Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

landholders a portion of the enormous sums now paid to continental, colonial, and transatlantic growers.

(6) Fruit cities, amateur and professional, when in full working order, will not only draw thousands of townsmen back to the land, but will help to materially decrease the number of physically fit unemployed.

(7) The establishment of these cities for townsmen to fill up their leisure amid rural surroundings will necessarily be followed by similar settlements for those desiring to live entirely from the raising of garden produce. The cry of 'Back to the land' is utterly futile until the people are taught how to utilise that land to the best advantage. Orchard cities even for townsmen will have a marked educational effect in this direction.

(8) Were one hundred thousand acres of land near large centres in the United Kingdom, now lying idle and unproductive, laid down to acre-orchards on the plan adopted in the orchard cities, town dwellers would gladly flock to settle down in them, thus relieving the congestion of the towns and improving the health and comfort of both the people who go out and those who remain in the city.

(9) Orchard cities, small or great, amateur or professional, open up enormous potentialities for the utilisation of women's work. There is a great opening for the utilisation of the art that doth mend nature' by women in fruit and flower growing. The minute care and attention needed for success in horticulture bring out the special qualities of the weaker sex, whilst the physical labour is not so heavy as with typewriting, telegraphy, sewing, cigarette-making, and other departments of women's work, and it is infinitely more healthy.

(10) Finally, the establishment and development of orchard cities will help us to meet the ever-increasing demand on the part of the people for choice fruit, to adequately supply which we now pay 11,000,000l. annually to the foreign grower.

FRANK ALTON MORGAN.

THE WANDERING JEW

Ar the beginning of the seventeenth century a book appeared with the following title: A brief description and tale of a Jew by name Ahasuerus, who was present in person at the Crucifixion of Christ, who moreover shouted with the rest the "Crucify Him! Crucify Him!" and instead of desiring His acquittal, desired that of Barabbas, the murderer; but after the Crucifixion was never able to return to Jerusalem, also never saw his wife and children again, has remained alive ever since, and came to Hamburg a few years ago, &c.'1

The contents of the book, which bears the date 1602, may be briefly stated thus:

Paul von Eitzen, Doctor in the Holy Scriptures, and Bishop of Schleswig, who is respected by all, and considered to be a teller of the truth, told this to me and to other students very often:

Once, when during my student days in the winter of 1542, I went to visit my parents at Hamburg, I saw the next Sunday in church during the sermon, a very tall man standing opposite the pulpit; he was barefoot, and his hair hung down over his shoulders. The man listened to the sermon with such attention that he stood there perfectly still and stiff, but every time the name of Jesus Christ was mentioned, he bowed, beat his breast, and gave a deep sigh. In conversations which I had with the man later, he informed me that he had been in Jerusalem at the time of Christ, had helped towards His condemnation, and on His last sorrowful journey had repulsed Him from his house with rough words. Thereupon Jesus had looked hard at him, and said: 'I shall stand here and rest, but you shall wander forth and be everlastingly restless.' Then he saw Jesus die on the Cross, but could not possibly return to his people in the town of Jerusalem; ever since he had been a wanderer on the face of the earth, and longed for death. The same man was also seen in the town of Danzig shortly before 1602.

Is this to be regarded as a legend or a myth? These two terms have of late been greatly confused. Originally they were quite distinct. A legend denotes a tale connected with an actual event

The German title runs: Kurze Beschreibung und Erzählung von einem Juden mit Namen Ahasverus, welcher bei der Kreuzigung Christi selbst persönlich dabeigewesen ist, auch das Kreuzige, kreuzige ihn! über Christus mitgeschrieen, und statt seiner Freisprechung die des Mörders Barrabas gewünscht hat, aber nach Christi Kreuzigung nicht mehr nach Jerusalem hat kommen können, auch sein Weib und Kinder nicht mehr gesehen hat und seitdem am Leben geblieben ist, vor etlichen Jahren nach Hamburg gekommen ist, u.s.w.'

