show the feeling which prevailed respecting the books that were brought and burned, and serve to illustrate the remark made by the writer of the Acts, 'So mightily grew the word of the Lord and prevailed.'

The ruins of Ephesus lie two short days' journey from Smyrna, in proceeding from which towards the south-east the traveller passes the pretty village of Sedekuy; and two hours and a half onwards he comes to the ruined village of Danizzi, on a wide, solitary, uncultivated plain, beyond which several burial-grounds may be observed; near one of these, on an eminence, are the supposed ruins of Ephesus, consisting of shattered walls, in which some pillars, architraves, and fragments of marble have been built. The soil of the plain appears rich. It is covered with a rank, burnt-up vegetation, and is everywhere deserted and solitary, though bordered by

picturesque mountains. A few corn-fields are scattered along the site of the ancient city, which is marked by some large masses of shapeless ruins and stone walls. Towards the sea extends the ancient port, a pestilential marsh. Along the slope of the mountain and over the plain are scattered fragments of masonry and detached ruins, but nothing can now be fixed upon as the great temple of Diana. There are some broken columns and capitals of the Corinthian order of white marble: there are also ruins of a theatre, consisting of some circular seats and numerous arches, supposed to be the one in which Paul was preaching when interrupted by shouts of, 'Great is Diana of the Ephesians. The ruins of this theatre present a wreck of immense grandeur, and the original must have been of the largest and most imposing dimensions. Its form alone can now be spoken of, for every seat is removed,

and the proscenium is a hill of ruins. A splendid circus (Fellows' Reports, p. 275) or stadium remains tolerably entire, and there are numerous piles of buildings seen alike at Pergamus and Troy as well as here, by some called gymnasia, by others temples; by others again, with more propriety, palaces. They all came with the Roman conquest. No one but a Roman emperor could have conceived such structures. In Italy they have parallels in Adrian's villa near Tivoli, and perhaps in the pile upon the Palatine. Many other walls remain to show the extent of the buildings of the city, but no inscription or ornament is to be found, cities having been built out of this quarry of worked marble. The ruins of the adjoining town, which arose about four hundred years ago, are entirely composed of materials from Ephesus. There are a few huts within these ruins (about a mile and a half from Ephesus), which

still retain the name of the parent city, Asalooka Turkish word, which is associated with the same idea as Ephesus, meaning the City of the Moon (Fellows). A church dedicated to St. John is thought to have stood near, if not on the site of, the present mosque. Arundell (Discoveries, vol. ii. p. 253) conjectures that the gate, called the Gate of Persecution, and large masses of brick wall, which lie beyond it, are parts of this celebrated church, which was fortified during the great Council of Ephesus. The tomb of St. John was in or under his church, and the Greeks have a tradition of a sacred dust arising every year, on his festival, from the tomb, possessed of miraculous virtues: this dust they term manna. Not far from the tomb of St. John was that of Timothy. The tomb of Mary and the seven raidía (boys, as the Synaxaria calls the Seven Sleepers) are found in an adjoining hill. At the back of the mosque,

on the hill, is the sunk ground-plan of a small church, still much venerated by the Greeks. The sites of two others are shown at Asalook. There is also a building, called the Prison of St. Paul, constructed of large stones without cement. Though Ephesus presents few traces of human life, and little but scattered and mutilated remains of its ancient grandeur, yet the environs, diversi- | fied as they are with hill and dale, and not scantily supplied with wood and water, present many features of great beauty. Arundell (ii. 211) enumerates a great variety of trees, which he saw in the neighbourhood, among which may be specified groves of myrtle near Ephesus. He also found heath in abundance, of two varieties; and saw there the common fern, which he met with in no other part of Asia Minor.

