ON the farthest north-eastern part of the Mediterranean sea, where
its waters are bounded by the great angle made by the meeting of the
Syrian coast with the Asian, there is a peculiarity in the course of
the mountain ranges, which deserves notice in a view of the countries
of that region, modifying as it does, all their most prominent
characteristics. The great chain of Taurus, which can be traced far
eastward in the branching ranges of Singara, Masius and Niphates,
running connectedly also into the distant peaks of mighty Ararat,
here sends off a spur to the shore of the Mediterranean, which
under the name of Mount Amanus meets its waters, just at their great
north-eastern angle in the ancient gulf of Issus, now called the gulf
of Scanderoon. Besides this connection with the mountain chains of
Mesopotamia and Armenia on the northeast, from the south the great
Syrian Lebanon, running very nearly parallel with the eastern shore
of the Mediterranean, at the Issic angle, joins this common center of
convergence, so insensibly losing its individual character in the Asian
ridge, that by many writers, Mount Amanus itself is considered only
a regular continuation of Lebanon. These, however, are as distinct as
any of the chains here uniting, and the true Libanic mountains cease
just at this grand natural division of Syria from the northern coast
of the Mediterranean. A characteristic of the Syrian mountains is
nevertheless prominent in the northern chain. They all take a general
course parallel with the coast and very near it, occasionally sending
out lateral ridges which mark the projections of the shore with high
promontories. Of these, however, there are much fewer on the southern
coast of Asia Minor; and the western ridge of Taurus, after parting
from the grand angle of convergence, runs exactly parallel to the
margin of the sea, in most parts about seven miles distant. The country
thus fenced off by Taurus, along the southern coast of Asia Minor, is
very distinctly characterized by these circumstances connected with
its orography, and is in a very peculiar manner bounded and inclosed
from the rest of the continent, by these natural features. The great
mountain barrier of Taurus, as above described, stretches along the
north, forming a mighty wall, which is at each end met at right angles
by a lateral ridge, of which the eastern is Amanus, descending within
a few rods of the water, while the western is the true termination of
Taurus in that direction,――the mountains here making a grand curve from
west to south, and stretching out into the sea, in a bold promontory,
which definitely marks the farthest western limit of the long, narrow
section, thus remarkably enclosed. This simple natural division, in
the apostolic age, contained two principal artificial sub-divisions. On
the west, was the province of Pamphylia, occupying about one fourth of
the coast;――and on the east, the rest of the territory constituted the
province of CILICIA, far-famed as the land of the birth of that great
apostle of the Gentiles, whose life is the theme of these pages.
CILICIA,――opening on the west into Pamphylia,――is elsewhere inclosed
in mountain barriers, impenetrable and impassable, except in two or
three points, which are the only places in which it is accessible
by land, though widely exposed, on the sea, by its long open coast.
Of these two adits, the most important, and the one through which
the vast proportion of its commercial intercourse with the world, by
land, has always been carried on, is the eastern, which is just at the
oft-mentioned great angle of the Mediterranean, where the mountains
descend almost to the waters of the gulf of Issus. Mount Amanus, coming
from the north-east, and stretching along the eastern boundary of
Cilicia an impassable barrier, here advances to the shore; but just
before its base reaches the water, it abruptly terminates, leaving
between the high rocks and the sea a narrow space, which is capable
of being completely commanded and defended from the mountains which
thus guard it; and forming the only land passage out of Cilicia to
the eastern coast of the Mediterranean, it was thence anciently called
“THE GATES OF SYRIA.” Through these “gates,” has always passed all the
traveling by land between Asia Minor and Palestine; and it is therefore
an important point in the most celebrated route in apostolic history.
The other main opening in the mountain walls of this region, is the
passage through the Taurus, made by the course of the Sarus, the
largest river of the province, which breaks through the northern ridge,
in a defile that is called “THE GATES OF CILICIA.”
