FOOTNOTE:

[1] But see Lang's _Historical Mysteries_, pp. 241-242, where this

traditional account is discussed and rejected.

EOTVOS, JOZSEF, BARON (1813-1871), Hungarian writer and statesman, the

son of Baron Ignacz Eotvos and the baroness Lilian, was born at Buda on

the 13th of September 1813. After an excellent education he entered the

civil service as a vice-notary, and was early introduced to political

life by his father. He also spent many years in western Europe,

assimilating the new ideas both literary and political, and making the

acquaintance of the leaders of the Romantic school. On his return to

Hungary he wrote his first political work, _Prison Reform_; and at the

diet of 1839-1840 he made a great impression by his eloquence and

learning. One of his first speeches (published, with additional matter,

in 1841) warmly advocated Jewish emancipation. Subsequently, in the

columns of the _Pesti Hirlap_, Eotvos disseminated his progressive ideas

farther afield, his standpoint being that the necessary reforms could

only be carried out administratively by a responsible and purely

national government. The same sentiments pervade his novel _The Village

Notary_ (1844-1846), one of the classics of the Magyar literature, as

well as in the less notable romance _Hungary in 1514_, and the comedy

_Long live Equality!_ In 1842 he married Anna Rosty, but his happy

domestic life did not interfere with his public career. He was now

generally regarded as one of the leading writers and politicians of

Hungary, while the charm of his oratory was such that, whenever the

archduke palatine Joseph desired to have a full attendance in the House

of Magnates, he called upon Eotvos to address it. The February

revolution of 1848 was the complete triumph of Eotvos' ideas, and he

held the portfolio of public worship and instruction in the first

responsible Hungarian ministry. But his influence extended far beyond

his own department. Eotvos, Deak and Szechenyi represented the pacific,

moderating influence in the council of ministers, but when the premier,

Batthyany, resigned, Eotvos, in despair, retired for a time to Munich.

Yet, though withdrawn from the tempests of the War of Independence, he

continued to serve his country with his pen. His _Influence of the

Ruling Ideas of the 19th Century on the State_ (Pest, 1851-1854, German

editions at Vienna and Leipzig the same year) profoundly influenced

literature and public opinion in Hungary. On his return home, in 1851,

he kept resolutely aloof from all political movements. In 1859 he

published _The Guarantees of the Power and Unity of Austria_ (Ger. ed.

Leipzig, same year), in which he tried to arrive at a compromise between

personal union and ministerial responsibility on the one hand and

centralization on the other. After the Italian war, however, such a

halting-place was regarded as inadequate by the majority of the nation.

In the diet of 1861 Eotvos was one of the most loyal followers of Deak,

and his speech in favour of the "Address" (see DEAK, FRANCIS) made a

great impression at Vienna. The enforced calm which prevailed during the

next few years enabled him to devote himself once more to literature,

and, in 1866, he was elected president of the Hungarian academy. In the

diets of 1865 and 1867 he fought zealously by the side of Deak, with

whose policy he now completely associated himself. On the formation of

the Andrassy cabinet (Feb. 1867) he once more accepted the portfolio of

public worship and education, being the only one of the ministers of

1848 who thus returned to office. He had now, at last, the opportunity

of realizing the ideals of a lifetime. That very year the diet passed

his bill for the emancipation of the Jews; though his further efforts in

the direction of religious liberty were less successful, owing to the

opposition of the Catholics. But his greatest achievement was the

National Schools Act, the most complete system of education provided for

Hungary since the days of Maria Theresa. Good Catholic though he was (in

matters of religion he had been the friend and was the disciple of

Montalembert), Eotvos looked with disfavour on the dogma of papal

infallibility, promulgated in 1870, and when the bishop of Fehervar

proclaimed it, Eotvos cited him to appear at the capital _ad audiendum

verbum regium_. He was a constant defender of the composition with

Austria (_Ausgleich_), and during the absence of Andrassy used to

preside over the council of ministers; but the labours of the last few

years were too much for his failing health, and he died at Pest on the

2nd of February 1871. On the 3rd of May 1879 a statue was erected to him

at Pest in the square which bears his name.

Eotvos occupied as prominent a place in Hungarian literature as in

Hungarian politics. His peculiarity, both as a politician and as a

statesman, lies in the fact that he was a true philosopher, a

philosopher at heart as well as in theory; and in his poems and novels

he clothed in artistic forms all the great ideas for which he contended

in social and political life. The best of his verses are to be found in

his ballads, but his poems are insignificant compared with his romances.

It was _The Carthusians_, written on the occasion of the floods at Pest

in 1838, that first took the public by storm. The Magyar novel was then

in its infancy, being chiefly represented by the historico-epics of

Josika. Eotvos first modernized it, giving prominence in his pages to

current social problems and political aspirations. The famous _Village

Notary_ came still nearer to actual life, while _Hungary in 1514_, in

which the terrible Dozsa _Jacquerie_ (see DOZSA) is so vividly

described, is especially interesting because it rightly attributes the

great national catastrophe of Mohacs to the blind selfishness of the

Magyar nobility and the intense sufferings of the people. Yet, as

already stated, all these books are written with a moral purpose, and

their somewhat involved and difficult style is, nowadays at any rate, a

trial to those who are acquainted with the easy, brilliant and lively

novels of Jokai.

The best edition of Eotvos' collected works is that of 1891, in 17

vols. Comparatively few of his writings have been translated, but

there are a good English version (London, 1850) and numerous German

versions of _The Village Notary_, while _The Emancipation of the Jews_

has been translated into Italian and German (Pest, 1841-1842), and a

German translation of _Hungary in 1514_, under the title of _Der

Bauernkrieg in Ungarn_ was published at Pest in 1850.

See A. Ban, _Life and Art of Baron Joseph Eotvos_ (Hung.) (Budapest,

1902); Zoltan Ferenczi _Baron Joseph Eotvos_ (Hung.) (Budapest, 1903)

[this is the best biography]; and M. Berkovics, _Baron Joseph Eotvos

and the French Literature_ (Hung.) (Budapest, 1904). (R. N. B.)

EPAMINONDAS (c. 418-362), Theban general and statesman, born about 418

B.C. of a noble but impoverished family. For his education he was

chiefly indebted to Lysis of Tarentum, a Pythagorean exile who had found

refuge with his father Polymnis. He first comes into notice in the

attack upon Mantineia in 385, when he fought on the Spartan side and

saved the life of his future colleague Pelopidas. In his youth

Epaminondas took little part in public affairs; he held aloof from the

political assassinations which preceded the Theban insurrection of 379.

But in the following campaigns against Sparta he rendered good service

in organizing the Theban defence. In 371 he represented Thebes at the

congress in Sparta, and by his refusal to surrender the Boeotian cities

under Theban control prevented the conclusion of a general peace. In the

ensuing campaign he commanded the Boeotian army which met the

Peloponnesian levy at Leuctra, and by a brilliant victory on this site,

due mainly to his daring innovations in the tactics of the heavy

infantry, established at once the predominance of Thebes among the

land-powers of Greece and his own fame as the greatest and most original

of Greek generals. At the instigation of the Peloponnesian states which

armed against Sparta in consequence of this battle, Epaminondas in 370

led a large host into Laconia; though unable to capture Sparta he

ravaged its territory and dealt a lasting blow at Sparta's predominance

in Peloponnesus by liberating the Messenians and rebuilding their

capital at Messene. Accused on his return to Thebes of having exceeded

the term of his command, he made good his defence and was re-elected

boeotarch. In 369 he forced the Isthmus lines and secured Sicyon for

Thebes, but gained no considerable successes. In the following year he

served as a common soldier in Thessaly, and upon being reinstated in

command contrived the safe retreat of the Theban army from a difficult

position. Returning to Thessaly next year at the head of an army he

procured the liberation of Pelopidas from the tyrant Alexander of Pherae

without striking a blow. In his third expedition (366) to Peloponnesus,

Epaminondas again eluded the Isthmus garrison and won over the Achaeans

to the Theban alliance. Turning his attention to the growing maritime

power of Athens, Epaminondas next equipped a fleet of 100 triremes, and

during a cruise to the Propontis detached several states from the

Athenian confederacy. When subsequent complications threatened the

position of Thebes in Peloponnesus he again mustered a large army in

order to crush the newly formed Spartan league (362). After some

masterly operations between Sparta and Mantineia, by which he nearly

captured both these towns, he engaged in a decisive battle on the latter

site, and by his vigorous shock tactics gained a complete victory over

his opponents (see MANTINEIA). Epaminondas himself received a severe

wound during the combat, and died soon after the issue was decided.

His title to fame rests mainly on his brilliant qualities both as a

strategist and as a tactician; his influence on military art in Greece

was of the greatest. For the purity and uprightness of his character he

likewise stood in high repute; his culture and eloquence equalled the

highest Attic standard. In politics his chief achievement was the final

overthrow of Sparta's predominance in the Peloponnese; as a constructive

statesman he displayed no special talent, and the lofty pan-Hellenic

ambitions which are imputed to him at any rate never found a practical

expression.

Cornelius Nepos, _Vita Epaminondae_; Diodorus xv. 52-88; Xenophon,

_Hellenica_, vii.; L. Pomtow, _Das Leben des Epaminondas_ (Berlin,

1870); von Stein, _Geschichte der spartanischen und thebanischen

Hegemonie_ (Dorpat, 1884), pp. 123 sqq.; H. Swoboda in Pauly-Wissowa,

_Realencyclopadie_, v. pt. 2 (Stuttgart, 1905), pp. 2674-2707; also

ARMY: _History_, S 6. (M. O. B. C.)

EPARCH, an official, a governor of a province of Roman Greece, [Greek:

eparchos], whose title was equivalent to, or represented that of the

Roman _praefectus_. The area of his administration was called an eparchy

([Greek: eparchia]). The term survives as one of the administrative

units of modern Greece, the country being divided into nomarchies,

subdivided into eparchies, again subdivided into demarchies (see GREECE:

_Local Administration_). "Eparch" and "eparchy" are also used in the

Russian Orthodox Church for a bishop and his diocese respectively.

EPAULETTE (a French word, from _epaule_, a shoulder), properly a

shoulder-piece, and so applied to the shoulder-knot of ribbon to which a

scapulary was attached, worn by members of a religious order. The

military usage was probably derived from the metal plate (_epauliere_)

which protected the shoulder in the defensive armour of the 16th

century. It was first used merely as a shoulder knot to fasten the

baldric, and the application of it to mark distinctive grades of rank

was begun in France at the suggestion, it is said, of Charles Louis

Auguste Fouquet, duc de Belle-Isle, in 1759. In modern times it always

appears as a shoulder ornament for military and naval uniforms. At first

it consisted merely of a fringe hanging from the end of the

shoulder-strap or cord over the sleeve, but towards the end of the 18th

century it became a solid ornament, consisting of a flat shoulder-piece,

extended beyond the point of the shoulder into an oval plate, from the

edge of which hangs a thick fringe, in the case of officers of gold or

silver. The epaulette is worn in the British navy by officers above the

rank of sub-lieutenant; in the army it ceased to be worn about 1855. It

is worn by officers in the United States navy above the rank of ensign;

since 1872 it is only worn by general officers in the army. In most

other countries epaulettes are worn by officers, and in the French army

by the men also, with a fringe of worsted, various distinctions of shape

and colour being observed between ranks, corps and arms of the service.

The "scale" is similar to the epaulette, but has no fringe.

