fanatical enemy of the faith he had left. While the violent policy of Lambert, embodied, at least in part, in the Homberg church order (see [87]Homberg Synod and Church Order of 1526) was abandoned, and an essentially Lutheran type of organization was adopted, the monasteries and religious foundations were dissolved; their property was applied to charitable and scholastic purposes; and the University of Marburg was founded in the summer of 1527 to be, like Wittenberg, a school for Protestant theologians. Philip's father-in-law and the bishops of Wuerzburg and Mainz were active in agitating against the growth of the new heresy, and the combination of several circumstances, including rumors of war, convinced Philip of the existence of a secret league among the Roman Catholic princes. His suspicions were confirmed to his own satisfaction by a forgery given him by an adventurer who had been employed in important missions by George of Saxony, one Otto von Pack; and after meeting with the Elector John of Saxony at Weimar Mar.9, 1528, it was agreed that the Protestant princes should take the offensive in order to protect their territory from invasion and capture. Both Luther and the elector's chancellor, Brueck, though convinced of the existence of the conspiracy, counseled strongly against acting on the offensive. The imperial authorities at Speyer now forbade all breach of the peace, and, after long negotiations, Philip succeeded in extorting the expenses for his armament from the dioceses of Wuerzburg, Bamberg, and Mainz, the latter bishopric also being compelled to recognize the validity of ecclesiastical jurisdiction in Hessian and Saxon territory until the emperor or a Christian council should decide to the contrary. The condition of affairs was, however, very unfavorable to Philip, who might easily be charged with disturbing the peace of the empire, and at the second Diet of Speyer, in the spring of 1529, he was publicly ignored by the emperor. Nevertheless, he took an active part in uniting the Protestant representatives, as well as in preparing the celebrated protest of Speyer; and before leaving the city he succeeded in forming, on Apr. 22, 1529, a secret understanding between Saxony, Hesse, Nuremberg, Strasburg, and Ulm. 3. Suspected of Zwinglianism. Philip was especially anxious to prevent division over the subject of the Lord's Supper. Through him Zwingli was invited to Germany, and Philip thus prepared the way for of the celebrated debate at Marburg (see [88]Marburg, Conference of). Although the attitude of the Wittenberg theologians frustrated his attempts to bring about harmonious relations, and although the situation was still further complicated by the position of George, margrave of Brandenburg, who demanded a uniform confession and a uniform church order, Philip held that the differences between Strasburg and the followers of Luther in their sacramental theories admitted of adjustment, and that the erring could not scripturally be rejected and despised. The result was that Philip was suspected of a tendency toward Zwinglianism. At the same time, the results of a conference with the elector of Saxony and with Margrave George at Schleiz (Oct. 3), the anger of the emperor at receiving from Philip a statement of Protestant tenets, composed by the ex-Franciscan Lambert, and the landgrave's failure to secure any common action on the part of the Protestant powers regarding the approaching Turkish war, all tended to draw him closer to the Swiss and the Strasburg Reformers. He eagerly embraced Zwingli's plan of a great Protestant alliance to extend from the Adriatic to Denmark to keep the Holy Roman emperor from crossing into Germany. This association caused some coldness between himself and the followers of Luther at the Diet of Augsburg in 1530, especially when he propounded his irenic policy to Melanchthon and urged that all Protestants should stand together in demanding that a general council alone should decide concerning religious differences. This was supposed to be indicative of Zwinglianism, and Philip soon found it necessary to explain his exact position on the question of the Lord's Supper, whereupon he declared that he fully agreed with the Lutherans, but disapproved of persecuting the Swiss. The arrival of the emperor put an end to these disputes for the time being; and when Charles demanded that the Protestant representatives should take part in the procession of Corpus Christi, and that Protestant preaching should cease in the city, Philip bluntly refused to obey. He now sought in vain to secure a modification of the tenth article of the Augsburg Confession; but when the position of the Upper Germans was officially rejected, Philip left the diet directing his representatives manfully to uphold the Protestant position, and to keep general, not particular, interests constantly in view. At this time he offered Luther a refuge in his own territories, and began to cultivate close relations with Martin Butzer, whose comprehension of political questions constituted a common bond of sympathy between them, and who fully agreed with the landgrave on the importance of compromise measures in treating the controversy on the Lord's Supper. 4. Leader of the Schmalkald League. In 1530 Philip was successful in accomplishing the purpose for which he had so long worked by securing the adhesion of the Protestant powers to the Schmalkald League (see [89]Schmalkald, League and Articles of), which was to protect their religious and secular interests against interference from the emperor. The landgrave and his ally, the elector of Saxony, became recognized leaders of this union of German princes and cities. Philip kept clearly in view the necessity of an anti-Hapsburg policy, and was thoroughly convinced that the Protestant cause depended on the weakening of the Hapsburgs both at home and abroad. Before engaging in hostilities, Philip attempted to accomplish the ends of Protestant policy by peaceful means. He proposed a compromise on the subject of the confiscated church property, but at the same time he was untiring in providing for a possible, recourse to war, and cultivated diplomatic relations with any and all powers whom he knew to have anti-Hapsburg interests. A peaceful turn was, however, given to the situation by the arrangements made at Nuremberg July 25, 1532 (see [90]Nuremberg, Religious Peace of), though this did not prevent Philip from preparing for a future struggle. He was untiring in trying to draw new allies into the league against Charles V. and Ferdinand, who had been invested with the duchy of Wurttemberg; the battle of Lauffen (May 13, 1534) cost Ferdinand his newly acquired possession; and Philip was now recognized as the hero of the day, and his victory as the victory of the Schmalkald League. In the years following this coalition became one of the most important factors in European politics, largely through the influence of Philip, who lost no opportunity of furthering the Protestant cause. Its alliance was sought by both France and England; it was extended for a period of ten years in 1535; and new members were added to it. On the other hand, the struggle between the two Protestant factions injured the advancement of their mutual interests, and Butzer, encouraged by Philip, was accordingly occupied in the attempt to bring Protestants together on a common religious platform, the result being the Concord of Wittenberg (see [91]Wittenberg, Concord of). The emperor's fears as to the political purpose of the league were, for the time being, set at rest; but at the same time a council which should include representatives of the pope was rejected; and measures were taken to secure the permanence of the Protestant cause in the future. In 1538-39 the relations between Roman Catholics and Protestants became strained almost to the breaking-point, and war was averted only by the Frankfort Respite (q.v.). The Protestants, however, failed to avail themselves of their possible opportunities, largely through the unwonted docility and pliability of Philip. 5. Bigamous Marriage. This unexpected course of the Protestant leader was largely conditioned by two factors: he was weakened by a licentious life, and his marital relations were about to bring scandal on all Protestantism. Within a few weeks after his marriage to the unattractive and sickly Christina of Saxony, who was also alleged to be an immoderate drinker, Philip had committed adultery; and as early as 1526 he had begun to consider the permissibility of bigamy. He accordingly wrote Luther for his opinion, alleging as a precedent the polygamy of the patriarchs; but Luther replied (Nov. 28, 1526) that it was not enough for a Christian to consider the acts of the patriarchs, but that he, like the patriarchs, must have special divine sanction. Since, however, such sanction was lacking in the present case, Luther advised against such a marriage, especially for Christians, unless there was extreme necessity, as, for example, if the wife was leprous, or abnormal in other respects. Despite this discouragement, Philip gave up neither his project nor a life of sensuality which kept him for years from receiving communion. He was affected by Melanchthon's opinion concerning the case of Henry VIII., where the Reformer had proposed that the king's difficulty could be solved by his taking a second wife better than by his divorcing the first one. To strengthen his position, there were Luther's own statements in his sermons on Genesis, as well as historical precedents which proved to his satisfaction that it was impossible for anything to be un-Christian that God had not punished in the case of the patriarchs, who in the New Testament were held up as models of faith. It was during an illness due to his excesses that the thought of taking a second wife became a fixed purpose. It seemed to him to be the only salve for his troubled conscience, and the only hope of moral improvement open to him. He accordingly proposed to marry the daughter of one of his sister's ladies-in-waiting, Margarethe von der Saale. While the landgrave had no scruples whatever, Margarethe was unwilling to take the step unless they had the approval of the theologians and the consent of the prince elector of Saxony and of Duke Maurice. Philip easily gained his first wife's consent to the marriage. Butzer, who was strongly influenced by political arguments, was won over by the landgrave's threat to ally himself with the emperor if he did not secure the consent of the theologians to the marriage; and the Wittenberg divines were worked upon by the plea of the prince's ethical necessity. Thus the "secret advice of a confessor" was won from Luther (see [92]Luther, S: 21) and Melanchthon (Dec. 10, 1539), neither of them knowing that the bigamous wife had already been chosen. Butzer and Melanchthon were now summoned, without any reason being assigned, to Rotenburg-on-the-Fulda, where, on Mar. 4, 1540, Philip and Margarethe were united. The time was particularly inauspicious for any scandal affecting the Protestants, for the emperor, who had rejected the Frankfort Respite, was about to invade Germany. A few weeks later, however, the whole matter was revealed by Philip's sister, and the scandal caused a painful impression throughout Germany. Some of Philip's allies refused to serve under him; and Luther, under the plea that it was a matter of advice given in the confessional, refused to acknowledge his part in the marriage. 6. Overtures to the Emperor. This event had affected the whole political situation. Even while the marriage question was occupying his attention, Philip was engaged in constructing far-reaching plans for reforming the Church and for drawing together the all the opponents of the house of Hapsburg, though at the same time he did not give up hopes of reaching a religious compromise through diplomatic means. He was bitterly disgusted by the criticism directed against him, and feared that the law which he himself had enacted against adultery might be applied to his own case. In this state of mind he now determined to make his peace with the emperor on terms which would not involve desertion of the Protestant cause. He offered to observe neutrality regarding the imperial acquisition of the duchy of Cleves and to prevent a French alliance, on condition that the emperor would pardon him for all his opposition and violation of the imperial laws, though without direct mention of his bigamy. The advances of Philip, though he declined to do anything prejudicial to the Protestant cause, were welcomed by the emperor; and, following Butzer's advice, the landgrave now proceeded to take active steps with the hope of establishing religious peace between the Roman Catholics and Protestants. Secure of the imperial favor, he agreed to appear at the Diet of Regensburg, and his presence there contributed to the direction which affairs took at the Regensburg religious colloquy (see [93]Regensburg, Conference of), in which Melanchthon, Butzer, and Johannes Pistorius the elder represented the Protestant side. Philip was successful in securing the permission of the emperor to establish a university at Marburg; and in return for the concession of an amnesty, he agreed to stand by Charles against all his enemies, excepting Protestantism and the Schmalkald League, to make no alliances with France, England, or the duke of Cleves, and to prevent the admission of these powers into the Schmalkald League. On the other hand, the emperor agreed not to attack him in case there was a common war against all Protestants. These arrangements for special terms led to the collapse of Philip's position as leader of the Protestant party. He had become an object of suspicion, and, although the league continued to remain in force, and gained some new adherents in succeeding years, its real power had departed. But while of the secular princes only Albrecht of Mecklenburg and Henry of Brunswick were still faithful to the Roman Catholic cause, and while united action might at the time easily have resulted in the triumph of Protestantism, there was no union; Duke Maurice and Joachim II. of Brandenburg would not join the Schmalkald League; Cleves was successfully invaded by the imperial troops; and Protestantism was rigorously suppressed in Metz. In 1543 the internal dissensions of the league compelled Philip to resign from its leadership, and to think seriously of dissolving it. He put his trust entirely in the emperor's good faith, agreeing to help him against both the French and the Turks. At the Diet of Speyer in 1544 he championed the emperor's policy with great eloquence; the bishop of Augsburg declared he must be inspired by the Holy Spirit; and Charles now intended to make him commander-in-chief in the next war against the Turks. 7. Resumption of Hostility to Charles. The situation was suddenly changed, however, and Philip was tardily forced again into the opposition, by the peace of Crespy (Sept., 1544), which opened his eyes to the danger threatening Protestantism. He prevented the Roman Catholic Duke Henry of Brunswick from taking forcible possession of his dominions; he unsuccessfully planned a new alliance with German princes against Austria, pledging its members to prevent the acceptance of the decrees of the projected Council of Trent; when this failed, he sought to secure the neutrality of Bavaria in a possible war against the Protestants; and he proposed a new Protestant alliance to take the place of the Schmalkald League. But all this, like his projected coalition with the Swiss, was prevented by the jealousy prevailing between Duke Maurice and the elector of Saxony. Fearful of the success of these plans, the emperor invited Philip to an interview at Speyer (Mar. 28, 1546). Philip spoke plainly in criticism of the emperor's policy, and it was soon evident that peace could not be preserved. Four months later (July 20, 1546) the imperial ban was declared against John Frederick and Philip as perjured rebels and traitors. The result was the Schmalkald war, the outcome of which was unfavorable to Protestant interests. The defeat at Muehlberg (Apr. 24, 1547) and the capture of the Elector John Frederick marked the fall of the Schmalkald League. In despair Philip, who had been negotiating with the emperor for some time, agreed to throw himself on his mercy, on condition that his territorial rights should not be impaired and that he himself should not be imprisoned. These terms were disregarded, however, and on June 23, 1547, both the leaders of the famous league were taken to south Germany and held as captives. 8. Imprisonment of Philip and Interim in Hesse. The imprisonment of Philip brought the Church in Hesse into great trials and difficulties. It had previously been organized carefully by Philip and Butzer, and synods, presbyteries, and a system of discipline had been established. The country was thoroughly protestantized, though public worship still showed no uniformity, discipline was not strictly applied, and many sectaries existed. The Interim (q.v.) was now introduced, sanctioning Roman Catholic practises and usages. Philip himself wrote from prison to forward the acceptance of the Interim, especially as his liberty depended upon it. As long-as the unrestricted preaching of the Gospel and the Protestant tenet of justification by faith were secured, other matters seemed to him of subordinate importance. He read Roman Catholic controversial literature, attended mass, and was much impressed by his study of the Fathers of the Church. The Hessian clergy, however, boldly opposed the introduction of the Interim and the government at Cassel refused to obey the landgrave's commands. Meanwhile his imprisonment was made still more bitter by the information which he received concerning conditions in Hesse, and the rigor of his confinement was increased after he had made an unsuccessful attempt to escape. It was not until 1552 that the Peace of Passau gave him his long-desired freedom and that he was able, on Sept. 12, 1552, to reenter his capital, Cassel. 9. Closing Years Though Philip was now active in restoring order within his territories, new leaders--Maurice of Saxony and Christopher of Wuerttemberg--had come to the fore. Philip no longer desired to assume the leadership of the Protestant party. All his energies were now directed toward finding a basis of agreement between Protestants and Roman Catholics. At his direction his theologians were prominent in the various conferences where representative Roman Catholics and Protestants assembled to attempt to find a working basis for reunion. Philip was also much disturbed by the internal conflicts that arose after Luther's death between his followers and the disciples of Melanchthon. He was never wearied in urging the necessity of mutual toleration between Calvinists and Lutherans, and to the last cherished the hope of a great Protestant federation, so that, with this end in view, he cultivated friendly relations with French Protestants and with Elizabeth of England. Financial aid was given to the Huguenots, and Hessian troops fought side by side with them in the French religious civil wars, this policy contributing to the declaration of toleration at Amboise in Mar., 1563. He gave permanent form to the Hessian Church by the great agenda of 1566-67, and in his will, dated in 1562, urged his sons to maintain the Augsburg Confession and the Concord of Wittenberg, and at the same time to work in behalf of a reunion of Roman Catholics and Protestants if opportunity and circumstances should permit. (T. Kolde.) Bibliography: As a source employ: M. Lenz, Briefwechsel Landgraf Philippe des Grossmuethigen . . . mit Bucer, 1541-47, 3 parts, Leipsic, 1880-91. Matter of pertinence is to be found in the literature under [94]Butzer, Martin; [95]Luther, Martin; [96]Melanchthon, Philipp; [97]Reformation; and the various articles named in the text. For the English reader the fullest account accessible is probably to be found in J. Janssen, Hist. of the German People, vols. v.-vii., St. Louis, 1903-05. Consult further: C. von Rommel, Philipp der Grossmuethige, 3 vols., Giessen, 1830; P. Hoffmeister, Das Leben Philipps des Grossmuethigen, Cassel, 1846; P. A. F. Walther, Landgraf Philipp von Hessen, Darmstadt, 1866; J. Wille, Philipp der Grossmuethige und die Restitution Ulrichs von Wirtemberg, 1526-1535, Tuebingen, 1882; S. Ehses, Landgraf Philipp von Hessen und Otto von Pack, Freiburg, 1886; A. Heidenhain, Die Unionspolitik Landgrafen Philipps des Grossmuetigen, 1557-62, Breslau, 1886; W. Falckenheiner, Philipp der Grossmuethige im Bauernkriege, Marburg, 1887; J. B. Rady, Die Reformatoren in ihrer Beziehung zur Doppelehe des Landgrafen Philipp, Frankfort, 1890; O. Winckelmann, Der schmalkaldische Bund, 1530-32, Strasburg, 1892; G. Turba, Verhaftung und Gefangenachaft les Landgrafen Philipp von Hessen, Vienna, 1896; S. Issleib, Die Gefangennahme des Landgrafen Philipp von Hessen, Hamburg, 1899; Philipp des Grossmuetige, Beitraege zur Geschichte seines Lebens and seiner Zeit, Marburg, 1901; Festschrift zum Gedaechtnis Philipps der Grossmuetigen, Cassei, 1904; Schenk, Philip der Grossmuetige, Landgrafen von Hessen (1504--67), Frankenberg, 1904; W. W. Rockwell, Die Doppelehe des Landgrafen Philipp von Hessen, Marburg, 1904; Cambridge Modern History, vol. iii. passim, London and New York, 1905; A. von Drach and G. Koennecke, Die Bildnisse Philipps des Grossmuetigen, Marburg, 1905; Schaff, Christian Church, vol. vi. passim. Philip the Magnanimous PHILIP THE MAGNANIMOUS. See [98]Philip of Hesse. Philip Neri, Saint PHILIP NERI, SAINT. See [99]Neri, Philip. Philip of Side PHILIP OF SIDE: Church historian; b. at Side (the modern Eski Adaliah; 92 m. sm. of Konieh, the ancient Iconium), Pamphylia; flourished about 420. He studied under Rhodon at the catechetical school in Alexandria, and while still a young man became the head of the branch school established by Rhodon, probably at Philip's suggestion, in Side about 405. Later he was a priest in Constantinople, where he was an intimate friend of Chrysostom; and he was a candidate for the patriarchate of Constantinople against Sisinnius (425), Nestorius (428), and Maximianus (431). He seems to have been identical with the Byzantine presbyter Philip, who was commended by Cyril of Alexandria for refusing to associate with the heretical Nestorius, and whom the Alexandrine patriarch sought to reconcile with Maximianus, when the latter succeeded the deposed heresiarch. It is also very possible that Philip may have spent some time in Antioch and Amida. From the statements of Socrates (Hist. eccl., VII., xxvii.), Photius (Bibliotheca, xxxv.), and Nicephorus (Hist. eccl., xiv. 29) it is clear that Philip of Side was a man of extraordinary learning and diligence, but more diffuse than accurate. Among his numerous books, which dealt with many themes, the most important were his "History of Christianity" and his polemic against the Emperor Julian. Of his writings, however, only scant fragments have survived, these being merely of an average character. A number of his fragments have been edited by Carl de Boor (ZKG, vi. 478-494; TU, v. 165-184), and his history seems also to have influenced the "Religious Conference at the Sassanid Court" (ed. Eduard Bratke, in TU, xix., part 3, 1899). A few other fragments of Philip's writings are known to exist, and it is possible that he was also the author of the still unedited De tinctura aeris Persici et de tinctura aeris Indici. (E. Bratke.) Bibliography: A. Wirth, Aus orientalischen Chroniken, pp. 208 sqq., Frankfort, 1894; O. Bardenhewer. Patrologie, pp. 332-333, Freiburg, 1901, Eng. transl., St. Louis, 1908; idem, in KL, ix. 2022-23; F. Kampers, Alexander der Grosse and die Idee des Weltimperiums in Prophetie and Sage, pp. 116-135, Freiburg, 1901; DCB, iv. 356; Ceillier, Auteurs sacres, viii. 535. Philip the Tetrach PHILIP THE TETRARCH (4 B.C.-34 A.D.): Son of Herod the Great and of Cleopatra, a woman of Jerusalem. He was educated in Rome. For his tetrarchate and rule see [100]Herod and his Family, II., S: 3. He was a gentle and gracious prince, who always resided in his own territories and was ever ready to give aid and justice to his people. Philip's coins bear the representation of the emperor and the device of a temple, which is more probably the temple of Augustus at Caesarea than the sanctuary at Jerusalem. His reign of thirty-seven years was almost contemporaneous with the life of Jesus, who sometimes traversed Philip's dominions. When the latter died in 33 or 34 A.D., his land became a part of the province of Syria and was administered as an imperial domain. There is some difficulty in bringing Mark vi. 17 (Matt. xiv. 3) into agreement with Josephus, Ant., xviii. 