The boundaries of Cilicia are then,――on the north, mountainous
Cappadocia, perfectly cut off by the impenetrable chain of Taurus,
except the narrow pass through “the gates of Cilicia;”――on the east,
equally well guarded by Mount Amanus, Northern Syria, the only land
passages being through the famed “Syrian gates,” and another defile
north of the coast, toward the Euphrates;――on the south, stretches
the long margin of the sea, which in the western two-thirds of the
coast takes the name of “the Cilician strait,” because it here flows
between the mainland and the great island of Cyprus, which lies off
the shore, always in sight, being less than thirty miles distant, the
eastern third of the coast being bounded by the waters of the gulf
of Issus;――and on the west Cilicia ends in the rough highlands of
Pamphylia. The territory itself is distinguished by natural features,
into two divisions,――Rocky Cilicia and “Level Cilicia,”――the former
occupying the western third, and the latter the eastern part,――each
district being abundantly well described by the term applied to it.
Within the latter, lay the opening scenes of the apostle’s life.
Thus peculiarly guarded, and shut off from the world, it might be
expected that this remarkable region would nourish, on the narrow
plains of its fertile shores, and the vast rough mountains of its
gigantic barriers, a race strongly marked in mental, as in physical
characteristics. In all parts of the world, the philosophical observer
may notice a relation borne by man to the soil on which he lives, and
to the air which he breathes,――hardly less striking than the dependence
of the inferior orders of created things, on the material objects which
surround them. Man is an animal, and his natural history displays as
many curious correspondences between his varying peculiarities and the
locality which he inhabits, as can be observed between the physical
constitution of inferior creatures, and the similar circumstances which
affect them. The inhabitants of a wild, broken region, which rises
into mighty inland mountains, or sends its cliffs and vallies into
a vast sea, are, in all ages and climes, characterized by a peculiar
energy and quickness of mind, which often marks them in history as
the prominent actors in events of the highest importance to mankind in
all the world. Even the dwellers of the cities of such regions, share
in that peculiar vivacity of their countrymen, which is especially
imbibed in the air of the mountains; and carry through all the world,
till new local influences have again subjected them, the original
characteristics of the land of their birth. The restless activity and
dauntless spirit of Saul, present a striking instance of this relation
of scenery to character. The ever-rolling waters of the tideless sea
on one side presenting a boundless view, and on the other the blue
mountains rearing a mighty barrier to the vision,――the thousand streams
thence rolling to the former,――the white sands of the long plains,
gemmed with the green of shaded fountains, as well as the active
movements of a busy population, all living under these same inspiring
influences,――would each have their effect on the soul of the young
Cilician as he grew up in the midst of these modifying circumstances.
Along these shores, from the earliest period of Hellenic
colonization, Grecian enterprise had planted its busy centers of
civilization. On each favorable site, where agriculture or commerce
could thrive, cities grew up in the midst of prosperous colonies, in
which wealth and power in their rapid advance brought in the lights
of science, art, literature, and all the refinements and elegances
which Grecian colonization made the invariable accompaniments of
its march,――adorning its solid triumphs with the graceful polish of
all that could exalt the enjoyment of prosperity. Issus, Mopsuestia,
Anchialus, Selinus and others, were among the early seats of Grecian
refinement; and the more modern efforts of the Syro-Macedonian sway,
had blessed Cilicia with the fruits of royal munificence, in such
cities as Cragic Antioch, Seleucia the Rocky, and Arsinoe; and in
still later times, the ever-active and wide-spreading beneficence of
Roman dominion, had still farther multiplied the peaceful triumphs
and trophies of civilization, by here raising or renewing cities, of
which Baiae, Germanicia and Pompeiopolis are only a specimen. But of
all these monuments of ancient or later refinement, there was none
of higher antiquity or fame than TARSUS, the city where was born this
illustrious apostle, whose life was so greatly instrumental in the
triumphs of Christianity.
TARSUS stands north of the point of a wide indentation of the coast of
Cilicia, forming a very open bay, into which, a few miles south, flow
the waters of the classic Cydnus, a narrow stream which runs a brief
course from the barrier of Taurus, directly southward to the sea. The
river’s mouth forms a spacious and convenient harbor, to which the
light vessels of ancient commerce all easily found safe and ready
access, though most of the floating piles in which the productions
of the world are now transported, might find such a harbor altogether
inaccessible to their heavier burden.