EPEE, CHARLES-MICHEL, ABBE DE L' (1712-1789), celebrated for his

labours in behalf of the deaf and dumb, was born at Paris on the 25th of

November 1712, being the son of the king's architect. He studied for the

church, but having declined to sign a religious formula opposed to the

doctrines of the Jansenists, he was denied ordination by the bishop of

his diocese. He then devoted himself to the study of law; but about the

time of his admission to the bar of Paris, the bishop of Troyes granted

him ordination, and offered him a canonry in his cathedral. This bishop

died soon after, and the abbe, coming to Paris, was, on account of his

relations with Soanen, the famous Jansenist, deprived of his

ecclesiastical functions by the archbishop of Beaumont. About the same

time it happened that he heard of two deaf mutes whom a priest lately

dead had been endeavouring to instruct, and he offered to take his

place. The Spaniard Pereira was then in Paris, exhibiting the results he

had obtained in the education of deaf mutes; and it has been affirmed

that it was from him that Epee obtained his manual alphabet. The abbe,

however, affirmed that he knew nothing of Pereira's method; and whether

he did or not, there can be no doubt that he attained far greater

success than Pereira or any of his predecessors, and that the whole

system now followed in the instruction of deaf mutes virtually owes its

origin to his intelligence and devotion. In 1755 he founded, for this

beneficent purpose, a school which he supported at his own expense until

his death, and which afterwards was succeeded by the "Institution

Nationale des Sourds Muets a Paris," founded by the National Assembly in

1791. He died on the 23rd of December 1789. In 1838 a bronze monument

was erected over his grave in the church of Saint Roch. He published

various books on his method of instruction, but that published in 1784

virtually supersedes all others. It is entitled _La Veritable Maniere

d'instruire les sourds et muets, confirmee par une longue experience_.

He also began a _Dictionnaire general des signes_, which was completed

by his successor, the abbe Sicard.

EPEE-DE-COMBAT, a weapon still used in France for duelling, and there

and elsewhere (blunted, of course) for exercise and amusement in fencing

(q.v.). It has a sharp-pointed blade, about 35 in. long, without any

cutting edge, and the guard, or shell, is bowl-shaped, having its

convexity towards the point. The _epee_ is the modern representative of

the small-sword, and both are distinguished from the older rapier,

mainly by being several inches shorter and much lighter in weight. The

small-sword (called thus in opposition to the heavy cavalry broadsword),

was worn by gentlemen in full dress throughout the 18th century, and it

still survives in the modern English court costume.

Fencing practice was originally carried on without the protection of any

mask for the face. Wire masks were not invented till near 1780 by a

famous fencing-master, La Boessiere the elder, and did not come into

general use until much later. Consequently, in order to avoid dangerous

accidents to the face, and especially the eyes, it was long the rigorous

etiquette of the fencing-room that the point should always be kept low.

In the 17th century a Scottish nobleman, who had procured the

assassination of a fencing-master in revenge for having had one of his

eyes destroyed by the latter at sword-play, pleaded on his trial for

murder that it was the custom to "spare the face."

Rowlandson's well-known drawing of a fencing bout, dated 1787, shows two

accomplished amateurs making a foil assault without masks, while in the

background a less practised one is having a wire mask tied on.

For greater safety the convention was very early arrived at that no hits

should count in a fencing-bout except those landing on the breast. Thus

sword-play soon became so unpractical as to lose much of its value as a

training for war or the duel. For, hits with "sharps" take effect

wherever they are made, and many an expert fencer of the old school has

been seriously wounded, or lost his life in a duel, through forgetting

that very simple fact.

Strangely enough, when masks began to be generally worn, and the

_fleuret_ (_anglice_, "foil," a cheap and light substitute for the real

epee) was invented, fencing practice became gradually even more

conventional than before. No one seems to have understood that with

masks all the conventions could be safely done away with, root and

branch, and sword-practice might assume all the semblance of reality.

Nevertheless it should be clearly recognized that the basis of modern

foil-fencing was laid with the epee or small-sword alone, in and before

the days of Angelo, of Danet, and the famous chevalier de St George, who

were among the first to adopt the fleuret also. All the illustrious

French professors who came after them, such as La Boessiere the younger,

Lafaugere, Jean Louis, Cordelois, Grisier, Bertrand and Robert, with

amateurs like the baron d'Ezpeleta, were foil-players pure and simple,

whose reputations were gained before the modern epee play had any

recognized status. It was reserved for Jacob, a Parisian fencing-master,

to establish in the last quarter of the 19th century a definite method

of the epee, which differed essentially from all its forerunners. He was

soon followed by Baudry, Spinnewyn, Laurent and Ayat. The methods of the

four first-named, not differing much _inter se_, are based on the

perception that in the real sword fight, where hits are effective on all

parts of the person, the "classical" bent-arm guard, with the foil

inclining upwards, is hopelessly bad. It offers a tempting mark in the

exposed sword-arm itself, while the point requires a movement to bring

it in line for the attack, which involves a fatal loss of time. The epee

is really in the nature of a short lance held in one hand, and for both

rapidity and precision of attack, as well as for the defence of the

sword-arm and the body behind it, a position of guard _with the arm

almost fully extended, and epee in line with the forearm_, is far the

safest. Against this guard the direct lunge at the body is impossible,

except at the risk of a mutual or double hit (_le coup des deux

veuves_). No safe attack at the face or body can be made without first

binding or beating, opposing or evading the adverse blade, and such an

attack usually involves an initial forward movement. Beats and binds of

the blade, with retreats of the body, or counter attacks with

opposition, replace the old foil-parries in most instances, except at

close quarters. And much of the offensive is reduced to thrusts at the

wrist or forearm, intended to disable without seriously wounding the

adversary. The direct lunge (_coup-droit_) at the body often succeeds in

tournaments, but usually at the cost of a counter hit, which, though

later in time, would be fatal with sharp weapons.

Ayat's method, as might be expected from a first-class foil-player, is

less simple. Indeed for years, too great simplicity marked the most

successful epee-play, because it usually gained its most conspicuous

victories over those who attempted a foil defence, and whose practice

gave them no safe strokes for an attack upon the extended blade. But by

degrees the epeists themselves discovered new ways of attacking with

comparative safety, and at the present day a complete epee-player is

master of a large variety of attractive as well as scientific movements,

both of attack and defence.

It was mainly by amateurs that this development was achieved. Perhaps

the most conspicuous representative of the new school is J.

Joseph-Renaud, a consummate swordsman, who has also been a champion

foil-player. Lucien Gaudin, Alibert and Edmond Wallace may be also

mentioned as among the most skilful amateurs, Albert Ayat and L. Bouche

as professors--all of Paris. Belgium, Italy and England have also

produced epeists quite of the first rank.

The epee lends itself to competition far better than the foil, and the

revival of the small-sword soon gave rise in France to "pools" and

"tournaments" in which there was the keenest rivalry between all comers.

In considering the epee from a British point of view, it may be

mentioned that it was first introduced publicly in London by C.

Newton-Robinson at an important assault-at-arms held in the Steinway

Hall on the 4th May 1900. Professor Spinnewyn was the principal

demonstrator, with his pupil, the late Willy Sulzbacher. The next day

was held at the Inns of Court R. V. School of Arms, Lincoln's Inn, the

first English open epee tournament for amateurs. It was won by W.

Sulzbacher, C. Newton-Robinson being second, and Paul Ettlinger, a

French resident in London, third. This was immediately followed by the

institution of the Epee Club of London, which, under the successive

residencies of a veteran swordsman, Sir Edward Jenkinson, and of Lord

Desborough, subsequently held annual open international tournaments. The

winners were: in 1901, Willy Sulzbacher; 1902, Robert Montgomerie; 1903,

the marquis de Chasseloup-Laubat; 1904, J.J. Renaud; 1905, R.

Montgomerie. In 1906 the Amateur Fencing Association for the first time

recognized the best-placed Englishman, Edgar Seligman (who was the

actual winner), as the English epee champion. In 1907 R. Montgomerie was

again the winner, in 1908 C.L. Daniell, in 1909 R. Montgomerie.

Among the most active of the English amateurs who were the earliest to

perceive the wonderful possibilities of epee-play, it is right to

mention Captain Hutton, Lord Desborough, Sir Cosmo Duff-Gordon, Bart.,

Sir Charles Dilke, Bart., Lord Howard de Walden, Egerton Castle, A.S.

Cope, R.A., W.H.C. Staveley, C.F. Clay, Lord Morpeth, Evan James, Paul

King, J.B. Cunliffe, John Norbury, Jr., Theodore A. Cook, John

Jenkinson, R. Montgomerie, S. Martineau, E.B. Milnes, H.J. Law, R.

Merivale, the Marquis of Dufferin, Hugh Pollock, R.W. Doyne, A.G. Ross,

the Hon. Ivor Guest and Henry Balfour.

Among foreign amateurs who did most to promote the use of the epee in

England were Messrs P. Ettlinger, Anatole Paroissien, J. Joseph-Renaud,

W. Sulzbacher, Rene Lacroix, H.G. Berger and the Marquis de

Chasseloup-Laubat.

Epee practice became popular among Belgian and Dutch fencers about the

same time as in England, and this made it possible to set on foot

international team-contests for amateurs, which have done much to

promote good feeling and acquaintanceship among swordsmen of several

countries. In 1903 a series of international matches between teams of

six was inaugurated in Paris. Up to 1909 the French team uniformly won

the first place, with Belgium or England second.

English fencers who were members of these international teams were Lord

Desborough, Theodore A. Cook, Bowden, Cecil Haig, J. Norbury, Jr., R.

Montgomerie, John Jenkinson, F. Townsend, W.H.C. Staveley, S. Martineau,

C.L. Daniell, W. Godden, Captain Haig, M.D.V. Holt, Edgar Seligman, C.

Newton-Robinson, A.V. Buckland, P.M. Davson, E.M. Amphlett and L.V.

Fildes. In 1906 a British epee team of four, consisting of Lord

Desborough, Sir Cosmo Duff-Gordon, Bart., Edgar Seligman and C.

Newton-Robinson, with Lord Howard de Walden and Theodore Cook as

reserves (the latter acting as captain of the team), went to Athens to

compete in the international match at the Olympic games. After defeating

the Germans rather easily, the team opposed and worsted the Belgians. It

thus found itself matched against the French in the final, the Greek

team having been beaten by the French and the Dutch eliminated by the

Belgians. After a very close fight the result was officially declared a

tie. This was the first occasion upon which an English fencing team had

encountered a French one of the first rank upon even terms. In fighting

off the tie, however, the French were awarded the first prize and the

Englishmen the second.

In the Olympic games of London, 1908, the Epee International Individual

Tournament was won by Alibert (France), but Montgomerie, Haig and Holt

(England) took the 4th, 5th, and 8th places in the final pool. The

result of the International Team competition was also very creditable to

the English representatives, Daniell, Haig, Holt, Montgomerie and

Amphlett, who by defeating the Dutch, Germans, Danes and Belgians took

second place to the French. Egerton Castle was captain of the English

team.

In open International Tournaments on the Continent, English epeists have

also been coming to the front. None had won such a competition up to

1909 outright, but the following had reached the final pool: C.

Newton-Robinson, Brussels, 1901 (10th), Etretat, 1904 (6th); E.

Seligman, Copenhagen, 1907 (2nd), and Paris, 1909 (12th); R.

Montgomerie, Paris, 1909 (5th); and E.M. Amphlett, Paris, 1909 (10th).

The method of ascertaining the victor in epee "tournaments" is by

dividing the competitors into "pools," usually of six or eight fencers.

Each of these fights an assault for first hit only, with every other

member of the same pool, and he who is least often hit, or not at all,

is returned the winner. If the competitors are numerous, fresh pools are

formed out of the first two, three or four in each pool of the

preliminary round, and so on, until a small number are left in for a

final pool, the winner of which is the victor of the tournament.

Epee fencing can be, and often is, conducted indoors, but one of its

attractions consists in its fitness for open-air practice in pleasant

gardens.