Dr. Chandler (p. 150, 4to) gives a striking description of Ephesus, as he found it on his visit in 1764-Its population consisted of a few Greek peasants, living in extreme wretchedness, dependence, and insensibility, the representatives of an illustrious people, and inhabiting the wreck of their greatness-some the substructure of the glorious edifices which they raised; some beneath the vaults of the stadium, once the crowded scene of their diversions; and some in the abrupt precipice, in the sepulchres which received their ashes. Such are the present citizens of Ephesus, and such is the condition to which that renowned city has been reduced. It was a ruinous place when the Emperor Justinian filled Constantinople with its statues and raised the church of St. Sophia on its columns. Its streets are obscured and overgrown. A herd of goats was driven to it for shelter from the sun at noon, and a noisy flight of crows from the quarries seemed to insult its silence. We heard the partridge call in the area of the theatre and of the stadium. The pomp of its heathen worship is no longer remembered; and Christianity, which was then nursed by apostles, and fostered by general councils, barely lingers on, in an existence hardly visible. However much the Church at Ephesus may (Rev. ii. 2), in its earliest days, have merited praise for its 'works, labour, and patience,' yet it appears soon to have left its first love,' and to have received in vain the admonition- Remember, therefore, from whence thou art fallen, and repent and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.' If any repentance was produced by this solemn warning, its effects were not durable, and the place has long since offered an evidence of the truth of prophecy, and the certainty of the divine threatenings, as well as a melancholy subject for thought to the contemplative Christian. Its fate is that of the onceflourishing seven churches of Asia: its fate is that of the entire country-a garden has become a desert. Busy centres of civilization, spots where the refinements and delights of the age were collected, are now a prey to silence, destruction, and death. Consecrated first of all to the purposes of idolatry, Ephesus next had Christian temples almost rivalling the pagan in splendour, wherein the image of the great Diana lay prostrate before the cross; and, after the lapse of some centuries, Jesus gives place to Mahomed, and the crescent glittered on the dome of the recently Christian church. A few more scores of years,

and Ephesus has neither temple, cross, crescent, nor city, but is a desolation, a dry land, and a wilderness. Even the sea has retired from the

scene of devastation, and a pestilential morass, covered with mud and rushes, has succeeded to the waters which brought up ships laden with merchandise from every part of the known world (Herod. i. 26, ii. 148; Liv. i. 45; Pausan. vii. 2, 4; Philo, Byz. de 7 Orb. Mirae. Gronov. Thesaur. viii.; Creuzer, Symbol. ii. 13; Hassl, Erdbeschr. ii. 132; for a plan of Ephesus, see Kiepert Atlas von Hellas; Arundell's Visit to the Seven Churches of Asia; Fellows' Excursion in Asia Minor, 1839; Discoveries in Asia Minor, by Rev. T. Arundell, 1834).-J. R. B.

EPHOD, an article of dress worn by the Hebrew priests. [PRIESTS.]

EPHRAIM (DEN; Sept. 'Eppatu), the younger son of Joseph, but who received prece dence over the elder in and from the blessing of Jacob (Gen. xli. 52; xlviii. 1). That blessing was an adoptive act, whereby Ephraim and his brother Manasseh were counted as sons of Jacob in the place of their father; the object being to give to Joseph, through his sons, a double portion in the brilliant prospects of his house, Thus the descendants of Joseph formed two of the tribes of Israel, whereas every other of Jacob's sons counted but as one. There were thus, in fact, thirteen tribes of Israel; but the number twelve is usually preserved, either by excluding that of Levi (which had no territory), when Ephraim and Manasseh are separately named, or by counting these two together as the tribe of Joseph, when Levi is included in the account. The intentions of Jacob were fulfilled, and Ephraim and Manasseh were counted as tribes of Israel at the departure from Egypt, and as such shared in the territorial distribution of the Promised Land (Num. i. 33; Josh. xvii. 14; 1 Chron. vii. 90The precise position of the immediate descendants of Joseph in Egypt might form an interesting subject for speculation. Being the sons of one in eminent place, and through their mother con nected with high families in Egypt, their con dition could not at once have been identified wit that of the sojourners in Goshen; and perhaps they were not fully amalgamated with the rest of their countrymen until that king arose who knew not Joseph.