VOL. LXI-No. 364

969

3 R

or locality, concerning something of importance which had a real existence. It easily becomes amplified, and possibly later embodies an idea, a tendency, or a warning. The myth, on the contrary, is a tale in which at its very outset an idea is illustrated or personified. It would be well if this distinction was always adhered to; for the question is whether the tale about Ahasuerus was connected with an actual event, or arose from probably an unconscious impulse to give concrete form to an idea.

It is not so easy to answer this question. If the tale be considered to be a legend, the narrative has been supposed to have been made up from other narratives earlier in circulation.

Thus, Roger of Wendover (died 1237), a monk of the English abbey of St. Albans, relates the following in his chronicle, under the year 1228:

In this year a certain Archbishop of Armenia Major came on a pilgrimage to England, to see the relics of the saints and visit the sacred places in this kingdom, as he had done in others; he also produced letters of recommendation from his Holiness the Pope to the religious men and prelates of the churches, in which they were enjoined to receive and entertain him with due reverence and honour. On his arrival he went to St. Albans, where he was received with all respect by the abbot and monks; at this place, being fatigued with his journey, he remained some days to rest himself and his followers, and a conversation was commenced between him and the inhabitants of the convent by means of their interpreters, during which he made many inquiries concerning the religion and religious observances of this country, and related many strange things concerning eastern countries. In the course of conversation he was asked whether he had ever seen or heard anything of Joseph, a man of whom there was much talk in the world, who, when our Lord suffered, was present and spoke to Him, and who is still alive in evidence of the Christian faith; in reply to which a knight in his retinue, who was his interpreter, replied, speaking in French, My Lord well knows that man, and a little before he took his journey to the western countries, the said Joseph ate at the table of my lord the Archbishop in Armenia, and he had often seen and held converse with him.' He was then asked about what had passed between Christ and the same Joseph, to which he replied, At the time of the suffering of Jesus Christ, he was seized by the Jews and led into the hall of judgment, before Pilate the governor, that he might be judged by him on the accusation of the Jews; and Pilate finding no cause for adjudging him to death, said to them: Take him and judge him according to your law;' the shouts of the Jews, however, increasing, he, at their request, released unto them Barabbas, and delivered Jesus to them to be crucified. When, therefore, the Jews were dragging Jesus forth, and had reached the door, Cartaphilus, a porter of the hall in Pilate's service, as Jesus was going out of the door, impiously struck Him on the back with his hand, and said in mockery, 'Go quicker, Jesus, go quicker; why do you loiter?' And Jesus, looking back on him, with a severe countenance said to him, 'I am going, and you will wait till I return.' And according as our Lord said, this Cartaphilus is still awaiting His return; at the time of our Lord's suffering he was thirty years old, and when he attains the age of a hundred years he always returns to the same age as he was when our Lord suffered. After Christ's death, when the Catholic faith gained ground, this Cartaphilus was baptised by Ananias (who also baptised the Apostle Paul), and was called Joseph. He often dwells in both divisions of Armenia and other eastern countries, passing his time amidst the bishops and other prelates of the

Church; he is a man of holy conversation and religious, a man of few words and circumspect in his behaviour, for he does not speak at all unless when questioned by the bishops and religious men ; and then he tells of the events of old times, and of the events which occurred at the suffering and resurrection of our Lord, &c.

In L. Neubaur's excellent book, Die Sage vom ewigen Juden (Leipzig, 1884, p. 6), Cartaphilus is mentioned as 'the prototype of the Wandering Jew.' But the reader cannot fail to perceive the great differences between the two figures. The first part of the word Cartaphilus, according to Neubaur, resembles the Greek κáρτа 'very,' so that the name signifies' very much loved,' and reminds one of John, the disciple whom Jesus loved,' of whom it was supposed that he will remain alive until the second advent of Christ. But the individual in the other story bore the name Ahasuerus. was a doorkeeper, the other a shoemaker.

