CHAPTER VI.

Names applied to the Nestorian Christians.-Proof derived of their Hebrew Origin.-Beni Israel.—Nazareans.— Syrians.— Chaldeans.-Nestorians not appropriate.-Why used.

THE multiplicity of names used to designate the people now under consideration may produce confusion, unless the subject is fully understood. But they all admit of a satisfactory explanation, and, as will be seen, furnish convincing testimony to their Hebrew origin.

BENI ISRAEL is used generally to designate the lineal origin of the Nestorians. Ask any intelligent Nestorian for information relating to his ancestry, and he replies at once, "We are sons of Israel." It is a term familiar to all; and we might, with as much propriety, deny them the name of Christians, as to refuse our assent to this more ancient appellation, since they lay claim alike to both, while their rites and customs and other circumstances furnish nearly as satisfactory testimony in the one case as in the other. But, while they assert an inalienable right to this name, so significant of their Hebrew origin, still, as their specific character as Jews has merged in the one they now bear as Christians, and as their national character is in a manner lost in their long cap

tivity, they now more commonly apply to themselves another name. The name Beni Israel, however, is not unfrequently used by the Nestorians; nor is this the first time it has been brought before the public. It is distinctly mentioned by writers upon the Persian Christians as evidence of their relation to the Jewish church.*

NAZAREANS is a term very commonly employed by themselves and others to designate the Nestorians. It is specific in its application to the Nestorians, and is never applied to the Armenians or other Christian sects. As evidence of their Hebrew origin, it may be, in some respects, even more satisfactory than the expressive appellation, sons of Israel.

The term Nazareans has been well defined to mean "Christians converted from Judaism, whose chief error consisted in defending the necessity or expediency of the works of the law, and who obstinately adhered to the practice of the Jewish ceremonies." In other words, they were "Jews or Israelites converted to Christianity;" i. e., converted Jews. Dr. Semler, a German writer, says they were "those who more rigidly maintained the Mosaic observances." Calmet mentions them

* See Encyclopædia of Religious Knowledge, art. Persian Christians.

† I have seen more than one letter written by Nestorians to the patriarch Mar Shimon, in which he was styled "Patriarch of all the Nazareans."

R

as "descendants of the original Jewish Christians, and, as Jews, were too harshly treated by those who should have been their Gentile brethren." Jerome speaks of them as Hebrews believing in Christ. Mosheim says, "those who have the title of Christians among the Greeks, were among the Jews called Nazareans;" and, "after their separation from their [Jewish] brethren, although they would not discard the ceremonies prescribed by Moses, yet they would not impose them upon the Gentile Christians. They, moreover, rejected the additions made to the Mosaic ritual by the doctors of the law and the Pharisees."* The learned Bishop Horsely† and others who have examined the subject, appear to have taken similar views, not regarding the Nazareans as a distinct sect, but as Christians converted from Judaism. That the Jewish converts, in the early age of the Church, tenaciously retained many of their ancient rites, is evident from their zeal to impose them upon the Gentiles, teaching "that it was needful to command them to keep the law of Moses." But the apostles, after much deliberation upon the subject, in a general council decided against putting this heavy "yoke" upon their Gentile brethren. We have good reason, therefore, to believe that the latter never adopted the rites of the Jews, nor

* Mosheim's Eccl. Hist., v. i., p. 170. + Reply to Priestley. Acts, xv., 5.

the name of Nazarean, to whom these rites were peculiar. It must, then, have been applied exclusively to the Jewish converts. Hence the conclusion that the Nestorians must have been Jews. This conclusion derives important support from their retaining, in connexion with this name, very many of the observances of the Jews. Had they the name of Nazarean without these peculiar customs, or any other evidence of Hebrew ancestry, we might be led to think that, in some unaccountable way, it had been incidentally adopted. I am led to this reflection by the fact that the Syrian or St. Thomas Christians of Travancore, in India, have also the name of Nazaranee* or NazaAnd in Syria† the term is used in a general sense, probably because that was the land of the first Hebrew converts, whose name appears to have there survived them. But this should obviously be regarded only as an exception to a general rule; since, as we have seen, the term is well defined, and supported by the most abundant testimony. It is more probable, however, that the former, whose case alone calls for particular notice, derived the name from the Nestorians who were driven to

reans.

* Buchanan's Researches, Appendix.

† In Môsul, as mentioned by Mr. Southgate, the term is made to include all the Christians in that vicinity. The reason is obvious from the fact that most, if not all, of them are of Hebrew origin.

Yates's Indian Church History.

seek refuge in India by the bloody persecutions of the fourth and seventh centuries. They may be, therefore, in part at least, a branch of the present Nestorians of Media and Assyria. We have good evidence that they were formerly of the Nestorian faith, though they have more recently become connected with the Jacobite Syrians. Or they may be converts from some other branch of the Hebrew family. It is worthy of inquiry, whether the Syrian Christians of Travancore have not traditions, rites, customs, or other evidence of a Hebrew origin.*

* The following are some of the evidences which have occurred to the writer:

1. Their name, Nazarean (Nazaranee), denotes a Hebrew origin. 2. They abstain from pork and every other meat prohibited in the law of Moses.-(Wolff's Researches, p. 469.)

3. They have Hebrew names, as Zacharias, Urias, Joshua or Jesu, Matthew, Luke, Abraham, &c.

4. They appear to have emigrated from the western parts of Asia.

5. They have an ancient inscription on a metallic plate, in a triangular or Babylonish character, with signatures attached to it in an old Hebrew character; both of Western origin: the former denoting great antiquity, and the latter a connexion with the Hebrews. Did Dr. Buchanan transmit a fac-simile of this inscription to the learned societies of Europe, as he intended? Its contents, if known, may throw some light on this subject.

6. If Thomas preached in India, he was probably drawn thither by existing Hebrew colonies, as it will be seen that he was an apostle of the circumcision before going to India, where there appear to have been Jews before that day. That the Apostle Thomas preached in India we have the testimony of numerous Greek, Latin, and Syrian authors, quoted by Assemani (Bib. Orient., vol. iv., p. 5-25, 435); also of the Jews of Malabar, who,