In the use of the epee the most essential points are (1) the position of

the sword-arm, which, whether fully extended or not, should always be so

placed as to ensure the protection of the wrist, forearm and elbow from

direct thrusts, by the intervention of the guard or shell; (2) readiness

of the legs for _instant_ advance or retreat; and (3) the way in which

the weapon is held, the best position (though hard to acquire and

maintain) being that adopted by J.J. Renaud with the fingers _over_ the

grip, so that a downward beat does not easily disarm.

The play of individuals is determined by their respective temperaments

and physical powers. But every fencer should be always ready to deliver

a well-aimed, swift, direct thrust at any exposed part of the

antagonist's arm, his mask or thigh. Very tall men, who are usually not

particularly quick on their legs, should not as a rule attack, otherwise

than by direct thrusts, when matched against shorter men. For if they

merely extend their sword-arm in response to a simple attack, their

longer reach will ward it off with a stop or counter-thrust. Short men

can only attack them safely by beating, binding, grazing, pressing or

evading the blade, and the taller fencers must be prepared with all the

well-known parries and counters to such offensive movements, as well as

with the stop-thrust to be made either with advancing opposition or with

a retreat. Fencers of small stature must be exceedingly quick on their

feet, unless they possess the art of parrying to perfection, and even

then, if slow to shift ground, they will continually be in danger. With

plenty of room, the quick mover can always choose the moment when he

will be within distance, for an attack which his slower opponent will be

always fearing and unable to prevent or anticipate.

It is desirable to put on record the modern form of the weapon. An

average epee weighs, complete, about a pound and a half, while a foil

weighs approximately one-third less. The epee blade is exactly like that

of the old small-sword after the abandonment of the "_colichemarde_"

form, in which the "_forte_" of the blade was greatly thickened. In

length from guard or shell to point it measures about 35 in., and in

width at the shell about 13/16ths of an inch. From this it gradually and

regularly tapers to the point. There is no cutting edge. The side of the

epee which is usually held uppermost is slightly concave, the other is

strengthened with a midrib, nearly equal in thickness and similar in

shape to either half of the true blade. The material is tempered steel.

There is a haft or tang about 8 in. long, which is pushed through a

circular guard or shell ("_coquille_") of convex form, the diameter of

which is normally 5 in. and the convexity 1-3/4 in. The shell is of

steel or aluminium, and if of the latter metal, sometimes fortified at

the centre with a disk of steel the size of a crown piece. The insertion

of the haft or tang through the shell may be either central or excentric

to the extent of about 1 in., for the better protection of the outside

of the forearm.

After passing through the shell, the haft of the blade is inserted in a

grip or handle ("_poignet_"), averaging 7 in. in length and of

quadrangular section, which is made of tough wood covered with leather,

india-rubber, wound cord or other strong material with a rough surface.

The grip is somewhat wider than its vertical thickness when held in the

usual way, and it diminishes gradually from shell to pommel for

convenience of holding. It should have a slight lateral curvature, so

that in executing circular movements the pommel is kept clear of the

wrist. The pommel, usually of steel, is roughly spherical or

eight-sided, and serves as a counterbalance. The end of the haft is

riveted through it, except in the case of "_epees demontables_," which

are the most convenient, as a blade may be changed by simply unscrewing

or unlocking the pommel.

An epee is well balanced and light in hand when, on poising the blade

across the forefinger, about 1 in. in advance of the shell, it is in

equilibrium.

For practice, the point is blunted to resemble the flat head of a nail,

and is made still more incapable of penetration by winding around it a

small ball of waxed thread, such as cobblers use. This is called the

"button." In competitions various forms of "_boutons marqueurs_," all of

which are unsatisfactory, are occasionally used. The "_pointe d'arret_,"

like a small tin-tack placed head downwards on the flattened point of

the epee, and fastened on by means of the waxed thread, is, on the

contrary, most useful, by fixing in the clothes, to show where and when

a good hit has been made. The point need only protrude about 1/16th of

an inch from the button. There are several kinds of pointes d'arret. The

best is called, after its inventor, the "Leon Sazie," and has three

blunt points of hardened steel each slightly excentric. The single point

is sometimes prevented by the thickness of the button from scoring a

good hit.

A mask of wire netting is used to protect the face, and a stout glove on

the sword hand. It is necessary to wear strong clothes and to pad the

jacket and trousers at the most exposed parts, in case the blade should

break unnoticed. A vulnerable spot, which ought to be specially padded,

is just under the sword-arm.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Among the older works on the history and practice of

the small-sword, or epee, are the following:--_The Scots

Fencing-Master, or Compleat Small-swordsman_, by W.H. Gent (Sir

William Hope, afterwards baronet) (Edinburgh, 1687), and several other

works by the same author, of later date, for which see _Schools and

Masters of Fence_, by Egerton Castle; _Nouveau traite de la perfection

sur le fait des armes_, by P.G.F. Girard (Paris, 1736); _L'Ecole des

armes_, by M. Angelo (London, 1763); _L'Art des armes_, by M. Danet (2

vols., Paris, 1766-1767); _Nouveau traite de l'art des armes_, by

Nicolas Demeuse (Liege, 1778).

More modern are: _Traite de l'art des armes_, by la Boessiere, Jr.

(Paris, 1818); _Les Armes et le duel_, by A. Grisier (2nd ed., Paris,

1847); _Les Secrets de l'epee_, by the baron de Bazancourt (Paris,

1862); _Schools and Masters of Fence_, by Egerton Castle (London,

1885); _Le Jeu de l'epee_, by J. Jacob and Emil Andre (Paris, 1887);

_L'Escrime pratique au XIX^e siecle_, by Ambroise Baudry (Paris);

L'Escrime a l'epee, by A. Spinnewyn and Paul Manonry (Paris, 1898);

_The Sword and the Centuries_, by Captain Hutton (London,1901); "The

Revival of the Small-sword," by C. Newton-Robinson, in the _Nineteenth

Century and After_ (London, January 1905); _Nouveau Traite de l'epee_,

by Dr Edom, privately published (Paris, 1908); and, most important of

all, _Methode d'escrime a l'epee_, by J. Joseph-Renaud, privately

published (Paris, 1909). (C. E. N. R.)

EPERJES, a town of Hungary, capital of the county of Saros, 190 m. N.E.

of Budapest by rail. Pop. (1900) 13,098. It is situated on the left bank

of the river Tarcza, an affluent of the Theiss, and has been almost

completely rebuilt since a great fire in 1887. Eperjes is one of the

oldest towns of Hungary, and is still partly surrounded by its old

walls. It is the seat of a Greek-Catholic bishop, and possesses a

beautiful cathedral built in the 18th century in late Gothic style. It

possesses manufactures of cloth, table-linen and earthenware, and has an

active trade in wine, linen, cattle and grain. About 2 m. to the south

is Sovar with important salt-works.

In the same county, 28 m. by rail N. of Eperjes, is situated the old

town of _Bartfa_ (pop. 6098), which possesses a Gothic church from the

14th century, and an interesting town-hall, dating from the 15th

century, and containing very valuable archives. In its neighbourhood,

surrounded by pine forests, are the baths of Bartfa, with twelve mineral

springs--iodate, ferruginous and alkaline--used for bathing and

drinking.

About 6 m. N.W. of Eperjes is situated the village of Vorosvagas, which

contains the only opal mine in Europe. The opal was mined here 800 years

ago, and the largest piece hitherto found, weighing 2940 carats and

estimated to have a value of L175,000, is preserved in the Court Museum

at Vienna.

Eperjes was founded about the middle of the 12th century by a German

colony, and was elevated to the rank of a royal free town in 1347 by

Louis I. (the Great). It was afterwards fortified and received special

privileges. The Reformation found many early adherents here, and the

town played an important part during the religious wars of the 17th

century. It became famous by the so-called "butchery of Eperjes," a

tribunal instituted by the Austrian general Caraffa in 1687, which

condemned to death and confiscated the property of a great number of

citizens accused of Protestantism. During the 16th and the 17th

centuries its German educational establishments enjoyed a wide

reputation.

EPERNAY, a town of northern France, capital of an arrondissement in the

department of Marne, 88 m. E.N.E. of Paris on the main line of the

Eastern railway to Chalons-sur-Marne. Pop. (1906) 20,291. The town is

situated on the left bank of the Marne at the extremity of the pretty

valley of the Cubry, by which it is traversed. In the central and oldest

quarter the streets are narrow and irregular; the surrounding suburbs

are modern and more spacious, and that of La Folie, on the east,

contains many handsome villas belonging to rich wine merchants. The town

has also extended to the right bank of the Marne. One of its churches

preserves a portal and stained-glass windows of the 16th century, but

the other public buildings are modern. Epernay is best known as the

principal _entrepot_ of the Champagne wines, which are bottled and kept

in extensive vaults in the chalk rock on which the town is built. The

manufacture of the apparatus and material used in the champagne industry

occupies many hands, and the Eastern Railway Company has important

workshops here. Brewing, and the manufacture of sugar and of hats and

caps, are also carried on. Epernay is the seat of a sub-prefect and has

tribunals of first instance and of commerce, and communal colleges for

girls and boys.

Epernay (_Sparnacum_) belonged to the archbishops of Reims from the 5th

to the 10th century, at which period it came into the possession of the

counts of Champagne. It suffered severely during the Hundred Years' War,

and was burned by Francis I. in 1544. It resisted Henry of Navarre in

1592, and Marshal Biron fell in the attack which preceded its capture.

In 1642 it was, along with Chateau-Thierry, erected into a duchy and

assigned to the duke of Bouillon.

EPERNON, a town of northern France in the department of Eure-et-Loir, at

the confluence of the Drouette and the Guesle, 17 m. N.E. of Chartres by

rail. Pop. (1906) 2370. It belonged originally to the counts of

Montfort, who, in the 11th century, built a castle here of which the

ruins are still left, and granted a charter to the town. In the 13th

century it became an independent lordship, which remained attached to

the crown of Navarre till, in the 16th century, it was sold by King

Henry (afterwards King Henry IV. of France) to Jean Louis de Nogaret,

for whom it was raised to the rank of a duchy in 1581. The new duke of

Epernon was one of the favourites of Henry III., who were called _les

Mignons_; the king showered favours upon him, giving him the posts of

colonel-general in the infantry and of admiral of France. Under the

reign of Henry IV. he made himself practically independent in his

government of Provence. He was instrumental in giving the regency to

Marie de' Medici in 1610, and as a result exercised a considerable

influence upon the government. During his governorship of Guienne in

1622 he had some scandalous scenes with the parlement and the archbishop

of Bordeaux. He died in 1642. His eldest son, Henri de Nogaret de la

Valette, duke of Candale, served under Richelieu, in the armies of

Guienne, of Picardy and of Italy. The second son of Jean Louis de

Nogaret, Bernard, who was born in 1592, and died in 1661, was, like his

father, duke of Epernon, colonel-general in the infantry and governor of

Guienne. After his death, the title of duke of Epernon was borne by the

families of Goth and of Pardaillan.

EPHEBEUM (from Gr. [Greek: ephebos], a young man), in architecture, a

large hall in the ancient Palaestra furnished with seats (Vitruvius v.

11), the length of which should be a third larger than the width. It

served for the exercises of youths of from sixteen to eighteen years of

age.