Ammianus Marcellinus, the elegant historian of the decline of the Roman
empire, speaks in high descriptive terms, both of the province, and
the city which makes it eminent in Christian history. In narrating
important events here performed during the times whose history he
records, he alludes to the character of the region in a preliminary
description. “After surmounting the peaks of Taurus, which towards
the east rise into higher elevation, Cilicia spreads out before the
observer, in far stretching areas,――a land, rich in all good things.
To its right (that is the west, as the observer looks south from
the summits of Taurus) is joined Isauria,――in equal degree verdant
with palms and many fruits, and intersected by the navigable river
Calycadnus. This, besides many towns, has two cities,――Seleucia, the
work of Seleucus Nicator of Syria, and Claudiopolis, a colony founded
by Claudius Caesar. Isauria however, once exceedingly powerful, has
formerly been desolated for a destructive rebellion, and therefore
shows but very few traces of its ancient splendor. But CILICIA, which
rejoices in the river Cydnus, is _ennobled_ by TARSUS, a splendid
city,――by Anazarbus, and by Mopsuestia, the dwelling-place of that
Mopsus, who accompanied the Argonauts. These two provinces (Isauria
or ‘Cilicia the Rocky,’ and Cilicia proper or ‘level’) being formerly
connected with hordes of plunderers in a piratical war, were subjugated
by the proconsul Servilius, and made tributary. And these regions,
placed, as it were, on a long tongue of land, are separated from the
eastern world by Mount Amanus.”
This account by Ammianus Marcellinus is found in book XIV. of
his history, (p. 19, edited by Vales.)
The native land of Saul was classic ground. Within the limits of
Cilicia, were laid the scenes of some of the most splendid passages
in early Grecian fable; and here too, were acted some of the grandest
events in authentic history, both Greek and Roman. The very city of
his birth, Tarsus, is said to have been founded by Perseus, the son of
Jupiter and Danae, famed for his exploit at another place on the shore
of this part of the Mediterranean. More authentic history however,
refers its earliest foundation to Sardanapalus, king of Assyria, who
built Tarsus and Anchialus in Cilicia, nine hundred years before Christ.
Its origin is by others ascribed to Triptolemus with an Argive colony,
who is represented on some medals as the founder. These two stories may
be made consistent with each other, on the supposition that the same
place was successively the scene of the civilizing influence of each
of these attributed founders. So too, may be taken, the legend which
Ammianus Marcellinus records and approves,――that it was founded by
Sandan, a wealthy and eminent person from Ethiopia, who at some early
period not specified, is said to have built Tarsus. It was however,
at the earliest period that is definitely mentioned, subject to the
Assyrian empire; and afterwards fell under the dominion of each of the
sovranties which succeeded it, passing into the hands of the Persian
and of Alexander, as each in turn assumed the lordship of the eastern
world. While under the Persian sway, it is commemorated by Xenophon
as having been honored by the presence of the younger Cyrus, when
on his march through Asia to wrest the empire from his brother. On
this occasion, he entered this region through the northern “gates of
Cilicia,” and passed out through the “gates of Syria,” a passage which
is, in connection with this event, very minutely described by the
elegant historian of that famous expedition.
_Sardanapalus._――The fact of the foundation both of Tarsus and
Anchialus by this splendid but unfortunately extravagant monarch,
the last of his line, is commemorated by Arrian, who refers to
the high authority of an inscription which records the event.
“Anchialus is said to have been founded by the king of Assyria,
Sardanapalus. The fortifications, in their magnitude and extent,
still, in Arrian’s time, bore the character of greatness, which
the Assyrians appear singularly to have affected in works of
the kind. A monument, representing Sardanapalus, was found there,
warranted by an inscription in Assyrian characters, of course
in the old Assyrian language, which the Greeks, whether well
or ill, interpreted thus: ‘Sardanapalus, son of Anacyndaraxes,
in one day founded Anchialus and Tarsus. Eat, drink, play: all
other human joys are not worth a fillip.’ Supposing this version
nearly exact, (for Arrian says it was not quite so,) whether the
purpose has not been to invite to civil order a people disposed
to turbulence, rather than to recommend immoderate luxury,
may perhaps reasonably be questioned. What, indeed, could be the
object of a king of Assyria in founding such towns in a country
so distant from his capital, and so divided from it by an
immense extent of sandy desert and lofty mountains, and, still
more, how the inhabitants could be at once in circumstances to
abandon themselves to the intemperate joys which their prince
has been supposed to have recommended, is not obvious; but
it may deserve observation that, in that line of coast, the
southern of Lesser Asia, ruins of cities, evidently of an
age after Alexander, yet barely named in history, at this day
astonish the adventurous traveler by their magnificence and
elegance.” (Mitford’s Greece, Vol. IX. pp. 311, 312.)