At the departure from Egypt, the population of the two tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh toge ther amounted to 72,700 men capable of bearing arms, greatly exceeding that of any single tribe. except Judah, which had somewhat more. Duri the wandering, their number increased to 95,20€, which placed the two tribes much higher tha even Judah. At the Exode, Ephraim singly had 40,500, and Manasseh only 32,200; but a grea change took place in their relative number during the wandering. Ephraim lost 8000, and Manasseh gained 20,500; so that just be entering Canaan, Ephraim stood at 32,500, and Manasseh at 52,700. At the departure fr Egypt, Ephraim, at 40,500, was above Ma nasseh and Benjamin in numbers; at the end of the wandering it was, at 32,500, above Sime only, which tribe had suffered a still greater los of numbers (comp. Num. i. and xxvi.).

One of the finest and most fruitful parts

from one apostle alone, but from all the four principal apostles; so that one and the same divine truth is presented to our eyes in various forms as it were in various mirrors, by which its richness and manifold character are the better displayed. The Epistles of the New Testament divide themselves into two parts-the PAULINE and the so-called CATHOLIC.

The PAULINE Epistles are thirteen in number; or fourteen, if we add to them the Epistle to the Hebrews. Up to our days their genuineness has almost unanimously been recognised in Germany, with the exception only of the pastoral epistles, and more especially the first letter to Timothy. Eichhorn and Bauer have attacked the genuineness of all the three pastoral epistles, and Schleiermacher that of the first epistle to Timothy. Indeed, the very peculiar character of the Pauline Epistles is so striking to any one who is not ignorant of the want of ease and originality conspicuous in the counterfeit writings of early times, as to leave not the least doubt of their genuineness. Depth of thought, fire of speech, firmness of character-these manly features, joined withal to the indulgence of feelings of the most devoted love and affection, characterize these epistles. The amiable personal character of the apostle may be most beautifully traced in his Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon.

All the Epistles, except the one to the Romans, were called forth by circumstances and particular occasions in the affairs of the communities to which they were addressed. Not all, however, were preserved; it is, at least, evident, from 1 Cor. v. 9, that a letter to the Corinthians has been lost; from Col. iv. 16, it has also been concluded-though probably erroneously, since there perhaps the letter to the Ephesians is referred tothat another letter to the community of Laodicea has likewise been lost. Press of business usually compelled Paul-what was, besides, not uncommon in those times-to use his companions as amanuenses. He mentions (Gal. vi. 11), as something peculiar, that he had written this letter with his own hand. This circumstance may greatly have favoured the temptation to forge letters in his name, because since the period of Alexandrine literature it was not unusual to indite spurious books, as is evident from Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. p. 23); and even Christian bishops made complaints about the falsification of their letters. Paul alludes to this (2 Thes. ii. 2), and therefore writes the greeting (2 Thes. iii. 17) with his own hand. Paul himself exhorted the communities mutually to impart to each other his letters to them, and read them aloud in their assemblies (Col. iv. 16). It is therefore probable that copies of these letters had been early made by the several communities, and deposited in the form of collections. So long therefore as the various communities transmitted the manuscripts to each other, no other letters, it is obvious, could come into the collections than those to whose genuineness the communities to whom they were originally addressed, bore witness. Even Peter (2 Pet. iii. 16) seems to have had before him a number of Paul's letters, as, about forty years later, a number of letters of Ignatius were transmitted by Polycarp to Smyrna, while the church of Philippi forwarded to him those directed to them (Ep. Polic. sub fin.; Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 36).

This Pauline collection, in contra-distinction to the gospels, passed by the name of à àæóσTokas.

The letters of Paul may be chronologically arranged into those written before his Roman imprisonment, and those written during and after it: thus beginning with his first letter to the Thessalonians, and concluding with his second to Timothy, embracing an interval of about ten years (A.D. 54-64). In our Bibles, however, the letters are arranged according to the pre-eminent parts and stations of the communities to whom they were addressed, and conclude with the epistles to the two bishops and a private letter to Philemon.

That the Epistles offered great difficulties was already felt in the earliest times (2 Peter iii. 16). In the Roman Church their true understanding was more particularly lost by the circumstance that it understood by THE LAW, only the opus operatum of the ceremonial law; consequently the Roman Church could not comprehend justification by faith, and taught instead justification by works; as soon, therefore, as the true understanding of the Pauline epistles dawned upon Luther, his breach with the Roman Church was decided.