137, where Philip is said to have married Salome, the daughter of his brother Herod Antipas and of his niece Herodias, while Mark makes Philip the first husband of Herodias herself, and states that she left him to marry Herod. Some interpreters suppose that two sons of Herod the Great bore the name of Philip, one of them being also called Herod; others again think that there must be some error either in Josephus or in Mark. It is probable that the latter confused two brothers, one of whom was the father and the other the husband of Salome. E. von Dobschuetz. Bibliography: Consult the literature under [101]Herod and his Family, and add to that S. Mathews, Hist. of New Testament Times in Palestine, New York, 1899. Phlippi, Friedrich Adolph PHILIPPI, fi-lip'-pi, FRIEDRICH ADOLPH: German Lutheran; b. at Berlin Oct. 15, 1809; d. at Rostock Aug. 29, 1882. Although a Jew by birth, he soon began to consider the problem of the truth of Christianity. He became a convert when he was sixteen years old, but out of respect to his parents he was not baptized until four years later. After completing his education at the universities of Berlin (1827-29) and Leipsic (1829-30), he taught at Dresden (1830-32) and Berlin (1833-34), but withdrew from active life to devote himself to the private study of theology, especially dogmatics and exegesis. In 1837 he became privat-docent for theology in the University of Berlin, whence he was called to Dorpat in 1841 as professor of dogmatics and moral theology. Here he took a lively interest in the ecclesiastical questions of the day, contributing much to strengthen the position of Lutheranism in Russian territory. In 1851 he was called to Rostock as professor of New-Testament exegesis, in which capacity he successfully opposed the theology of Johann Hofmann and Michael Baumgarten (qq.v.). In addition to his professorial duties, Philippi was appointed a theological examiner in 1856, and a consistorial councilor in 1874. Among his writings are: De Celsi adversarii Christianorum philosophandi genere (Berlin, 1836); Der thaetige Gehorsam Christi, ein Beitrag zur Rechtfertigungslehre (1841); Commentar ueber den Brief Pauli an die Roemer (3 parts, Erlangen and Frankfort, 1848-52; Eng. transl. by J. S. Banks, 2 vols., Edinburgh, 1878-79); Kirchliche Glaubenslehre (6 vols., Guetersloh, 1854-79); Predigten and Vortraege (edited by F. Philippi, 1883); Symbolik, akademische Vorlesungen (edited by the same, 1883); and Erklaerung des Briefes Pauli an die Galater (edited by the same, 1884). (Ferdinand Philippi.) Bibliography: Meklenburgisches Kirchen- und Zeitblatt, 1882, nos. 19-21; M. A. Landerer, Neueste Dogmengeschichte, p. 215 et passim, Heilbronn, 1881. Philippi, Jacobus PHILIPPI, JACOBUS: German Roman Catholic; author of the Reformatorium vitae clericorum (Basel, 1494); b. at Kuelchhoffen or Kilchen (now Kirchhoffen, a hamlet near Freiburg) about 1435; d. apparently after 1510. In 1463 he matriculated in the theological faculty at Basel. Here he edited a gradual (Basel, 1488) and a breviary (1492), and also lectured on various books of the Bible, especially on the Pauline epistles. In 1464 he was a member of the committee of advisement on the university statutes. In scholastic philosophy he was a realist. Of his activity little is known; but it is evident that he was inclined toward the Brethren of the Common Life (see [102]Common Life, Brethren of the), making his will in favor of their house at Zwolle in 1486. He was attracted to the community primarily by his brother Ludwig, who had become one of their number at Zwolle in 1472, and who died there as rector of the Brethren in 1490. The statement in Johann Butzbach's Auctarium de scriptoribus ecclesiasticis that Jacobus Philippi was still living after 1508 seems to be confirmed by a title-deed of 1510. Among Philippi's writings Butzbach makes special mention of the Sermons ad populum (thus far undiscovered) and of the Praecordiale sacerdotum devote celebrare cupientium utile et consolatorium (Strasburg, 1489). His chief work, however, was his Reformatorium (first printed at Basel, 1494, not 1444, as a misprint led many to suppose), directed against evils in the life of the clergy. As a remedy Philippi recommended the community of the Brethren of the Common Life. The close of the book admonishes against the misuse of benefices accumulated in the hands of a single holder. In all his reform measures Philippi shows himself in harmony with many of his contemporaries. L. Schulze. Bibliography: Biographical material is to be found in the Reformatorium; scattered notices are collected by L. Schulze in ZKW, 1886, pp. 88 sqq., and by Schoengen in the "Chronicle" of Jacobus Trajecti published by the Historical Society of Utrecht, 1903. Consult further: J. Huerbin, Peter von Andlau, Strasburg, 1897; idem, Handbuch der schweizerischen Geschichte, ii. 87 sqq., Stans, 1902. Philippians, Epistle to the PHILIPPIANS, EPISTLE TO THE. See [103]Paul the Apostle, II. Philppine Islands PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. Geographical Description. The most northern group of the Malay Archipelago, situated between the Pacific Ocean on the east and the Sea of China on tile west and south of Japan and north of the islands of Borneo and Celebes, and included between latitude 4DEG 40' and 21DEG 10' north and longitude 116DEG 40' and 126DEG 34' east. The archipelago consists of 3,141 islands, most of which are very small; the total land area is 115,026 square miles; population, 7,635,426. The principal islands are as follows: Luzon (area, 40,969 square miles; population, 3,798,507), Mindanao (area, 36,292; population, 499,634), Samar (area, 5,031; population, 222,690), Negros (area, 4,881; population, 460,776), Panay (area, 4,611; population, 743,646), Palawan (area, 4,027; population, 10,918), Mindoro (area, 3,851; population, 28,361), Leyte (area, 2,722; population, 357,641); and Cebu (area, 1,762; population, 592,247). Historical and Political. The islands were discovered by Ferdinand Magellan in 1521; were conquered by the Spanish from Mexico under Legaspi; and were subject to the crown of Spain, until, by the treaty of Paris, Dec. 10, 1898, they were ceded to the United States by right of conquest and for the additional consideration of $20,000,000. Upon taking possession the United States proceeded to reorganize the civil and judicial administration of the islands. Religious liberty was guaranteed by the treaty of Paris. The general government is modeled after that of the United States. The executive is composed of the governor-general who is the head of a commission of eight members appointed by the president of the United States and assigned as heads of the different departments. The commission serves as the upper house of legislation and the lower is elected by the people. The Supreme Court, composed of four American and three native judges, is also appointed by the American president. A limited franchise is granted to the natives outside of the Mohammedan islands. The population known as the Filipinos is not homogeneous, but consists of numerous tribes speaking many languages. The aborigines were the Negritos, who now number only 23,500; they are black, dwarfish, woolly-haired, thick-lipped, and dwell in the remote parts of the islands. The Malay or brown races constitute nine-tenths of the population, of which the principal are the Tagalogs, Visayans, Ilocanos, Moros, Bicals, and Igorrotes. There are small elements of negroes brought by the Spanish from Africa and Papua; of Indians brought from Mexico, Mongoloids, and whites. Immediately after the establishment of American sovereignty, a system of free public schools was established. In 1905-06 the average attendance per month was 375,554 out of a total of 1,200,000 between the ages of six and fifteen. In the latter year there were 3,340 schools (primary, intermediate, and high), 4,719 native, and 831 American teachers. The Roman Catholics in 1903 maintained 1,004 private schools with an enrolment of 63,545, and 325 religious schools with an enrolment of 26,478. Religious History; Roman Catholics. When the Spanish took possession their design was the establishment of a politico-religious sovereignty. The picturesque ceremonials of the Roman Catholic Church appealed to the natives, whose adherence to their own religious beliefs was weak while they were disunited by their diversities and rivalries. Great numbers of missionary friars of the Augustinian, Franciscan, Dominican, and Recollet orders came to the islands, to each of whom a charge was assigned. They labored with great success, the entire body of people yielding rapidly to conversion. At present only eight and one-half per cent of the inhabitants are classed as wild, while all the others are termed civilized. This was the result mainly of the devotion of the friars to parochial instruction and to the spiritual and physical welfare of the natives. The Jesuits likewise participated in the work; but, becoming the richest and most powerful order, they aroused the jealousy of the others and were recalled in 1767. In 1850 they were given permission to return. The bishopric erected in 1581 was made suffragan to Mexico, and in 1595 it was raised to metropolitan rank with three suffragan bishoprics; to which a fourth was added in 1867, which was, however, merged in one of the others in 1874. With these at the head of the Church stood the provincials of the four great orders named above. The members of these orders or regular clergy greatly preponderated in numbers and influence over the secular clergy composed mostly of natives. The domestic history of the archipelago, naturally secluded, was parochial; consisting of missionary extension and political and industrial progress subject to the religious interest and the will of the friars, with an occasional conflict between the archbishop and the latter. Finally, the leaven of western forces finding various access bore fruit, and the insurrections of 1896 and 1898 constituted an upheaval for the overthrow of the land-holding friars and the political and economic stagnation resulting from their long undisputed occupation. One of the demands of the revolutionists was their expulsion. With the insurrection of 1896 a priest, Aglipay by name, placed himself at the head of a seeding religious or antipapal party, entitled Independent Catholic Church. After negotiations between the United States' government and Pope Leo XIII. in 1907 it was agreed that the United States pay $7,000,000 for the friar lands and that the Church send no friar as priest into any parish after a final objection by the governor-general. The majority of the people are Roman Catholics of whom there are 3,940,000, besides 3,000,000 Independent Catholics. Every village as established by the Spanish had its central church. Most of these buildings were of stone and many were elaborate structures. In 1903 there were 1,608 churches of which 1,573 were Roman Catholic, and in the city of Manila alone there were 51. The Moros of the Sulu Archipelago, southern Mindanao, and Palawan in the southwest, who were the least affected by the Spanish occupation, about 270,000, are Mohammedan. Buddhists of Asiatic derivation number 75,000 and Animists 260,000. Protestant Missions. Immediately after the Spanish cession, various Protestant churches in the United States took steps to enter the field by adopting in conference a plan of cooperation and union having in view the erection of "La Iglesia Evangelica Filipina," as the national church of the Filipinos. The Presbyterian Church established a permanent mission in 1899; the Methodist Episcopal, the same year; the Baptist in 1900; the Protestant Episcopal and Christian (Disciples) in 1901; the United Brethren in 1902; and the Congregational in 1903. In Apr., 1901, a federation of missions and churches was formed in Manila called "The Evangelical Union of the Philippine Islands." The field was to be mutually divided with Manila as the common center. The Presbyterian Board opened stations on Luzon, at Laguna and Albay, in 1903, and at Tayabas in 1906; at Iloilo, Panay, in 1900; at Dumaguete, Negros, in 1901; and in Cebu in 1902. The Ellinwood School at Manila became a theological seminary in 1907, conducted jointly by the Methodist Episcopal bishop and the presbytery. In 1901 the Silliman Industrial Institute was established at Dumaguete. In 1908, 63 outstations were opened and the 20 churches had 4,127 members. In 1900 the Methodist Episcopal Church assumed the occupation of northern Luzon divided into three districts, which became a district conference in 1904. In 1908 there were 108 churches in the seven outstations with 25,000 communicants and 35,000 adherents. The American Baptist Missionary Union occupied the Visayan islands of Panay and Negros in the south in 1900, with Iloilo as a center. The work has been extended into Cebu. By 1908 there were 25 churches with 2,838 members. The Brotherhood of St. Andrew sent out two clergymen and two laymen in 1899, who established the Mission of the Holy Trinity. In 1901 Bishop Brent arrived and the islands became a mission district of the Protestant Episcopal Church. A cathedral and settlement-house have been established at Manila for the English-speaking people, and stations scattered among the natives. The Foreign Christian Missionary Society (Disciples), with stations at Manila, Laoag, Vigan, and Aparri, laying much stress on evangelistic work, have 29 churches and 2,505 members. The American Board planted a mission on Mindanao in 1901 and has a station at Davao and an outstation at Santa Cruz; and in 1908 the Mindanao Missions Medical Association was formed (in New York. The missions of the various denominations generally combine the industrial, medical, educational, and evangelizing features. There are (1908) 7 societies with 212 stations and outstations, 126 missionaries, 492 native helpers, 18 schools with 519 pupils, 8 hospitals, 194 churches with 35,000 communicants and 45,000 adherents, exclusive of Protestant Episcopalians. Theodora Crosby Bliss Bibliography: For lists of literature consult: A. P. C. Griffin, Library of Congress, List of Works Relating to . . . Philippine Islands, Washington, 1905; J. A. Robertson, Bibliography of the Philippine Islands, Cleveland, 1908; and Richardson, Encyclopaedia, p. 851. Works on geography and description are: J. Montero, El Archipielago Filipino, Madrid, 1886; J. Foreman, The Philippine Islands, London. 1899; R. Reyes Lala, The Philippine Islands, New York, 1899; S. MacClintock, The Philippines, New York, 1903; H. C. Stunts, The Philippines and the Far East, Cincinnati, 1904; F. W. Atkinson, The Philippine Islands, Boston, 1905; J. A. Le Roy, Philippine Life in Town and Country, New York, 1905; D. C. Worcester, Philippine Islands and their People, New York, 1907. For ethnology consult: D. G. Brinton, Peoples of the Philippines, Washington, 1898; A. B. Meyer, The Distribution of the Negritos in the Philippine Islands, Dresden, 1899; F. Blumenthal, Die Philippinen. Eine Darstellung der ethnographischen Verhaeltnis des Archipels, Hamburg, 1900; F. H. Sawyer, The Inhabitants of the Philippines, London, 1900; G. A. Koeze, Bijdrage tot de Anthropolopie der Philippijnen, Haarlem, 1901-04; D. Folkmar, Album of Philippine Types, Manila, 1904; Ethnological Survey Publications, Manila, 1905 sqq. On the history consult: M. Halstead, Story of the Philippines, New York, 1898; A. K. Fiske, Story of the Philippines, New York, 1899; J. Foreman, Philippine Islands, New York, 1899; A. March, Hist. of the Philippines, New York, 1899; E. H. Blair and J. A. Robertson, The Philippine Islands, 1493-1803, Cleveland, 1903; idem The Philippine Islands, 1493-1898, 55 vols., ib. 1903-08 (giving text and translation of innumerable documents--a monumental work); A. J. Brown, The New Era in the Philippines, New York, 1903; A. de Morga, Hist. of the Philippine Islands, 2 vols., Cleveland, 1907; D. B. Barrows, History of Philippines, New York, 1908. For the religious side consult: A. Coleman, The Friars in the Philippines, Boston, 1899; J. T. Medina, El Tribunal de la Inquisicion en las Islas Filipinas, Santiago, 1899; F. Colin, Labor Evangelica, Ministeros de los Obreros de la Compania de Jesus . . . en las Islas Filipinas, 3 vols., Barcelona, 1900-1902; E. Zamora, Las Corporaciones religiosas en Filipinas, Valladolid, 1901. For accounts of evangelical missionary work consult: H. O. Dwight, The Blue Book of Missions, pp. 68-69, New York, 1907; and the annual reports of the missionary societies at work there. Philippists PHILIPPISTS. [104]Before Luther's Death (S: 1). [105]Opposition to Melanchthon (S: 2). [106]Open Conflict (S: 3). [107]Lutheran Strictures (S: 4). [108]Downfall of the Philippists (S: 5). [109]Estimate of Philippism (S: 6). 1. Before Luther's Death. Philippists was the designation usually applied in the latter half of the sixteenth century to the followers of Philipp Melanchthon (q.v.). It probably originated among the opposite or Flacian party (see [110]Flacius, Matthias), and was applied at first to the theologians of the universities of Wittenberg and Leipsic, who were all adherents of Melanchthon's distinctive views, especially those in which he approximated to Roman Catholic doctrine on the subject of free will and the value of good works, and to the Swiss Reformers' on the Lord's Supper. Somewhat later it was used in Saxony to designate a distinct party organized by Melanchthon's son-in-law Caspar Peucer (q.v.), with George Cracovius, Johann Stoessel (q.v.), and others, to work for a union of all the Protestant forces, as a means to which end they attempted to break down by this attitude the barriers which separated Lutherans and Calvinists. Melanchthon had won, by his eminent abilities as a teacher and his clear, scholastic formulation of doctrine, a large number of disciples among whom were included some of the most zealous Lutherans, such as Matthias Flacius and Tileman Hesshusen (qq.v.), afterward to be numbered among the vehement opponents of Philippism; both of whom formally and materially received the forms of doctrine shaped by Melanchthon. As long as Luther lived, the conflict with external foes and the work of building up the Evangelical Church so absorbed the Reformers that the internal differences which had already begun to show themselves were kept in the background. 2. Opposition to Melanchthon. But Luther was no sooner dead than the internal as well as the external peace of the Lutheran Church declined. It was a misfortune not only for Melanchthon, but for the whole body that he, who had formerly stood as a teacher by the side Luther, the real leader, was now forced suddenly into the position of head not only of the University of Wittenberg but of the entire Evangelical Church of Germany. There was among certain of Luther's associates, notably Nikolaus von Amsdorf (q.v.), a disinclination to accept his leadership. When in the negotiations set on foot with reference to the Augsburg Interim (see [111]Interim) by the Elector Maurice in 1548 he showed himself increasingly ready to yield and make concessions, he ruined his position with a large part of the Evangelical theologians for all time; and an opposition party was formed, in which the leadership was at once assumed by Flacius in view of his learning, controversial ability, and inflexible firmness. Melanchthon, on the other hand, with his faithful followers (Camerarius, Major, Menius, Pfeffinger, Eber, Cruciger, Strigel [qq.v.]), and others saw in the self-styled genuine Lutherans naught but a narrow and contentious class, which, ignoring the inherent teaching of Luther, sought to domineer over the church by letter and name, and in addition to assert its own ambitious self. On the other hand, the Philippists regarded themselves as the faithful guardians of learning over against the alleged "barbarism," and as the mean between the extremes. The genuine Lutherans also claimed to be representatives of the pure doctrine, defenders of orthodoxy, and heirs of the spirit of Luther. Personal, political, and ecclesiastical animosities widened the breach; such as the rivalry between the Ernestine branch of the Saxon house (now extruded from the electoral dignity) and the Albertine branch; the jealousy between the new Ernestine University of Jena and the electoral universities of Wittenberg and Leipsic, in both of which the Philippists had the majority; and the bitter personal antagonism felt at Wittenberg for Flacius, who assailed his former teachers harshly and made all reconciliation impossible. 3. Open Conflict The actual conflict began with the controversy over the Interim and the question of Adiaphora (see [112]Adiaphora and the Adiaphoristic Controversy) in 1548 and the following years. In the negotiations concerning the Leipsic Interim the Wittenberg theologians as well as Johann Pfeffinger and the intimate of Melanchthon, George of Anhalt (q.v.), were on the side of Melanchthon, and thus drew upon themselves the violent opposition of the strict Lutherans, under the leadership of Flacius, who now severed his connection with Wittenberg. When the Philippist Georg Major (q.v.) at Wittenberg and Justus Menius (q.v.) at Gotha put forth the proposition that good works were necessary to salvation, or as Menius preferred to say "the new obedience, the new life, is necessary to salvation," they were not only conscious of the danger that the doctrine of justification by faith alone would lead to antinomianism and moral laxity but they manifested a tendency to bring into account the necessary connection of justification and regeneration: namely, that justification as possession of forgiving grace by faith is indeed not conditioned by obedience; but also that the new life is presupposed by obedience and works springing out of the same justification. But neither Major nor Menius was sufficiently firm in his view to stand against the charge of denying the doctrine of justification and going over to the Roman camp, and thus they were driven back to the general proposition of justification by faith alone. The Formula of Concord (q.v.) closed the controversy by avoiding both extremes, but failed to offer a final solution of the question demanded by the original motive of the controversy. The synergistic controversy (see [113]Synergism), breaking out about the same time, also sprang out of the ethical interest which had induced Melanchthon to enunciate the doctrine of free will in opposition to his previous predestinarianism. After the clash in 1555 between Pfeffinger (who in his Propositiones de libero arbitrio had held closely to the formula of Melanchthon) and Amsdorf and Flacius, Strigel went deeper into the matter in 1559 and insisted that grace worked upon sinful men as upon personalities, not natural objects without a will; and that in the position that there was a spontaneous cooperation of human powers released by grace there was an actual lapse into the Roman Catholic view. The suspicions now entertained against Melanchthon and his school were quickened by the renewed outbreak of the sacramentarian controversy in 1552. Joachim Westphal (q.v.) accused Melanchthon of agreement with Calvin, and from this time the Philippists rested under the suspicion of Crypto-Calvinism. The more the German Lutherans entertained a dread of the invasion of Calvinism, the more they mistrusted every announcement of a formula of the Lord's Supper after the form of Luther's doctrine yet obscure. The controversy on this subject, in which Melanchthon's friend Hardenberg of Bremen (see [114]Hardenberg, Albert Rizaeus) was involved with Timann (q.v.) and then with Hesshusen, leading to his deposition in 1561, elevated the doctrine of ubiquity to an essential of Lutheran teaching. The Wittenberg pronouncement on the subject prudently confined itself to Biblical expressions and forewarned itself against unnecessary disputations, which only strengthened the suspicion of unavowed sympathy with Calvin. 4. Lutheran Strictures. The strict Lutherans sought to strike a decisive blow at Philippism. This was apparent at the Weimar meeting of 1556 and in the negotiations of Coswig and Magdeburg in this and the following years, which showed a tendency to work not so much for the reconciliation of the contending parties as for a personal humiliation of Melanchthon. He, although deeply wounded, showed great restraint in his public utterances; but his followers in Leipsic and Wittenberg paid their opponents back in their own coin. The heat of partizan feeling was displayed at the Conference of Worms in 1557, where the Flacian party did not hesitate, even in the presence of Roman Catholics, to show their enmity for Melanchthon and his followers. After several well-meant attempts at pacification on the part of the Lutheran princes, the most passionate outbreak occurred in the last year of Melanchthon's life, 1559, in connection with the "Weimar Confutation" published by Duke John Frederick, in which together with the errors of Servetus, Schwenckfeld, the Antinomians, Zwingli, and others, the principal special doctrines of the Philippists (Synergism (q.v.], Majorism, see [115]Majoristic Controversy, adiaphorism) were denounced as dangerous errors and corruptions. It led, however, to discord among the Jena theologians themselves, since Strigel defended against Flacius Melanchthon's doctrine on sin and grace, and drew upon himself very rough treatment from the impetuous duke. But the ultimate outcome was the decline of the University of Jena, the deposition of the strict Lutheran professors and the replacing of them by Philippists. It seemed for the time that the Thuringian opposition to the Philippism of Electoral Saxony was broken; but with the downfall of John Frederick and the accession of his brother John William to power, the tables were turned; the Philippists at Jena were again. displaced (1568-69) by the strict Lutherans, Johann Wigand (q.v.), Coelestin, Kirchner, and Hesshusen, and the Jena opposition to Wittenberg was once more organized, finding voice in the Bekenntnis von der Rechtfertigung und guten Werken of 1569. The Elector August was now very anxious to restore peace in the Saxon territories, and John William agreed to call a conference at Altenburg (Oct. 21, 1568), in which the principal representatives of Philippism were Paul Eber and Caspar Cruciger the younger, and of the other side Wigand, Coelestin, and Kirchner. It led to no result, although it continued until the following March. The Philippists asserted the Augsburg Confession of 1540, the loci of Melanchthon of the later editions, and of the Corpus Philippicum, met by the challenge from the other side that these were an attack upon the pure teaching and authority of Luther. Both sides claimed the victory, and the Leipsic and Wittenberg Philippists issued a justification of their position in the Endlicher Bericht of 1571, with which is connected the protest of the Hessian theologians in conference at Ziegenhain in 1570 against Flacian Lutheranism and in favor of Philippism. 5. Downfall of the Philippists. Pure Lutheranism was now fortified in a number of local churches by Corpora doctrinae of a strict nature, and the work for concord went on more and more definitely along the lines of eliminating Melanchthonism. The Philippists, fully alarmed, attempted not only Philippists. to consolidate in Electoral Saxony but to gain ascendency over the entire German Evangelical Church, but met their downfall first in Electoral Saxony. The conclusion of the Altenburg Colloquy prompted the elector, in Aug., 1569, to issue orders that all the ministers in his domains should hold to the Corpus doctrinae Philippicum, intending thus to avoid Flacian exaggerations and guard the pure original doctrine of Luther and Melanchthon in the days of their union. But the Wittenberg men interpreted it as an approval of their Philippism, especially in regard to the Lord's Supper and the person of Christ. They pacified the elector, who had become uneasy, by the Consensus Dresdensis of 1571, a cleverly worded document; and when on the death of John William, in 1574, August assumed the regency in Ernestine Saxony and began to drive out not only strict Lutheran zealots like Hesshusen and Wigand, but all who refused their subscription to the Consensus, the Philippists thought they were on the way to a victory which should give them all Germany. But the unquestionably Calvinistic work of Joachim Cureus (q.v.), Exegesis perspicua de sacra coena (1574), and a confidential letter of Johann Stoessel (q.v.) which fell into the elector's hands opened his eyes. The heads of the Philippist party were imprisoned and roughly handled, and the Torgau Confession of 1574 completed their downfall. By the adoption of the Formula of Concord their cause was ruined in all the territories which accepted it, although in some others it survived under the aspect of a modified Lutheranism, as in Nuremberg, or, as in Nassau, Hesse, Anhalt, and Bremen, where it became more or less definitely identified with Calvinism. It raised its head once more in Electoral Saxony in 1586, on the accession of Christian I., but on his death five years later it came to a sudden and bloody end with the murder of Nicolaus Krell (q.v.) as a victim to this unpopular revival of Calvinism. 6. Estimate of Philippism. Though it may be regretted that the moderate, pacific, and enlightened spirit of Melanchthon himself was not allowed to have more influence in the Lutheran Church and that his estimable points of departure from Luther remained unrecognized, yet it can not be denied that Philippism was only something halfway, while it claimed to guard the genuine religious ideas and motives of the Reformation better than the doctrine of the Formula of Concord. Nor must the fact be overlooked that where, after the promulgation of the Formula, Philippism still maintained its ground, it produced no results in the domain of theology which can be compared for a moment with those which proceeded from the stricter school. The latter won its victory to a great extent because it gave birth to the greater number of popularly effective writings and powerful literary personalities. Melanchthon's spirit, however, yet remained operative in the seventeenth century, even though at the end of the sixteenth his influence was greatly superseded by that of orthodox Lutherans. The movement initiated by Georg Calixtus (q.v.) shows not only considerable affinity with its tendency, but has a direct historical connection with it through his Helmstedt teachers, especially Johann Caselius (q.v.), who was a personal disciple of Melanchthon. (G. Kawerau.) Bibliography: Perhaps the best method of mastering the subject treated in the foregoing article is a study of the men mentioned in the text as active by means of the articles in this work and of the literature appended to those articles. Especially valuable are the letters of Melanchthon and the accounts of his life and activities. Much of the literature under [116]Formula of Concord is valuable. The works on the history of the Church and of the doctrine of the period are also to be consulted. Besides the foregoing consult: V. E. Loescher, Historia motuum zwischen den Evangelisch-Lutherischen und Reformirten, Frankfort, 1723; G. J. Planck, Geschichte der Entstehung und der Veraenderung . . . unsers protestantischen Lehrbegriffs, vols. iv.