Over the same route passed the conquering armies of the great Alexander.
At Issus, within the boundaries of Cilicia, he met, in their mightiest
array, the vast hosts of Darius, whom here vanquishing, he thus decided
the destiny of the world. Before this great battle, halting to repose
at Tarsus, he almost met his death, by imprudently bathing in the
classic Cydnus, whose waters were famed for their extreme coldness.
By a remarkable coincidence, the next conqueror of the world, Julius
Caesar, also rested at Tarsus for some days before his great triumphs
in Asia Minor. Cilicia had in the interval between these two visits
passed from the Macedonian to the Roman dominion, being made a Roman
province by Pompey, about sixty years before Christ, at the time when
all the kingdoms of Asia and Syria were subjugated. After this it
was visited by Cicero, at the time of his triumphs over the cities of
eastern Cilicia; and its classic stream is still farther celebrated
in immortal verse and prose, as the scene where Marcus Antony met
Cleopatra for the first time. It was the Cydnus, down which she sailed
in her splendid galley, to meet the conqueror, who for her afterwards
lost the empire of the world. During all the civil wars which desolated
the Roman empire through a long course of years in that age, Tarsus
steadily adhered to the house of Caesar, first to the great Julius and
afterwards to Augustus. So remarkable was its attachment and devotion
to the cause of Julius, that when the assassin Cassius marched through
Asia into Syria to secure the dominion of the eastern world, he
laid siege to Tarsus, and having taken it, laid it waste with the
most destructive vengeance for its adherence to the fortunes of
his murdered lord; and such were its sufferings under these and
subsequent calamities in the same cause, that when Augustus was at
last established in the undivided empire of the world, he felt himself
bound in honor and gratitude, to bestow on the faithful citizens of
Tarsus the most remarkable favors. The city, having at the request of
its inhabitants received the new name of _Julio_polis, as a testimony
of their devotion to the memory of their murdered patron, was lavishly
honored with almost every privilege which the imperial Augustus could
bestow on these most faithful adherents of his family. From the terms
in which his acts of generosity to them are recorded, it has been
inferred,――though not therein positively stated,――that he conferred on
it the rank and title of a Roman colony, or free city, which must have
given all its inhabitants the exalted privileges of _Roman citizens_.
This assertion has been disputed however, and forms one of the most
interesting topics in the life of the great apostle, involving the
inquiry as to the mode in which he obtained that inviolable privilege,
which, on more than one occasion, snatched him from the clutches of
tyrannical persecutors. Whether he held this privilege in common with
all the citizens of Tarsus, or inherited it as a peculiar honor of
his own family, is a question yet to be decided. But whatever may have
been the precise extent of the municipal favors enjoyed by Tarsus,
it is certain that it was an object of peculiar favor to the imperial
Caesars during a long succession of years, not only before but after
the apostle’s time, being crowned with repeated acts of munificence
by Augustus, Adrian, Caracalla and Heliogabalus, so that through many
centuries it was the most favored city in the eastern division of the
Roman empire.
The history of Cilicia since the apostolic age, is briefly this:
It remained attached to the eastern division of the Roman empire,
until about A. D. 800, when it first fell under the Muhammedan
sway, being made part of the dominion of the Califs by Haroun
Al Rashid. In the thirteenth century it reverted to a Christian
government, constituting a province of the Armenian kingdom of
Leo. About A. D. 1400, it fell under the sway of Bajazet II.,
Sultan of the Ottoman empire, and is at present included in that
empire,――most of it in a single Turkish pashalic, under the name
of Adana.
_Roman citizens._――Witsius very fully discusses this point, as
follows. (Witsius _on the Life of Paul_ § 1. ¶ V.)