EPHEBI (Gr. [Greek: epi], and [Greek: hebe], i.e. "those who have

reached puberty"), a name specially given, in Athens and other Greek

towns, to a class of young men from eighteen to twenty years of age, who

formed a sort of college under state control. On the completion of his

seventeenth year the Athenian youth attained his civil majority, and,

provided he belonged to the first three property classes and passed the

scrutiny ([Greek: dokimasia]) as to age, civic descent and physical

capability, was enrolled on the register of his deme ([Greek:

lexiarchikon grammateion]). He thereby at once became liable to the

military training and duties, which, at least in the earliest times,

were the main object of the Ephebia. In the time of Aristotle the names

of the enrolled ephebi were engraved on a bronze pillar (formerly on

wooden tablets) in front of the council-chamber. After admission to the

college, the ephebus took the oath of allegiance, recorded in Pollux and

Stobaeus (but not in Aristotle), in the temple of Aglaurus, and was sent

to Munychia or Acte to form one of the garrison. At the end of the first

year of training, the ephebi were reviewed, and, if their performance

was satisfactory, were provided by the state with a spear and a shield,

which, together with the _chlamys_ (cloak) and _petasus_ (broad-brimmed

hat), made up their equipment. In their second year they were

transferred to other garrisons in Attica, patrolled the frontiers, and

on occasion took an active part in war. During these two years they were

free from taxation, and were not allowed (except in certain cases) to

appear in the law courts as plaintiffs or defendants. The ephebi took

part in some of the most important Athenian festivals. Thus during the

Eleusinia they were told off to fetch the sacred objects from Eleusis

and to escort the image of Iacchus on the sacred way. They also

performed police duty at the meetings of the ecclesia.

After the end of the 4th century B.C. the institution underwent a

radical change. Enrolment ceased to be obligatory, lasted only for a

year, and the limit of age was dispensed with. Inscriptions attest a

continually decreasing number of ephebi, and with the admission of

foreigners the college lost its representative national character. This

was mainly due to the weakening of the military spirit and the progress

of intellectual culture. The military element was no longer

all-important, and the ephebia became a sort of university for

well-to-do young men of good family, whose social position has been

compared with that of the Athenian "knights" of earlier times. The

institution lasted till the end of the 3rd century A.D.

It is probable that the ephebia was in existence in the 5th century

B.C., and controlled by the Areopagus and strategus as its moral and

military supervisors. In the 4th century their place was taken by ten

_sophronistae_ (one for each tribe), who, as the name implies, took

special interest in the morals of those under them, their military

training being in the hands of experts, of whom the chief were the

_hoplomachus_, the _acontistes_, the _toxotes_ and the _aphetes_

(instructors respectively in the use of arms, javelin-throwing, archery

and the use of artillery engines). Later, the _sophronistae_ were

superseded by a single official called _cosmetes_, elected for a year by

the people, who appointed the instructors. When the ephebia instead of a

military college became a university, the military instructors were

replaced by philosophers, rhetoricians, grammarians and artists. In

Roman imperial times several new officials were introduced, one of

special importance being the director of the Diogeneion, where youths

under age were trained for the ephebia. At this period the college of

ephebi was a miniature city; its members called themselves "citizens,"

and it possessed an archon, strategus, herald and other officials, after

the model of ancient Athens.

There is an extensive class of inscriptions, ranging from the 3rd

century B.C. to the 3rd century A.D., containing decrees relating to

the ephebi, their officers and instructors, and lists of the same, and

a whole chapter (42) of the Aristotelian _Constitution of Athens_ is

devoted to the subject. The most important treatises on the subject

are: W. Dittenberger, _De ephebis Atticis_ (Gottingen, 1863); A.

Dumont, _Essai sur l'ephebie attique_ (1875-1876); L. Grasberger,

_Erziehung und Unterricht im klassichen Altertum_, iii. (Wurzburg,

1881); J.P. Mahaffy, _Old Greek Education_ (1881); P. Girard,

_L'Education athenienne au V_^e _et IV_^e _siecle avant J.-C._ (2nd

ed., 1891), and article in Daremberg and Saglio's _Dictionnaire des

antiquites_ which contains further bibliographical references; G.

Gilbert, _The Constitutional Antiquities of Athens_ (Eng. tr., 1895);

G. Busolt, _Die griechischen Staats- und Rechtsaltertumer_ (1892); T.

Thalheim and J. Ohler in Pauly-Wissowa, _Realencyclopadie der

classischen Altertumswissenschaft_, v. pt. 2 (1905); W.W. Capes,

_University Life in Ancient Athens_ (1877).

EPHEMERIS (Greek for a "diary"), a table giving for stated times the

apparent position and other numerical particulars relating to a heavenly

body. The _Astronomical Ephemeris_, familiarly known as the "Nautical

Almanac," is a national annual publication containing ephemerides of the

principal or more conspicuous heavenly bodies, elements and other data

of eclipses, and other matter useful to the astronomer and navigator.

The governments of the United Kingdom, United States, France, Germany

and Spain publish such annals.

EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE. This book of the New Testament, the most

general and least occasional and polemic of all the Pauline epistles, a

large section of which seems almost like the literary elaboration of a

theological topic, may best be described as a solemn oration, addressed

to absent hearers, and intended not primarily to clarify their minds but

to stir their emotions. It is thus a true letter, but in the grand

style, verging on the nature not of an essay but a poem. _Ephesians_ has

been called "the crown of St Paul's writings," and whether it be

measured by its theological or its literary interest and importance, it

can fairly dispute with _Romans_ the claim to be his greatest epistle.

In the public and private use of Christians some parts of _Ephesians_

have been among the most favourite of all New Testament passages. Like

its sister Epistle to the Colossians, it represents, whoever wrote it,

deep experience and bold use of reflection on the meaning of that

experience; if it be from the pen of the Apostle Paul, it reveals to us

a distinct and important phase of his thought.

To the nature of the epistle correspond well the facts of its title and

address. The title "To the Ephesians" is found in the Muratorian canon,

in Irenaeus, Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria, as well as in all the

earliest MSS. and versions. Marcion, however (c. A.D. 150), used and

recommended copies with the title "To the Laodiceans." This would be

inexplicable if Eph. i. 1 had read in Marcion's copies, as it does in

most ancient authorities, "To the saints which are at Ephesus"; but in

fact the words [Greek: en Epheso] of verse 1 were probably absent. They

were not contained in the text used by Origen (d. 253); Basil (d. 379)

says that "ancient copies" omitted the words; and they are actually

omitted by Codices B (Vaticanus, 4th century) and [Hebrew: alef]

(Sinaiticus, 4th century), together with Codex 67 (11th century). The

words "in Ephesus" were thus probably originally lacking in the address,

and were inserted from the suggestion of the title. Either the address

was general ("to the saints who are also faithful") or else a blank was

left. In the latter case the name may have been intended to be supplied

orally, in communicating the letter, or a different name may have been

written in each of the individual copies. Under any of these hypotheses

the address would indicate that we have a circular letter, written to a

group of churches, doubtless in Asia Minor. This would account for the

general character of the epistle, as well as for the entire and striking

absence of personal greetings and of concrete allusions to existing

circumstances among the readers. It appears to have drawn its title, "To

the Ephesians," from one of the churches for which it was intended,

perhaps the one from which a copy was secured when Paul's epistles were

collected, shortly before or after the year 100. That our epistle is the

one referred to in Col. iv. 16, which was to be had by the Colossians

from Laodicea, is not unlikely. Such an identification doubtless led

Marcion to alter the title in his copies.

The structure of _Ephesians_ is epistolary; it opens with the usual

salutation (i. 1-2) and closes with a brief personal note and formal

farewell (vi. 21-24). In the intervening body of the epistle the writer

also follows the regular form of a letter. In an ordinary Greek letter

(as the papyri show) we should find the salutation followed by an

expression of gratification over the correspondent's good health and of

prayer for its continuance. Paul habitually expanded and deepened this,

and, in this case, that paragraph is enormously enlarged, so that it may

be regarded as including chapters i.-iii., and as carrying the main

thought of the epistle. Chapters iv.-vi. merely make application of the

main ideas worked out in chapters i.-iii. Throughout the epistle we have

a singular combination of the seemingly desultory method of a letter,

turning aside at a word and straying wherever the mood of the moment

leads, with the firm, forward march of earnest and mature thought. In

this combination resides the doubtless unconscious but nevertheless real

literary art of the composition.

The fundamental theme of the epistle is _The Unity of Mankind in

Christ_, and hence the Unity and Divinity of the Church of Christ. God's

purpose from eternity was to unite mankind in Christ, and so to bring

human history to its goal, the New Man, the measure of the stature of

the fulness of Christ. Those who have believed in Christ are the present

representatives and result of this purpose; and a clear knowledge of the

purpose itself, the secret of the ages, has now been revealed to men.

This theme is not formally discussed, as in a theological treatise, but

is rather, as it were, celebrated in lofty eulogy and application.

First, in chapters i.-iii., under the mask of a conventional

congratulatory paragraph, the writer declares at length the privileges

which this great fact confers upon those who by faith receive the gift

of God, and he is thus able to touch on the various aspects of his

subject. Then, in chapters iv.-vi., he turns, with a characteristic and

impressive "therefore," to set forth the obligations which correspond to

the privileges he has just expounded. This author is indeed interested

to prosecute vigorous and substantial thinking, but the mainspring of

his interest is the conviction that such thought is significant for

inner and outer life.

The relationship, both literary and theological, between the epistle to

the _Ephesians_ and that to _the Colossians_ (q.v.) is very close. It is

to be seen in many of the prominent ideas of the two writings,

especially in the developed view of the central position of Christ in

the whole universe; in the conception of the Church as Christ's body, of

which He is the head; in the thought of the great Mystery, once secret,

now revealed. There is further resemblance in the formal moral code,

arranged by classes of persons, and having much the same contents in the

two epistles (Eph. v. 22-vi. 9; Col. iii. 18-iv. 1). In both, also,

Tychicus carries the letter, and in almost identical language the

readers are told that he will by word of mouth give fuller information

about the apostle's affairs (Eph. vi. 21-22; Col. iv. 7-8). Moreover, in

a great number of characteristic phrases and even whole verses the two

are alike. Compare, for instance, Eph. i. 7, Col. i. 14; Eph. i. 10,

Col. i. 20; Eph. i. 21, Col. i. 16; Eph. i. 22, 23, Col. i. 18, 19; Eph.

ii. 5, Col. ii. 13; Eph. ii. 11, Col. ii. 11; Eph: ii. 16, Col. i. 20;

Eph. iii. 2, 3, Col. i. 25, 26, and many other parallels. Only a

comparison in detail will give a true impression of the extraordinary

degree of resemblance. Yet the two epistles do not follow the same

course of thought, and their contents cannot be successfully exhibited

in a common synoptical abstract. Each has its independent occasion,

purpose, character and method; but they draw largely on a common store

of thought and use common means of expression.

The question of the authorship of _Ephesians_ is less important to the

student of the history of Christian thought than in the case of most of

the Pauline epistles, because of the generalness of tone and the lack of

specific allusion in the work. It purports to be by Paul, and was held

to be his by Marcion and in the Muratorian canon, and by Irenaeus,

Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria, all writing at the end of the 2nd

century. No doubt of the Pauline authorship was expressed in ancient

times; nor is there any lack of early use by writers who make no direct

quotation, to raise doubts as to the genuineness of the epistle. The

influence of its language is probably to be seen in Ignatius, Polycarp

and Hermas, less certainly in the epistle of Barnabas. Some resemblances

of expression in Clement of Rome and in Second Clement may have

significance. There is here abundant proof that the epistle was in

existence, and was highly valued and influential with leaders of

Christian thought, about the year 100, when persons who had known Paul

well were still living.