-vi., 6 vols., Leipsic, 1791-1800; H. Heppe, Geschichte des deutschen Protestantismus 1555-81, 4 vols., Marburg, 1852-59; idem, Dogmatik des deutschen Protestantismus im 16. Jahrhundert, 3 vols., Gotha, 1857; A. Beck, Johann Friedrich der Mittlere, 2 vols., Weimar, 1858; E. L. T. Henke, Neuere Kirchengeschichte, ii. 274 sqq., Halle, 1878; G. Wolf, Zur Geschichte der deutschen Protestanten 1555-59, Berlin, 1888; H. E. Jacobs, The Book of Concord, vol. ii., Philadelphia, 1893; W. Moeller, Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte ed. G. Kawerau, 3d ed., vol. iii., Tuebingen, 1907; Schaff, Creeds, i. 258-340. Philippus Solitarius PHILIPPUS SOLITARIUS: Greek monk of the late eleventh century. In 1095 he completed, apparently at Constantinople, his mystic and devotional "Mirror," a dialogue in political verse which represents Body and Soul as setting forth their mutual relations as factors of human nature, and as making preparation for death. The Greek text is still unedited, except for scanty fragments (ed. P. Lambecius, Commentarii de bibliotheca Caesarea Vindobonensi, v. 76-84, Vienna, 1778; C. Oudin, Commentarius de scriptoribus ecclesiae antiquis, ii. 851, Frankfort, 1722; J. B. Cotelerius, on Apostolic Constitutions, viii. 42, in his Sanctorum Patrum qui temporibus apostolicis floruerunt opera, 2 vols., Paris, 1672), but was translated into Latin prose by the Jesuit Jacobus Pontanus (Ingolstadt, 1604; most convenient reprint in MPG, cxxvii. 701-902). Closely akin to the "Mirror" is the short poem "Lamentations" (ed. E. Auvray, Paris, 1875; E. S. Shuckburgh, in Emmanuel College Magazine, vol. v.), which may in reality be the eighth book of the "Mirror," which was omitted by Pontanus. A new redaction of both poems was prepared by Phialites in the twelfth century, and the Vienna manuscripts of the "Mirror" contain noteworthy additions, especially on the dogmas and rites of the Armenians, Jacobites, and Romans (the two former portions ed. F. Combefis, Auctuarium novum bibliothecae Graeco-Latinorum patrum, ii. 261, 271, Paris, 1648. (Philipp Meyer.) Bibliography: Krumbacher, Geschichte, pp. 742-744; P. Lambecius, Commentarium de . . . bibliotheca Caesarea Vindebonensi, v. 78-84, Vienna, 1778; KL, ix. 2023. Philips, Obbe PHILIPS, OBBE. See [117]Mennonites, VI. Philistines PHILISTINES, fi-lis'tinz or tainz. [118]Name and Territory (S: 1). [119]Origin (S: 2). [120]Not Semitic (S: 3). [121]Early History (S: 4). [122]Later History (S: 5). [123]The Cities (S: 6). 1. Name and Territory. In the Hebrew the Philistines are known as Pelishtim or Pelishtiyyim, and their country as Pelesheth. In the Greek they appear as Phulistieim or Philistieim, Phulistiaioi, and sometimes as allophuloi, "foreigners"; and in the Vulgate as Philisthiim, Philistini, and Palaestini, the last recalling the usage of Josephus (see [124]Palestine, I., S: 1). The expression allophuloi dates from about the period of the beginning of the Septuagint, has reference to a distinction based on national and religious grounds, and designates all not Jews who are of oriental origin and dwell in Palestine, and particularly the Philistines. The territory occupied by the Philistines was the southern part of the coast of Palestine. Taking Joppa (the modern Jaffa) as the most northern and Raphia as the most southern Philistine city, the length of the territory was rather less than sixty miles, with a width varying between twelve and thirty-five-miles. The eastern boundary was the hill country of Judea, and the whole territory was included within what was known as the Shephelah. The significance of the district lay in the coast cities, not so much because of their sea trade as of their importance for overland traffic, as they were situated on one of the principal trade routes between Egypt and Babylon. Their location bought them into relation with the two centers of early culture and yet secured for them a relative independence, removed from both as they were either by a great distance or by the desert. The coast is almost without natural harbors, the hinterland possessed a few small plains, and toward the south the country gradually becomes transformed into pastureland. 2. Origin The first reports of this district come from Egyptian inscriptions and from the Amarna Tablets (q.v.). Thothmes III. (c. 1500 B.C.) reckoned the district to the land of Haru. The Amarna Tablets mention Gaza, Ashkelon, and Joppa. Especially instructive is the portrayal at Karnak of the conquest of Ashkelon by Rameses II. (c. 1280), in which the defenders of the fortress are shown as distinct from the Philistines both in dress and countenance and as identical with Canaanites, proving that the inhabitants at that time were of the same race as those of Upper Palestine and that a foreign people had not yet intruded. This fact is confirmed by the names which come from this period, which are of Semitic-Canaanitic type. Deut. ii. 23 affirms that the Avvim dwelt here until the Caphtorim entered and destroyed them; Josh. xiii. 3, cf. xi. 22, implies that the Avvim and the Philistines lived along side each other. The culture of the region was like that of other parts of Palestine, except that Egyptian influence was felt more strongly. The Old Testament (cf. Amos ix. 7) thus agrees with other information that the Philistines were intruders, and Jer. xlvii. 4is in accord with other passages in deriving them from Caphtor (q.v.), the identification of which is not yet settled. A connection of the Philistines with the Cherethites of I Sam. xxx. 14-15 and with the Carim, "captains," of II Kings xi. 4, 19 (cf. the gloss on Gen. x. 14), supposed to be from Caria in Asia Minor, has been attempted, but the combination is uncertain, even in view of I Kings i. 38, where Cherethites and Pelethites (or Philistines) are mentioned as part of the royal guard, and no certain datum is gained for determining the place of origin of the Philistines. The Egyptian monuments of the period of Rameses III. (1208-1180 B.C.) speak of unrest in northern and central Syria caused by a foreign and hitherto unnamed people, whose names are read Purasati, Zakkari, Shakrusha, Dano or Danona, Washasha, and Shardana. Of these the Purasati are always named first, and, it is assumed, were the leaders. The fact that these peoples marched with a great amount of baggage and with wives and children is taken by E. Meyer as proving that it was the migration of a people which pushed on to the borders of Egypt. W. M. Mueller argues from the application to them of the name equivalent to "heroes" that they were predatory bands of soldiers plundering alike friend and foe. Rameses III. speaks of a land battle with them and also of a sea fight. The Golenisheff papyrus relates that the Egyptian Uno-Amon journeyed in a ship to Dor in Palestine for timber during the fifth year of Herihor, the last king of the twentieth Egyptian dynasty, and that the city then belonged to the Zakkari, whose chief was named Bidir. It is noteworthy that this people's name occurs both in the time of Rameses and of Herihor, in the for mer in connection with the Purasati, and that with Rameses the Egyptian hegemony of southern Syria begins to vanish; it is further probable that since the Zakkari made sure their footing, their associates the Purasati also did. With the Purasati the Egyptologist Champollion connected the Philistines before 1832, and this identification has approved itself to later scholars. W. M. Mueller supposed the pronunciation to have been Pulsesti, cf. the Assyrian Palastu, Pilistu. This scholar has located their home on the southern coast of Asia Minor and in the islands of the AEgean Sea. A sea people was known to the Egyptians as Ruku or Luku (Lycians). An attempt to derive the name from a Semitic root meaning "to wander" does not approve itself, since it is practically certain that the Philistines were not of Semitic stock, and the Egyptians gave to the peoples of Syria their own names, describe the Philistines and their associates as coming from "the end of the sea," and portray them as differing in feature and dress from Semites. It is not unlikely that between the Philistines and their associates and the "early Cretans" of Odyssey xix. 176 a relationship existed, but definite proof is lacking. 3. Not Semitic. Proof from the language of the Philistines is lacking, since practically nothing is known of it, and the occurrence of persons and places in the Old Testament and Assyrian inscriptions helps little, since the Philistines naturally adopted the language of the country after their settlement therein. The Semitic names of places, upon which F. Schwally bases his argument that the Philistines were Semites proves nothing, since these names often remain unaltered in the East through successive waves of population. The Achish of I Sam. xxvii.-xxviii. has been placed alongside the Ikausu of the Assyrian Inscriptions (cf. Schrader, KAT, 3d ed., p. 473), a form "Ekasho of the land of Kefti" found in an Egyptian source, which seems to make a non-Semitic origin of this name clear. The Old Testament calls in several places (Josh. xiii. 3; Judges iii. 3; I Sam. vi. 4, 16) the rulers of the Philistines seranim, "lords," a word which does not yield readily to a Hebrew (Semitic) etymology, and Klostermann (on I Sam. v. 8) has equated it with the Gk. tyrannos. The deities of the Philistines appear to be Semitic--cf. Dagon, Ashtaroth, and Beelzebub (qq.v.). This people had images in their temples and took them when they went to war as did the Hebrews the ark (II Sam. v. 21); Isa. ii. 6 shows that their soothsayers were held in honor. Those who visited the temple of Dagon avoided stepping on the threshold (I Sam. v. 5; cf. Zeph. i. 9). But these observances are in accordance with Semitic custom. The general impression, however, received from a view of the facts is that the Philistines were not of Semitic stock, and were intruders into the land where they adopted Semitic customs and language. [The name of Goliath, with its Aramaic ending--ath, does not contradict the theory of the non-Semitic origin of the Philistines, since he is described as belonging to the Giants (q.v.; cf. II Sam. xxi. 15-19; 1 Chron. xx. 4-8 accord with Josh. x. 22, who are recorded as descended from the Avvim or Anakim. Descendants of the old stock would be reckoned by outlanders to the dominant people, even though their descent was not forgotten. G. W. G.] This is confirmed by the further fact that they did not practise circumcision (Judges xiv. 3, xv. 18; I Sam. xvii. 26, xviii. 25), with which should be put the fact that the "sea folk" of Merneptah were uncircumcised (W. M. Mueller, Asien und Europa, pp. 357-358, Leipsic, 1893), and with these the Purasati of Rameses were connected. For the time when they entered Palestine the Golenisheff papyrus (ut sup.) gives a suggestion, since the date of Herihor is about 1100. The Bidir of Dor had received an Egyptian embassy sixteen years earlier, and the Egyptians had bought timber of his father and grandfather. Hence the Zakkari had been settled in the region some fifty or sixty years before the time of the papyrus, and this goes back approximately to the time of Rameses III. (ut sup.). This comes into close connection with the unrest caused by the dissolution of the Hittite realm in northern Syria. By 1100 the Philistines had at least partly subjected the Hebrews, and it would appear that shortly after they had firmly seated themselves in the lowlands of Judea they attacked the mountain region. Their success was won probably not through greater numbers but by means of better weapons and cleverer tactics. The Egyptian monuments show that they were equipped with felt helmets, coats of mail, large round shields, short spears, large swords, and war chariots. If they came from Asia Minor, they must have possessed the Mycenean culture and were by no means "barbarians." 4. Early History. When the Philistines came into touch with Israel, their territory was divided into five districts, the chiefs of which were called seranim, "lords." The capitals of these districts, named from north to south, were Ekron, Ashdod, Gath, Ashkelon, and Gaza. This fivefold division may correspond to tribal divisions. The Old Testament names the Cherethites as occupying the northwestern part of the Negeb, and these with the Zakkari may make up two outside groups of the same stock. Since Achish is called "king" in I Sam. xxi. 10 and elsewhere, he may have been the head of the Philistine confederation; an alternative supposition is that the Hebrew writer used the ordinary terminology. Inasmuch as during the reign of Rameses III. the Egyptian boundaries reached to Lebanon, while Dor was apparently in the possession of the Zakkari, it seems probable that their advance along the great highway of commerce by way of Carmel took place after the Egyptian power suffered a decline. It appears strange that the region about Dor and the Plain of Sharon was not reckoned in with the five districts of the Philistines, for when the battle of Gilboa was fought, these regions must have been in their power. The southernmost limits of their territory had been attained when they reduced Israel. The mention of the Philistines which appears in such passages as Gen. xxvi., cf. xxi. 22-23, are anachronisms, since the Egyptian monuments do not indicate settlement in what became their territory before the twentieth dynasty. The migration of the Danites (Judges xviii.) may have been due to the Philistines. In the long contest between the Philistines and Israel, the former appear as the aggressors, with the purpose of conquering the highland, the middle portion of which came into their power according to I Sam. v.-vi. The lower portion is shown by the story of Samson to have been already under their control (Judges xiii-xvi., cf. iii. 31). The fear of this people was so great among the Hebrews that many of the latter entered their ranks against their own kin (I Sam. xiv. 21). While Saul began the period of successful resistance, his reign was rather one of little contests with them than a serious campaign for freedom. At this time David (q.v.) became a beloved leader of his people (I Sam. xviii. 7) against the common foe. When Saul turned against David, the latter took refuge with Achish of Gath, who gave, him Ziklag as his residence. The last battle between Saul and the Philistines took place at the foot of Mount Gilboa, where Saul and his sons fell, and the earlier hegemony of the Philistines was reestablished. Ishbosheth established his capital at Mahanaim, and David became king over Judah in Hebron (II Sam. ii.-iv.). When the latter became king over all Israel, the Philistines regarded the act as one of revolt and sought to maintain their mastery. David knew, however, the advantage which was his in the possession of the highlands, and in numerous great and small conflicts (II Sam. v. 17-25, xxi. 15-22, xxiii. 9-17) not only secured the freedom of his people but reduced the Philistines to a position of subjection, at least in part, though their position on the highway enabled them still to profit by overland commerce. Gittites (from Gath) were in David's army (II Sam. xv. 18), as well as the Cherethites and Pelethites, who were probably of Philistine blood. The theory of W. M. Mueller that the victory of David was due to the Philistines having at the same time to resist an attack by the Egyptians has little to sustain it; David's success was partly due to the advantage of position. In Solomon's time Egypt sought to reestablish her hegemony over the region (I Kings ix. 16), and to this may be due the fact that Dor was independent of Israel. But the result was such a weakening of the Philistines that the Plain of Jezreel and Carmel, the key to the trade route, fell into Solomon's hands and with it command of commerce. When Shishak made his raid, the Philistines seem to have given him no trouble, since no mention is made of capture of plunder with reference to them. The territory of the Philistines, as it is reflected in the Old Testament, seems to picture the situation as it was after Solomon's time. 5. Later History. From that time there appears little which indicates an independent development of the Philistines. The conflicts between them and Israel have little significance. Rehoboam fortified his dominion against them by a line of strongholds (II Chron. xi. 7-12). Nadab and Elah fought with them at Gibbethon (I Kings xv. 27, xvi. 15 sqq.); Jehoshaphat received tribute from them (II Chron. xvii. 11), but the harem of Jehoram was carried off by them (II Chron. xxi. 16-17). Gath seems to have been taken from Judah by Hazael (II Kings xii. 17), while Uzziah carried on a victorious campaign against them (II Chron. xxvi. 6), though against ahab the philistines became aggressive II Chron. xxviii. 18), but were subjected under Hezekiah (II Kings xviii. 8). This people were included in the denunciations of the prophets (Amos i. 6-8; Jer. xxv. 15 sqq.; Ezek. xxv. 15, and elsewhere). They were subdued by the Assyrians, and in that period Gaza had especial importance because of the trade route to Arabia; and the region figures in the Assyrian annals with frequency. Sargon deported the inhabitants of Ashdod and Gath and settled foreigners in their place (711 B.C.). Zidka of Ashkelon and Hezekiah united against the Assyrians in 701, dethroned the Assyrian vassal king of Ekron, but the prior status was restored by Sennacherib. On the downfall of the Assyrians, the Egyptians once more tried to control the region, and Psammeticus is said to have besieged Ashdod for twenty-nine years (Herodotus, Hist., ii. 157); about this time that city is reported by the same author (i. 105) to have been plundered by the Scythians. Necho II. made another attempt to control Syria, but Nebuchadrezzar was the victor. Neither at that time nor in the time of Cyrus do the Philistines appear as aggressive. Under Darius Philistia, Phenicia, and Cyprus belonged to the fifth satrapy. Gaza was an independent city flourishing through its commerce, but was taken by Alexander after a siege of two months, while under the Seleucidae its fortunes were frequently changed, especially in the contest between Egypt and Syria (see [125]Ptolemies; [126]Seleucidae). In the Maccabean contest for independence, the cities of the Philistines were the centers of hard battles. Bacchides sought to shut the Jews out from. the plain; Jonathan attacked and plundered Joppa, took Ashdod, received Ekron from Alexander, while Ashkelon surrendered (I Macc. v. 68, ix. 50-52, x. 75-89); Simon took Joppa and settled Jews there, and also took Gezer (I Macc. xii. 33-34, xiii. 43-48); while Alexander Jannaeus seems to have completed the reduction of the region (Josephus, Ant., XIII., xiii. 3, xv. 4; War, I., iv. 2). Pompey freed it from the Jewish yoke, but Caesar gave Joppa back to the Jews. Antony gave the region to Cleopatra in 36 B.C., but in 30 through the gift of Augustus part of it was in Herod's hands. After the fall of Jerusalem, Jamnia became the center of Jewish Palestine. But long before this most that was distinctively Philistine had vanished. During the Persian period Greeks had settled in the country and cities and had gained control of commerce. It is significant that the coins of Gaza of the Persian period contain lettering partly Phenician and partly Greek, but of Greek workmanship. The government was on Greek models, the gods bore Greek names, while the cities were centers of Greek culture. While this is true, the rural population used the Aramaic tongue, as did the lower classes in the cities, at the end of the fourth century B.C.; moreover, the Greek names of deities but concealed local conceptions; the chief temple of Ashdod in the Hasmonean period was Dagon's, Gaza's chief deity was Marnas (Aramaic for "Our Lord"). 6. The Cities. For Dor see [127]Samaria. Japho (Joppa, the modern Jaffa) was one of the border cities of Dan (Josh. ix. 46), later the seaport of Jerusalem (II Chron. ii. 16), and seems to have been a city of great age, possessing a Canaanitic population in the time of the eighteenth and nineteenth Egyptian dynasties. The Amarna Tablets show an Egyptian governor for the place. Later it must have been in the hands of the Philistines. The New Testament speaks of it as visited by Peter (Acts ix. 36-43). It has retained its importance through the centuries because of its port, though the protection afforded is not of the best. The story of Andromeda centers at this place. In the fourth century it was the seat of a bishop. At the present time it is the seaport of Jerusalem, with which it is connected by rail, has about 45,000 inhabitants, and is celebrated for its gardens. About twelve miles south of Joppa and about five miles from the coast is the modern Jebna, which corresponds to the Jabneh of II Chron. xxvi. 6 and the Jabneel of Josh. xv. 11; it is the Jamnia of II Macc. xii. 8. About six miles inland the village of Akir probably locates the site of Ekron, variously assigned to Dan and to Judah (Josh. xix. 43, xv. 45-46; cf. however Josh. xiii. 2-3. the name of Ashdod (gk. Azotos) is preserved in the modern Esdud, a village with about 3,000 inhabitants situated on the trade route about midway between Joppa and Gaza. The city was reckoned to Judah (Josh. xv. 47; but cf. xiii. 2-3). The account of the conquest of the city by Uzziah in II Chron. xxvi. 6 seems doubtful in view of Amos i. 7. [This rhetorical passage, however, does not imply the independence of Ashdod.] Neh. iv. 1 probably refers not merely to the inhabitants of the city but to those of the outlying territory which reached to the limits of Gezer. The Evangelist Philip visited Ashdod (Acts viii. 40). In the early Christian centuries a distinction was made between Ashdod-on-the-Sea and Ashdod-Within, the former probably represented by the ruins of Minet al-K?ala. The name of Ashkelon is also preserved in the modern Askalan, about ten miles south of Ashdod and about thirteen miles north of Gaza. The ruins on the site of the present village appear to date only from the Middle Ages; apparently there were two sites other than this, one near the sea and one inland, a distinction which is supported by reports of a bishop of Ashkelon and one of Mayumas Ashkelon. Ruins exist quite near a little haven, and also others at the present El-Hammame and El-Mejdel to the northeast of the ruins of the time of the Middle Ages. It is in these last ruins that the sanctuaries of the early city are to be found. Ashkelon was a Roman colony in the fourth Christian century. Gaza is to be sought at the present Ghazze, situated a little over two miles from the coast, at the present a market place of some importance. Underground streams nourish fine groves of olive-trees and palms. Its haven was mentioned by Strabo and Ptolemy, and by Constantine the Great it was made a city with the name Constantia; its privileges were taken away by Julian, and it was known thereafter as Mayumas. Near one of the gates of the present city is a Mohammedan sanctuary dedicated to "the Strong one," i.e., Samson. Walls which are found under the present town were built over the city founded by Gabinius, the commander of Pompey's army, in 61 B.C. The earlier city lay somewhat to the north, and was destroyed by Alexander Jannaeus 96 B.C. Still farther to the south lay Raphia, the modern Tell Refah, about two miles from the sea and without a harbor. It marked the boundary between the Egyptian and Syrian domains (Josephus, War, IV., xi. 5). Gath lay nearer the land of Judah, according to I Sam. xvii.1-2, 52, near the Wadi el Sunt, and according to Eusebius (Onomasticon, ed. Lagarde, 244, 127, cf. 246, 129) about four miles to the north of Eleutheropolis toward Lydda (Diospolis). Jerome (on Mic. i. 10) asserts that it lay on the way from Eleutheropolis to Gaza. It early ceased to be a Philistine city (II Kings xii. 17; cf. Jer. xxv. 20; Amos i. 7; Zeph. ii. 4). (H. Guthe.) Bibliography: The literature on Hebrew history should be consulted as indicated under [128]Ahab; and [129]Israel, History of. The older literature directly bearing on the subject is noted in K. B. Stark, Gaza and die philistaeische Kueste, Jena, 1852. Consult: G. Baur, Der Prophet Amos, pp. 78-94: Giessen, 1847; V. Guerin, Description de la Palestine, ii. 36 sqq., Paris, 1869; A. Hannecker, Die Philistaeer, Eichstaedt, 1872; W. M. Thomson, The Land and the Book, vol. i., New York, 1882; E. Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums, I. 317 sqq., 358 sqq., Stuttgart, 1884; F. Schwally, in ZWT, xxxiv (1891), 103-108, 265 sqq.; J. F. McCurdy, History, Prophecy and the Monuments, vol i.-ii., passim, New York 1894-96. idem, in The Expositor ("Uzziah and the Philistines "), 1890; G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, chap. ix., London, 1897; R. Raabe, Petrus der Iberer, Leipsic, 1895; C. Clermont-Ganneau, Etudes d'archeologie orientale, x. 1-9, Paris, 1896; W. M. Mueller, in Mittheilungen der vorderasiatischen Gesellschaft, v (1900), 1-42. also his Asien and Europa, cited in the text; R. Dussaud, Questions myceniennes, Paris, 1905; M. A. Meyer, Hist. of the City of Gaza, New York, 1907; E. Meyer Der Diskus von Phaestos and die Philister auf Kreta, Berlin, 1909; Robinson, Researches, vol. ii.; Schrader, KAT passim; DB, iii. 844-848; EB, iii. 3713-3727; JE, x. 1-2; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, fasc. xxxi (1908), 286-300. Phillips, Philip PHILLIPS, PHILIP: Methodist Episcopal Gospel singer; b. in Chautauqua Co., N. Y., Aug. 13, 1834; d. in Delaware, Ohio, June 25, 1895. Brought up on a farm, he developed a talent for song; received some training in the country singing-school and later studied under Lowell Mason. He conducted his first singing-class at Alleghany, N. Y., in 1853, and after that similar schools in adjacent towns and cities. In 1860 he changed from the Baptist to the Methodist Episcopal Church. He brought out Early Blossoms (1860). The next year he opened a music-store in Cincinnati, and published Musical Leaves (Cincinnati, 1862). During the Civil War he aided the Christian Commission by raising funds with his Home Songs and services of song throughout the country. He visited England and prepared The American Sacred Songster (London, 1868) for the British Sunday-school Union; of which 1,100,000 copies were sold. Later he made a tour of the world holding praise services in the Sandwich Islands, Australia, New Zealand, Palestine, Egypt, India, and the cities of Europe. Other published collections are Spring Blossoms (Cincinnati, 1865); Singing Pilgrim (New York, 1866); Day School Singer (Cincinnati, 1869); Gospel Singer (Boston, 1874); Song Sermons (New York, 1877). He wrote also Song Pilgrimage around and throughout the World, with an introduction by J. H. Vincent and a biographical sketch by A. Clark (Chicago, 1880). Philipps, Ubbo PHILIPPS (PHILIPZOON), UBBO. See [130]Ubbonites. Phillpots, Henry PHILLPOTTS, HENRY: Church of England bishop of Exeter; b. at Bridgewater (50 m. s.w. of Bristol), Somerset, May 6, 1778; d. at Bishopstowe, Torquay (29 m. e.n.e. of Plymouth), Sept. 18, 1869. He was educated at Corpus Christi, Oxford (B.A., 1795), was elected a fellow at Magdalen College, and prelector of moral philosophy in 1800. He became a deacon (1802), and priest (1804), prebendary of Durham (1809), dean of Chester (1828), and bishop of Exeter (1830). He was the recognized head of the High-church party, and, in the House of Lords, was upon the extreme Tory side, opposing every kind of liberal measure. He was also involved in several memorable controversies, especially with the Roman Catholic historians, John Lingard (q.v.; 1806) and Charles Butler (1822). But he is best known by the Gorham Case (q.v.). On the reversal of the lower courts' decision by the privy council, he published A Letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury (London and New York, 1850), in which he threatened to hold no communion with the archbishop. Bibliography: Of the Life by R. N. Shutte only vol. i. appeared, London, 1863. Consult: H. P. Liddon, Life of . . . Pussy, 4 vols., London, 1893-97; DNB, xlv. 222-225. Philo of Alexandria PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA. [131]I. Life. [132]II. Works. [133]Lost and Spurious (S: 1). [134]Exegetical (S: 2). [135]Philosophical and Political (S: 3). [136]III. Doctrines. [137]Relation and Scope (S: 1). [138]On God in Himself (S: 2). [139]God Revealed; Creation (S: 3). [140]Intermediate Potencies; the Logos (S: 4). [141]Man (S: 5). [142]The Scriptures (S: 6). [143]Ethics (S: 7). [144]Eschatology (S: 8). [145]IV. Later Influence. I. Life. Philo of Alexandria (b. about 20 B.C.; d. about 42 A.D.) stands as the leading exponent of the Jewish-Alexandrine religious philosophy, and in its influence upon the literature of the Christian Church its foremost representative. The incomplete biography of him is derived from statements in his own works and from incidental passages in Josephus (Ant., XVIII., viii. 1, XX., v. 2), Eusebius (Hist. eccl., ii. 4-5; Eng. transl., NPNF, 2 ser., i. 107-109; Praeparatio evangelica, viii. 13-14; Eng. transl., 2 vols., Oxford, 1903), Jerome (De vir. ill., xi.), Isidore of Pelusium, Photius, and Suidas. From these it appears that Philo was of a rich, prominent family, brother of Alexander Lysimachus, alabarch of the Jews at Alexandria. Whether he was of priestly descent (Jerome) and whether his name was Jedediah or this was merely a free rendering of the name Philo by later Jewish writers remain uncertain. In 39 or 40 A.D. he appeared as the representative of the Jews of Alexandria before Caligula at Rome to regain the privileges lost through the acts of the imperial governor Publius Avilius Flaccus in conjunction with the bloody atrocities of the hostile Greek party. The mission secured no promise of relief; but the accession of Claudius brought the restoration of their rights and the release of their imprisoned alabarch; and under Claudius, Philo wrote the report of the expedition to Rome. At what time he sojourned in Palestine is uncertain. II. Works. 