“It is remarkable that though he was of Tarsus, he should say
that he was a ROMAN citizen, and that too by the right of
_birth_: Acts xxii. 28. There has been some discussion whether
he enjoyed that privilege in common with all the Tarsans, or
whether it was peculiar to his family. Most interpreters firmly
hold the former opinion. Beza remarks, ‘that he calls himself a
Roman, not by country, but by right of citizenship; since Tarsus
had the privileges of a Roman colony.’ He adds, ‘Mark Antony,
the triumvir, presented the Tarsans with the rights of citizens
of Rome.’ Others, without number, bear the same testimony.
Baronius goes still farther,――contending that ‘Tarsus obtained
from the Romans, the _municipal_ right,’ that is, the privileges
of free-born citizens of Rome; understanding Paul’s expression
in Acts xxi. 39, to mean that he was a _municeps_ of Tarsus,
or a Tarsan with the freedom of the city of Rome. Now the
_municipal_ towns, or free cities, had rights superior to those
of mere colonies; for the _free-citizens_ were not only called
Roman citizens as the _colonists_ were, but also, as Ulpian
records, could share in all the honors and offices of Rome.
Moreover, the _colonies_ had to live under the laws of the
Romans, while the municipal towns were allowed to act according
their own ancient laws, and country usages. To account for the
distinction enjoyed by Tarsus, in being called a ‘_municipium_
of Romans,’ the citizens are said to have merited that honor,
for having in the civil wars attached themselves first to Julius
Caesar, and afterwards to Octavius, in whose cause they suffered
much. For so attached was this city to the side of Caesar, that,
as Dion Cassius records, their asked to have their name changed
from Tarsus to _Juliopolis_, in memory of Julius and in token of
good will to Augustus; and for that reason they were presented
with the rights of a colony or a _municipium_, and this general
opinion is strengthened by the high testimony of Pliny and
Appian. On the other hand Heinsius and Grotius strongly urge
that these things have been too hastily asserted by the learned;
for scarcely a passage can be found in the ancient writers,
where Tarsus is called a colony, or even a _municipium_. ‘And
how could it be a colony,’ asks Heinsius, ‘when writers on
Roman law acknowledge but two in Cilicia? Ulpian (_Liber I.
De censibus_) says of the Roman colonies in Asia Minor, “there
is in Bithynia the colony of Apamea,――in Pontus, Sinope,――in
Cilicia there are Selinus and Trajanopolis.” But why does he
pass over Tarsus or Juliopolis, if that had place among them?’
Baronius proves it to have been a _municipium_, only from the
Latin version of Acts, where that word is used; though the term
in the original Greek (πολιτης) means nothing more than the
common word, citizen, (as it is rendered in the English version.)
Pliny also calls Tarsus not a colony, nor a _municipium_,
but a free city. (libera urbs.) Book V. chap xxvii. Appian
in the first book of the civil wars, says that Antony granted
to the Tarsans _freedom_, but says nothing of the rights of a
_municipium_, or colony. Wherefore Grotius thinks that the only
point established is, that some one of the ancestors of Paul, in
the civil wars between Augustus Caesar, and Brutus and Cassius,
and perhaps those between this Caesar and Antony, received the
grant of the privileges of a Roman citizen. Whence he concludes
that Paul must have been of an opulent family. These opinions of
Grotius have received the approval of other eminent commentators.
These notions however, must be rejected as unsatisfactory;
because, though some writers have but slightly alluded to Tarsus
as a _free city_, yet Dio Chrysostom, (_in Tarsica posteriore_,)
has enlarged upon it in a tone of high declamation. ‘Yours,
men of Tarsus, was the fortune to be first in this nation,――not
only because you dwell in the greatest city of Cilicia, and one
which was a metropolis from the beginning,――but also because the
second Caesar was remarkably well-disposed and gracious towards
you. For, the misfortunes which befell the city in his cause,
deservedly secured to you his kind regard, and led him to make
his benefits to you as conspicuous as the calamities brought
upon you for his sake. Therefore did Augustus confer on you
everything that a man could on friends and companions, with a
view to outdo those who had shown him so great good-will,――your
land, laws, honors, the right of the river and of the
neighboring sea.’ On which words Heinsius observes in comment,
that by _land_ is doubtless meant that he secured to them their
own territory, free and undisturbed. By _laws_ are meant such
as relate to the liberty usually granted to free towns. _Honor_
plainly refers to the right of citizenship, as the most exalted
he could offer. The point then seems to be established, if this
interpretation holds good, and it is evidently a rational one.