To the evidence given above may be added the use of _Ephesians_ in the

First Epistle of Peter. If the latter epistle could be finally

established as genuine, or its date fixed, it would give important

evidence with regard to _Ephesians_; but in the present state of

discussion we must confine ourselves to pointing out the fact. Some of

the more striking points of contact are the following: Eph. i. 3, 1

Peter i. 3; Eph. i. 20, 21, 1 Peter iii. 22; Eph. ii. 2, 3, iv. 17, 1

Peter iv. 3; Eph. ii. 21, 22, 1 Peter ii. 5; Eph. v. 22, 1 Peter iii. 1,

2; Eph. v. 25, 1 Peter iii. 7, 8; Eph. vi. 5, 1 Peter ii. 18, 19. A

similar relation exists between _Romans_ and _1 Peter_. In both cases

the dependence is clearly on the part of _1 Peter_; for ideas and

phrases that in _Ephesians_ and _Romans_ have their firm place in

closely wrought sequences, are found in _1 Peter_ with less profound

significance and transformed into smooth and pointed maxims and

apophthegmatic sentences.

Objections to the genuineness of _Ephesians_ have been urged since the

early part of the 19th century. The influence of Schleiermacher, whose

pupil Leonhard Usteri in his _Entwickelung der paulinischen

Lehrbegriffs_ (1824) expressed strong doubts as to _Ephesians_, carried

weight. He held that Tychicus was the author. De Wette first (1826)

doubted, then (1843) denied that the epistle was by Paul. The chief

attack came, however, from Baur (1845) and his colleagues of the

Tubingen school. Against the genuineness have appeared Ewald, Renan,

Hausrath, Hilgenfeld, Ritschl, Pfleiderer, Weizsacker, Holtzmann, von

Soden, Schmiedel, von Dobschutz and many others. On the other hand, the

epistle has been defended by Bleek, Neander, Reuss, B. Weiss, Meyer,

Sabatier, Lightfoot, Hort, Sanday, Bacon, Julicher, Harnack, Zahn and

many others. In recent years a tendency has been apparent among critics

to accept _Ephesians_ as a genuine work of Paul. This has followed the

somewhat stronger reaction in favour of _Colossians_.

Before speaking of the more fundamental grounds urged for the rejection

of _Ephesians_, we may look at various points of detail which are of

less significance.

(1) The style has unquestionably a slow and lumbering movement, in

marked contrast with the quick effectiveness of _Romans_ and

_Galatians_. The sentences are much longer and less vivacious, as any

one can see by a superficial examination. But nevertheless there are

parts of the earlier epistles where the same tendency appears (e.g. Rom.

iii. 23-26), and on the whole the style shows Paul's familiar traits.

(2) The vocabulary is said to be peculiar. But it can be shown to be no

more so than that of _Galatians_ (Zahn, _Einleitung_, i. pp. 365 ff.).

On the other hand, some words characteristic of Paul's use appear

(notably [Greek: dio], five times), and the most recent and careful

investigation of Paul's vocabulary (Nageli, _Wortschatz der paulinischen

Briefe_, 1905) concludes that the evidence speaks for Pauline

authorship. (3) Certain phrases have aroused suspicion, for instance,

"the devil" (vi. 11, instead of Paul's usual term "Satan"); "his holy

apostles and prophets" (iii. 5, as smacking of later fulsomeness); "I

Paul" (iii. 1); "unto me, who am less than the least of all the saints"

(iii. 8, as exaggerated). But these cases, when properly understood and

calmly viewed, do not carry conviction against the epistle. (4) The

relation of _Ephesians_ to _Colossians_ would be a serious difficulty

only if _Colossians_ were held to be not by Paul. Those who hold to the

genuineness of _Colossians_ find it easier to explain the resemblances

as the product of the free working of the same mind, than as due to a

deliberate imitator. Holtzmann's elaborate and very ingenious theory

(1872) that _Colossians_ has been expanded, on the basis of a shorter

letter of Paul, by the same later hand which had previously written the

whole of _Ephesians_, has not met with favour from recent scholars.

But the more serious difficulties which to many minds still stand in the

way of the acceptance of the epistle have come from the developed phase

of Pauline theology which it shows, and from the general background and

atmosphere of the underlying system of thought, in which the absence of

the well-known earlier controversies is remarkable, while some things

suggest the thought of John and a later age. Among the most important

points in which the ideas and implications of _Ephesians_ suggest an

authorship and a period other than that of Paul are the following:

(a) The union of Gentiles and Jews in one body is already accomplished.

(b) The Christology is more advanced, uses Alexandrian terms, and

suggests the ideas of the Gospel of John. (c) The conception of the

Church as the body of Christ is new. (d) There is said to be a general

softening of Pauline thought in the direction of the Christianity of the

2nd century, while very many characteristic ideas of the earlier

epistles are absent.

With regard to the changed state of affairs in the Church, it must be

said that this can be a conclusive argument only to one who holds the

view of the Tubingen scholars, that the Apostolic Age was all of a piece

and was dominated solely by one controversy. The change in the situation

is surely not greater than can be imagined within the lifetime of Paul.

That the epistle implies as already existent a developed system of

Gnostic thought such as only came into being in the 2nd century is not

true, and such a date is excluded by the external evidence. As to the

other points, the question is, whether the admittedly new phase of

Paul's theological thought is so different from his earlier system as to

be incompatible with it. In answering this question different minds will

differ. But it must remain possible that contact with new scenes and

persons, and especially such controversial necessities as are

exemplified in _Colossians_, stimulated Paul to work out more fully,

under the influence of Alexandrian categories, lines of thought of which

the germs and origins must be admitted to have been present in earlier

epistles. It cannot be maintained that the ideas of _Ephesians_ directly

contradict either in formulation or in tendency the thought of the

earlier epistles. Moreover, if _Colossians_ be accepted as Pauline (and

among other strong reasons the unquestionable genuineness of the epistle

to Philemon renders it extremely difficult not to accept it), the chief

matters of this more advanced Christian thought are fully legitimated

for Paul.

On the other hand, the characteristics of the thought in _Ephesians_

give some strong evidence confirmatory of the epistle's own claim to be

by Paul. (a) The writer of Eph. ii. 11-22 was a Jew, not less proud of

his race than was the writer of Rom. ix.-xi. or of Phil. iii. 4 ff. (b)

The centre in all the theology of the epistle is the idea of redemption.

The use of Alexandrian categories is wholly governed by this interest.

(c) The epistle shows the same panoramic, pictorial, dramatic conception

of Christian truth which is everywhere characteristic of Paul. (d) The

most fundamental elements in the system of thought do not differ from

those of the earlier epistles.

The view which denies the Pauline authorship of _Ephesians_ has to

suppose the existence of a great literary artist and profound

theologian, able to write an epistle worthy of Paul at his best, who,

without betraying any recognizable motive, presented to the world in the

name of Paul an imitation of _Colossians_, incredibly laborious and yet

superior to the original in literary workmanship and power of thought,

and bearing every appearance of earnest sincerity. It must further be

supposed that the name and the very existence of this genius were

totally forgotten in Christian circles fifty years after he wrote. The

balance of evidence seems to lie on the side of the genuineness of the

Epistle.

If _Ephesians_ was written by Paul, it was during the period of his

imprisonment, either at Caesarea or at Rome (iii. 1, iv. 1, vi. 20). At

very nearly the same time he must have written _Colossians_ and

_Philemon_; all three were sent by Tychicus. There is no strong reason

for holding that the three were written from Caesarea. For Rome speaks

the greater probability of the metropolis as the place in which a

fugitive slave would try to hide himself, the impression given in

_Colossians_ of possible opportunity for active mission work (Col. iv.

3, 4; cf. Acts xxviii. 30, 31), the fact that _Philippians_, which in a

measure belongs to the same group, was pretty certainly written from

Rome. As to the Christians addressed, they are evidently converts from

heathenism (ii. 1, 11-13, 17 f., iii. 1, iv. 17); but they are not

merely Gentile Christians at large, for Tychicus carries the letter to

them, Paul has some knowledge of their special circumstances (i. 15),

and they are explicitly distinguished from "all the saints" (iii. 18,

vi. 18). We may most naturally think of them as the members of the

churches of Asia. The letter is very likely referred to in Col. iv. 16,

although this theory is not wholly free from difficulties.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The best commentaries on _Ephesians_ are by C.J.

Ellicott (1855, 4th ed. 1868), H.A.W. Meyer (4th ed., 1867), (Eng.

trans. 1880), T.K. Abbott (1897), J.A. Robinson (1903, 2nd ed. 1904);

in German by H. von Soden (in _Hand-Commentar_) (1891, 2nd ed. 1893),

E. Haupt (in Meyer's _Kommentar_) (8th ed., 1902). J.B. Lightfoot's

commentary on _Colossians_ (1875, 3rd ed. 1879) is important for

_Ephesians_ also. On the English text see H.C.G. Moule (in Cambridge

Bible for Schools) (1887). R.W. Dale, _Epistle to the Ephesians; its

Doctrine and Ethics_ (1882), is a valuable series of expository

discourses.

Questions of genuineness, purpose, &c., are discussed in the New

Testament _Introductions_ of H. Holtzmann (1885, 3rd ed. 1892); B.

Weiss (1886, 3rd ed. 1897, Eng. trans. 1887); G. Salmon (1887, 8th ed.

1897); A. Julicher (1894, 5th and 6th ed. 1906, Eng. trans. 1904); T.

Zahn (1897-1899, 2nd ed. 1900); and in the thorough investigations of

H. Holtzmann, _Kritik der Epheser- und Kolosserbriefe_ (1872), and

F.J.A. Hort, _Prolegomena to St Paul's Epistles to the Romans and the

Ephesians_ (1895). See also the works on the _Apostolic Age_ of C.

Weizsacker (1886, 2nd ed. 1892, Eng. trans. 1894-1895); O. Pfleiderer

(_Das Urchristenthum_) (1887, 2nd ed. 1902, Eng. trans. 1906); and

A.C. McGiffert (1897).

On early attestation see A.H. Charteris, _Canonicity_ (1880) and the

_New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers_ (Oxford, 1905).

The theological ideas of Ephesians are also discussed in some of the

works on Paul's theology; see especially F.C. Baur, _Paulus_ (1845,

2nd ed. 1866-1867, Eng. trans. 1873-1874); O. Pfleiderer, _Der

Paulinismus_ (1873, 2nd ed. 1890, Eng. trans. 1877); and in the works

on New Testament theology by B. Weiss (1868, 7th ed. 1903, Eng. trans.

1882-1883); H. Holtzmann (1897), and G.B. Stevens (1899). See also

Somerville, _St Paul's Conception of Christ_ (1897).

For a guide to other literature see W. Lock, art. "Ephesians, Epistle

to," in Hastings's _Dictionary of the Bible_, the various works of

Holtzmann above referred to, and T.K. Abbott's _Commentary_, pp.

35-40. (J. H. Rs.)

EPHESUS, an ancient Ionian city on the west coast of Asia Minor. In

historic times it was situate on the lower slopes of the hills, Coressus

and Prion, which rise out of a fertile plain near the mouth of the river

Cayster, while the temple and precinct of Artemis or Diana, to the fame

of which the town owed much of its celebrity, were in the plain itself,

E.N.E. at a distance of about a mile. But there is reason to think both

town and shrine had different sites in pre-Ionian times, and that both

lay farther south among the foot-hills of Mt. Solmissus. The situation

of the city was such as at all times to command a great commerce. Of the

three great river basins of Ionia and Lydia, those of the Hermus,

Cayster and Maeander, it commanded the second, and had already access by

easy passes to the other two.