1. Lost and Spurious. Of his works, Eusebius (Hist. eccl., ii. 18; Eng. transl., ut sup., 119-122) gives a fair but incomplete enumeration; but some of the writings mentioned thus, as well as others in the later accounts of Jerome, Photius, and Suidas, are extant, if at all, in fragments only. All but meager fragments is lost of the important work "Counsels for the Jews," no doubt identical with the "Apology for the Jews" mentioned by Eusebius; likewise three books of "Questions and Answers on Exodus," two books of the "Allegory of the Sacred Laws," one book of "On Rewards," and the same of "On Numbers." Peter Alexius refuted the charge brought by a forgotten Socinian theologian of the seventeenth century that a Christian author toward the close of the second century composed the collective writings of Philo and ascribed them to him. This untenable hypothesis was taken up in the last century by a hypercritic of Jewish descent, Kirschbaum by name, who assumed, however, a gigantic fraud by several Christian authors. More consideration is due to recent attacks on individual works; such as, for instance, against the apparent composite character of De incorruptibilitate mundi, against the "Dissertations on Samson and Jonah" from the Armenian, the Interpretatio Hebraicorum nominum, and the Liber antiquitatum Biblicarum printed in the sixteenth century in Philo's name. The last three are certainly not genuine. Weighty objections have been raised by recent critics against the authenticity of De vita contemplativa, some of whom claim its origin to have been from the monk Falsarius at the close of the third century; because (1) of its connection with the writing Quod omnis probes liber of which it is claimed to be a continuation; (2) the author is more limited in his cosmic view than Philo and has in mind the monastic mode of thought; and (3) it was never mentioned before Eusebius, who seeks to establish thereby the historical priority of the Therapeutae (q.v.). However, this argument makes too much of the silence before Eusebius; besides, the diction is decidedly of the period of Philo, and the descent of the manuscript as well as the Jewish character of its contents speak also for its authenticity. 2. Exegetical. The genuine or unquestioned works of Philo fall into three groups: the exegetical on the Pentateuch, the philosophical, and the political. The exegetical is the most replete and comprehensive and is subdivided as to contents into the cosmogonical, historical, and legislative writings. Of the cosmogonical, De mundi opificio is an allegorical explanation of the creation in Genesis. The historical writings, called also allegorical or genealogical, present a historico-allegorical elucidation of Genesis chapter by chapter. Those of legislative content present ethical considerations with reference to the decalogue and Hebrew ritual based on the codes in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. 3. Philosophical and Political. The philosophical works belonging to Philo's earlier period and challenged by the modern critics on account of difference of content with that of the later works are, De incorruptibilitate mundi; Quod omnis probus liber; and De vita contemplativa. To these belong the Quaestiones et solutiones in Genesin et Exodum, a brief catechetical explanation of the Pentateuch originally in five books, partly preserved in a Latin translation and partly recovered in an Armenian translation; and, from the Armenian, De providentia (2 books); and Alexander seu de ratione brutorum. The political or historico-apologetical writings for the cultured class of Jews and heathen in common, with an apologetical tendency in favor of the first, embrace, De vita Mosis; the "Counsels for the Jews"; "Unto Flaccus"; and "Embassy to Gaius" [Caligula], the last two important for autobiographical notices, and forming books iii. and iv. respectively of a more comprehensive work of five books, "On the Fate of the Jews under Emperor Gaius," the fourth and fifth of which bore the common title, "On the Virtues." III. Doctrines. 1. Relationship and Scope. Philo stands as the most conspicuous figure and the culminating point of a long development marked by the confluence of Jewish monotheism and Hellenic cosmogony. This movement is represented at Alexandria in the middle of the third century before Christ by the peripatetic Aristobulus, who already shows the tendency of allegorizing and of abstracting the conception of deity from Biblical anthropomorphism by the intrusion of intermediate entities. The allegorizing of Philo is said to have gathered up into a mighty basin all the streams of Alexandrine hermeneutics from the past and discharged them again into multiple streams and rivulets of the later exegesis of Judaism and Christianity. He knew all the important Greek philosophers, from whom he cited freely; but first for him was Plato, from whom he derived his philosophical content, while in his method of extravagant allegorizing he imitated the Stoics. These allegorized the Greek myths in the effort to philosophize the multiple forms of popular religion and reduce them to simple fundamental principles; so did Philo in dealing with the Biblical and legal forms and cultic prescriptions of the Jews, in the interest, however, of monotheism. In his adherence to a living personal Creator and Ruler of the universe, revealed through Moses, and choosing Israel from the world races as his peculiar possession, he did not waver. Moses to him is the prophet of all prophets and his law the essence of all wisdom and doctrine of virtue; and waiving his privilege of constructing an independent cosmology he presents his cosmological views in the form of a great practico-speculative commentary on the Pentateuch. He disapproves of the heretical sects of Judaism, and lavishes warm praise on the pious Essenes. The emphasis of Philo is positive; faith and piety are the supreme virtues. His positive faith is saturated with an ardent mysticism; not that of absorption in divine contemplation, but rather that sustained on the one hand throughout his monotheistic ethical point of view and on the other throng out his philosophical consciousness, ever alert to penetrate to the nature of things. Philo was thus the first monotheistic theologian in this cosmopolitan sense and the predecessor of the Alexandrine school. 2. On God in Himself. In his doctrine of God he distinguished strictly between God in himself and God revealed, as demanded by his Old-Testament theistic point of view as well as his Platonic dualism of spirit and matter. On the one hand, he rejects the pantheistic view and the deification of creatures; on the other, the anthropomorphic and anthropopathic view. God in himself is absolute, incorporate, and outside of the material universe; comprehending all, yet uncomprehended. He is outside of time and space, and in his being unknowable. The only name by which God can be designated is therefore pure being (to on or ho On). Though without real attributes yet in contrast with created being certain marks can not be avoided, such as immutability, unity, simplicity, absolute freedom, and beatitude, without lack of anything, self-sufficiency, whereby he stands in relation to nothing and is none of the created beings. God is called "the Good" only in the sense that he is the source of all good; "Light," in the figurative, only as the divine source, as much brighter than the visible lights as the sun exceeds the darkness. 3. God Revealed; Creation. God, as revealed, on the other hand, is also immanent in his relation with the universe and is the all-filling, all-penetrating, leaving no vacuum. He is the author of the universe and first cause on whom depends the world of spirits and sense. A series of attributes arise from his relations with the universe; such as omnipotence, by virtue of which he is almighty and the efficient cause of all; omniscience, all-knowing the present and all-fore seeing the future; and wisdom, whereby he transcends the counsel and reason of mankind. Three corollaries follow his creative power: the material, the means, and the object. (1) The stuff was the matter (hyle), the relative nothing (me on). Time is evolved from formless matter; and, not in time but with time becoming, heaven and earth were created. Creation in six days is to be taken figuratively, six being a symbol of perfection and representing the relative order and not time. This conception of creation taken from the Timaeus of Plato is fundamentally nothing else than the absolute rational plan of creation springing from the Logos of God (cf. [146]Origen and Origenistic Controversies). This Logos is the means by which the universe was created and the object was God's beneficence as love and as free self-impartation to his creatures. 4. Intermediate Potencies; the Logos. Between God the Infinite and the finite, imperfect universe there is a wide gap which is, however, removed by being filled with divine potencies (dynameis), which are peculiar mediating beings or concepts, represented on the one hand as active powers, self-revelations, or attributes of God; on the other, as personal beings of a spiritual kind. Incomprehensible in number they submit to classification; namely, into the well-doing and the primitive powers. At the head of the former is the agathotes through whom God made the universe and at the head of the other is the arche, through whom be rules it. But higher than these two at the summit of the series of all mediate beings, constituting their principle of unity, appears the divine Logos. He is their father and leader, the first-born. Are the others angels, he is the archangel. He stands in immanent relation with God and proceeds from him, whereas the others proceed from the Logos. He is sometimes called second God or image of God; his administrator, tool, and mediator. As mediator, through him the world was made. In him subsisted at the beginning of creation heaven and earth; i.e., the body of ideals. He is the seat of ideals which by partition or separation he projects from himself. Through him God imprints the intermediate potencies, which have their seat in the Logos, upon matter; hence his is called "seal of God." As the bond of unity, God holds together, supports, and directs all through him. He is also represented as the high-priest and advocate for men with God. The synonym "word" (hrema; Gen. i. 3; Ps. xxxiii. 6; Deut. viii. 3) used sometimes by Philo indicates that the Logos was to him equivalent to the Biblical term of the Old Testament instrument of creation and governance of the world. 5. Man. At the conclusion of the work of creation, God made first the heavenly man through the Logos; i.e., the preexistent ideal man, in his pretemporal, spiritual, unsexual eternal state, untainted by sin and truly in the divine image. Subsequently, the earthly man, made not by the Logos alone but with the aid of the lower potencies, was deficient in the perfect image of God and was, in advance, subject to the possibility of sinning. Indeed, his higher soul (nous) came from the creative, living breath of God, but in the creation of his lower soul (with its earthly reason, nous geinos) as well as his body, several angelic potencies or demiurges cooperated. After the earthly man had lived seven years in Paradise, or the realm of virtues, especially of piety and wisdom, he was sexually differentiated by the formation of woman from him and he entered the state of temptation and sin. The results of the fall are partly physical and partly ethical, the latter being the increasing degeneration of Adam's descendants, impure from birth. A partial image of God remains as freedom of will and rational perception; by these the fallen retain unbroken connection with God, particularly through the Logos through whom God reveals himself. Many men fail to apprehend God because of their guilt; only the consecrated who know how to rise above the earthly may enter into closer relations with him. In the special Scripture revelation, Moses is the earthly mediator of a revelation which shows Israel to be the chosen and the possessed of God, just as the Logos is the heavenly mediator. 6. The Scriptures. The Scriptures--Philo having in mind the Septuagint--are capable of a double sense, and must not be understood otherwise than as allegorical. The immediate sense is the literal, fit only for weaker minds; it is the outer integument which the mediate or allegorical sense penetrates and fills as the soul does the body. The formal criteria for preferring the allegorical are, (1) when the literal represents something unworthy of God; (2) when there is apparent contradiction; and (3) when the text itself is figurative. In a series of instances a deeper sense is implied, (1) by a duplication of expression; (2) a redundant word or words; (3) repetition with slight variation; and (4) play of words and the like. 7. Ethics. In the doctrine of the moral law Philo stands on strict monotheistic, Old-Testament ground; in the doctrine of virtue he adheres to Plato and the Stoics. The divine moral law appears to him the entire natural and moral, world comprehending order. The law of Moses is the visible transcript of the natural law. The Hebrew ceremonial law requires in all points a spiritual or allegorical interpretation. The virtues are arranged in the order of importance according to the Platonic-Stoic scheme, with the exception that piety is supreme. The strict ascetic retirement of the Therapeutae and Essenes is commended for the culture of the virtues. The Logos is given an important place in the ethical sphere, as the teacher of virtues, the conqueror of evils, and the heavenly model for men. He operates on the one hand in the human conscience as judge; on the other, as mediator before God for man. 8. Eschatology. In his doctrine on immortality and retribution, so far as it affects the individual, Philo stands on Hellenic ground; in his expectation for the future of the people of God, he is Jewish particularist. Man is designed to be immortal by virtue of his godlike nature. Actual immortality is attained through virtue, especially piety; also by philosophy, apprehended and realized in life. Though the life of the sinner continues after death, yet it is not really immortal; this property belongs to those only who carry their blessedness attained in this world into the highest ether of the world beyond, where they behold God. The fate of the godless is that the punishment which sin carries within itself in this world, such as fear, sadness, and strife, continues into the next. The misery involved in sin is the place of its condemnation and not the mythical Hades. Philo knows nothing of a trans-mundane hell as a place for torment, the devil, or malevolent angels. IV. Later Influence. Philo's religious philosophy exerted a profound influence upon the early Christian theology and the development of Christianity. It has been termed "an outline of the kernel of Christian history formed by the Jew Philo before it went into effect," and the Logos doctrine has been called "the Jewish prologue of Christianity." But such generalizations can be supported only so far as the coincidences of individual concepts and expressions of Philo with those of the New Testament and some of the early Christian writers. The teachings of Philo differ as much as possible from the fundamental doctrines of Christianity regarding the person and work of Christ. In his treatment of messianic prophecies of the Old Testament he either preoccupies himself with abstractly spiritualistic allegory or with a one-sided national hope, stopping short of a deeper ethical interpretation. His Logos doctrine is one only in name with that of the New Testament; the former is a cosmic potency without true personal character, the latter is above all else a personal being of ethical godlike significance. The former is unrelated to the theocratic national expectations of Israel; the latter is the incarnate Son of the Father, the Messiah. However, this is not equally true of the influence of Philo upon the formal dogma and exegesis of the Fathers, which were both far-reaching and persistent. As already upon Josephus and upon the later exegetes of the Targum and the Midrash, the Cabalists, and the religious philosophers of the Middle Ages; so the influence of Philo's phraseology and allegorical exegesis shows itself upon a considerable number of the early Christian writers, particularly of the Alexandrian school; and even in a certain sense upon New-Testament writers like Paul, John, and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Of the Greek Fathers, especially Barnabas, Justin, Theophilus of Antioch, Clement, Origen, Eusebius, and, among the Latino, Ambrose and Jerome, show a similar influence. (O. Zoeckler.) Bibliography: The best ed. of the "Works" is by L. Cohn and P. Wendland, in an editio major and minor, vols. i.-v. and ix., Berlin, 1896-1909. There is also an editio stereotypa in course of issue from Leipsic, vols. i., v., vi., 1898-1905; The editio princeps by A. Turnebus was issued Paris, 1552; an edition which has long been standard is that by T. Mangey, 2 vols., London, 1742. There is an Eng. transl. by C. D. Yonge, 4 vols., London, 1854-55; and a new Germ. transl. was began under the editorship of L. Cohn, Vol. i., Breslau, 1909. Special mention should be made of Neu entdeckte Fragmenta Philos, ed. P. Wendland, Berlin, 1891; Fragments of Philo Judaeus, newly ed., J. R. Harris, Cambridge, 1886; and the Eng. transl., Philo about the Contemplative Life, by F. C. Conybeare, Oxford, 1895 (contains a full bibliography). Very useful as covering the whole subject are: DCB, iv. 357-388 (a notable discussion); Schuerer, Geschichte, iii. 487-562, Eng. transl., II., iii. 321-381; DB, extra vol., pp. 197-208; and Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, fasc. xxxi., cols. 300-312. Consult further: J. Bryant, The Sentiment of Philo Judaeus, London, 1798; C. G. L. Grossmann, Quaestiones Philoneae, part 1, De theologiae Philonis fontibus et auctoritate, Leipsic, 1829; A. Gfroerer, Philon and die alexandrinische Theosophie, Stuttgart, 1831; A. F. Daehne, Geschichtliche Darstellung der juedisch-alexandrinischen Religionsphilosophie, 2 vols., Halle, 1834; F. Keferstein, Philo's Lehre vom den goettlichen Mittelwesen, Leipsic, 1846; J. Bucher, Philonische Studien, Tuebingen, 1848; C. Morgan, An Investigation of the Trinity of Plato and Philo, London, 1853; J. T. Delaunay, Philon d'Alexandrie, Paris, 1867; M. Heinze, Lehre vom Logos, Leipsic, 1872; B. Bruno, Philo, Strauss und Renan, and das Urchristenthum, Berlin, 1874; J. W. Lake, Plato, Philo and Paul; or the pagan Conception of a "Divine Logos" the Basis of the Christian Dogma, Edinburgh, 1874; C. Siegfried, Philon von Alexandrien als Ausleger des Alten Testaments, Jena, 1875; H. Soulier, La doctrine du logos chez Philon d'Alexandrie, Turin, 1876; F. Klasen, Die alttestamentliche Weisheit and der Logos der juedisch-alexandrinischen Philosophie, Freiburg, 1878; J. Reville, Le Logos d'apres Philon d'Alexandrie, Geneva, 1877; P. E. Lucius, Die Therapeuten . . . Eine kritische Untersuchung der Schrift "De vita contemplativa," Strasburg, 1879; J. Reville, La Doctrine du logos dans le quatrieme evangile et dans les oeuvres de Philon, Paris, 1881; S. Weiss, Philo von Alexandrien and Moses Maimonides, Halle, 1884; J. Drummond, Philo Judaeus, or the Jewish-Alexandrian Philosophy in its Development and Completion, 2 vols., London, 1888; H. von Arnim, Quellenstudien zu Philo van Alexandrien, Berlin, 1888; L. Massebieau, Le Classement des oeuvres de Philon, Paris, 1889 M. Freudenthal, Die Erkenntnisslehre Philos von Alexandria, Berlin, 1891; P. Wendland and O. Kern, Beitraege zur Geschichte der grieschischen Philosophie und Religion, pp. 1-75, Berlin, 1895; C. G. Montefiore in JQR, vii (1895), 481-545 (a florilegium); A. Aall, Geschichte der Logosidee in der grieschischen Philosophie, 2 parts. Leipsic, 1896-99; E. Herriot, Philon le juif, Paris 1898; S. Tiktin, Die Lehre von den Tugenden und Pflichten bei Philo, Bern, 1898; T. Simon, Der Logos, Leipsic, 1902; W. Bousset, Die Religion des Judenthums im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter, Berlin, 1903; P. Krueger, Philo and Josephus als Apologeten des Judenthums, Leipsic, 1906; J. Martin, Philon, Paris, 1907; P. Heinisch, Der Einfluss Philos auf die aelteste christliche Exegese, in Altestamentliche Abhandlungen, ed. J. Nikel, Muenster, 1908; Les Idees Philosophiques et religieuses de Philon d' Alexandrie, Paris, 1908; K. S. Guthrie, The Message of Philo-Judaeus of Alexandria, Chicago, 1909; H. Windisch, Die Froemmigkeit Philos and ihre Bedeutung fuer das Christenthum, Leipsic, 1909; N. Bentwich, Philo-Judaeus of Alexandria, Philadelphia, 1910; K. S. Guthrie The Message of Philo Judaeus of Alexandria, London, 1910; works on the history of Israel, e.g., H. Ewald, Geschichte, vi. 257-312, and on the history of philosophy. Phylo Byblius PHILO BYBLIUS (HERENNIUS PHILO): Greek grammarian and historian; b. in 63 A.D. (not 42, as was usually given); d. after 141. Knowledge of him comes principally through Suidas, though he is mentioned not infrequently by the Church Fathers, particularly by Origen (Contra Celsum, i. 15; Eng. transl., ANF, iv. 403) and Eusebius (Praeparatio Evangelica, i. 9-10; Eng. transl., 2 vols., Oxford, 1903). Suidas makes him an ambassador to Rome in the time of Hadrian, and a friend of Herennius Severus (from whom he took his name Herennius), consul in 141 A.D. Three of the many works ascribed to him are often referred to: "Concerning Cities and the Famous Men they have produced," "Phenician History" or "Things Phenician" (a professed translation of a work by Sanchuniathon, q.v.); and "Concerning Jews," about which it is debated whether it was an independent work or merely an excursus to or a chapter in the "Phenician History," with the probability inclining in favor of the former alternative. The quotations from his "Phenician History" are supposed to make him out to be a Euhemerist;. but it is to be remembered that if this work is really a translation from the putative author, Sanchuniathon, Philo can not be held responsible for the trend of opinion there expressed. Only fragments remain of his works in citations by Eusebius. Geo. W. Gilmore. Bibliography: The fragments are collected in C. and T. Muller, Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum, iii. 580-576, 4 vols., Paris, 1841-51. Consult H. Ewald, in the Abhandlungen of the Royal Society of Goettingen, v (1853); E. Renan, in the Memoires of the Academy of Inscriptions, xxiii. 2 (1858), 241 sqq.; W. von Baudissin, Studien zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte, i. 3 sqq.. Leipsic, 1878; Schuerer, Geschichte, and Eng. transl., Introduction, S:S: 3, 18; and literature under [147]Sanchuniathon. Philo of Carpasia PHILO OF CARPASIA: Bishop who flourished in the fourth century. Polybius in his fanciful Vita Epiphanii (MPG, xli. 85) writes of a deacon Philo whom among others the sister of Honorius and Arcadius sent to Cyprus to Epiphanius to summon him to Rome to cure her of sickness by the laying on of hands and prayer. But Philo on account of his piety was consecrated by Epiphanius as bishop of Carpasia, Cyprus, and was entrusted with the former's official administration during his absence at Rome. With this has been combined the notice of Suidas that "Philo the Carpathian wrote a commentary on the Song of Songs"; but Carpathos is the name of an island between Rhodes and Crete. Here there is either reference to different persons or a confusion of places; probably the latter, since the commentary mentioned by Suidas, preserved in a number of manuscripts, is provided with the superscription, "Commentary on the Song of Songs of Philo, bishop of Carpasia." The commentary was first published by A. Giacomelli (Rome, 1772); was printed by A. Gallandius, Bibliotheca veterum patrum, vol. ix. Appendix, p. 713 (Venice, 1765-1781); and is in MPG, xl. i sqq. (A. Hauck.) Bibliography: Fabricius-Harles, Bibliotheca Graeca, ix. 252, Hamburg, 1804; O. Bardenhewer, Patrologie, p. 276, Freiburg, 1901, Eng. transl., St. Louis, 1908. Philopatris PHILOPATRIS, fi''lo-pe'tris: A dialogue ascribed by a single family of manuscripts to the Greek satirist Lucian. Formerly regarded as a satire on Christianity, it is now known to be a political pamphlet of the Byzantine period. It is divided into two parts: the first is theological and contains a refutation of heathen polytheism accompanied by an exposition of Christian doctrine; the second is political and reveals the dissatisfaction felt in certain circles with the government of that period, though it closes with expressions of loyalty, and with the hope that the emperor would overcome his enemies. The Humanist editors of Lucian themselves perceived that this dialogue, which is inartistic both in form and execution, was not written by their author; and this view is undoubtedly correct, although naturally there have been some defenders of its authenticity, the latest of whom was C. G. Kelle, Luciani Philopatris (Leipsic, 1826). Some classicists sought at least to maintain that the dialogue was written in the time of Trajan, but the majority of critics allowed themselves to be influenced by J. M. Gesner (De aetate et auctore dialogi . . . qui Philopatris inscribitur, Jena, 1714) in favor of the period of Julian. A. van Gutschmid and others were inclined to refer the work to the time of the Persian wars of Heraclius. At present, however, the general opinion is in harmony with the view of B. G. Niebuhr, to the effect that the dialogue belongs to the second half of the tenth century, the time of Nicephorus Phocas (963-969) or to that of his successor, John Tzimiskes (969-976). If this be true, the whole first part must be regarded as a jesting religious controversy, introduced to give plausibility to the attribution of the dialogue to Lucian; although R. Crampe has argued that, if the work was written in the seventh century, political opposition would be combined with a tendency toward paganism. The dialogue was expunged from the Aldine edition of Lucian of 1522 by the Inquisition, and was placed on the Index by Paul V. in 1559. To whatever period it may be assigned, the Philopatris retains its interest from a theological point of view because of its combination of Christian ideas with Lucianic style, whether it proves the existence of paganism in Byzantium in the seventh century, or whether it simply shows how frivolously the Humanists of the tenth century treated questions of faith. The description of Paul borrowed from the Acts of Paul and Thecla and the allusion to II Cor. xii. 2 sqq. are also worthy of note. E. von Dobschuetz. Bibliography: The work is printed in the eds. of Lucian's "Works" of Florence, 1496, the Aldine, 1503 (expunged in that of 1522), Zweibruecken, 1791, and Leipsic, 1839. Separate issues are by J. M. Gesner, Jena, 1715; C. B. Hase, in Leo Diaconus, CSHB, Bonn, 1828. Consult: Fabricius-Harles, Bibliotheca Graeca, v. 344, Hamburg, 1796; Krumbacher, Geschichte, pp. 459 sqq.; idem, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xi (1902), 578 sqq.; B. G. Niebuhr, Uber das Alter des Dialogs Philopatris, Bonn, 1843; R. Crampe, Philopatris, Halle, 1894; E. Rohde, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, v (1895), 1-15, vi (1896), 475-482; C. Stach, De Philopatride, Cracow, 1897; R. Garnett, Alms for Oblivion, in Cornhill Magazine, May, 1901; S. Reinach, La Question