For when he had made up his mind to grant high favors to a city,
in return for such great merits, why, when it was in his power,
should Augustus fail to grant it the rights of Roman citizenship,
which certainly had been often granted to other cities on much
slighter grounds? It would be strange indeed, if among the
exalted honors which Dio proclaims, that should not have been
included. This appears to be the drift, not only of Dio’s
remarks, but also of Paul’s, who offers no other proof of his
being a Roman citizen, than that he was a Tarsan, and says
nothing of it as a special immunity of his own family, although
some such explanation would otherwise have been necessary to
gain credit to his assertion. Whence it is concluded that it
would be rash to pretend, contrary to all historical testimony,
any peculiar merits of the ancestors of Paul, towards the Romans,
which caused so great an honor to be conferred on a _Jewish_
family.”
But from all these ample and grandiloquent statements of Dio
Chrysostom, it by no means follows that Tarsus had the privilege
of Roman citizenship; and the conclusion of the learned Witsius
seems highly illogical. The very fact, that while Dio was
panegyrizing Tarsus in these high terms, and recounting all
the favors which imperial beneficence had showered upon it, he
yet did _not_ mention among these minutiae, the privilege of
citizenship, is quite conclusive against this view; for he would
not, when thus seeking for all the particulars of its eminence,
have omitted the greatest honor and advantage which could be
conferred on any city by a Roman emperor, nor have left it
vaguely to be inferred. Besides, there are passages in the
Acts of the Apostles which seem to be opposed to the view,
that Tarsus was thus privileged. In Acts xxi. 39, Paul is
represented as distinctly stating to the tribune, that he was
“a _citizen_ of Tarsus;” yet in xxii. 24, 25, it is said, that
the tribune was about proceeding, without scruple, to punish
Paul with stripes, and was very much surprised indeed, to learn
that he was a Roman citizen, and evidently had no idea that a
citizen of Tarsus was, as a matter of course, endowed with Roman
citizenship;――a fact, however, with which a high Roman officer
must have been acquainted, for there were few cities thus
privileged, and Tarsus was a very eminent city in a province
adjoining Palestine, and not far from the capital of Judea. And
the subsequent passages of chap. xxii. represent him as very
slow indeed to believe it, after Paul’s distinct assertion.
Hemsen is very clear and satisfactory on this point, and
presents the argument in a fair light. See his note in his
“Apostel Paulus” on pp. 1, 2. He refers also to a work not
otherwise known here;――John Ortwin Westenberg’s “Dissert. de
jurisp. Paul. Apost.” Kuinoel in Act. Apost. xvi. 37. discusses
the question of citizenship.
“It ought not to seem very strange, that the ancestors of
Paul should have settled in Cilicia, rather than in the land
of Israel. For although Cyrus gave the whole people of God
an opportunity of returning to their own country, yet many
from each tribe preferred the new country, in which they had
been born and bred, to the old one, of which they had lost the
remembrance. Hence an immense multitude of Jews might be found
in almost all the dominions of the Persians, Greeks, Romans
and Parthians; as alluded to in Acts ii. 9, 10. But there were
also other occasions and causes for the dispersion of the Jews.
Ptolemy, the Macedonian king of Egypt, having taken Jerusalem
from the Syro-Macedonians, led away many from the hill-country
of Judea, from Samaria and Mount Gerizim, into Egypt, where
he made them settle; and after he had given them at Alexandria
the rights of citizens in equal privilege with the Macedonians,
not a few of the rest, of their own accord, moved into Egypt,
allured partly by the richness of the land, and partly by
the good will that Ptolemy had shown towards their nation.
Afterwards, Antiochus the Great, the Macedonian king of Syria,
about the thirtieth year of his reign, two hundred years before
the Christian era, brought out two thousand Jewish families from
Babylonia, whom he sent into Phrygia and Lydia with the most
ample privileges, that they might hold to their duty the minds
of the Greeks, who were then inclining to revolt from his sway.