The earliest inhabitants assigned to Ephesus by Greek writers are the

"Amazons," with whom we hear of Leleges, Carians and Pelasgi. In the

11th century B.C., according to tradition (the date is probably too

early), Androclus, son of the Athenian king Codrus, landed on the spot

with his Ionians and a mixed body of colonists; and from his conquest

dates the history of the Greek Ephesus. The deity of the city was

Artemis; but we must guard against misconception when we use that name,

remembering that she bore close relation to the primitive Asiatic

goddess of nature, whose cult existed before the Ionian migration at the

neighbouring Ortygia, and that she always remained the virgin-mother of

all life and especially wild life, and an embodiment of the fertility

and productive power of the earth. The well-known monstrous

representation of her, as a figure with many breasts, swathed below the

waist in grave-clothes, was probably of late and alien origin. In early

Ionian times she seems to have been represented as a natural matronly

figure, sometimes accompanied by a child, and to have been a more

typically Hellenic goddess than she became in the Hellenistic and Roman

periods.

Twice in the period 700-500 B.C. the city owed its preservation to the

interference of the goddess; once when the swarms of the Cimmerians

overran Asia Minor in the 7th century and burnt the Artemision itself;

and once when Croesus besieged the town in the century succeeding, and

only retired after it had solemnly dedicated itself to Artemis, the sign

of such dedication being the stretching of a rope from city to

sanctuary. Croesus was eager in every way to propitiate the goddess, and

since about this time her temple was being restored on an enlarged

scale, he presented most of the columns required for the building as

well as some cows of gold. That is to say, these gifts were probably

paid for out of the proceeds of the sequestration of the property of a

rich Lydian merchant, Sadyattes, which Croesus presented to Ephesus

(Nic. Damasc. fr. 65). To counteract, perhaps, the growing Lydian

influence, Athens, the mother-city of Ephesus, despatched one of her

noblest citizens, Aristarchus, to restore law on the basis of the

Solonian constitution. The labours of Aristarchus seem to have borne

fruit. It was an Ephesian follower of his, Hermodorus, who aided the

Decemviri at Rome in their compilation of a system of law. And in the

same generation Heraclitus, probably a descendant of Codrus, quitted his

hereditary magistracy in order to devote himself to philosophy, in which

his name became almost as great as that of any Greek. Poetry had long

flourished at Ephesus. From very early times the Homeric poems found a

home and admirers there; and to Ephesus belong the earliest elegiac

poems of Greece, the war songs of Callinus, who flourished in the 7th

century B.C. and was the model of Tyrtaeus. The city seems to have been

more than once under tyrannical rule in the early Ionian period; and it

fell thereafter first to Croesus of Lydia, and then to Cyrus, the

Persian, and when the Ionian revolt against Persia broke out in the year

500 B.C. under the lead of Miletus, the city remained submissive to

Persian rule. When Xerxes returned from the march against Greece, he

honoured the temple of Artemis, although he sacked other Ionian shrines,

and even left his children behind at Ephesus for safety's sake. We hear

again of Persian respect for the temple in the time of Tissaphernes (411

B.C.). After the final Persian defeat at the Eurymedon (466 B.C.),

Ephesus for a time paid tribute to Athens, with the other cities of the

coast, and Lysander first and Agesilaus afterwards made it their

headquarters. To the latter fact we owe a contemporary description of it

by Xenophon. In the early part of the 4th century it fell again under

Persian influence, and was administered by an oligarchy.

Alexander was received by the Ephesians in 334, and established

democratic government. Soon after his death the city fell into the hands

of Lysimachus, who introduced fresh Greek colonists from Lebedus and

Colophon and, it is said, by means of an artificial inundation compelled

those who still dwelt in the plain by the temple to migrate to the city

on the hills, which he surrounded by a solid wall. He renamed the city

after his wife Arsinoe, but the old name was soon resumed. Ephesus was

very prosperous during the Hellenistic period, and is conspicuous both

then and later for the abundance of its coinage, which gives us a more

complete list of magistrates' names than we have for any other Ionian

city. The Roman coinage is remarkable for the great variety and

importance of its types. After the defeat of Antiochus the Great, king

of Syria, by the Romans, Ephesus was handed over by the conquerors to

Eumenes, king of Pergamum, whose successor, Attalus Philadelphus,

unintentionally worked the city irremediable harm. Thinking that the

shallowness of the harbour was due to the width of its mouth, he built a

mole part-way across the latter; the result, however, was that the

silting up of the harbour proceeded more rapidly than before. The third

Attalus of Pergamum bequeathed Ephesus with the rest of his possessions

to the Roman people, and it became for a while the chief city, and for

longer the first port, of the province of Asia, the richest in the

empire. Henceforth Ephesus remained subject to the Romans, save for a

short period, when, at the instigation of Mithradates Eupator of Pontus,

the cities of Asia Minor revolted and massacred their Roman residents.

The Ephesians even dragged out and slew those Romans who had fled to the

precinct of Artemis for protection, notwithstanding which sacrilege they

soon returned from their new to their former masters, and even had the

effrontery to state, in an inscription preserved to this day, that their

defection to Mithradates was a mere yielding to superior force. Sulla,

after his victory over Mithradates, brushed away their pretexts, and

inflicting a very heavy fine told them that the punishment fell far

short of their deserts. In the civil wars of the 1st century B.C. the

Ephesians twice supported the unsuccessful party, giving shelter to, or

being made use of by, first, Brutus and Cassius, and afterwards Antony,

for which partisanship or weakness they paid very heavily in fines.

All this time the city was gradually growing in wealth and in devotion

to the service of Artemis. The story of St Paul's doings there

illustrates this fact, and the sequel is very suggestive,--the burning,

namely, of books of sorcery of great value. Addiction to the practice of

occult arts had evidently become general in the now semi-orientalized

city. The Christian Church which Paul planted there was governed by

Timothy and John, and is famous in Christian tradition as a nurse of

saints and martyrs. According to local belief, Ephesus was also the last

home of the Virgin, who was lodged near the city by St John and there

died. But to judge from the Apocalyptic Letter to this Church (as shown

by Sir W.M. Ramsay), the latter showed a dangerous tendency to lightness

and reaction, and later events show that the pagan tradition of Artemis

continued very strong and perhaps never became quite extinct in the

Ephesian district. It was, indeed, long before the spread of

Christianity threatened the old local cult. The city was proud to be

termed _neocorus_ or servant of the goddess. Roman emperors vied with

wealthy natives in lavish gifts, one Vibius Salutaris among the latter

presenting a quantity of gold and silver images to be carried annually

in procession. Ephesus contested stoutly with Smyrna and Pergamum the

honour of being called the first city of Asia; each city appealed to

Rome, and we still possess rescripts in which the emperors endeavoured

to mitigate the bitterness of the rivalry. One privilege Ephesus

secured; the Roman governor of Asia always landed and first assumed

office there: and it was long the provincial centre of the official cult

of the emperor, and seat of the Asiarch. The Goths destroyed both city

and temple in the year A.D. 262, and although the city revived and the

cult of Artemis continued, neither ever recovered its former splendour.

A general council of the Christian Church was held there in 431 in the

great double church of St Mary, which is still to be seen. On this

occasion Nestorius was condemned, and the honour of the Virgin

established as _Theotokus_, amid great popular rejoicing, due,

doubtless, in some measure to the hold which the cult of the virgin

Artemis still had on the city. (On this council see below.) Thereafter

Ephesus seems to have been gradually deserted owing to its malaria; and

life transferred itself to another and higher site near the Artemision,

the name of which, Ayassoluk (written by early Arab geographers

_Ayathulukh_), is now known to be a corruption of the title of St John

_Theologos_, given to a great cathedral built on a rocky hill near the

present railway station, in the time of Justinian I. This church was

visited by Ibn Batuta in A.D. 1333; but few traces are now visible. The

ruins of the Artemision, after serving as a quarry to local builders,

were finally covered deep with mud by the river Cayster, or one of its

left bank tributaries, the Selinus, and the true site remained

unsuspected until 1869.

_Excavations._--The first light thrown on the topography of Ephesus was

due to the excavations conducted by the architect, J.T. Wood, on behalf

of the trustees of the British Museum, during the years 1863-1874. He

first explored the Odeum and the Great Theatre situate in the city

itself, and in the latter place had the good fortune to find an

inscription which indicated to him in what direction to search for the

Artemision; for it stated that processions came to the city from the

temple by the Magnesian gate and returned by the Coressian. These two

gates were next identified, and following up that road which issued from

the Magnesian gate, Wood lighted first on a ruin which he believed to be

the tomb of Androclus, and afterwards on an angle of the peribolus wall

of the time of Augustus. After further tentative explorations, he struck

the actual pavement of the Artemision on the last day of 1869.

_The Artemision._--Wood removed the whole stratum of superficial

deposit, nearly 20 ft. deep, which overlay the huge area of the temple,

and exposed to view not only the scanty remains of the latest edifice,

built after 350 B.C., but the platform of an earlier temple, now known

to be that of the 6th century to which Croesus contributed. Below this

he did not find any remains. He discovered and sent to England parts of

several sculptured drums (_columnae caelatae_) of the latest temple, and

archaic sculptures from the drums and parapet of the earlier building.

He also made accurate measurements and a plan of the Hellenistic temple,

found many inscriptions and a few miscellaneous antiquities, and had

begun to explore the Precinct, when the great expense and other

considerations induced the trustees of the British Museum to suspend his

operations in 1874. Wood made two subsequent attempts to resume work,

but failed; and the site lay desolate till 1904, when the trustees,

wishing to have further information about the earlier strata and the

Precinct, sent D.G. Hogarth to re-examine the remains. As a result of

six months' work, Wood's "earliest temple" was re-cleared and planned,

remains of three earlier shrines were found beneath it, a rich deposit

of offerings, &c., belonging to the earliest shrine was discovered, and

tentative explorations were made in the Precinct. This deep digging,

however, which reached the sand of the original marsh, released much

ground water and resulted in the permanent flooding of the site.

[Illustration: Ground plan of the 6th Century ("Croesus") Temple at

Ephesus, conjecturally restored by A.E. Henderson.]

The history of the Artemision, as far as it can be inferred from the

remains, is as follows. (1) There was no temple on the plain previous to

the Ionian occupation, the primeval seat of the nature-goddess having

been in the southern hills, at Ortygia (near mod. _Arvalia_). Towards

the end of the 8th century B.C. a small shrine came into existence on

the plain. This was little more than a small platform of green schist

with a sacred tree and an altar, and perhaps later a wooden icon

(image), the whole enclosed in a _temenos_: but, as is proved by a great

treasure of objects in precious and other metals, ivory, bone, crystal,

paste, glass, terra-cotta and other materials, found in 1904-1905,

partly within the platform on which the cult-statue stood and partly

outside, in the lowest stratum of deposit, this early shrine was

presently enriched by Greeks with many and splendid offerings of

Hellenic workmanship. A large number of electron coins, found among

these offerings, and in style the earliest of their class known, combine

with other evidence to date the whole treasure to a period considerably

anterior to the reign of Croesus. This treasure is now divided between

the museums of Constantinople and London. (2) Within a short time,

perhaps after the Cimmerian sack (? 650 B.C.), this shrine was restored,

slightly enlarged, and raised in level, but not altered in character.

(3) About the close of the century, for some reason not known, but

possibly owing to collapse brought about by the marshy nature of the

site, this was replaced by a temple of regular Hellenic form. The latter

was built in relation to the earlier central statue-base but at a higher

level than either of its predecessors, doubtless for dryness' sake. Very

little but its foundations was spared by later builders, and there is

now no certain evidence of its architectural character; but it is very

probable that it was the early temple in which the Ionic order is said

to have been first used, after the colonists had made use of Doric in

their earlier constructions (e.g. in the _Panionion_); and that it was

the work of the Cnossian Chersiphron and his son, Metagenes, always

regarded afterwards as the first builders of a regular Artemision. Their

temple is said by Strabo to have been made bigger by another architect.