du Philopatris, in Revue archeologique, 1902, 79-110. Philoponus PHILOPONUS. See [148]Johannes Philoponus. Philostorgius PHILOSTORGIUS, fil''o-ster'jius: Arian controversialist; b. at Borissus in Cappadocia about 364; d. after 425. His father was the strict Arian Carterius, and he became a polemical writer in the same cause. At the age of twenty he repaired to Constantinople for study and met Eunomius on the way, whose works he studied. There is no further knowledge of the course of his life. The work for which he was famous was a church history in twelve books, intended to justify the Arian party and is unfortunately lost. Only excerpts by Photius and others who used it have come down, and these are unreliable except as they report mere facts. It is certain that he used the writings of Aetius and Eunomius and Arian documents as well as the history of Eusebius. The history began with the controversy between Arius and Alexander and extended to Valentinian III. It would scarcely be reliable in its partizan representation of persons and relations, yet the loss of so much historical matter dealing with an age so intensely, controversial is to be deplored. The work was used and read during the Middle Ages; the excerpts of Photius are mentioned, Suidas used it for his lexicon, Nicetes Akominatus possessed it, and Nicephorus seems to have used it. (Erwin Preuschen.) Bibliography: The first issue of the excerpts of Photius, ed. J. Gothofredus, was at Geneva, 1643; Valesius edited them next, Paris, 1673, after which there were several editions, principally the one by W. Reading, Cambridge, 1720, reprinted at Turin, 1748, and in MPG, lxv. New fragments were edited by P. Batiffol in Roemische Quartalschrift, iii (1889), 134 sqq., cf. his Quaestiones Philostoggianae, Paris, 1891, and his articles in the Quartalschrift, iv (1890), 134 sqq., ix (1895), 57 sqq. An Eng. transl. is by Walford, London, 1855. Consult: Fabricius-Harles, Bibliotheca Graeca, vii. 509 sqq, Hamburg, 1801; J. R. Asmus, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, iv. 30 sqq.; L. Jeep, in Rheinisches Museum, lii (1897), 213 sqq.; TU, xvii (1899); Ceillier, Auteurs sacres, viii. 509-514; DCB iv. 390; and the literature under Arianism. Philoxenus PHILOXENUS, fi-lex'i-nUs, (XENAIA, AXENAIA): Monophysite bishop of Mabug (Hierapolis); said to have been born at Tahal, a little place in the Persian district of Beth-Garmai, between the Tigris and the mountains of Kurdistan, in the second quarter of the fifth century; d. a violent death at Gangra in Paphlagonia, probably 523. He was probably of Syrian parentage, and not a slave, as was reported by Theodore the Lector; studied at Edessa while Ibas was bishop there (435-457), but was an opponent of Ibas and of Nestorianism. He left Edessa and went to Antioch, where, having accepted the Henoticon (q.v.), he came into conflict with the Patriarch Calandio, who expelled him; but he returned and was by Peter Fullo (458) consecrated metropolitan of Hierapolis (Mabug), when he took the name Philoxenus, sending a confession of his faith to the Emperor Xenos, to refute a charge of Eutychianism (q.v.). For the next thirteen years nothing is heard of him. It is not impossible that this was the period when the writings which made him famous were composed. In May, 498, he was in Edessa, being charged with undue leniency toward drunken carnival rioters. With the accession to office of Flavian in 498 (see [149]Monophysites) Philoxenus came more into publicity as the spokesman of the Monophysites. He was twice at Constantinople, being summoned thither by Anastasius in 506 at the end of the Persian war. He was the animating spirit of the party which assailed Flavian as a Nestorian. At the Synod of Tyre Monophysitism was victorious; but a few years later came the reversal, and under Justin (successor of Anastasius) Philoxenus was banished to Philippopolis (518 or 519), and then to Gangra. The eminent position and ability of Philoxenus as a writer are conceded. His productions stamp him as a man of virile thought, strong will, and warm heart, while the "strife-seeking rioter" his opponents deemed him disappears in the spiritual curate of souls. Jacob of Edessa (q.v.) regarded him as one of the four great teachers of the Syrian church, Ephraem, Jacob of Sarug, and Isaac of Antioch being the others. He was held in equal estimation by the Armenians, who quoted and used his writings. Numerous manuscripts of his writings exist at Paris, Rome, Oxford, and particularly at the British Museum, but comparatively few have been published. For his work on Bible translation see [150]Bible Versions, A, III., 2. He wrote a partial commentary on the Gospels, and dealt with dogmatic subjects, liturgies, and the like, and a list of eighty writings is given by Budge (see below). Among the printed productions are thirteen addresses on the Christian life, dogmatic treatises on matters dealing with a personal creed; on the Chalcedonian creed; against Nestorius and Nestorianism; letters of theological content. to Abraham and Orestes, priests at Edessa, on the pantheism of Stephen bar Sudaili to the monks at Teleda (between Antioch and Aleppo); circular addresses to monks, with no particular ascription; letters to monks at Beth Gaugal near Amida, and to Emperor Zeno; and two Anaphora, printed in E. Renaudot, Liturgiarum orientalium collectio, ii. 370 (Paris, 1716). In considering his Christology, it is to be borne in mind that he stood for the same thing as Severus of Antioch (q.v.), with whom he fought shoulder to shoulder, the two being the foremost representatives of Monophysitism, ever energetically opposed to Eutychianism (q.v.) and Apollinarianism (see [151]Apollinaris of Laodicea). His letter to Zeno issued from a desire to purge himself of false suspicion. "He who was complete deity assumed flesh and became true man," he asserts in this letter. While the polemic against Nestorius gradually lost its interest, the effort continued to guard against the consequences of Docetism (q.v.), and appears in the latest of his writings--to the monks of Teleda. In this the avowal of the reality of the manhood of Christ and of his undergoing the experiences of humanity is explicit. Philoxenus emphasized the fact that all which Christ did was done both voluntarily and vicariously. In the last phases of his thought he approached the position of Julian of Halicarnassus (q.v.). Yet it must remain a matter of doubt whether Philoxenus had part in the strife between Julian and Severus, since this broke out while Philoxenus was in banishment in Thrace, though Severus expressly stated that Julian had not only published his book in Alexandria but had distributed it broadcast. Possibly Philoxenus had received it, in whose earlier writings Severus "had found nothing foolish." The letter to the monks of Teleda and a work of unassigned authorship appear to be the only documents which contain an echo of the dispute. Early issue of some of his works is to be found in S. E. Assemani, Bibliotheca orientalis (Rome, 1719-1728); and M. Le Quien, Oriens Christianus (Paris, 1740). Later issues are: The Discourses of Philoxenus, Bishop of Mabbogh A.D. 486-519, Edited from Syriac Manuscripts . . . with an English Translation by E. A. Wallis Budge, 2 vols. (London, 1894); Three Letters of Philoxenus, Bishop of Mabbogh (485-519): being the Letter to the Monks, the first Letter to the Monks of Beth-Gaugal, and the Letter to the Emperor Zeno . . . with an English Translation, and Introduction, . . by A. A. Vaschalde (Rome, 1902); the Letter of Mar Xenaias of Mabug to Abraham and Orestes, in A. L. Frothingham's Stephen bar Sudaili (Leyden, 1886); and his Tractatus tres de trinitate et incarnatione, ed. A. Vaschalde, in CSCO, vol. xxvii., 1907. (G. Krueger.) Bibliography: The early sources are for the most part collected, abstracted, or used in J. S. Assemani, Bibliotheca orientalis, i. 268, 346-358, 475, 479, ii 10, 13, 17, 20. Consult further: W. Wright, Short Hist. of Syriac Literature, pp. 72-76, London, 1894; idem, Catalogue of Syriac MSS. in the British Museum, 3 parts, London, 1870-72; R. Duval, Hist. politique, religieuse et litteraire d'Edesse, Paris, 1892; idem, La Litterature syriaque, ib. 1900; E. Ter-Minassiantz, in TU, xxvi (1904); DCB, iv. 391-393. Phocas, Saint PHOCAS, SAINT: Christian martyr. He is said to have been a gardener at Sinope in Pontus where he was famous for his lavish almsgiving and hospitality to strangers. He suffered martyrdom, as some hold, in the persecution under Trajan (98-117); according to others, under Diocletian (284-305). In the East he is the patron saint of mariners, who are accustomed to revere him with hymns, call upon him when in distress at sea, and share with him a part of their profits by giving them to the poor. A magnificent church was erected to his honor at Constantinople by the emperor of the same name shortly before 610. The Phocas revered by Roman tradition as the bishop of Sinope must be the same person. Another Phocas must be a martyr of Antioch, a touch of the door of whose tomb, according to Gregory of Tours, was a cure for serpent bites. (O. Zoeckler.) Bibliography: The Acta, by Bishop Asterius, are in ASB, Sept., vi. 293-299; in F. Combefis, Graeco-Lat. patrum bibliothecae: novum auctarium, i. 169-182, Paris, 1648; and L. Surius, Vitae sanctorum, Sept., 22, 12 vols., Cologne, 1617-18. The anonymous Martyrium S. Phocae martyris et episcopi Sinope in Ponto, is in ASB, July, iii. 639-645. The Vita of Phocas the martyr of Antioch is in ASB, Mar., i. 366-367, and in Surius, ut sup., Mar., 5. Consult DCB, iv. 393-394. Phoebadius PHOEBADIUS, fi-be'di-Us (FOEGADIUS, FITADIUS) : Bishop of Aginnum, the modern Agen (73 m. s.e. of Bordeaux); d. after 392. He skilfully confuted the second Sirmian formula (see [152]Arianism, I., iii., S: 6) in southern Gaul by means of western orthodoxy, in his work Liber contra Arianos (in the latter part of 357 or in 358; MPL, xx. 13-20), a work clear, animated, and occasionally ironical in argument and admirable and impressive in style. The main thought is that if Christ is not God he is not real Son. Known after the beginning of the sixteenth century is a tract, De fide orthodoxa contra Arianos (MPL, xx. 31-50) with an attached confession of faith, with which Phoebadius has been generally credited. At the Synod of Rimini in 359, Phoebadius obstinately defended orthodoxy, but finally with Servatio of Tongern was made to yield. These two bishops at a certain stage of the synod produced special formulas, "in which first Arius and all his unbelief are condemned, and secondly, the Son of God is not only pronounced to be equal with the Father but also without beginning." Phoebadius took part in the synods of Valence and Saragossa (380), and was still living in 392. (Edgar Hennecke.) Bibliography: K. Schoenemann, Bibliotheca . . . Patrum Latinorum, i. 309-312, Leipsic, 1792; Tillemont, Memoires, vi. 427-428; Gallia Christiana, ii (1720), 895-897; J. Draeseke, in ZWT, 1890, pp. 78-98; F. W. F. Kattenbusch, Das apostolische Symbol, i. 171-173, Leipsic, 1894; Ceillier, Auteurs sacres, v. 372-377; DCB, ii. 547 (under "Foegadius "). Photinus PHOTINUS, fO'ti-nUs: Bishop of Sirmium; b. in Ancyra in Galatia; d. in Galatia 376. He was a pupil of Marcellus of Ancyra and bishop of Sirmium in Pannonia, near the modern Mitrovicza. He first appears at the Synod of Antioch in 344, where the Eastern Church condemned him and Marcellus. This judgment was approved by a Synod at Milan in 345, and Photinus was deprived of his bishopric by a Synod of Sirmium in 351. According to Epiphanius he appealed to the Emperor Constantius, was granted a hearing, and disputed with Basil of Ancyra before his judges. Socrates and Sozomen correctly refer this disputation to the Synod of Sirmium in 351, and state that he was exiled. The Synod of Milan, 355, renewed the anathema. That he returned for a season appears from the friendly letter of Emperor Julian to him and from the fact that Jerome knows him to have been banished by Valentinian (364-375). His heresy obtained little influence in the East; but in the West, especially on the Balkan peninsula, Photinians continued for a longer period. They were known at Sirmium in 381, and at the beginning of the fifth century a Photinian Marcus, driven from Rome, found refuge in the diocese of Senia, Dalmatia. Augustine refers to them frequently not as a sect but as persons in general who think after the Photinian manner; i.e., persons who regard Christ as a mere man. Photinus was a dynamic monarchian (see [153]Monarchianism) who, without denying the virgin birth, regarded the person of Christ as essentially human; and denied a hypostatic distinction of the Logos from the Father and a hypostasis of the Spirit. He attached himself to the Marcellian doctrine and argumentation: "the Son is known simply according to his appearance in the flesh" and Daniel (vii. 13) speaks "prophetically, not as of the Son existing." His most significant writings, according to Jerome, were Contra gentes and Libra ad Valentinianum. Socrates knows of a book "Against All Heresies" and Rufinus of a tract on the symbol (MPL, xxi. 336). (F. Loofs.) Bibliography: The principal sources are Epiphanius, Haer., lxxi.; Hilary, Fragments 1-3, and De Trinitate, vii. 3-7; Socrates, Hist. eccl., ii. 30, Eng. transl., NPNF, 2 ser., ii. 44-45, 56-58; Vigilius of Thapsus, MPL, lxii. 179 sqq., and MPL, xxxv. 2213-2214. These are mostly collected in M. de Larroque, Dissertatio duplex, Geneva, 1670. Consult, besides the literature under Arianism and Monarchianism, especially that under Diodorus and Marcellus of Ancyra; DCB, iv. 394-395; C. R. W. Klose, Geschichte and Lehre des Marcellus and Photinus, Hamburg, 1837; C. W. F. Walch, Historie der Ketzereien, iii. 1-70, Leipsic, 1766; Fabricius-Harles, Bibliotheca Graeca, ix. 222-226, Hamburg, 1804; Tillemont, Memoires, vol. vi.; Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, vols. i.-ii., Eng. transl., ii.188-189, Fr. transl., vol. i., passim; Harnack, Dogma, vols. i.-v. passim; Neander, Christian Church, vol. ii. passim. Photius PHOTIUS, fo'shi-Us. [154]I. Life. [155]Early Life (S: 1). [156]First Patriarchate (S: 2). [157]Decisive Break with Rome (S: 3). [158]Years of Retirement (S: 4). [159]Second Patriarchate (S: 5). [160]II. Writings. [161]Bibliotheca (S: 1). [162]Amphilochia (S: 2). [163]Polemical Works (S: 3). [164]Other Writings (S: 4). [165]Editions (S: 5). Photius, twice patriarch Of Constantinople in the ninth century, enjoys an almost unparalleled preeminence in both the Greek and the Russian Church of the present day. Though in his own time he had enemies, and though circumstances clouded his fame at Rome and at the Byzantine court, he took deep hold among his people from the first, and soon after his death his Church put his name in her calendar of saints. To judge his character is not easy. He was not the tyrant that his opponents represented him to be, though he could be hard and domineering. He was crafty, double-tongued, and vain, but to be so lay in the character of his time and in the atmosphere of the Constantinople in which he lived. He was a sort of universal genius--philologian, philosopher, theologian, jurist, mathematician, man of science, orator, and poet; no original thinker but of powerful memory, of iron industry, of good esthetic sense, of great dialectic skill, far-seeing and clever in practical matters, of commanding will-power, a profound judge of men, and true in friendship, though also always exacting the return. His piety in its way was real. To him the Orthodox Church owes her understanding and appreciation of her distinction from the Latin. Proud already of her inheritance, Photius intensified and confirmed her self-consciousness, and gave her the pregnant catchwords which have never been forgotten. I. Life 1. Early Life. Photius was born at Constantinople, probably between 815 and 820, and died in the Armenian monastery of Bordi Feb. 6, 897 or 898. He was of a family of quality, rigidly orthodox, and friendly to images. His parents died early, "adorned with the martyr's crown," this probably meaning that, as friends of images, they were despoiled of their property and honors. It is known that they, with Photius, were excommunicated by an iconoclastic synod, but Photius himself appears never to have been in pecuniary straits. It is not possible to follow the course of his life closely before he became patriarch. When hardly more than a boy he began to give public lectures, first on grammar, then on philosophy and theology--an activity which was interrupted by an embassy "to the Assyrians," mentioned without further explanation in the preface to the Bibliotheca (see below, [166]II., S: 1); probably a visit to the court of the calif in Bagdad is meant. After the death of the Emperor Theophilus in 842, the Empress Theodora became regent for her young son, Michael III., called the Drunkard, assisted by her brother, Bardas, who from his sister's counselor speedily developed into her rival. Learning was now held in higher esteem than it had been by the preceding iconoclastic emperors, and Photius' relations with the court became very intimate. He was first secretary of state and captain of the bodyguard, and his brother Sergius was married to Irene, a younger sister of Theodora and Bardas. Photius himself was never married nor was he a monk. Bardas succeeded in entirely supplanting Theodora as regent, probably in 857, and, to nullify her influence, which was feared by the young Michael as well as by his uncle, it was proposed to immure her in a convent. The Patriarch Ignatius, however (see [167]Ignatius of Constantinople), was a partizan of Theodora and refused to lend himself to this plan, so that, on Nov. 23, 858 (or, according to others, 857), Bardas deposed him and chose Photius for his successor. 2. First Patriachate. Photius undoubtedly belonged to a powerful party antagonistic to Ignatius, which included Bardas and was led by a certain Gregorius Asbesta. He was not a cleric, but the elevation of a layman to the patriarch's chair was not unprecedented. On five successive days (Dec. 20-24, 858) Gregorius hurried the candidate through the five grades necessary for the assumption of the patriarchate, and on Christmas Day he was enthroned. Ignatius, however, did not retire quietly, in spite of-the efforts of Bardas and Photius to make him yield, and he had a large following, the monks being especially hostile to Photius. The ill-treatment of Ignatius and his friends was doubtless exaggerated, and, so far as it really occurred, was due to Bardas rather than to Photius. Photius exerted himself to secure episcopal sees for his friends and accomplished Ignatius' deposition, in apparently canonical form, by a synod in 859. Ignatius went to Rome and sought aid from Pope Nicholas I. (q.v.). At first Photius ignored this move, but ultimately he sent a particularly impressive legation to Nicholas with a notification of his enthronization which completely concealed the real situation. A letter from the emperor went with it asking for recognition of Photius and requesting that legates be sent to a council in Constantinople to settle the few remaining problems connected with the iconoclastic disorders. At the same time Photius wrote to the Eastern patriarchs concealing the facts even more than in his letter to the pope and evidently wishing to secure recognition from them before the pope's legates should arrive in Constantinople. The council (called "first-second"--prima-secunda) met in May, 861, and from the very first the papal legates, Rodoald of Porto and Zacharias of Anagni, espoused Photius' side. Ignatius was very summarily treated and his deposition was confirmed, although he received more support from the assembled bishops than the emperor and Photius had expected. Nicholas seems to have hoped that Photius would recognize the primacy of jurisdiction, which he had assumed from the first. But Photius had no such intention, however much he may have been willing to flatter. The pope proceeded slowly, but on Mar. 18, 862, he issued an encyclical to the Eastern bishops in which he disavowed the acts of his legates at the council and declared: "We do not consider Ignatius deposed nor do we recognize Photius as in episcopal orders." He wrote to the emperor and to Photius to the same effect, and a year later (Apr., 863), when it had become evident that writing accomplished nothing, he had his judgment confirmed by a synod in Rome and threatened Photius and his adherents with excommunication. Meanwhile Photius found unexpected support from certain Western bishops who had fallen out with Nicholas over the divorce of Lothair II. (see [168]Nicholas I). He drew up a reply from the emperor to the pope in which he adopted a very lofty tone, even addressing Nicholas as the emperor's subject. The document is lost, though its tenor is evident from certain letters of Nicholas. The pope answered with spirit, but he failed to measure public opinion in Constantinople. The new Rome looked down with scorn on the old and its "barbarians' tongue," and Photius all his life disdained to learn Latin (see below, [169]II., S: 1). Constantinople regarded the connection of the papacy with the Carolingian empire as a manifestation of revolt. There was a firm determination to insist that the pope should at least respect ecclesiastical boundaries, and feeling on this point was excited at the time by the case of the Bulgarians, who, converted by eastern missionaries and placed under the jurisdiction of the ecumenical patriarch by the Council of Chalcedon, were showing some disposition to go over to Rome (see [170]Bulgarians, Conversion of the). Photius, apparently in 865, addressed a long letter to the newly converted Bulgarian Bogoris; but the latter, doubtless for political reasons, turned to the pope, who sent two legates and a number of priests, as well as a voluminous pastoral epistle to the prince. At the same time Nicholas sent three messengers with no less than eight letters addressed to the emperor, Bardas, Photius, and all concerned, even the senators of Constantinople, requiring the execution of his judgment. The emperor, however, turned the pope's envoys back at the border, and the letters were not delivered. 3. Decisive Break with Rome. Photius now executed the master stroke which really separated East and West. As the pope had attacked the validity of his ordination and position, so he called in question the pope's own position, declaring the pontiff to be a patron of heresy. The encyclical to the patriarchs of the East in which Photius made the charge and sought to prove it is rightly regarded as the magna charta of the Orient in all its subsequent attitude and conduct toward the Occident. Leaving personal matters quite out of account, and not hinting at the relations between Nicholas and himself, Photius spoke only of the danger which threatened from Rome, making the sending of Roman priests to the Bulgarians his starting-point and ending with an attack on the Filioque (see [171]Filioque Controversy), concerning which he wrote a minute theological discussion with fourteen arguments against the doctrine of double procession. He wished to hold a synod in Constantinople to counteract the work of the West, and it actually met in the summer of 867. The acts are lost, but Photius secured the decrees which he wished, and he then allowed his personal resentment to appear when he retaliated for his own excommunication by Nicholas with anathematizing the pope. He seems even to have attempted to exalt the new Rome over the old and to have thought of claiming the primacy for Constantinople. 4. Years of Retirement Photius' triumph was short-lived. Bardas had been murdered in 866, and Basil the Macedonian had succeeded him as joint ruler with Michael. In Sept., 867, Basil had Michael murdered and became sole ruler. He thought it would strengthen his position if Ignatius were restored. Accordingly, Photius was expelled from his palace a few days after Basil's accession, and on the anniversary of his deposition, Nov. 23, 867, Ignatius was reenthroned, ten days after the death of Nicholas I. Basil deemed a break with the West inopportune, and, after negotiating for a year with Rome, he called a council (the Fourth Constantinople, Oct. 5, 869-Feb. 28, 870; the eighth general council of the West) which brought about the full restitution of Ignatius, at the same time officially deposing and condemning Photius. It was dominated by the Pope Adrian II. (q.v.), but his triumph was more apparent than real. In the West this council is regarded as the settlement of the controversy over images; but Photius could claim with reason that he had finally allayed this strife by the council of 861; and when the papal legates at the council demanded recognition of the claims of Rome concerning the Bulgarians, the Orientals protested in words which showed how the alliance of the pope with the West rather than with the East burned in all Greek souls. Photius lived at Stenos, on the European side of the Bosphorus, under strict surveillance and deprived of his books. Direct association with his friends was forbidden, but he was allowed to correspond with them freely. His following among the clergy was so great that at first scarcely twenty bishops appeared at the council which condemned him, and, in spite of the strenuous exertions, of his enemies, only a little over 100 were present at the final session. Harsh measures against his adherents made it easy for him to organize a sort of antihierarchy, and he well knew how to hold his party together and to animate all with his own unyielding spirit, which steadily refused to hear of compromise. Gregorius Asbesta and a whole company of influential metropolitans stood by him faithfully. At the same time he carefully refrained from attacking the emperor in all that he wrote, and the time came when he could move more freely. His requests for favor to his friends were listened to, the emperor even consulted him on theological questions, and finally (probably in 876) he was recalled to Constantinople as tutor to the princes royal. It was evident that after the imminent death of Ignatius, Photius would again ascend his throne. 5. Second Patriarchate. Ignatius died Oct. 23, 878 (according to others, 877), and three days later Photius was installed in his place. The relations between Photius and Basil were thenceforth of the best. Basil asked Pope John VIII. (q.v.) to recognize the reinstated patriarch, and this time the pope, needing imperial support for his schemes in Italy, showed a disposition to comply. He declared Photius' first elevation illegal, however, criticized the second be cause it had taken place without his knowledge, and stipulated that Photius should ask pardon be fore a synod. This was not at all to Photius' mind, and he accordingly contrived that a council should meet in Constantinople (the "Synod of St. Sophia," Nov., 879--Jan. 26, 880, the eighth general council of the East), attended by three times as many bishops as the council of 869. From this he obtained all that he desired, and the acts read as though the papal legates did not fully comprehend what they were doing. Photius was very amiable and apparently submissive to "his beloved brother," John, but he obscured the full meaning of his demands, and, remaining in the background himself, spoke in the council through others. The emperor kept away from the council; but after it was officially closed, he presided, at the instance of Photius, over two supplementary assemblies, at the first of which those present, including the papal legates, declared their adherence to the old creed. In the second Photius had one of the bishops deliver an address which in no veiled terms put him above the pope. Later, for political reasons, John rather outbid his legates than disavowed them. Photius was now at the zenith of his power and glory, but relations with Rome soon became strained again. In 882 John VIII. was succeeded by Marinus I., the first pope who had previously been bishop of a non-Roman see and who had not been chosen directly from the Roman clergy. That he himself had made many translations did not deter Photius from using this technical irregularity against his Roman rival. Though his pontificate was too brief for any real results, Marinus renewed the ban against Photius, whereupon the latter stirred up afresh the strife over the procession of the Holy Spirit (see below, [172]II., S: 3). On Aug. 29, 886, the Emperor Basil died unexpectedly. His successor, Leo VI., had been Photius' pupil and originally was devoted to him, though for unknown reasons he had been the patriarch's bitter enemy since 880. Like Basil at his accession, Leo determined to be rid of Photius. He was ruthlessly deprived of his office and was banished to the monastery of Bordi in Armenia, where he lived probably a full decade or more. With his second downfall, however, Photius disappears from history. It should be noted that Photius' contest with the popes did not absorb all his powers. He always found time for learning and art. He promoted missions to the Bulgarians and Russians; he sought relations with the Saracen princes, primarily for the good of the Christians under their rule and because of the holy places in Palestine; and he watched and endeavored to convert the Paulicians and other heretics both within and without the empire. Though some of his acts may be criticized, he had a lofty concept of his duty both as "watchman" against the West and as supreme shepherd of the East, and he performed it with zeal and energy. The Greeks are right when they reckon him among the foremost of all their spiritual leaders. II. Writings. 