These were from Asia Minor, spread abroad over the surrounding
countries, between the Mediterranean sea, the Euphrates and
Mount Amanus, on the frontiers of Cilicia. Besides, others
afterwards, to escape the cruelty of Antiochus Epiphanes, betook
themselves to foreign lands, where, finding themselves well
settled, they and their descendants remained. Moreover, many, as
Philo testifies, for the sake of trade, or other advantages, of
their own accord left the land of Israel for foreign countries:
whence almost the whole world was filled with colonies of Jews,
as we see in the directions of some of the general epistles,
(James i. 1: 1 Peter i. 1.) Thus also Tarsus had its share
of Jewish inhabitants, among whom were the family of Paul.”
(Witsius in Vita Pauli, § 1. ¶ v.)
Nor were the solid honors of this great Asian city, limited to the
mere favors of imperial patronage. Founded, or early enlarged by the
colonial enterprise of the most refined people of ancient times, Tarsus,
from its first beginning, shared in the glories of Helleno-Asian
civilization, under which philosophy, art, taste, commerce, and
warlike power attained in these colonies a highth before unequalled,
while Greece, the mother country, was still far back in the march
of improvement. In the Asian colonies arose the first schools of
philosophy, and there is hardly a city on the eastern coast of the
Aegean, but is consecrated by some glorious association with the name
of some Father of Grecian science. Thales, Anaxagoras, Anaximander, and
many others of the earliest philosophers, all flourished in these Asian
colonies; and on the Mediterranean coast, within Cilicia itself, were
the home and schools of Aratus and the stoic Chrysippus. The city of
Tarsus is commemorated by Strabo as having in very early times attained
great eminence in philosophy and in all sorts of learning, so that “in
science and art it surpassed the fame even of Athens and Alexandria;
and the citizens of Tarsus themselves were distinguished for individual
excellence in these elevated pursuits. So great was the zeal of the
men of that place for philosophy, and for the rest of the circle of
sciences, that they excelled both Athens and Alexandria, and every
other place which can be mentioned, where there are schools and
lectures of philosophers.” Not borrowing the philosophic glory of their
city merely from the numbers of strangers who resorted thither to enjoy
the advantages of instruction there afforded, as is almost universally
the case in all the great seats of modern learning; but entering
themselves with zeal and enjoyment into their schools of science,
they made the name of TARSUS famous throughout the civilized world,
for the cultivation of knowledge and taste. Even to this day the
stranger pauses with admiration among the still splendid ruins of
this ancient city, and finds in her arches, columns and walls, and in
her chance-buried medals, the solid testimonies of her early glories
in art, taste and wealth. Well then might the great apostle recur
with patriotic pride to the glories of the city where he was born and
educated, challenging the regard of his military hearers for his native
place, by the sententious allusion to it, as “NO MEAN CITY.”
“It appears on the testimony of Paul, (Acts xxi. 39,) that
Tarsus was a city of no little note, and it is described by
other writers as the most illustrious city of all Cilicia; so
much so indeed, that the Tarsans traced their origin to Ionians
and Argives, and a rank superior even to these;――referring their
antiquity of origin not merely to heroes, but even to demi-gods.
It was truly exalted, not only by its antiquity, situation,
population and thriving trade, but by the nobler pursuits
of science and literature, which so flourished there, that
according to Strabo it was worthy to be ranked with Athens
and Alexandria; and we know that Rome itself owed its most
celebrated professors to Tarsus.” (Witsius. § 1, ¶ iv.)
The testimony of Strabo is found in his Geography, book XIV.
Cellarius (Geog. Ant.) is very full on the geography of Cilicia,
and may be advantageously consulted. Conder’s Modern Traveler
(Syria and Asia Minor 2.) gives a very full account of its
ancient history, its present condition, and its topography.
The present appearance of this ancient city must be a matter of
great interest to the reader of apostolic history; and it can
not be more clearly given than in the simple narrative of the
enterprising Burckhardt, who wrote his journal on the very spot
which he describes. (Life of Burckhardt, prefixed to his travels
in Nubia, pp. xv. xvi.)