(4) The latter's work must have been the much larger temple, exposed by

Wood, and usually known as the Archaic or Croesus temple. This overlies

the remains of No. 3, at a level higher by about a metre, and the area

of its _cella_ alone contains the whole of the earlier shrines. Its

central point, however, was still the primitive statue-base, now

enlarged and heightened. About half its pavement, parts of the _cella_

walls and of three columns of the peristyle, and the foundations of

nearly all the platform, are still in position. The visible work was all

of very fine white marble, quarried about 7 m. N.E., near the modern Kos

Bunar. Fragments of relief-sculptures belonging to the parapet and

columns, and of fluted drums and capitals, cornices and other

architectural members have been recovered, showing that the workmanship

and Ionic style were of the highest excellence, and that the building

presented a variety of ornament, rare among Hellenic temples. The whole

ground-plan covered about 80,000 sq. ft. The height of the temple is

doubtful, the measurements of columns given us by later authority having

reference probably to its successor, the height of which was considered

abnormal and marvellous. Judged by the diameter of the drums, the

columns of the Croesus temple were not two-thirds of the height of those

of the Hellenistic temple. This fourth temple is, beyond question, that

to which Croesus contributed, and it was, therefore, in process of

building about 540 B.C. Our authorities seem to be referring to it when

they tell us that the Artemision was raised by common contribution of

the great cities of Asia, and took 120 years to complete. It was

dedicated with great ceremony, probably between 430 and 420 B.C., and

the famous Timotheus, son of Thersander, carried off the magnificent

prize for a lyric ode against all comers. Its original architects were,

probably, Paeonius of Ephesus, and Demetrius, a [Greek: hieros] of the

shrine itself: but it has been suggested that the latter may have been

rather the actual contracting builder than the architect. Of this temple

Herodotus speaks as existing in his day; and unless weight be given to

an isolated statement of Eusebius, that it was burned about 395 B.C., we

must assume that it survived until the night when one Herostratus,

desirous of acquiring eternal fame if only by a great crime, set it

alight. This is said to have happened in 356 B.C. on the October night

on which Alexander the Great came into the world, and, as Hegesias said,

the goddess herself was absent, assisting at the birth; but the

exactness of this portentous synchronism makes the date suspect. (5) It

was succeeded by what is called the Hellenistic temple, begun almost

immediately after the catastrophe, according to plans drawn by the

famous Dinocrates the architect of Alexandria. The platform was once

more raised to a higher level, some 7 ft. above that of the Archaic, by

means of huge foundation blocks bedded upon the earlier structures; and

this increase of elevation necessitated a slight expansion of the area

all round, and ten steps in place of three. The new columns were of

greater diameter than the old and over 60 ft. high; and from its great

height the whole structure was regarded as a marvel, and accounted one

of the wonders of the world. Since, however, other Greek temples had

colonnades hardly less high, and were of equal or greater area, it has

been suggested that the Ephesian temple had some distinct element of

grandiosity, no longer known to us--perhaps a lofty sculptured parapet

or some imposing form of _podium_. Bede, in his treatise _De sept. mir.

mundi_, describes a stupendous erection of several storeys; but his

other descriptions are so fantastic that no credence can be attached to

this. The fifth temple was once more of Ionic order, but the finish and

style of its details as attested by existing remains were inferior to

those of its predecessor. The great sculptured drums and pedestals, now

in the British Museum, belong to the lower part of certain of its

columns: but nothing of its frieze or pediments (if it had any) has been

recovered. Begun probably before 350 B.C., it was in building when

Alexander came to Ephesus in 334 and offered to bear the cost of its

completion. It was probably finished by the end of the century; for

Pliny the Elder states that its cypress-wood doors had been in existence

for 400 years up to his time. It stood intact, except for very partial

restorations, till A.D. 262 when it was sacked and burned by the Goths:

but it appears to have been to some extent restored afterwards, and its

cult no doubt survived till the Edict of Theodosius closed the pagan

temples. Its material was then quarried extensively for the construction

of the great cathedral of St John Theologos on the neighbouring hill

(Ayassoluk), and a large Byzantine building (a church?) came into

existence on the central part of its denuded site, but did not last

long. Before the Ottoman conquest its remains were already buried under

several feet of silt.

The organization of the temple hierarchy, and its customs and

privileges, retained throughout an Asiatic character. The priestesses of

the goddess were [Greek: parthenoi] (i.e. unwedded), and her priests

were compelled to celibacy. The chief among the latter, who bore the

Persian name of Megabyzus and the Greek title Neocorus, was doubtless a

power in the state as well as a dignitary of religion. His official

dress and spadonic appearance are probably revealed to us by a small

ivory statuette found by D.G. Hogarth in 1905. Besides these there was a

vast throng of dependents who lived by the temple and its

services--_theologi_, who may have expounded sacred legends, _hymnodi_,

who composed hymns in honour of the deity, and others, together with a

great crowd of _hieroi_ who performed more menial offices. The making of

shrines and images of the goddess occupied many hands. To support this

greedy mob, offerings flowed in in a constant stream from votaries and

from visitors, who contributed sometimes money, sometimes statues and

works of art. These latter so accumulated that the temple became a rich

museum, among the chief treasures of which were the figures of Amazons

sculptured in competition by Pheidias, Polyclitus, Cresilas and

Phradmon, and the painting by Apelles of Alexander holding a

thunderbolt. The temple was also richly endowed with lands, and

possessed the fishery of the Selinusian lakes, with other large

revenues. But perhaps the most important of all the privileges possessed

by the goddess and her priests was that of _asylum_. Fugitives from

justice or vengeance who reached her precincts were perfectly safe from

all pursuit and arrest. The boundaries of the space possessing such

virtue were from time to time enlarged. Mithradates extended them to a

bowshot from the temple in all directions, and Mark Antony imprudently

allowed them to take in part of the city, which part thus became free of

all law, and a haunt of thieves and villains. Augustus, while leaving

the right of asylum untouched, diminished the space to which the

privilege belonged, and built round it a wall, which still surrounds the

ruins of the temple at the distance of about a quarter of a mile,

bearing an inscription in Greek and Latin, which states that it was

erected in the proconsulship of Asinius Gallus, out of the revenues of

the temple. The right of asylum, however, had once more to be defended

by a deputation sent to the emperor Tiberius. Besides being a place of

worship, a museum and a sanctuary, the Ephesian temple was a great bank.

Nowhere in Asia could money be more safely bestowed, and both kings and

private persons placed their treasures under the guardianship of the

goddess.

_The City._--After Wood's superficial explorations, the city remained

desolate till 1894, when the Austrian Archaeological Institute obtained

a concession for excavation and began systematic work. This has

continued regularly ever since, but has been carried down no farther

than the imperial stratum. The main areas of operation have been: (1)

The _Great Theatre_. The stage buildings, orchestra and lower parts of

the _cavea_ have been cleared. In the process considerable additions

were made to Wood's find of sculptures in marble and bronze, and of

inscriptions, including missing parts of the Vibius Salutaris texts.

This theatre has a peculiar interest as the scene of the tumult aroused

by the mission of St Paul; but the existing remains represent a

reconstruction carried out after his time. (2) The _Hellenistic Agora_,

a huge square, surrounded by porticoes, lying S.W. of the theatre and

having fine public halls on the S. It has yielded to the Austrians fine

sculpture in marble and bronze and many inscriptions. (3) _The Roman

Agora_, with its large halls, lying N.W. of the theatre. Here were found

many inscriptions of Roman date and some statuary. (4) A street running

from the S.E. angle of the Hellenic Agora towards the Magnesian gate.

This was found to be lined with pedestals of honorific statues and to

have on the west side a remarkable building, stated in an inscription to

have been a library. The tomb of the founder, T. Julius Celsus, is hard

by, and some fine Roman reliefs, which once decorated it, have been sent

to Vienna. (5) A street running direct to the port from the theatre.

This is of great breadth, and had a Horologion half-way down and fine

porticoes and shops. It was known as the Arcadiane after having been

restored at a higher level than formerly by the emperor Arcadius (A.D.

395). It leaves on the right the great _Thermae_ of Constantine, of

which the Austrians have cleared out the south-east part. This huge pile

used to be taken for the Artemision by early visitors to Ephesus. Part

of the quays and buildings round the port were exposed, after measures

had been taken to drain the upper part of the marsh. (6) The Double

Church of the Virgin "Deipara" in the N.W. of the city, wherein the

council of 431 was held. Here interesting inscriptions and Byzantine

architectural remains were found. Besides these excavated monuments, the

Stadion; the _enceinte_ of fortifications erected by Lysimachus, which

runs from the tower called the "Prison of St Paul" and right along the

crests of the Bulbul (Prion) and Panajir hills; the round monument

miscalled the "Tomb of St Luke"; and the Opistholeprian gymnasium near

the Magnesian gate, are worthy of attention.

The work done by the Austrians enables a good idea to be obtained of the

appearance presented by a great Graeco-Roman city of Asia in the last

days of its prosperity. It may be realized better there than anywhere

how much architectural splendour was concentrated in the public

quarters. But the restriction of the clearance to the upper stratum of

deposit has prevented the acquisition of much further knowledge. Both

the Hellenistic and, still more, the original Ionian cities remain for

the most part unexplored. It should, however, be added that very

valuable topographical exploration has been carried out in the environs

of Ephesus by members of the Austrian expedition, and that the Ephesian

district is now mapped more satisfactorily than any other district of

ancient interest in Asia Minor.

The Turkish village of Ayassoluk (the modern representative of Ephesus),

more than a mile N.E. of the ancient city, has revived somewhat of

recent years owing to the development of its fig gardens by the Aidin

railway, which passes through the upper part of the plain. It is

noteworthy for a splendid ruined mosque built by the Seljuk, Isa Bey

II., of Aidin, in 1375, which contains magnificent columns: for a

castle, near which lie remains of the pendentives from the cupola of the

great cathedral of St John, now deeply buried in its own ruins: and for

an aqueduct, Turkish baths and mosque-tombs. There is a fair inn managed

by the Aidin Railway Company.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--E. Guhl, _Ephesiaca_ (1843); E. Curtius, _Ephesos_

(1874); C. Zimmermann, _Ephesos im ersten christlichen Jahrhundert_

(1874); J.T. Wood, _Discoveries at Ephesus_ (1877); E.L. Hicks, _Anc.

Greek Inscr. in the Brit. Museum_, iii. 2 (1890); B.V. Head, "Coinage

of Ephesus" (_Numism. Chron._, 1880); J. Menadier, _Qua condicione

Ephesii usi sint_, &c. (1880); Sir W.M. Ramsay, _Letters to the Seven

Churches_ (1904); O. Benndorf, R. Heberdey, &c., _Forschungen in

Ephesos_, vol. i. (1906) (Austrian Arch. Institute); D.G. Hogarth,

_Excavations at Ephesus: the Archaic Artemisia_ (2 vols., 1908), with

chapters by C.H. Smith, A. Hamilton Smith, B.V. Head, and A.E.

Henderson. (D. G. H.)

EPHESUS, COUNCIL OF. This Church council was convened in 431 for the

purpose of taking authoritative action concerning the doctrine of the

person of Christ. The councils of Nicaea and Constantinople had asserted

the full divinity and real humanity of Christ, without, however,

defining the manner of their union. The attempt to solve the apparent

incongruity of a perfect union of two complete and distinct natures in

one person produced first Apollinarianism, which substituted the divine

Logos for the human [Greek: nous] or [Greek: pneuma] of Jesus, thereby

detracting from the completeness of his humanity; and then Nestorianism,

which destroyed the unity of Christ's person by affirming that the

divine Logos dwelt in the man Jesus as in a temple, and that the union

of the two was in respect of dignity, and furthermore that, inasmuch as

the Logos could not have been born, to call Mary [Greek: theotokos],

"Godbearer," was absurd and blasphemous. The Alexandrians, led by Cyril,

stood for the doctrine of the perfect union of two complete natures in

one person, and made [Greek: theotokos] the shibboleth of orthodoxy. The

theological controversy was intensified by the rivalry of the two

patriarchates, Alexandria and Constantinople, for the primacy of the

East. As bishop of Constantinople Nestorius naturally looked to the

emperor for support, while Cyril turned to Rome. A Roman synod in 430

found Nestorius heretical and decreed his excommunication unless he

should recant. Shortly afterwards an Alexandrian synod condemned his

doctrines in twelve anathemas, which only provoked counter-anathemas.