1. Bibliotheca. Measured by the standard of his time, Photius ranks very high as scholar; in the ninth century he is a phenomenon of learning and good judgment. Even when measured by a more exacting standard, he is still far from contemptible; his books were literary treasure-houses for the later dark ages of his people and have their value even now. The best known and most important for the present time is that commonly called the Bibliotheca or Myriobiblon, which presents summary accounts (cited as "codices") of 280 books read and studied by Photius, put together without apparent plan of arrangement and varying much in length and method of treatment. Some codices are mere brief synopses of contents; others contain excerpts, which steadily grow longer as the work proceeds; and some include critical remarks, which also vary from superficial opinions to carefully weighed and exact judgments. Possibly the book epitomizes Photius' academic lectures or gives specimens from them. It purports to have been written at the request of "our dear brother, Tarasius," who asked Photius, when he was preparing for his journey "to the Assyrians" (see above, [173]I., S: 1), to leave behind on his departure a description of books which he had read with his scholars at times when Tarasius could not be present. In its present form the work can hardly have been composed under such conditions; perhaps it originated as indicated at Tarasius' request and was elaborated later. It takes account of both heathen and Christian writers, and includes not a few works which are now lost. Historians, theologians, philosophers, grammarians, physicists, as well as acts of councils, martyrs, and saints, are reviewed. The rhetoricians appear to have been particularly interesting to Photius. Of theologians the dogmaticians proper are preferred. The poets hardly appear, and the great philosophers of ancient Greece are scarcely mentioned, perhaps from an evident intention to treat only less-known works. Thucydides, Polybius, Plutarch, and writers like Hippocrates and Pausanias are also left out of account, and the more famous theologians are treated briefly. Athanasius, Chrysostom, Gregory Nazianzen, and Basil are often mentioned, but only their rarer works . receive extended notice. The summaries are often excellent, and Photius' remarks on the style of his authors show good and cultivated taste. For his biographical notices he used an abridgment of a work of Hesychius of Miletus. Latin writers he knew only in translation. 2. Amphilochia. The Amphilochia is so called because it is dedicated to Amphilochius of Cyzicus, one of the truest friends and oldest disciples of Photius, who had propounded certain questions to his teacher and who is often mentioned in the work. It consists of a series of questions and answers (300 in number according to the prologue; in existing manuscripts and editions the number is greater and variable, and the order is not the same), chiefly relating to Biblical topics, but including some which belong to dogmatics and philosophy and some which hardly appertain to theology at all. The Bible questions generally relate to passages which appear to be contradictory, the so-called enantiophanies of Scripture, and some of the answers are merely exegetical expositions. Many passages are treated more than once. As in the Bibliotheca, the answers vary greatly in length, some being mere notes, others almost treatises, and .there is no apparent plan. Most of the answers evidently belong to the time of the first exile of Photius, and may have been communicated by letter. It is possible that Photius collected them later, and probably the work was expanded with time. The author shows little originality, excerpting whole sections from Chrysostom, Polychronius, Germanus of Constantinople, John of Damascus, and others, and elsewhere being dependent on Athanasius, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Dionysius the Areopagite, Maximus Confessor, and others without directly copying them. In no less than thirty-two passages he repeats Theodoret almost verbally. The long, minute, and keen first answer addressed to Amphilochius may, however, be original. 3. Polemical Works. The best-known of Photius' polemical works is the "Treatise on the Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit," written against the Filioque. It was an incident of the renewed strife with Rome begun by Marinus (see above, [174]I., S: 5) and belongs to the years 885 or 888. It is throughout an independent product of Photius. It was he who gave the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit the sharp and precise definition which it ever afterward had in dogmatics. It is significant that the doctrine is not mentioned in the Amphilochia; it had no immediate interest for Photius,-and only the need of points of attack upon the West led him to elaborate it. After a brief introduction he fixes on John xv. 26, as the locus classicus of the doctrine, where Christ says that the Spirit proceeds "from the Father." To add that he proceeds also from the Son is held to lead to absurdities; it makes the Spirit a "product of the Son," and it destroys the unity of the three Persons of the Trinity (iii., iv.). The latter argument remained the leading one of all Eastern polemics against the West in the Filioque controversy. The consequences of the addition are further considered in chaps. vi.-xix., xxxi-xlvii., and lxi.-lxiv. Such passages as John xvi. 14 and Gal. iv. 6 are declared to be invalid arguments against the position of Photius (xx.-xxx., xlviii.-lx., xc.-xciv.). In chap. v. he asserts that the Fathers and councils are unanimous against the addition; and in chaps. lxv.-lxxxix. he examines the utterances of such western authorities as Ambrose, Augustine, and Jerome, and the popes from Damasus to Adrian III., and maintains that they support the contention of the East. The "Dissertation on the (New) Sprouting of the Manicheans" is a work against the Paulicians (q.v.). It consists of four books, of which the first gives a historical account of the Paulicians as New Manicheans, and the remainder a dogmatic and Biblical refutation of their doctrines. Books ii.-iv. do not fully accord with the plan as laid down in book i., and it has been suggested that they are a working-over of twelve lectures against the Manicheans. The fourth book appears to be an independent work and later than ii. and iii. If genuine, it probably belongs to the time of the first exile, since in it the author complains of being deprived of his books. The first book is closely related to the Historia Manichaeorum ascribed to Petrus Siculus (MPG, civ. 1240 sqq.). The "Precise Conclusions and Proofs," in the form of questions and answers, furnishes a compendium of historical documents (acts of synods, etc.) relating to metropolitans, bishops, and the like; and it has been held that Photius wrote it as an indirect defense of his elevation and his opposition to Rome, as well as a refutation of the arguments advanced by his opponents against his legitimacy. 4. Other Works. Hergenroether knew of twenty-two addresses by Photius, of which only two were printed (MPG, cii. 548 sqq.). Eighty-three "addresses and homilies" are now offered by Aristarches (see below, [175]S: 5), but the greater number of these are compositions of the editor rather than of Photius. No doubt Photius' works contain passages which were originally parts of spoken discourses; but it may well be questioned whether it is possible to select these fragments and put them together so as properly to reproduce the original addresses. At the same time, the collection offers some important inedita which are attested by manuscript evidence as real specimens of Photius' homiletic manner and skill. In general his thought follows the old and familiar channels of his Church. He is fluent and figurative, soars not seldom in a real flight, but more often shows mere floridity and phrasing. Photius' letters are the roost important source for his character and type of thought. Migne arranges them in three books: political letters to popes, patriarchs, bishops, emperors, and other princes (24 numbers); private letters to bishops, clerics, monks, etc., mostly letters of encouragement, recommendation, admonition, and the like (102 numbers, many of them very short); and letters to laymen, especially high officials (67 numbers). Valettas (see below, [176]S: 5) gives a larger number disposed in five books: "dogmatic and hermeneutic letters" (84 numbers); "parenetic letters" (57 numbers); "consolatory letters" (15 numbers); "letters of censure" (64 numbers); and "miscellaneous letters" (40 numbers, mostly brief friendly notes). Photius' other writings include: Bible commentaries, of which only fragments are preserved (cf. MPG, ci. 1189-1253). A lexicon intended as a help to the understanding of authors whose diction was no longer current in the ninth century; it shows little originality and perhaps belongs to Photius' youth; probably he had help in composing it. Poems, of which three odes on Basil and a hymn of nine odes on Christ are known (the former in MPG, cii. 577 sqq., the latter in the Ekklesiastike Aletheia, Constantinople, 1895). An "Exhortation by Means of Proverbs" is published by J. Hergenroether in his Monumenta Graeca ad Photium ejusque historiam pertinentia (Regensburg, 1869, pp. 20-52), as well as some fragments of philosophical writings (pp. 12 sqq.) and a not uninteresting extract from a work "On the Holy Liturgy" (pp. 11-12). For lost works of Photius (against the Emperor Julian, against Leontius of Antioch, and probably also a study on contradictions in the Roman codes) cf. Krumbacher, Geschichte, p. 522. Photius was not the author of the Nomocanon, the standard law-book of the Eastern Church (see [177]Nomocanons). It is older than his time, though it was supplemented during his patriarchate (in 883, according to the preface), and his councils of 861 and 879 had a part in this work. Whether Photius himself prepared the new edition is uncertain; but it is at least evident that he had a good knowledge of canon law, for some of his letters expound legal points in an illuminating manner. The canons of his councils were certainly Photius' work, and the Bibliotheca proves his acquaintance with the legal literature. 5. Editions. Photius' writings are collected. in MPG, ci.-civ. The last two volumes contain the Bibliotheca, the text being that of Immanuel Bakker (2 vols., Berlin, 1824). Migne's text of the Amphilochia (vol. ci.) was furnished by Bishop Jean Baptiste Malou, with the help of Hergenroether, from a Vatican manuscript and without knowledge of the manuscript of Mt. Athos, which is the basis of the more valuable edition published by Constantinus OEconomus (Athens, 1858). The "Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit" was first edited by Hergenroether (Regensburg, 1857); his text is reprinted with copious notes in Migne (cii.). The "Dissertation on the Manicheans" was first published in complete form (four books) by Johann Christoph Wolff in his Anecdota Graeca, i.-ii (Hamburg, 1722), whence it was reprinted by Migne (cii. pp. 15 sqq.). The work referred to above as "Precise Conclusions and Proofs" is given by Migne (civ. 1219 sqq.) under the title "Ten Questions and Answers." The most complete collection of Photius' addresses and sermons (or of what purport to be such; see above. [178]II., S: 4) is 9. Aristarches' "Eighty-three Addresses and Homilies of Photius" (2 vols., Constantinople, 1900). The letters (reprinted from older works) are in MPL, cii., as well as in the much better and more complete edition by Johannes Valettas. "Letters of Photius" (London, 1864); as supplements, Valettas prints the "Ten Questions and Answers" mentioned above and a similar "Five Questions and Answers." A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus has attempted to supplement Valettas in his Sancti Patriarchae Photii epistolae xlv. (St. Petersburg, 1896), though in his Photiaka (1897) he states that only the first twenty-one letters really belong to Photius, the others being properly ascribed to Isidore of Pelusium. The best edition of the lexicon is by S. A. Naber (2 vols., Leyden, 1864-65). Certain fragments and treatises of lesser moment are published in J. Hergenroether, Monumenta graeca ad Photium ejusqe historiam pertinentia (Regensburg, 1869), and in A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, Monumenta graeca et latina ad historian Photii patriarchae pertinentia (2 parts, St. Petersburg, 1899-1901). The writing "On the Franks and the Other Latins," printed by Hergenroether in the first of these collections (pp. 62 sqq.), is shown in his Photius (iii. 172 sqq.) to be spurious; it is probably subsequent to the time of Michael Caerularius. For the Scripta canonica (including the Nomocanon), cf. MPG, cv. (F. Kattenbusch.) Bibliography: The most accessible compend of epistolary and conciliar sources is Mansi, Concilia, xv. 159 sqq., xvi. 1 sqq., 209 sqq., 295 sqq., 413 sqq., 425 sqq., xvii. 365 sqq.; to this may be added the material in MPG, cv. 509 sqq., cviii. 1037 sqq., cix. 155 sqq., 663 sqq., 985 sqq. The work of first rank is J. Hergenroether, Photius, sein Leben, siene Schriften, und das grieschische Schisma, 3 vols., Regensburg, 1867-69. Exceedingly useful is Krumbacher. Geschichte, 73 sqq.. 515 sqq., 971 sqq., where an excellent list of literature is found, including a very full statement of editions of the works. Consult further: Fabricius-Harles, Biliotheca Graeca, x. 670 sqq xi. 1 sqq., Hamburg, 1807-08; J. N. Jager, Histoire de Photius, Paris, 1854; L. Tosti, Storia dell' origine dello scisma greco, 2 vols., Florence, 1856; H. Laemmer, Papst Nikolaus and die byzantinische Staatskirche seiner Zeit, Berlin, 1857; A. Pichler, Geschichte der kirchliche Trennung zwischen dem Orient und Occident, i. 180 sqq., Munich, 1864; . R. Baxmann, Die Politik der Paepste von Gregor I. bis auf Gregor VII., ii. 1 sqq., Elberfeld, 1869; A. F. Gfroerer, Byzantinische Geschichten, vols. ii.-iii., Gras, 1873; B. Jungmann, Dissertationes selectae, iii. 319-442, Regensburg,1882; A. Gasquet, L'Empire byzantin et la monarchie franque, pp. 348-372, Paris, 1888; G. Bernhardy, Grundriss der griechischen Litteratur, vol. i.; Halle, 1892; F. W. F. Kattenbusch, Vergleichende Konfessionskunde, i. 118 sqq., Freiburg, 1892; A. H. Hore, Eighteen Centuries of the Orthodox Greek Church, 365-369, 376-383, London, 1899; idem, Students Hist. of the Greek Church, ib. 1902; W. F. Adeney, The Greek and Eastern Churches, pp . 209, 235 sqq., 279-280, New York, 1908; Ceillier, Auteurs sacres, xii. 719-734; Schaff, Christian Church, iv. 636-42; Neander, Christian Church, iii. 561-578 et passim; Harnack, Dogma, vols. ii.-v.; the literature under the articles on Popes John VIII., Martin II., Adrian III., Stephen V. and VI., and Formosus II., also contain matter that is pertinent; Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, vol. iv.; KL, ix. 2082 sqq. Phrygia PHRYGIA frij'i-a: A region of fluctuating boundaries occupying the central portion of Asia Minor. At the beginning of the Christian era the name had merely an ethnological and no geographical significance. There was no Roman province of the name Phrygia until the fourth century. In the northern part were the cities of Ancyra, Gordician, Doryleum; in the southern, Colossae, Hierapolis, Laodicea. The region is of great importance for the history of religion after about 200 B.C., the cults of ,the West imported from the East receiving a profound impress from the primitive usages still current in Phrygia. Especially is this the case with the mysteries so strongly renascent in the century before the Christian era. See [179]Asia Minor. Phut PHUT. See [180]Table of the Nations, S: 6. Phylactery PHYLACTERY. See [181]Tefillin. Piacenza, Synod of PIACENZA, SYNOD OF. See [182]Urban II. Piarists PIARISTS, pai'a-rists: A Roman Catholic order of men having as its aim the giving of free juvenile instruction especially to poor boys. The members are variously known by other names, such as Piarians, Scolopians, and Paulinists. Their beginning was an independent brotherhood founded at Rome in 1597 by the Spanish nobleman Jose Calasanze; they received their constitution as a congregation for their present function in 1617, and were promoted to an order by Gregory XV. in 1621, with the title, Congregatio Paulina clericorum regularium pauperum matris Dei scholarum piarum. The order ranks second in importance as a religious brotherhood for the instruction of boys. Jose Calasanze (Josephus a Matre Dei) was born in the Castle Calasanze near Petralta de la Sal in Aragon Sept. 11, 1556; and died at Rome Aug. 25, 1648. He studied law at Lerida and theology at Alcala and became a priest in 1583. In 1592 he went to Rome, where as a strict ascetic and a member of four religious brotherhoods he devoted himself to the care of the sick and the instruction of youth. In 1612, the number of scholars was 1,200. Soon a division into popular and higher schools was required; in 1630 Calasanze established the Nazarene College at Rome for noble youths; and in 1632 Pope Urban VIII. made him general for life. The order extended its work from Italy, so that after 1631 it had spread over Germany, Poland, Hungary, and other lands; but on account of its pedagogical results it aroused the jealousy of the Jesuits, which led to Calasanze's downfall. In 1646 the order was reduced to a secular brotherhood without vows. Alexander VII. restored it in 1660 to a congregation, yet without its fourth vow; Clement IX. granted this in 1669, and raised it to a formal order; and Innocent XII. in 1698 restored its mendicant privileges. Calasanze was canonized by Clement XIII. in 1767. The order, distributed in nine provinces, consists of 121 houses and 2,100 members and is strongest in Spain. (O. Zoeckler.) Bibliography: Among the sketches of the life of the founder may be named those by J Timon-David, 2 vols., Marseilles. 1884 (best); A. della Concettione, Rome, 1893; F. J. Lipowsky, Munich, 1720; W. E. Hubert, Mainz, 1886; N. Tommaseo, Rome, 1898; D. M. Casasnovas y Sans, Saragossa, 1904; and J. C. Heidenreich, Vienna, 1907. For the Constitutions consult L. Holsten, Codex regularum monasticarum et canonicarum, ed. M. Brockie, Augsburg, 1759. Consult: Heimbucher, Orden und Kongregationen, iii. 287-296; L. Kellner, Erziehungsgeschichte en Skizzen und Bildern, i. 327 sqq., Essen, 1880; H. Zschokke, Die theologische studien der katholishen Kirche in Oesterreich, Vienna, 1894; A. Brendler, Das Wirken der . . . Piaristen, Vienna, 1898; F. Endl, in Mittheilungen der Geschichte fuer deutsche Erziehungs- und Schulgeschichte, VIII., 147 sqq., Helyot, Ordres monastiques, iv. 281-282; KL. ix. 20-96 sqq. Pi-beseth PI-BESETH, pi-be'seth: An Egyptian city mentioned in Ezek. xxx. 17, together with Aven (On); called by the Greeks (and the Septuagint) Boubastos, or, more rarely, Boubastis. It was situated in the Delta on the right bank of the eastern arm of the Nile. The Hebrew name represents the Egyptian Per-Baste(t), "House of Bast," the local goddess who was represented as a cat or as a woman with a feline head. The real name of the city was Bast, from which the name of the goddess was derived. Pi-beseth was the residence of the Lybian kings of the Twenty-second Dynasty, including Shishak; and in Christian times was an episcopal see-city. The extensive ruins of its temples are at Tell Basta, near the modern Zak?azik?. (G. Steindorff.) Bibliography: The Eighth Memoir (for 1889-90) of the [183]Egypt Exploration Fund; the literature under [184]Leontopolis, and part of that (on exploration and discovery) under [185]Egypt. Picards PICARDS (PICKARDS): A corruption of "Beghards" (see [186]Beghards, Beguines), applied as a term of reproach to the Bohemian Brethren (q.v., [187]I., S: 4). Pick, Bernard PICK, BERNARD: Lutheran; b. at Kempen (27 m. s.s.w. of Essen), Prussia, Dec. 19, 1842. He was educated at the universities of Breslau and Berlin, and at Union Theological Seminary, from which he was graduated in 1868. He was then pastor at New York City (1868-69), North Buffalo, N. Y. (1869-70), Syracuse, N. Y. (1870-74), Rochester, N. Y. (1874-81), Allegehany, Pa. (1881-95), Albany, N. Y. (1895-1901). Since 1905 he has occupied a pastorate in Newark, N. J. He has translated F. Delitzsch's Jewish Artisan Life in the Time of Christ (New York, 1883) and H. Cremer's Essence of Christianity (1903); has edited Luther's "Eine Feste Burg" in Nineteen Languages (New York, 1883); and has written Luther as a Hymnist (Philadelphia, 1875); Juedischen Volksleben zur Zeit Jesu (Rochester, N. Y., 1880); Historical Sketch of the Jews since the Destruction of Jerusalem (New York, 1887); The Life of Jesus according to extra-canonical Sources (1887); The Talmud, what it is, and what it knows about Jesus and his Followers (1888); Historical Sketch of the Jews since their Return from Babylon (Chicago, 1892); Vade Mecum Homileticum, i. (Cleona, Pa., 1899); The Extra-canonical Life of Christ (New York, 1903); Extra-canonical New Testament Writings of the First Two Centuries (1905); Lyra Gerhardti: A Selection of Paul Gerhardt's Spiritual Songs (Burlington, Ia., 1906); Hymns and Poetry of the Eastern Church (1908); Paralipomena: Remains of Gospels and Sayings of Christ (1908); and The Apocryphal Acts (Chicago, 1909). Pick, Israel PICK, ISRAEL: Founder of the Amenian Congregation; b. about 1830. Baptized as a Christian at Breslau in 1854, he professed that by so doing he did not renounce his Judaism, but became a Jew in the truest sense. All the law and ordinances of the Old Testament were included with the Christian sacraments as the ordinances of the new congregation founded by him, which he styled Amenian because in Christ (Elohim-amen; Isa. lxv. 16) all the promises of God are yea and amen (II Cor. i. 20). He gathered about 800 adherents, mainly at Muenchen-Gladbach. In 1859 he went to the Holy Land in search of a place of settlement for his followers and was never heard of again. His principal literary work was Der Gott der Synagoge and der Gott der Judenchristen (Breslau, 1854). (O. Zoeckler.) Bibliography: Consult Pick's Briefe an meine Stammesgenossen, Hamburg, 1854; Hollenberg in Deutsche Zeitschrift fuer christliche Wissenschaft und christliches Leben, 1857, nos. 6-8; J. E. Joerg, Geschichte die Protestantismus in seiner neuesten Entwickelung, ii. 294-300, Freiburg, 1857. Pickett, James PICKETT, JAMES: Primitive Methodist; b. at Berwick Bassett (27 m. n. of Salisbury), England, Dec. 19, 1853. He received his education at Wootton Bassett, Wiltshire; was in business in London, 1870-76; entered the Primitive Methodist ministry, and served at Bognor, 1876-78; Southwark, 1878-81; Forest Hill, 1881-85; Leicester, 1885-97; and at Hull, 1891-1903; became general missionary secretary in 1903; and was elected president of the conference of his denomination, 1908. Pico Della Mirandola PICO DELLA MIRANDOLA, pi'co del'la mi''ran-dO'la, GIOVANNI: Italian philosopher; b. at Mirandola Feb. 24, 1463; d. at Florence Nov. 17, 1494. He studied at the University of Bologna (1477-79), and then visited the principal universities of Europe, pursuing the studies of philosophy and theology, learning as a means to this end Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic. In this arduous course of discipline he became a follower of Marsilio Ficino, and their common aim was to demonstrate the fundamental agreement of heathen philosophers with each other and with Christian scholasticism and mysticism. The root idea of this propaganda was that all truth is one and all science is one. Yet the substructure of Pico's system was derived from the Cabala. In 1487 he went to Rome where he proposed to hold a disputation covering the domain of knowledge, to which he invited the leading scholars as participants. As the themes of the discussion he issued 900 theses "in dialectics, morals, physics, mathematics, metaphysics, theology, magic, and cabalism." In publishing these he declared that he did not intend to defend anything regarded by the Church or its head as untrue or improbable. But the theologians declared some of the theses heretical at least in tendency, and the pope (Innocent VIII.) prohibited the disputation. Pico composed an apology, and went to France. He was later, through the intervention of Lorenzo de' Medici, permitted to return to Italy, and took up his residence near Florence, a member of the brilliant circle which gathered about Lorenzo. In 1493 a brief of the new pope, Alexander VI., relieved him of the taint of heresy. The humiliation suffered through the interdiction of the disputation led his thoughts toward celibacy, and when he died he had been contemplating retirement to a monastery, and for this he prepared by ascetic practises. He transferred his estates to his nephew, Giovanni Francesco, and bestowed his personal property on the poor. Bibliography: Pico's Opera were published, 2 parts. Venice, 1498; again, ed. his nephew, with a life, ib. 1557; again, including the works of his nephew, 2 vols., Basel, 1572-1573, and (best) 1601. His Epistolae were very often edited and published, e.g., Paris, 1500, 1520; Cologne, 1518. On his life and work consult: G. Dreydorff, Das System des Johann Pico, Grafen von Mirandula und Concordia, Marburg, 1858; W. H. Pater, Studies in the Hist. of the Renaissance, London, 1873; Pastor, Popes, v. 151, 154, 342-344, 389; Creighton, Papacy, iv. 164-166, 173; KL, viii. 1549-55. The life by his nephew, with three of his letters, his "Interpretation of Ps. xvi." his "Twelve Rules of a Christian Life," "Twelve Points of a Perfect Lover," and his "Hymn to God," transl. into Eng. from the Latin of Sir Thomas More, ed. J. M. Rigg, appeared London, 1890. Picpus, Congregation of PICPUS, pik''pUs', CONGREGATION OF (Congregation of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Mary): A Roman Catholic congregation founded at Paris in 1805. The founder, Pierre Marie Joseph Coudrin (b. 1768; d. Mar. 27, 1837) was led to undertake the work by contemplation of the effects of the French Revolution on morals and religion. He desired an organization the purpose of which should be the conversion and moral and religious instruction of both sexes, and should commemorate by suitable services four phases of the life of Christ--his childhood by free instruction of children, his private life by Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament (q.v.), his public life by preaching and missions, and his suffering and death by the practise of austerities. He was encouraged and assisted by Bishop J. B. Chabot of Mende, and the congregation took its name from the street and buildings in Paris in which it was instituted. In 1817 confirmation was granted by Pius VII, after which seminaries were founded and preaching to the people was begun. In 1826 missions to the heathen were sent out, six priests going to the Sandwich Islands. In 1833 Gregory XVI. entrusted to the congregation the mission for eastern Oceania. From that time the two branches of work, education and preaching, were greatly