Among the more ancient interpreters of the Pauline letters Chrysostom and Calvin deserve particular distinction; though the former, with all his zeal and psychological penetration, was still deficient in the true hermeneutic method.

THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES.-There is, in the first instance, a diversity of opinion respecting their name: some refer it to their WRITERS (letters from all the other apostles who had entered the stage of authorship along with Paul); some, again, to their CONTENTS (letters of no special but general Christian tenor); others, again, to the RECEIVERS (letters addressed to no community in particular). None of these views, however, is free from difficulties. The first and the second views-and more especially the first-cannot be brought to harmonize with the idiomatic expressions in the extant pages of the ancient writers; the second is, besides, contradicted by the fact that the letter of James is of a special tenor, while, on the contrary, that to the Romans is of such a general character as to deserve the name CATHOLIC in that sense. The third opinion is most decidedly justified by passages from the ancient writers (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. v. 18; Clem. Alex. Strom. iv. 15, ed. Potter, p. 606; Orig. c. Cels. i. 63). The Pauline Epistles had all their particular directions, while the letters of Peter, James, 1 John, and Jude were circular epistles. The Epistles 2 and 3 John were subsequently added, and included on account of their shortness, and to this collection was given the name CATHOLIC LETTERS, in contradistinction to the PAULINE, which were called & άπÓσтоλOS.—A. T.

EPISTLES OF THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS. Under this head we shall briefly notice those remains of Christian antiquity which are ascribed to the writers usually styled the Apostolic Fathers, from the circumstance that they were converted to the Christian faith during the life-time, and probably by the instrumentality, of the Apostles. Of Barnabas and the epistle which bears his name we have already spoken at length [BARNABAS].

1. CLEMENT, or CLEMENS ROMANUS. It will probably be generally admitted that no produc

tion of the early church approaches so near the apostolic writings, in the union of devout feeling with justness and sobriety of thought, as that denominated the First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians' but addressed in the name of the Church sojourning at Rome (apoikovσa Púμny) to the Church of God sojourning at Corinth.' Eusebius terms it, 'great and wonderful' (μeyáλn te kal Davμaría), and states that in his own and former times it was read in most churches. (Hist. Eccles. iii. 16; iii. 38; iv. 22, 23). Irenæus calls it ikavæτάTηY Yрaphy, a most powerful writing' (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. v. 6). It is frequently quoted by Clemens Alexandrinus (Strom. i. 7, $38; Opera, ed. Klotz, ii. p. 29), ¿ dróσtoλos KAhuns; Strom. iv. 17, § 107; ii. p. 335; Strom. v. 12, § 81; iii. p. 57; Strom. vi. 3, § 65; iii. p. 137. The only known manuscript of this Epistle is that appended to the celebrated Alexandrian Codex, which was presented to Charles I. by Cyrillus Lucaris, the patriarch of Constantinople. The same manuscript contains also a fragment of the so-called second Epistle. They were first published at Oxford, in 1633, by Patrick Young, the royal librarian. Sir Henry Wotton re-examined the manuscript, amended Young's copy in above eighty places, and published a very correct edition at Cambridge, in 1718. Certain portions of the first epistle have been thought to bear internal evidence of spuriousness. Bignonius, in a letter to Grotius, instances ch. xl., which relates to the presentation of offerings at set times, in which the word λaïkós occurs; and the epithet ancient (apxaíav) applied to the Corinthian church in ch. xlvii. Mosheim asserts that some passages are evidently taken from Clement of Alexandria (Mosheim's Commentaries, transl. by Vidal, vol. i. p. 271). The main object of this Epistle was to allay the dissensions which had arisen in the Corinthian church, and especially to repress the unruly spirit shown by many against their teachers. It is worthy of notice that Clement uniformly speaks of the opposition of the Corinthians against their presbyters, never of their insubordination to their bishop: he inculcates submission to the presbyters, but never to the bishop. Thus in ch. xlvii., It is disgraceful, beloved, and unworthy of your training in Christ, to have it reported that the well-established and ancient Corinthian church has been excited by one or two individuals to revolt against the presbyters' (its priests, Abp. Wake's transl.). Ch. liv., Only let the flock of Christ be at peace with the presbyters that are set over it' (TV Kabεσтаμévæv πреσВνтépwv). Ch. lvii., 'Do ye who laid the foundation of the dissension submit to the presbyters' (priests, Abp. Wake's transl.). In two other passages the term TрEOBUTEρo appears to denote simply the elder members of the church, while the term youμevo (Heb. xiii. 7, 17, 24) is used for their teachers or superintendents. Ch. i., Being subject to those that have the rule over you' (Toîs yovμévois buy), and giving due honour to the aged among you' (Tois Tap' vμîv преσВνтéρоis). Ch. xxi., 'Let us honour those that are set over us' (Toùs προηγουμένους); • let us respect the aged that are among us' (Tous Tрeo Buтéρous); let us instruct the young,' &c. In ch. xlii. he speaks of bishops and deacons in a manner which shows that he considered the former as synonymous with presby