[ocr errors]

The one

Of course, the same person could easily combine the post of doorkeeper with the trade of a shoemaker. But the one is represented as a Christian who received the name of Joseph, while the other remained a Jew and was called Ahasuerus. Moreover, it is important to note that no credible testimony of the life of the legend about Cartaphilus-Joseph can be traced in the sixteenth century (Neubaur, p. 12). The narrative of Ahasuerus, printed in 1602, makes no reference to earlier statements. An edition printed at Danzig, however, has a statement on its title-page that the same Jew was named earlier by an Italian author Johannes Buttadeus. The first part of that name was probably derived from the Italian buttare, to thrust out, and therefore may signify a fighter against God, an aggressor of Christ. In the narrative of 1602, however, there is no mention of a blow given by Ahasuerus to Jesus. The identity of Cartaphilus and Ahasuerus was questioned by Lessing in a letter to his brother, and I am myself of opinion that the absolute independence which clothes the Ahasuerus figure of the 1602 narrative renders it scarcely possible to suppose that it was evolved from earlier fables. Is, then, the 1602 narrative a myth?

The idea that the Jewish people were, soon after the Crucifixion (and, indeed, as a result of that event), driven from their homes, to become wanderers on the face of the earth, may easily have been crystallised into a concrete tale. The significant words of the bearer of the cross to the women of Jerusalem, 'Do not lament for Me; lament for yourselves and for your children,' might easily be developed into a tale of the miserable fate of one native of Jerusalem, as the representative of the people of Jerusalem. We should then have before us the material husk of a truth equally concerned with the history of religion and of civilisation.

If the tale be regarded as a myth, the name 'Ahasuerus' appears, however, at a first glance, to present an insurmountable obstacle. It is so rare that it is unlikely to have been invented. It occurs only

twice in the ancient Hebrew Scriptures-as the name of a Median prince (Dan. ix. 1), and as the name of the king of Persia in whose reign the story of Esther takes place (Esther, i. &c.). In many of the manuscripts of the Apocryphal supplements to the ancient Hebrew and primitive Christian literature the name is found only in the additions to the Book of Esther. Josephus does not mention the name Ahasuerus, nor does the Jewish Encyclopædia (completed by the publication of its twelfth volume in December last) mention any other bearer of that name. In the Greek translation of the ancient Hebrew Scriptures the name is written Assueros, and in the Latin version Assuerus.2

But the name Ahasuerus, which, at a first glance, seems to offer an obstacle to the mythical significance of the Ahasuerus narrative, affords, on the contrary, a distinct support to that solution. For in reflecting over the question whence in that narrative the name Ahasuerus exactly occurs—a question as yet scarcely propounded—I am inclined to the hypothesis that it arose from the Purim Festival of the Jews. At that festival, especially in earlier times, the dramatic reading aloud of the Book of Esther, and the interruptions and shouts of the assembly, gave an opportunity of cursing all who were of different faith-Persians, Mohammedans, and especially Christians. This is clearly stated in the Encyclopædia Biblica (1899–1903), edited by T. K. Cheyne and A. S. Black, col. 3977. During the celebration of the Purim Festival-at least in the seventeenth century-an 'Ahasuerus play' was performed which bore a very hostile character. This is proved by the fact that in 1708 its performance was forbidden at Frankfurt a/M. The president of the Frankfurt Jewish community had all the printed copies burnt. It is not unlikely that, in view of this abuse hurled every spring through words and mimicry at the religious standpoint of the Christians, the idea of composing a counterpiece should have suggested itself to one of them. The author might even have created an Ahasuerus who was deeply repentant for his former mocking attitude towards Christ, the Man of Sorrows.

3

The explanation is rendered plausible by other considerations, but it also has some almost insurmountable difficulties. When an author has formed a plan of this kind, coloured by a strong motive, he generally works it out with clearness, and thus the details em

·

2 Thus is explained the form of the name Asuerus, which occurs in an edition of the 1602 book (Neubaur, p. 74), as also in the Dutch edition (Neubaur, p. 99), where he says: Myn naam is Azuweer.' Yet the true form of the name had already been established. For in the fifteenth century there was an edition of the Book of Esther inscribed with the title, 'Concerning (or Regarding) Ahasuerus,' as we learn from Johann Gottfried Eichhorn's Einleitung in das Alte Testament (vol. iii. p. 635, ed. 1823-24). The name Ahasuerus may have been taken from the German Bible, but not necessarily so. Where then was it created?

3 Gustav Karpeles, in an article, Das Theater bei den Juden,' in the Nationalzeitung, 13th of April, 1889.

« VorigeDoorgaan »