“The road from our anchoring place to Tarsus crosses the
above-mentioned plain in an easterly direction: we passed
several small rivulets which empty themselves into the sea, and
which, to judge from the size of their beds, swell in the rainy
season to considerable torrents. We had rode about an hour, when
I saw at half an hour’s distance to the north of our route, the
ruins of a large castle, upon a hill of a regular shape in the
plain; half an hour further towards Tarsus, at an equal distance
from our road, upon a second tumulus, were ruins resembling
the former; a third insulated hillock, close to which we passed
midway of our route, was over-grown with grass, without any
ruins or traces of them. I did not see in the whole plain any
other elevations of ground but the three just mentioned. Not far
from the first ruins, stands in the plain an insulated column.
Large groups of trees show from afar the site of Tarsus. We
passed a small river before we entered the town, larger than
those we had met on the road. The western outer gate of the town,
through which we entered, is of ancient structure; it is a fine
arch, the interior vault of which is in perfect preservation:
on the outside are some remains of a sculptured frieze. I did
not see any inscriptions. To the right and left of this gateway
are seen the ancient ruined walls of the city, which extended
in this direction farther than the town at present does. From
the outer gateway, it is about four hundred paces to the modern
entrance of the city; the intermediate ground is filled up by
a burying ground on one side of the road, and several gardens
with some miserable huts on the other. * * * * The little I saw
of Tarsus did not allow me to estimate its extent; the streets
through which I passed were all built of wood, and badly; some
well furnished bazars, and a large and handsome mosque in the
vicinity of the Khan, make up the whole register of curiosities
which I am able to relate of Tarsus. Upon several maps Tarsus
is marked as a sea town: this is incorrect; the sea is above
three miles distant from it. On our return home, we started in
a south-west direction, and passed, after two hours and a half’s
march, Casal, a large village, half a mile distant from the
sea-shore, called the Port of Tarsus, because vessels freighted
for Tarsus usually come to anchor in its neighborhood. From
thence turning towards the west, we arrived at our ship at the
end of two hours. The merchants of Tarsus trade principally with
the Syrian coast and Cyprus: imperial ships arrive there from
time to time, to load grain. The land trade is of very little
consequence, as the caravans from Smyrna arrive very seldom.
There is no land communication at all between Tarsus and Aleppo,
which is at ten journeys (caravan traveling) distant from
it. The road has been rendered unsafe, especially in later
times, by the depredations of Kutshuk Ali, a savage rebel,
who has established himself in the mountains to the north of
Alexandretta. Tarsus is governed by an Aga, who I have reason to
believe is almost independent. The French have an agent there,
who is a rich Greek merchant.”
A fine instance of the value of the testimony of the Fathers on
points where knowledge of the Scriptures is involved, is found
in the story by Jerome, who says that “Paul was born at Gischali,
a city of Judea,” (in Galilee,) “and that while he was a child,
his parents, in the time of the laying waste of their country
by the Romans, removed to Tarsus, in Cilicia.” And yet this most
learned of the Fathers, the translator of the whole Bible into
Latin, did not know, it seems, that Paul himself most distinctly
states in his speech to the Jewish mob, (Acts xxii. 3,) that
he was “_born_ in Cilicia,” as the common translation has
it;――in Greek, γεγενημενος εν Κιλικια,――words which so far
from allowing any such assertion as Jerome makes, even imply
that Paul, with Tristram Shandy-like particularity, would
specify that he was “_begotten_ in Cilicia.” Jerome’s ridiculous
blunder, Witsius, after exposing its inconsistency with Jewish
history, indignantly condemns, as “a most shameful falsehood,”
(_putidissima_ fabula,) which is as hard a name as has been
applied to anything in this book.
But if this blunder is so shameful in Jerome, what shall be said
of the learned Fabricius, who (Bibliotheca Graeca, IV. p. 795,)
copies this story from Jerome as authentic history, without a
note of comment, and without being aware that it most positively
contradicts the direct assertion of Paul? And this blunder
too is passed over by all the great critical commentators of
Fabricius, in Harles’s great edition. Keil, Kuinoel, Harles,
Gurlitt, and others equally great, who revised all this, are
involved in the discredit of the blunder. “Non omnes omnia.”