ters: They (the Apostles) appointed their firstfruits to be bishops and deacons (ministers, Abp. Wake's transl.) of those who should believe. Nor was this any new thing, seeing that long before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus the Scripture, in a certain place, saith, I will appoint their overseers (bishops, Toùs ¿πiσKÓжOvs), and their ministers (deacons, Toùs diaKóvous) in faith.' It has indeed been supposed that the bishop of the Corinthian church was deceased, and that the disorders which Clement sought to repress broke out before his successor was appointed. But had this been the case, for which there is not the slightest evidence, it is almost incredible that no allusion should be made to it. The only legitimate inference appears to be, that the original constitution of the church of Corinth still subsisted in Clement's time; the government was still vested not in one man, but in many' (Dr. Arnold's Sermons on the Christian Life, Introduction, p. xlvi.).

In Clement's Epistle only one book of the New Testament is expressly named, Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians; but though the Evangelists are not named, several sayings of Christ contained in our Gospels are repeated. There are also evident allusions to the Acts, all the Pauline Epistles (1 Thessalonians excepted), the Epistles of Peter and James, and the Epistle to the Hebrews. A tabular view of these passages is given by Dr. Lardner (Credibility of the Gospel History, pt. ii. ch. ii.; Works, vol. ii. pp. 35-53). Eusebius, speaking of Clement's Epistle, says, 'He has inserted in it many sentiments taken from the Epistle to the Hebrews, and sometimes makes use of the identical expressions, from which it is evident that that composition is not a recent one.

Paul having addressed the Hebrews in their native language, some say that the Evangelist Luke, and others that this very Clement, translated the document; an opinion which is supported by the fact, that the Epistle of Clement and that to the Hebrews are marked by the same peculiarities of style, and in both compositions the sentiments are not unlike.'-(Hist. Eccles. iii. 38, ed. Valessii, 1672, p. 110.)

As to the date of this epistle it has been fixed by Grabe, Galland, Wotton, and Hefele about the year 68; but Cotelerius, Tillemont, and Lardner think that it was written at the close of the Diocletian Persecution in 96 or 97. A passage in ch. xli., in which Clement speaks in the present tense respecting the sacrifices of the Mosaic law, has been supposed to favour the earlier date; but Josephus adopts the same phraseology in his Antiquities, which were not finished till twenty years after the destruction of Jerusalem.

The first writer that notices the second Epistle of Clement is Eusebius, who does not absolutely pronounce it spurious, but says that it was less known than the former, and not quoted by ancient writers (Hist. Eccles. iii. 38). Photius states decidedly that it was rejected as spurious. It is only a fragment, and its style is rather homiletic than epistolary. The Gospels are quoted several times in it, more expressly than in the first Epistle, and there is one passage from an apocryphal writing called the Gospel according to the Egyptians (Lardner's Credibility, &c., part ii. ch. 3; Works, ii. 55). In 1752, John James Wetstein published, at the end of his edition of