extended. Missionaries went to various parts of Oceania and Australasia, to North and South America, and to Africa, while in all these parts as well as in Europe educational institutions were established, there being 200 with 12,000 scholars in Oceania alone. The celebrated Father Damien (see [188]Veuster, Joseph de) was a member of the congregation, and a large number of equally devoted but less celebrated missionaries have contributed to success, and have added to the sum of knowledge by books dealing with the languages and ethnology of the islands and lands where they have labored. There is a branch of the congregation for women, The Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Mary, the foundation of which was laid in 1800 by Coudrin and Henriette Aymer de la Chevalerie (d. 1834). Prior to the separation of Church and State in France, the sisters had establishments in France, and such are still found in Belgium, Holland, Spain, England, and South America. Bibliography: The Constitutions were printed Paris, 1840. Consult: A. Coudrin, Vie de l' Abbe Coudrin, Paris, 1846; S. Perron, Vie de . . . Pierre Marie-Joseph Coudrin, ib. 1900; E. Keller. Les Congregations religieusee en France. pp. 372, 434, ib. 1880; Helyot, Ordres monastiques, iv. 1277 sqq., Paris, 1859; Heimbucher, Orden and Kongregationen, iii. 471-473; KL, ix. 2102-05. Pictet, Benedict PICTET, pic''te', BENEDICT: Swiss Reformed; b. at Geneva May 30, 1655; d. there June 10, 1724. After receiving his education in the university of his native city, he made an extensive tour of Europe, after which he assumed pastoral duties at Geneva, and in 1686 was appointed professor of theology. In the domain of systematic theology, Pictet published two great works: Theologia Christiana (3 vols., Geneva, 1696; Eng. transl., Christian Theology, London, 1834) and Morale chretienne (2 vols., 1692), in which he sought to revive the old and somewhat stagnating orthodox theology, though he was unable to prevent the Genevan "Company of Pastors" from adopting a new formula of subscription in 1706. Pictet also distinguished himself as Christian poet, his hymns soon becoming popular conjointly with the Psalms, and some of them still being found in French hymnals. Mention should likewise be made of Pictet's Huit sermons sur l'examen des religions (3d ed., Geneva, 1716; Eng. transl., True and False Religion examined; the Christian Religion defended; and the Protestant Reformation vindicated, Edinburgh, 1797) and of his Dialogue entre un catholique et un protestant (1713; Eng. transl., Romanist Conversations, London, 1826). Eugene Choisy. Bibliography: E. de Bude, Vie de Benedict Pictet, Lausanne, 1874; J. Gabriel, Hist. de l'eglise de Geneve, vol. iii., Geneva, 1862; C. Borgeaud, Hist. de l'universite de Geneve, ib. 1900; Lichtenberger, ESR, x. 599-600. Pictures, Miraculous PICTURES, MIRACULOUS: Certain pictures or images believed by the Roman Catholic Church to confer special graces upon those who look at them, on the intercession of the saint represented in them, and on condition of more or less subjective Bus! on the part of the beholder. Among these graces are recovery from illness, discovery of secrets, inspiration to good works, and the like. The popular notion ascribes miraculous powers to the pictures themselves; but theologians take pains to explain that God alone is the wonder-worker, and the picture only the locality and occasion of the miracle, by means of the intercession of the saint, or sometimes the means by which the miracle is worked, as in cases where the image is supposed to speak, to weep, or to open and close its eyes. (C. Gruenersen.) Bibliography: Council of Trent, session XXV., Latin and English in Schaff, Creeds, ii. 199-205; M. Chemnitz, Examinis concilii O Tridentini . . . Opus, Frankfort, 1565-1573, reprint, ed. Preuse, Berlin, 1861, Eng. transl., London, 1582; J. Marx, Das Wallfahren in der katholischen Kirche, Treves, 1842. Pie PIE (PYE), pai: The name given to the index table on which prior to the Reformation in England the directions for worship were written, and to the early ordinal or directory for priests, containing a table of daily services and a summary of the mass rubrics: The arrangement was complicated and obscure, and the investigation required to discover the proper order was sometimes extended. The result was great confusion in the services. The name is perhaps derived from pica, "magpie," and is the result of the "pied" appearance of the book caused by the printing of initials in red and the body in black type on white paper. Bibliography: W. Maskell, Monumenta ritualia ecclesiae Anglicanae, 3 vols., London 1846-47; M. E. C. Walcott, The English Ordinal; its Hist., Validity, and Catholicity, ib 1851; idem, Sacred Archaeology, p. 445, ib. 1860; J. H. Blunt, The Annotated Book of Common Prayer, pp. 101 sqq., New York, 1908. A transl. of a pie is given in The Roman Breviary, transl. by John, Marquess of Bute, i. pp. xi.-l., Edinburgh, 1879. Pieper, Anton PIEPER, pi'per, ANTON: German Roman Catholic; b. at Luedinghausen (16 m. s.w. of Muenster), Westphalia, Mar. 20, 1854. He was educated at the universities of Muenster, Innsbruck; and Rome from 1874 to 1883 (D.D., Freiburg, 1883), and in 1890 became privat-docent for church history and Christian archeology at the University of Muenster, associate professor of church history in 1896, and full professor of church history and Christian archeology in 1899. He has written Papst Urban VIII. und die Mantuaner Erbfolgefrage (Freiburg, 1883); Die Propaganda-Congregation und die nordlichen Missionen in siebzehnten Jahrhundert (Cologne, 1886); Zur Entstehungsgeschichte der staendigen Nuntiaturen (Freiburg, 1894); Die paepslichen Legaten und Nuntien in Deutschland, Frankreich und Spanien seit der Mitte des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts (Muenster, 1897); Die alte Universitaet Muenster 1773-1818 (1902); and Christentum, roemisches Kaisertum, and heidnischer Staat (1907). Pieper, Franz August Otto PIEPER, FRANZ AUGUST OTTO: Lutheran; b. at Carwitz (85 m. w. of Danzig), Pomerania, June 27, 1852. After studying at the gymnasium of Colberg, Pomerania, he graduated in 1872 at Northwestern University, Watertown, Wis., and in 1875 from Concordia Theological Seminary, St. Louis, Mo. He was Lutheran pastor at Manitowoc, Wis. (1875-78), professor of theology in Concordia Seminary (1878 to 1887), since president of the same institution, and also president of the Lutheran Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and other states since 1899. In addition to his work as editor of Lehre and Wehre, he has written Das Grundbekenntnis der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche (St. Louis, Mo., 1880); Lehre von der Rechtfertigung (1889); Gesetz und Evangelium (1892); Distinctive Doctrines of the Lutheran Church (Philadelphia, 1892); Unsere Stellung in Lehre and Praxis (St. Louis, 1896); Lehrstellung der Missouri-Synode (1897); Christ's Work (1898); and Das Wesen des Christentums (1903). Pierce, Lovick PIERCE, LOVICK: Methodist Episcopal South; b. in Halifax County, N. C., Mar. 24, 1785; d. at Sparta, Ga., Nov. 9, 1879. With very limited education, he entered the ministry in South Carolina in 1804, and served as chaplain in the war of 1812, after which he studied medicine and practised at Greensborough, Ga., until about 1821, when he permanently resumed the ministry. He was abundant in labors; possessed remarkable physical endurance, and was a man of great intellectual force and moral power. He was a strong advocate of the Wesleyan. doctrine of sanctification; and was one of the first to encourage, and did much to advance, the cause of higher education in his church. He was a member of the first delegated general conference of Methodism in 1812; and remained one of its chief representatives in its conferences as well as before the country until his death. Bibliography: J. M. Buckley, in American Church History Series, vol. v. passim, New York 1895; and the other works cited under [189]Methodists which cover his locality and period. Pierrius PIERIUS, pi-er'i-Us: Presbyter of Alexandria. According to an excerpt from the "Christian History" of Philippus Sidetes by H. Dodwell, Dissertatio in Irenaeum (Oxford, 1689), it appears that Pierius was the head of the catechetical school at Alexandria, the successor of Dionysius, and predecessor of Theognostus [c. 265 A.D.]. Photius also names Pierius as master of the school and teacher of Pamphilus. Eusebius (Hist. eccl., VII., xxxii. 26, 27, 30, Eng. transl. in NPNF, 1 ser., i. 321-322, cf. note 42) names Achillas, later bishop, as conductor of the school at that time, and if this is correct, the two might have been jointly at the head. At any rate his character, according to Eusebius, of ascetic, philosopher, exegete, and preacher, would present him as amply qualified. Sidetes also states, on the authority of a lawyer, Theodore, that Pierius and his brother Isidore were martyrs and had a very large church at Alexandria, which is also reported by Photius. Jerome (De vir. ill., lxxvi.; also his second Epist. ad Pammachium, Eng. transl. in ANF, vi. 157) states that, after the persecution of Decius, Pierius lived at Rome. The work (Biblion) of Pierius to which Photius refers (Codex cxix.) consisted of twelve treatises or addresses, of which also Sidetes makes mention. One of these was an extemporaneous first Easter sermon, mentioned by Photius. The address upon the martyrdom of his pupil Pamphilus which contains exegetical elements is to be distinguished from the Biblion, and the representation of Jerome that he was the author of a commentary on I Corinthians is not substantiated. Pierius was a follower of Origen, was indeed called "the younger Origen," and his writings were studied with those of Origen. (N. Bonwetsch.) Bibliography: For Philippus Sidetes consult C. de Boor, in TU, v. 2 (1889), 169 sqq.; for Photius use M. J. Routh, Reliquiae sacrae, iii. 423 sqq., 5 vols., Oxford, 1846-48, MPG, x. 241 sqq., and the Eng. transl. in ANF, v. 157. Consult further: ANF, Bibliography, pp. 70-71 (contains detailed list of notices); Palladius, Hist. Lausiaca, chaps. xii., cxliii., in MPG, xxxiv.; Harnack, Litteratur, i. 439-441 (collects the passages), ii. 2, pp. 66-69, 71, 105, 123; idem, Dogma, ii. 95-96, 116, iv. 41; Bardenhewer, Geschichte, ii. 168 sqq.; Krueger, History, pp. 217-218; L. B. Radford, Three Teachers of Alexandria, Cambridge and New York, 1908. Pierson, Arthur Tappan PIERSON, ARTHUR TAPPAN: Presbyterian; b. at New York City Mar. 6, 1837. He was graduated at Hamilton College, Clinton, N. Y. (A.B., 1857), and Union Theological Seminary (1869), being minister of the Congregational Church at Winsted, Conn., in the summers of 1859 and 1860. He was then pastor at Binghampton, N. Y. (1860-1863), Waterford, N. Y. (1863-69), Detroit, Mich. (1869-82), Indianapolis, Ind. (1882-83), Bethany Church, Philadelphia (1883-89), Metropolitan Tabernacle, London (1891-93), and Christ Church, London (1902--03). In 1889-90 he made a missionary tour of the British Isles. Since 1888 he has been editor of the Missionary Review of the World, and was lecturer on missions in Rutgers College in 1891 and Duff lecturer in Scotland in 1892. He has written The Crisis of Missions (New York, 1886); Many Infallible Proofs: Chapters on the Evidences of Christianity (1886); Evangelistic Work in Principle and Practise (1887); Keys to the Word: or, Helps to Bible Study (1887); The Divine Enterprise of Missions (1891); Miracles of Missions (4 vols., 1891-1901); The Divine Art of Preaching (1892); From the Pulpit to the Palm-Branch: Memorial of Charles H. Spurgeon (1892); The Heart of the Gospel (sermons; 1892); New Acts of the Apostles (1894); Life-Power: or, Character Culture, and Conduct (1895); Lessons in the School of Prayer (1895); Acts of the Holy Spirit (1895); The Coming of the Lord (1896); Shall we continue in Sin? (1897); In Christ Jesus: or, The Sphere of the Believer's Life (1898); Catharine of Siena, an ancient Lay Preacher (1898); George Mueller of Bristol and his Witness to a Prayer-Hearing God (1899); Forward Movements of the last half Century (1900); Seed Thoughts for Public Speakers (1900); The Modern Mission Century viewed as a Cycle of Divine Working (1901); The Gordian Knot: or, The Problem which baffles Infidelity (1902); The Keswick Movement in Precept and Practice(1903); God's Living Oracles (1904); The Bible and Spiritual Criticism (1906); The Bible and Spiritual Life (1908); and Godly Self-control (1909). Pietism PIETISM. [190]I. Philipp Jakob Spener. [191]Early Life and Education (S: 1). [192]Frankfort and the Collegia Pietatis (S: 2). [193]The Pia Desideria (S: 3). [194]Attacks on Teachings and Collegis (S: 4). [195]Stormy Career at Dresden (S: 5). [196]Call to Berlin; Real Rise of Pietism (S: 6). [197]Speners Closing Years (S: 7). [198]Personality and Theology (S: 8). [199]Part in Pastoral Reform (S: 9). [200]Promotion of Lay Religion (S: 10). [201]Cooperating Forces (S: 11). [202]II. Pietism at Halle. [203]Prestige of Francke and his Institutions (S: 1). [204]Unsuccessful War on Pietism (S: 2). [205]One-sided Nature of the Movement (S: 3). [206]Effect on Theological Study (S: 4). [207]III. Pietism in Wuerttemberg. [208]Pietism Cordially Welcomed (S: 1). [209]Separatism and Tuebingen Influence (S: 2). [210]Attitude toward Moravians (S: 3). [211]IV. The Spread of Pietism. [212]V. The Nature and Influence of Pietism. [213]Complexity of Pietism (S: 1). [214]Lutheran Orthodoxy and Pietism (S: 2). [215]Disadvantages of Pietism (S: 3). [216]Influence on the Church (S: 4). [217]Religious Training and the Bible (S: 5). [218]Effect on Theology and Union (S: 6). [219]Forerunner of Religious Freedom (S: 7). [220]Conventicles and Lay Cooperation (S: 8). [221]Separatistic Tendencies (S: 9). [222]Rigid Austerity (S: 10). [223]Philanthropic and Missionary Activity (S: 11). [224]Pietism and the Enlightenment (S: 12). [225]Development and Origin (S: 13). [226]VI. Later Development. [227]Factors and Growth (S: 1). [228]Character of Modern Pietism (S: 2). [229]Estimate of the Movement (S: 3). The term Pietism connotes a movement in behalf of practical religion within the Lutheran Church of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Established at Halle by Philipp Jakob Spener, and following distinct and individual courses of development in Halle, Wuerttemberg, and Herrnhut, it received a bond of union in its conviction that the type of Christianity then prevailing in Lutheranism stood in urgent need of reform, and that this could be brought about by "piety," or living faith made active and manifest in upright conduct. I. Philipp Jakob Spener. Philipp Jakob Spener, the founder of Pietism, was born at Rappoltsweiler (33 m. sm. of Strasburg), Upper Alsace, Jan. 23, 1635; d. at Berlin Feb. 5, 1705. His parents gave him a devout education, and he received still more lasting religious impressions from his godmother, the widowed Agatha von Rappoltstein (d. 1648) and her chaplain, Joachim Stoll (1615-78), finding additional spiritual nourishment in such works as the Vom wahren Christentum of Johann Arndt (q.v.) and German translations of the English devotional writers Emanuel Sonthomb (Emanuel Thompson?), Lewis Bayly, Daniel Dyke, and Richard Baxter. 1. Life and Early Education. Spener began his university studies at Strasburg in May, 1651, devoting himself primarily to history, philosophy, and philology, and receiving his master's degree in 1653. He later gained a reputation as a student of genealogy and heraldry, particularly through his voluminous Opus heraldicum (2 vols., Frankfort, 1690). His theological teachers were Johann Schmidt (1594-1658), Sebastian Schmidt (1617-96), and especially Johann Konrad Dannhauer (q.v.). It was to the latter scholar that Spener was chiefly indebted for his living interest in the writings of Luther and the assertion of the religious rights of the laity, as well as for his subsequent avoidance of separatistic tendencies. As a student he lived a quiet, reserved life; his acquaintance confined itself to a few sympathetic. friends; and his Sundays were devoted to serious reading and singing hymns with these friends, as well as to the composition of his Soliloquia et meditationes sacrae. He terminated his formal studies in 1659, and spent the next three years at Basel, Geneva, and Tuebingen. Here his chief object was further knowledge of languages, literature, and history, but at the same time his religious development was profoundly influenced, notably by his acquaintance with Jean de Labadie (see [230]Labadie, Jean de, Labadists), whom he met in Geneva. Though many desired Spener to remain in Wuerttemberg, he accepted, in Mar., 1663, the position of assistant preacher at the cathedral in Strasburg, an appointment which was particularly attractive to him, since it allowed him time to pursue his studies and to attend lectures; and in the following year he received his theological doctorate. 2 Frankfort and the Colegia Pietatis. Spener now planned to live a quiet scholar's life, and eventually to become a professor of theology. In 1666, however, he was called as senior to Frankfort, where he not only found that his new office restricted his customary and congenial scholastic leisure, but also that his Lutheran orthodoxy was doubted, and that he was accused of Calvinistic tendencies. Accordingly, on the eighth Sunday after Trinity, 1667, he delivered a sermon on "necessary caution against false prophets," among whom he classed the Reformed, who had a small congregation at Frankfort. Spener afterward regretted the attitude here taken against the Reformed, however, and sought as far as possible to prevent the circulation of his sermon. Very different, and far happier, were the results of his sermon on July 18, 1669, on the "vain righteousness of the Pharisees." Here he described this ineffectual righteousness of the Pharisees as that superficial security which is content with an external subscription to the orthodox Lutheran Church, and which is satisfied with, merely intellectual attachment to pure doctrine, outward participation in divine service and the sacraments, and abstinence from gross sins and vices. Most of his hearers were disposed to feel that Spener demanded too much from frail men, but others were startled into a salutary dread and were aroused to serious. repentance. It was those thus affected who, a year later (1670), participated in the Collegia Pietatis, or private devotional gatherings, which Spener assembled twice a week in his house, this course being a decided innovation, though at first the meetings escaped attack. At the same time, Spener by no means restricted himself to the care of his little band of conventicle people, but strove to arouse and maintain personal and vital Christianity by preaching, by ecclesiastical discipline, and, most of all, by improving and animating the catechizings held each Sunday. His catechetical sermons and his catechism itself, the Erklaerung der christlichen Lehre nach der Ordnung des kleinen Katechismus Luthers (Frankfort, 1677), were a fruit of these endeavors, as well as several annual series of sermons. 3. The Pia Desideria The event that formed an epoch in Spener's life and attracted wide attention was the publication of his little Pia desideria (Frankfort, 1675). In this work Spener first depicted the Christianity of his period, which left much to be desired in every rank and station. Nevertheless, God had promised better times for the Church militant, which were to begin when Israel should have become converted and papal Rome should have fallen. Meanwhile he proposed the following helpful measures: the word of God must be more widely diffused among the people, this end being furthered by discussions on the Bible under the pastor's guidance; the establishment and maintenance of the spiritual priesthood, which is not possessed by the clergy alone, but is rather constituted by the right and duty of all Christians to instruct others, to punish, to exhort, to edify, and to care for their salvation; the fact must be emphasized that mere knowledge is in sufficient in Christianity, which is expressed rather in action; more gentleness and love between denominations are needed in polemics; the university training of the clergy must be changed so as to include personal piety and the reading of books of edification, as well as intellectual knowledge and dogmatic controversies; and, finally, sermons should be prepared on a more edifying plan, with less emphasis on rhetorical art and homiletic erudition. 4. Attacks on Teachings and Collegia Concretely regarded, these fundamental ideas of the Pia desideria were not new, but the very fact that Spener's treatise made so great a stir, and within a few years evoked a complete literature of its own, shows how imperative it was to emphasize such principles afresh. But amid much approval, there was, from the very first, no lack of opposition. This turned especially on the reiterated recommendation of private devotional gatherings in the Pia desideria. It was only now that the Frankfort conventicles became a center of general observation, visited by many, copied by many, and also distrusted by many. [But while Spener hoped that the small bands of earnest Christians thus formed within the general congregation would serve as a spiritual leaven for the larger body, they possessed from the start the two inherent dangers of separatistic tendencies and, as being composed preponderatingly of laymen associated on the theory of the universal priesthood of all believers, of opposition to the clergy proper. Both these dangers proved real perils; and as early as 1677 complaints were lodged against the collegia pietatis by the police of Frankfort, while on Jan. 26, 1678, the Darmstadt consistory warned all pastors under its jurisdiction against them.] Spener defended his innovations, however, in his Das geistliche Priestertum (Frankfort, 1677), and finally transferred the meetings from his house to the church, only to be confronted with fresh difficulties. His assertion that conversion and regeneration were indispensable for the right study of theology was contested by Georg Konrad Dilfeld in his Theologia Horbio-Speneriana in 1679, only to be easily refuted by Spener in his Allgemeine Gottesgelehrtheit aller glaeubigen Christen and rechtschaffenen Theologen (Frankfort, 1680). Spener now hoped to proceed unmolested in his work, but his plans were abruptly frustrated in 1682 by the secession of a number of his most zealous friends and adherents from all connection with the Church. With the utmost reluctance Spener broke with the separatists for love of his church and his pastoral office, and even opposed them openly in his Der Klagen ueber das verdorbene Christentum Missbrauch und rechter Gebrauch (Frankfort, 1685). A portion of these Frankfort separatists emigrated to Pennsylvania in 1683; and Spener's position was still further complicated by misunderstandings with the municipal council, which proved little disposed to comply with his wishes in combating public offenses, regularly inspecting catechetical examinations, and effecting a better organization of the parishes and of the practise of confession. 5. Stormy Career at Dresden. Under these circumstances Spener decided, in the summer of 1686, to accept a call to Dresden as first chaplain to Elector John George III. of Saxony. Still greater conflicts awaited him here. The morals at the Saxon Court were crude and licentious, and Spener fell into disfavor with the elector by reproaching him, as his confessor on a fast-day, for his intemperance. The Saxon clergy, moreover, received Spener with distrust as a stranger, and his Dresden colleagues were offended when he began catechetical exercises in his house, deeming such a course beneath the dignity of a first court chaplain. In addition to all this, Spener alienated the Saxon universities of Leipsic and Wittenberg by his criticism of university conditions and the defective training of theological students in his De impedimentis studii theologici (1690). The conflict between the old orthodoxy and the new spirit represented by Spener became acute at Leipsic in 1689, when Spener's friends and pupils, who included August Hermann Francke and Paul Anton (qq.v.), organized, for purposes of edification, the so-called collegia biblica. [Three years previous, on July 18, 1686, at the instance of Johann Benedikt Carpzov (q.v.), their subsequent opponent, Francke and Anton had established a similar institution, the collegium philobiblicum, an association of eight masters who met at the house of Valentin Alberti (q.v.) for the study of the Bible. Gradually, under the influence of Spener, the devotional element gained ascendency over the technical theology that had been the purpose of the original society; but no open disturbance was created until Francke started the collegia biblica. His pietistic lectures now caused such a sensation among the students, however, as well as among the townsmen of Leipsic, that "doubtful conventicles and private assemblies" were forbidden by an electoral edict on Mar. 10, 1690, and Francke was eventually obliged to leave the university.] 6. Call to Berlin; Real Rise of Pietism. A lively literary controversy now began concerning the merits of Pietism, but in 1691 Spener, who was deemed the spiritual leader of the Pietists, who were themselves opposed as sectaries, accepted a call to Berlin as provost of the Nikolaikirche. At Berlin, unlike Saxony, Spener and Pietism were to a certain extent protected by Elector Frederick III. (King Frederick I. of Prussia after 1701); for the Reformed elector, desiring to establish peace in his land between Lutherans and Reformed was opposed to strict Lutheranism, and perceived in the practical and unionistic trend of Pietism an ally to his plans. In Brandenburg, accordingly, Spener exercised a profound influence over ecclesiastical conditions through his powerful patrons. He utilized this influence, after 1692, primarily to further the creation of a theological school after his own liking at the new University of Halle, its first significant exponent being A. H. Francke (q.v.). Meanwhile the Pietistic movement had attracted wide circles and divided Lutheran Germany into two camps, organizing itself into a kind of party which, though claiming to be entirely orthodox and repudiating all attributes of heresy or sectarianism, was forced to struggle for existence against orthodoxy. The situation was still further complicated by the incorporation, after 1691-92, of certain chiliastic, enthusiastic, and ecstatic phenomena with the Pietistic movement. [As early as 1691 an unnamed opponent of Spener (probably C. A. Roth of Halle), in his Imago Pietismi, brought essentially the same charges against Pietism which were afterward constantly repeated in polemics against it.] Between 1691 and 1698 Spener alone exchanged some fifty controversial treatises with his antagonists. His chief opponents were Carpzov and Alberti in Leipsic, and such Wittenberg theologians as Johann Deitschmann (q.v.) and Johann Georg Neumann, the former of whom, in his Christlutherische Vorstellung (1695), written in behalf of the Wittenberg theological faculty, charged Spener with 283 erroneous teachings. Besides these opponents, there were Johann Friedrich Mayer (q.v.) in Hamburg, Samuel Schelwig (q.v.) in Danzig, and August Pfeiffer in Luebeck, the latter especially charging Spener with heterodox chiliastic views because of the Behauptung der Hoffnung kuenftiger besserer Zeiten, which he had published in 1692. The controversy was the more bitter since Spener's opponents feared, not without reason, that Pietism represented a new religious tendency, though they were unable to grasp its true nature, much less to understand its relative justification. 