The emperor now intervened and summoned a council, which met at Ephesus

on the 22nd of June 431. Nestorius was present with an armed escort, but

refused to attend the council on the ground that the patriarch of

Antioch (his friend) had not arrived. The council, nevertheless,

proceeded to declare him excommunicate and deposed. When the Roman

legates appeared they "examined and approved" the acts of the council,

whether as if thereby giving them validity, or as if concurring with the

council, is a question not easy to answer from the records. Cyril, the

president, apparently regarded the subscription of the legates as the

acknowledgment of "canonical agreement" with the synod.

The disturbances that followed the arrival of John, the patriarch of

Antioch, are sufficiently described in the article NESTORIUS.

The emperor finally interposed to terminate that scandalous strife,

banished Nestorius and dissolved the council. Ultimately he gave

decision in favour of the orthodox. The council was generally received

as ecumenical, even by the Antiochenes, and the differences between

Cyril and John were adjusted (433) by a "Union Creed," which, however,

did not prevent a recrudescence of theological controversy.

See Mansi iv. pp. 567-1482, v. pp. 1-1023; Hardouin i. pp. 1271-1722;

Hefele (2nd ed.) ii. pp. 141-247 (Eng. trans. iii. pp. 1-114);

Peltanus, _SS. Magni et Ecumen. Conc. Ephesini primi Acta omnia_ ...

(Ingolstadt, 1576); Wilhelm Kraetz, _Koptische Akten zum Ephes.

Konzil_ ... (Leipzig, 1904); also the articles NESTORIUS; CYRIL;

THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA.

The so-called "Robber Synod" of Ephesus (_Latrocinium Ephesinum_) of

449, although wholly irregular and promptly repudiated by the church,

may, nevertheless, not improperly be treated here. The archimandrite

Eutyches (q.v.) having been deposed by his bishop, Flavianus of

Constantinople, on account of his heterodox doctrine of the person of

Christ, had appealed to Dioscurus, the successor of Cyril in the see of

Alexandria, who restored him and moved the emperor Theodosius II. to

summon a council, which should "utterly destroy Nestorianism." Rome

recognizing that she had more to fear from Alexandria, departed from her

traditional policy and sided with Constantinople. The council of 130

bishops, which convened on the 8th of August 449, was completely

dominated by Dioscurus. Eutyches was acquitted of heresy and reinstated,

Flavianus and other bishops deposed, the Roman legates insulted, and all

opposition was overborne by intimidation or actual violence. The death

of Flavianus, which soon followed, was attributed to injuries received

in this synod; but the proof of the charge leaves something to be

desired.

The emperor confirmed the synod, but the Eastern Church was divided

upon the question of accepting it, and Leo I. of Rome excommunicated

Dioscurus, refused to recognize the successor of Flavianus and demanded

a new and greater council. The death of Theodosius II. removed the main

support of Dioscurus, and cleared the way for the council of Chalcedon

(q.v.), which deposed the Alexandrian and condemned Eutychianism.

See Mansi vi. pp. 503 sqq., 606 sqq.; Hardouin ii. 71 sqq.; Hefele

(2nd ed.) ii. pp. 349 sqq. (Eng. trans. iii. pp. 221 sqq.); S.G.F.

Perry, _The Second Synod of Ephesus_ (Dartford, 1881); l'Abbe Martin,

_Actes du brigandage d'Ephese_ (Amiens, 1874) and _Le Pseudo-synode

connu dans l'histoire sous le nom de brigandage d'Ephese_ (Paris,

1875). (T. F. C.)

EPHOD, a Hebrew word (_ephod_) of uncertain meaning, retained by the

translators of the Old Testament. In the post-exilic priestly writings

(5th century B.C. and later) the ephod forms part of the gorgeous

ceremonial dress of the high-priest (see Ex. xxix. 5 sq. and especially

Ecclus. xlv. 7-13). It was a very richly decorated object of coloured

threads interwoven with gold, worn outside the luxurious mantle or robe;

it was kept in place by a girdle, and by shoulder-pieces (?), to which

were attached brooches of onyx (fastened to the robe) and golden rings

from which hung the "breastplate" (or rather pouch) containing the

sacred lots, Urim and Thummim. The somewhat involved description in Ex.

xxviii. 6 sqq., xxxix. 2 sqq. (see V. Ryssel's ed. of Dillmann's

commentary on Ex.-Lev.) leaves it uncertain whether it covered the back,

encircling the body like a kind of waistcoat, or only the front; at all

events it was not a garment in the ordinary sense, and its association

with the sacred lots indicates that the ephod was used for divination

(cf. Num. xxvii. 21), and had become the distinguishing feature of the

leading priestly line (cf. 1 Sam. ii. 28).[1] But from other passages it

seems that the ephod had been a familiar object whose use was by no

means so restricted. Like the teraphim (q.v.) it was part of the common

stock of Hebrew cult; it is borne (rather than worn) by persons acting

in a priestly character (Samuel at Shiloh, priests of Nob, David), it is

part of the worship of individuals (Gideon at Ophrah), and is found in a

private shrine with a lay attendant (Micah; Judg. xvii. 5; see, however,

vv. 10-13).[2] Nevertheless, while the prophetical teaching came to

regard the ephod as contrary to the true worship of Yahweh, the priestly

doctrine of the post-exilic age (when worship was withdrawn from the

community at large to the recognized priesthood of Jerusalem) has

retained it along with other remains of earlier usage, legalizing it, as

it were, by confining it exclusively to the Aaronites.

An intricate historical problem is involved at the outset in the

famous ephod, which the priest Abiathar brought in his hand when he

fled to David after the massacre of the priests of Nob. It is

evidently regarded as the one which had been in Nob (1 Sam. xxi. 9),

and the presence of the priests at Nob is no less clearly regarded as

the sequel of the fall of Shiloh. The ostensible intention is to

narrate the transference of the sacred objects to David (cf. 2 Sam. i.

10), and henceforth he regularly inquires of Yahweh in his movements

(1 Sam. xxiii. 9-12, xxx. 7 sq.; cf. xxiii. 2, 4; 2 Sam. ii. 1, v.

19-23). It is possible that the writer (or writers) desired to trace

the earlier history of the ephod through the line of Eli and Abiathar

to the time when the Zadokite priests gained the supremacy (see

LEVITES); but elsewhere Abiathar is said to have borne the ark (1

Kings ii. 26; cf. 2 Sam. vii. 6), and this fluctuation is noteworthy

by reason of the present confusion in the text of 1 Sam. xiv. 3, 18

(see commentaries).

On one view, the ark in Kirjath-jearim was in non-Israelite hands (1

Sam. vii. 1 sq.); on the other, Saul's position as king necessitates

the presumption that his sway extended over Judah and Israel,

including those cities which otherwise appear to have been in the

hands of aliens (1 Sam. xiv. 47 sq.; cf. xvii. 54, &c.). There are

some fundamental divergencies in the representations of the traditions

of both David and Saul (qq.v.), and there is indirect and independent

evidence which makes 1 Kings ii. 26 not entirely isolated. Here it

must suffice to remark that the ark, too, was also an object for

ascertaining the divine will (especially Judg. xx. 26-28; cf. 18, 23),

and it is far from certain that the later records of the ark (which

was too heavy to be borne by one), like those of the ephod, are valid

for earlier times.

For the form of the earlier ephod the classic passage is 2 Sam. vi. 14,

where David girt in (or with) a linen ephod dances before the ark at its

entry into Jerusalem and incurs the unqualified contempt of his wife

Michal, the daughter of Saul. Relying upon the known custom of

performing certain observances in a practically, or even entirely, nude

condition, it seems plausible to infer that the ephod was a scanty

wrapping, perhaps a loin-cloth, and this view has found weighty support.

On the other hand, the idea of contempt at the exposure of the person,

to whatever extent, may not have been so prominent, especially if the

custom were not unfamiliar, and it is possible that the sequel refers

more particularly to grosser practices attending outbursts of religious

enthusiasm.[3]

The favourite view that the ephod was also an image rests partly upon 1

Sam. xxi. 9, where Goliath's sword is wrapped in a cloth in the

sanctuary of Nob _behind the ephod_. But it is equally natural to

suppose that it hung on a nail in the wall, and apart from the omission

of the significant words in the original Septuagint, the possibility

that the text read "ark" cannot be wholly ignored (see above; also G.F.

Moore, _Ency. Bib._ col. 1307, n. 2). Again, in the story of Micah's

shrine and the removal of the sacred objects and the Levite priest by

the Danites, parallel narratives have been used: the graven and molten

images of Judg. xvii. 2-4 corresponding to the ephod and teraphim of

ver. 5. Throughout there is confusion in the use of these terms, and the

finale refers only to the graven image of Dan (xviii. 30 sq., see 1

Kings xii. 28 sq.). But the combination of ephod and teraphim (as in

Hos. iii. 4) is noteworthy, since the fact that the latter were images

(1 Sam. xix. 13; Gen. xxxi. 34) could be urged against the view that the

former were of a similar character. Finally, according to Judg. viii.

27, Gideon made an ephod of gold, about 70 lb. in weight, and "put" it

in Ophrah. It is regarded as a departure from the worship of Yahweh,

although the writer of ver. 33 (cf. also ver. 23) hardly shared this

feeling; it was probably something once harmlessly associated with the

cult of Yahweh (cf. CALF, GOLDEN), and the term "ephod" may be due to a

later hand under the influence of the prophetical teaching referred to

above. The present passage is the only one which appears to prove that

the ephod was an image, and several writers, including Lotz (_Realencyk.

f. prot. Theol._ vol. v., s.v.), T.C. Foote (pp. 13-18) and A.

Maecklenburg (_Zeit. f. wissens. Theol._, 1906, pp. 433 sqq.) find this

interpretation unnecessary.

Archaeological evidence for objects of divination (see, e.g., the

interesting details in Ohnefalsch-Richter, _Kypros, the Bible and

Homer_, i. 447 sq.), and parallels from the Oriental area, can be

readily cited in support of any of the explanations of the ephod which

have been offered, but naturally cannot prove the form which it actually

took in Palestine. Since images were clothed, it could be supposed that

the diviner put on the god's apparel (cf. _Ency. Bib._ col. 1141); but

they were also plated, and in either case the transference from a

covering to the object covered is intelligible. If the ephod was a

loin-cloth, its use as a receptacle and the known evolution of the

article find useful analogies (Foote, p. 43 sq., and _Ency. Bib._ col.

1734 [1]). Finally, if there is no decisive evidence for the view that

it was an image (Judg. viii. 27), or that as a wrapping it formed the

sole covering of the officiating agent (2 Sam. vi.), all that can safely

be said is that it was certainly used in divination and presumably did

not differ radically from the ephod of the post-exilic age.

See further, in addition to the monographs already cited, the articles

in Hastings's _Dict. Bible_ (by S.R. Driver), _Ency. Bib._ (by G.F.

Moore), and _Jew. Encyc._ (L. Ginsburg), and E. Sellin, in _Oriental.

Studien: Theodor Noldeke_ (ed. Bezold, 1906), pp. 699 sqq.

(S. A. C.)