7. Spener's Closing Years. After 1698 Spener withdrew both from controversial writing and from public advocacy of Pietism, deeming further debate useless and his opponents as altogether incapable of amendment. In 1700-02, under the title Theologische Bedenken, he published at Halle four volumes of selections from his correspondence with both men and women, princes and statesmen, theologians and scholars, nobles and commoners, through which he had for decades exercised a profound influence on Germany. During his closing years his mood fluctuated between hopes for his cause and a dejection which was increased by many extravagances of his friends and followers. Nevertheless, from first to last he conscientiously fulfilled his duties as preacher and catechizer. His last literary labor was his anti-Socinian Verteidigung des Zeugnisses von der ewigen Gottheit Christi (Frankfort, 1706). He spent May, 1704, at Grosshennersdorf in Saxony, where he dedicated his godson, Zinzendorf, then four years old, to the advancement of the kingdom of God. After a severe attack of illness, Spener passed his seven last months tranquilly and with patience, though growing more and more feeble until his death, Feb. 5, 1705. 8. Personality and Theology. Spener's was no heroic nature. He lacked bold initiative, as he himself knew; timidity and hesitation were inborn in him; and he was drawn into active life only by his living devotion, his moral earnestness, his strong faith-born sense of duty and responsibility. Nevertheless, his Christianity was somewhat one-sided, restricted, and narrow; and, like his style, he was dry, prosy, and heavy. But notwithstanding this, his personality made a profound impression on many because of his unswerving earnestness, his conscientiousness and fidelity to duty, his ingenuous modesty, and his irenic temper. Neither was Spener's importance inherent in his theology. He meant to be simply an orthodox Lutheran, and persistently dwelt on his harmony with the doctrinal standards of the Lutheran Church. At the same time, he shifted the center of interest from the maintenance of orthodox doctrine to conduct and practical piety, and from the objective validity of the verities of salvation and means of grace to the subjective conditions connected with them, their subjective ethical accountability then following as a necessary corollary. Spener was concerned, above all, with the true personal faith of the heart, which, he maintained, might coexist with serious doctrinal errors. At bottom, however, this meant a far graver revolution in existing dogmatic and theological tenets than Spener himself had surmised, and led, in practise, to connivance at all sorts of erroneous teachers, sectarians, and fanatics. This laxity afforded Spener's opponents a ground of attack, but. their unskilful, superficial, and impassioned onslaughts not only lightened Spener's task of defense and substantiation, but also, unfortunately, helped to obscure his perception of the real consequences of his position. Spener's activity as a practical theologian and reformer may be summarized as efforts, on the one hand, to reform the clergy and their official ministration; and, on the other hand, to regenerate the ecclesiastical, religious, and moral life of the congregations and their members. In his attempted reform of the clergy, Spener justly discerned and combated the great defects in the theological studies of his time, especially the neglect of Biblical exegesis, undue in stress on formal rhetoric and polemics, and, most of all, the worldly life of those busied with theology. He maintained that it was neither sufficient nor even the chief essential for a pastor simply to hold pure doctrine, stressing instead the importance of Christian character in the pastor with relation to his office and his official activity. He set forth the principle that the first and foremost object of preaching is to edify, to induct the hearers into the word of God, and to awaken and foster personal piety and Christian living, all erudition and fine rhetoric, unless they subserve that end, being from the realm of evil. The rise of Spener, therefore, betokened an advance in the cause of preaching and homiletics, even though he himself fell far short of realizing the ideal of a plain, Scriptural, and edifying style of preaching. He was an important factor in securing recognition of the great importance of the religious instruction of the young; and by his direct example he revived the languishing condition of catechetical training, combated the mechanical system of memorizing, emphasized the serious duty of religious tuition, strove to secure a practical method of catechetical instruction, introduced the Bible as a school text-book, and contributed largely toward the spread of confirmation in the Lutheran Church of Germany. The improprieties and misuses connected with private confession at the time of Spener were felt by him to be a heavy pastoral burden and responsibility, especially as he had little sympathy with the custom. He had, therefore, no direct personal interest in its retention or improvement. Any reform of it seemed to him possible and desirable only in connection with the formation of boards of elders who should share the responsibility of church discipline. Since, however, such an institution appeared impracticable at the time, Spener's influence on confession and ecclesiastical discipline was little more than negative. The importance of detailed pastoral care was taught by Spener more by precept than by example, though in private life, especially in association with the clergy, candidates, and students, he exerted a profound and pervasive influence in this direction, while his extensive correspondence made him known as the " father confessor of all Germany." 10. Promotion of Lay Religion. In his endeavor to reform the ecclesiastical, religious, and moral life of Germany Spener combated, among both clergy and laity, inert, conventional Christianity and reliance on mere external orthodoxy, unceasingly preaching the necessity of conscious, personal, vital, active, and practical Christian life. For the furtherance of this type of Christianity he recommended household devotions, extempore prayer, and Bible readings, as well as a stricter observance of Sunday. He labored earnestly in behalf of Christian discipline and morals, not only assailing current offenses in public and private life, but also raising the standard of conscience and refining the moral sense. In his reaction against the prevailing laxity and licentiousness which the Lutheran clergy judged too leniently as things indifferent, Spener's stress on Christian and moral earnestness was no less wholesome than justifiable. He also emphasized the rights, and still more the obligations, of the laity in the Church; opposed the monopoly of the clergy; energetically revived the theory of the common spiritual priesthood of all believers; promoted the cooperation of the laity in ecclesiastical administration; and procured both recognition and free scope for the spontaneous activity of laymen in the life of the Church, even though in the latter direction he merely gave expression to general ideas and wishes. He created no actual organizations, for neither was he the man, nor was the time yet ripe. Nevertheless, in an age of sharp denominational cleavage, Spener awoke the Protestant sense of fellowship between all cornmunions that rested on the common basis of the Reformation. He helped pave the way toward friendly relationship between the Lutheran and Reformed Churches in Germany, both fortifying unionistic sentiment and preparing the means of union though rejecting any artificial and precipitate attempts at union. On the other hand, he was far more firmly convinced than most of the statesmen and clergy of his time that Roman Catholicism had deviated fundamentally from the Gospel of Christ, and that the "Roman peril" was real. He gave repeated expression to the thought of missions among Jews and heathen, and emphasized the missionary duty of Protestant Christianity at a time when the Lutheran Church had almost no conception of any such duty; and it was Spener's Pietistic friends, pupils, and disciples who went out from Halle in 1705 to the work of the Evangelical mission among the heathen, they being the first in Germany to attempt that field. 11. Cooperating Forces. In all these lines, indeed, Spener did not stand entirely alone among his contemporaries. He had his forerunners and colaborers. He was not the "Father of Pietism" in the sense that it emanated exclusively from him. He was met half-way, as it were, by a widely diffused sentiment in the Lutheran Church of Germany, and he was aided in many phases of the situation by the change which took place in the general spirit of the age. There were also cooperative influences proceeding from England, Holland, and Switzerland. For the Lutheran Church of Germany, however, Spener was the acknowledged and honorable protagonist; he was the most eminent advocate and the spiritual center of all those forces which so vigorously sought to reform the Lutheran Church in the last quarter of the seventeenth century. Paul Grueberg. II Pietism at Halle. 1. Prestige of Francke and his Institutions. A new epoch in the development of Pietism was marked when, for a time, the University of Leipsic closed its doors to the movement, whereupon the theological faculty of the newly founded University of Halle was filled, under Spener's influence with men of his own type. From the first the dominant spirit was August Hermann Francke (q.v.), who, though professor of Hebrew and Greek in the philosophical faculty until 1698, immediately began to lecture on exegesis. His colleagues were Joachim Justus Breithaupt, Johann Wilhelm Baier, Paul Anton, Johann Heinrich Michaelis, Joachim Lange (qq.v.), and Johann Daniel Hernschmied. The university was also profoundly affected by Francke's establishment of the famous Halle orphan asylum and affiliated schools and institutions. Many students of theology here received not only support, but preparation for their studies; the publishing house facilitated the literary propagation of Halle's cause; the collegium orientale afforded opportunity for linguistic training; and in the infirmary attached to the orphan asylum the medical faculty found compensation for the lack of a university clinic. Since Francke was both the dominant power in the faculty and the director of the orphan asylum, the former organization soon became so closely bound up with the interests and aims of these various in stitutions that the Halle phase of Pietism derived its peculiar nature from this very combination. This state of affairs was undeniably advantageous in many ways to the faculty, which gained prestige from the growing recognition of Francke's organizations, while the number of theological students at Halls rapidly increased; though, at the same time, these very factors caused a decided lose of independence and freedom of action in the faculty. 2. Unsuccessful War on Pietism. In its command of an assured position, the Halle school of Pietism quickly assumed the aggressive, and deemed itself called to be the censor of divergent tendencies, views, and modes of life. This attitude rendered it still more difficult for its opponents to recognize its good intent, and contributed much to the degeneration of the controversies into personal animosities to the prejudice of real explanation and mutual understanding. This turn of events was the more unhappy since even without them the mass of conflicting elements would have resulted in open rupture. In 1698 strife broke out between Francke and the clergy of Halle, followed by a series of clashes between the theological faculty and the law professor, Christian Thomasius (q.v.), who had enthusiastically espoused the cause of Francke at Leipsic, all these controversies, however, being eclipsed by the attitude of the theological faculty toward their colleague, the philosopher Christian Wolff, who was deposed from his office by King Frederick William I. (see [231]Wolff, Christian, and the Wolffian Theology). Of still greater moment were the literary battles between Pietism and its opponents outside of Halle. The most significant of these was the Wittenberg theological professor Valentin Ernst Loescher (q.v.), with his Vollstaendiger Timotheus Verinus (Wittenberg, 1718). Loescher was no fanatical assailant of Pietism; he recognized some good in the movement, and by a threefold classification of its adherents (the Halle Pietists being reckoned as midway between the radical and conservative wings) he sought to do justice to its several gradations. At the same time, his estimate of conversion, his concept of the pastoral office, and his stress on pure doctrine rested on a theological basis so wholly and fundamentally at variance with that of the Halle school that the harmony which he desired proved impossible, despite long correspondence and a personal interview with Francke and Hernschmied in May, 1719. The orthodox Lutheran attacks on Pietism, however, neither distracted the Pietists from their cause nor checked its wider development. Francke's educational institutions grew and multiplied; the Canstein Bible Institute was founded (see [232]Canstein, Karl Hildebrand, Baron von); union was effected with the Danish mission in Tranquebar; and Francke also found time to interest himself in behalf of the captive Swedes in Siberia. His death, in 1727, was a serious loss for his faculty, which soon was greatly changed. Many of the institutions and organizations created by the Pietism of Halle exercised a deep influence on the Lutheran Church in Germany. Even before Francke's death, however, the movement had reached its zenith; and it had only been his powerful, energetic, and influential personality which had, in many ways, lessened the dangers of one-sidedness and extravagance in Pietism at Halle, and kept its darker side comparatively inconspicuous. At the same time, the flaws in the movement did not originate altogether in the second generation, but were innate in the Halle type of Pietism from the first. 3. One Sided Nature of the Movement. One obvious characteristic of the movement at Halle was its lack of appreciation of the diversity and wealth of development in the growth of piety. "Conversion," as Francke experienced it, was not viewed in the light of an individual phenomenon, but as the normal way to salvation, regardless of other experiences taught by the history of the religious life. The question then arose as to the distinguishing marks of real conversion, and whether this must include a conviction of sin and the experience of ictic conversion at a precise moment. The affirmation of these demands also afforded a standard for gaging the Christianity of others; and in applying this the Pietists of Halle were no very lenient judges where they lighted upon the "unconverted." Their one-sided insistence on the religious tone in education was not above criticism, admirable as were the results which it produced, for in some cases it was the cause of spiritual pride, and in others of hypocrisy. Francke, himself, however, in his inculcation of intense Christianity, clearly recognized the claims of practical life. Among the subjects of instruction he included botany, zoology, mineralogy, anatomy, physics, and astronomy, as well as such mechanical crafts as turning and glass-grinding, thus preparing the way for the modern trade schools. But not withstanding all this breadth of judgment, which Francke also evinced in many other directions, he was strangely ignorant of the needs and feelings of the young. The incessant surveillance of the pupils in all of his institutions clogged the development of independence and was an obvious pedagogical error; and the same statement holds true of the restriction of harmless amusements. 4. Effect on Theological Study The practical religion taught by the Pietism of Halle exerted a significant influence upon the attitude of the university toward technical theology. Since Francke was convinced that living faith and sincere conversion were indispensable postulates to a knowledge of God, independent value was denied mere intellect, and the entire curriculum of studies was arranged accordingly. First of all, the development of personal religion was furthered; all academic lectures assumed the character of devotional sessions and revival sermons; every lecture was opened and closed with prayer. In addition to all this, the faculty met twice each week at the dean's house, where the students had to report on their studies and receive advice. The study of the Bible in the original was the center of the entire course. The darker side of this concept of theology, however, was shown in the Halle faculty's unproductiveness in the field of strict scholarship. Francke's own ability for scientific activity was undeniable, but he was far too much engrossed by his institutions to have time for research, though he never felt that this curtailed his efficiency as a teacher. There was, however, no perception of the fact that the new foundation of theology upon conversion and the edifying study of Scripture needed to be harmonized with orthodox theology, or that the entire body of systematic theology must be reconstructed, any more than there was recognition of the desirability of reaching a scholarly understanding with extremists in the Pietistic camp itself and with the Wolffian philosophy. Since these problems lay within the scope of the faculty's duties, the fact that they were ignored was an act of remissness that brought speedy vengeance. The faculty grew torpid and, after the death of Francke, lost its influence over the student body. II. Pietism in Wuerttemburg. 1. Pietism Cordially Welcomed. The entrance of Pietism into Wuerttemberg was particularly momentous for the subsequent development of the movement, since it there not only attracted many adherents, but also acquired a distinct character which was both independent of Spener and sharply distinguished from the Halle and Moravian Pietistic types. The movement received its first incentives in Wuerttemberg from Spener himself, who visited Stuttgart in May, 1662, and later spent four months in Tuebingen. Not only were the general conditions of religious life in Wuerttemberg favorable for the growth of Pietism, but special welcome seems to have been accorded it because of contemporary political burdens, which rendered men more open to the preaching of a gospel of the heart. The movement was also aided by the fact that the princes of the land did not oppose it; while it received direct encouragement from the Church authorities, who had early begun to turn Spener's views to practical account in favor of true Christian life. The influence of the Halle Pietist was very evident in the efforts to raise the standard of theological education; and as early as 1694 an edict was issued declaring that even a comprehensive theological training did not lead to a true knowledge of God if the heart clung to the world, and urging professors to educate not only learned, but devout and godly men. At Stuttgart the consistory successfully sought to obviate conflicts with Pietism on Wuerttemberg soil; the controversial Considerationum theologicarum decas of the Tuebingen professor Michael Mueller was confiscated; and on Feb. 28, 1694, appeared an edict joyfully hailed by Spener for, while assuming the inviolable validity of the symbolical books and the existing agenda, it conceded a whole series of details to Pietism. There was, however, no uniform attitude on the part of the ecclesiastical authorities toward private devotional meetings, which had become popular in Wuerttemberg as early as the ninth decade of the seventeenth century. Where these meetings lacked clerical direction, they were at first partly forbidden; and it was only long afterward, in consequence of the organization of collegia pietatis by some lecturers at Tuebingen in 1703, that the conventicles were regularly sanctioned, though even then it was desired that they be held in the churches. Moreover, this favorable disposition of the consistory had reference only to that section of Pietism which continued strictly within the bounds of the Church and did not favor the separatistic tendencies to which Wuerttemberg was peculiarly predisposed. 2. Separatism and Tuebingen Influence. The early stages of Pietistic separatism may be traced back to the initial stages of the movement itself. It found particular support among clergymen of marked devoutness and gravity, and firmly ensconced itself in various places, including the country districts. The conflict with this growing separatism was opened by the Edict of 1703; a second edict, forbidding all conventicles held by sectaries, followed in 1706; and the third, or general, rescript of Mar. 2, 1707, added certain drastic measures, threatening to banish those separatists who should refuse to attend Church and communion within three months. This course was abandoned, however, in a few years, so that the decree of Jan. 14, 1711, showed a milder attitude toward the separatistic Pietists. It came to be more and more the practise to. abandon all forcible measures in the case of such separatists as behaved themselves quietly, until finally the general rescript of Oct. 10, 1743, permitted all private devotional meetings that did not involve breach of the peace. This leniency toward the separatists, which was in sharp contrast to North German practise of the period, became possible since it involved no danger to the Church, and since there was no contentious orthodoxy to misconstrue its spirit. At the same time, this policy prevented the Church from putting down separatism, which persisted throughout the eighteenth century and broke out afresh at its close. Lastly, the attitude of the University of Tuebingen was important for implanting Pietism in Wuerttemberg. While the influence of Tuebingen's theological faculty upon this development was far from equal to that of Halle, nevertheless, the plan of filling professorships with men who took their inspiration from Spener showed its practical effects in more ways than mere modification of the aims and methods of instruction. Besides Johann Wolfgang Jaeger, who imparted a new spirit to the faculty, the teaching force included Johann Christian Pfaff, Andreas Adam Hochstetter, Christoph Reuchlin, and Christoph Eberhard Weismann. The Pietism evolved under these conditions showed certain distinctive features. Its adherents were predominantly among the clergy, among the middle classes in the towns, and in the rural districts; not, as with Pietism in North Germany, among the nobility. This insured a far more popular character for the movement, so that Pietistic Stunden, or prayer-meetings, have survived to the present time. On the other hand, the Wuerttemberg phase of Pietism preserved the church ideal more largely than was the case at Halle, this attitude doubtless being strengthened by the moderate and reasonable course adopted by the ecclesiastical authorities, as well as by the absence of a contentious type of orthodoxy. In Wuerttemberg, moreover, Pietism enjoyed a distinct advantage through its intimate sympathy with scientific theology, the resultant combination being shown, for example, by the New-Testament critic and exegete Johann Albrecht Bengel (q.v.), who constantly sought to unite the two. In view of the influence exercised by Pietism on the life of the Church in Wuerttemberg this attitude toward scientific method was not without moment for theology; and its influence on Pietism itself was still more profound, since it served to maintain its intellectual mobility, and fostered that spirit of independence and self-restraint which preserved it from the decline which overtook the movement at Halle. Finally, Wuerttemberg Pietism was characterized by a range, and scope of religious life far wider and more diverse than the stereotyped form of the movement which prevailed at Halle; and while it is not always easy precisely to define the new elements introduced by Swabian individualism, it is certain that there were many direct points of contact between the Swabian movement and the Pietism of Halle. 3. Attitude toward Moravians. Though Wuerttemberg never became entirely independent of Halle, a distinct sense of the divergence between the two schools was eventually evolved. This became clear in the position taken by the Wuerttemberg Pietists with regard to the Moravians. Count Nicholas Louis von Zinzendorf (q.v.) exercised a considerable influence from the time of his first visit in 1729, and induced many young theologians to enter the Moravian communion. Nevertheless, he was denied the fruit of great and permanent results, since men like Georg Konrad Rieger, and especially Bengel (qq.v.), who disapproved the formation of independent congregations, Count Zinzendorf's personality, and many other things, opposed the further inroads of Moravianism. Yet though they thus blocked its advance in Wuerttemberg, this rebuff did not entirely break off friendly relations with the Unity of the Brethren, with whom harmony is still preserved, chiefly because of Lutheran appreciation of Moravian missionary activity. The third main division of Pietists was the Unity of the Brethren (q.v.), or Moravians, founded by Zinzendorf. IV. The Spread of Pietism. Statistics of the spread of Pietism can scarcely be given with any approximation to completeness until preliminary studies, such as have already been begun, shall have been made of the history of the movement in the various localities in which it took root. Such studies, moreover, would doubtless aid in distinguishing the frequently interchanging tendencies proceeding from Herrnhut and Halle respectively. Spener himself, like Francke, sought to find interests in common with other religious bodies and leaders, while Zinzendorf surpassed them both in this regard. The triumph of Pietism over all obstacles, and its spread not only throughout Germany, but even into Switzerland, Holland, England, Denmark, and Russia, was partly due to the wide-spread indifference toward dogmatic formulas that had been discredited through theological wrangling, though it owed its real success to the fact that it was able to offer something not then supplied by the State churches. In addition to preaching, the personal association that was facilitated by the private devotional meetings, and an extensive correspondence dating from the time of Spener, the spread of Pietism was furthered by the influence exerted in filling pastorates and professorships with men sympathetic with the movement. This was particularly the case at Halle, which had a thousand theological students about 1730, while in 1729 an edict of Frederick William I. required all candidates for the ministry in his dominions to study there for two years. The university, therefore, together with Francke's institutions in Halle, developed a powerful influence in behalf of Pietism up to the middle of the eighteenth century; and Francke's journey to South Germany in 1718 still further promoted the cause. V. The Nature and Significance of Pietism. 1. Complexity of Pietism The wide diversity of opinion, even at the present time, regarding Pietism is due not only to the fact that the movement, as a peculiar concept of Protestant Christianity, is naturally judged according to the dogmatic position of each individual critic, but also to the very nature of the Pietistic tendency. The mere question of authoritative sources for a determination of the essence of Pietism involves great difficulties, since the movement produced neither official doctrinal writings nor any principles which, when acknowledged everywhere and at all times, should constitute regular affiliation with the Pietist cause. The sole recourse, therefore, is to the private literature of the movement, which is predominantly devotional. It must, however, be used with caution because of its subjective, transient tone, which is shared by its opponents as well; and Purely biographical sources are lamentably scanty. Moreover, Pietism embraced very heterogeneous phenomena, eo that it assumed extremely divergent phases in different individuals living at the same time but in different regions, with different antecedents, and under different conditions. It likewise underwent the most diverse combinations, to say nothing of the variations which distinguished the chief phases of the movement from each other, or of the development which each of these phases worked out independently. 2. Lutheran Orthodoxy and Pietism. Claiming possession of pure doctrine, the right administration of the sacraments, and a well-organized establishment as a national Church, Lutheranism had embarked upon a course of development during the seventeenth century in which, though the Bible was recognised as the sole authority and as the first and and highest source of knowledge, its essential content was held to be summarized and contained