Part 55
tivity) style. But it is at least likely that dogmatic objections led Marcion to delete it, and that his action accounts for the other phenomena which seem to witness against its place at the finale.
It is worth noting that Hort, a singularly fearless, while sober student, defends without reserve the entirety of the Ep. as we have it, or practically so. See his essay printed in Lightfoot's Bib. Studies.
is more likely to have had its origin in their martyrdoms there than in St. Peter's having in any sense shared in the early evangelization of the city.
We can fix the proximate date with fair certainty within reasonable limits. We gather from 15 19 that St. Paul, when he wrote, was in
As to Rome itself, we may picture it at the date of the Ep. as containing, with its suburbs, a closely massed population of perhaps 800,000 people; a motley host of many races, with a strong oriental element, among which the Jews were present as a marked influence, despised and sometimes dreaded, but always attracting curiosity.
3. Proxithe act of closing his work in the East mate Date and was looking definitely westward. But he was first about (15 25.26) to
revisit Jerus with his collection, mainly made in Macedonia and Achaia, for the "poor saints." Placing these allusions side by side with the references in 1 and 2 Cor to the collection and its conveyance, and again with the narrative of Acts, we may date Rom very nearly at the same time as 2 Cor, just before the visit to Jerus narrated in Acts 20, etc. The year may be fixed with great probability as 58 AD. This estimate follows the
The Ep. was written in Gr, the "common dia-
lect," the Gr of universal intercourse of that age.
One naturally asks, why not in Lat,
6. Lanwhen the message was addressed to the guage supreme Lat city? The large major-
ity of Christian converts beyond doubt came from the lower middle and lowest classes, not
least from the slave class. These strata of society were supplied greatly from immigrants, much as in parts of East London now aliens make the main population. Not Lat but Gr, the then lingua franca of the Mediterranean, would be the daily speech of these people. It is remarkable that all the early Rom bishops bear Gr names. And some 40 years after the date of this Ep. we find Clement of Rome writing in Gr to the Corinthians, and later again, early in the 2d cent., Ignatius writing in Gr to the Romans.
lines of Lightfoot's chronology, which Robertson
(ut supra) supports. More recent schemes would move the date back to 56 AD.
"The reader's attention is invited to tliisdate. Broadly .speaicing. it was about 30 years at tlie most after tlie Crucifixion. Let anyone in middie life reflect on the freshness in memory of events, whether public or private, which .30 years ago made any marked impression on his mind. Let him consider how concrete and vivid
still are the prominent personages of 30 years ago, many of whom of course are still with us. And let him trans-
fer this thought to the 1st cent., and to the time of our Ep. IjCt him remember that we have at least this one great Christian writing composed, for certain, within such easy reach of the very lifetime of Jesus Christ when His contemporary friends were still, in numbers, alive and active. Then let him open the Ep. afresh, and read, as if for the first time, its estimate of Jesus Christ—a Figure then of no legendary past, with its halo, but of the all but present day. Let him note that this transcendent estimate comes to us conveyed in the vehicle not of poetry and rhetoric, but of a treatise pregnant with masterly argument and admirable practical wisdom, tolerant and comprehensive. And we think that the reader will feel that the result of his meditations on date and circumstances is reassuring as to the solidity of the historic basis of the Christian faith" (from the present writer's introduction to the Ep. in the Temple
We cannot specify the occasion of -nTiting for certain. No hint appears of any acute crisis in the
mission (as when 1 Cor, 2 Cor, Gal, or
7. Occasion Col were written). Nor would personal reminiscences influence the writer,
for he had not yet seen Rome. We can only suggest some possibilities as follows:
(1) A good opportunity for safe communication was offered by the deaconess Phoebe's proposed visit to the metropolis. She doubtless asked 8t. Paul for a commendatory letter, and this may have suggested an extended message to the church.
(2) St. Paul's thoughts had long gone toward Rome. See Acts 19 21: "/ must see Rome," words which seem perhaps to imply some Divine intimation (cf 33 11). And his own life-course would fall in with such a supernatural call. He had always aimed at large centers; and now his great work in the central places of the Levant was closing; he had worked at Ephesus, Thessalonica, Corinth; he was at last to think of the supreme center of all. Rome must always have had a dominant interest for the "Apostle of the Nations," and any suggestion that his Lord's will tended that way would intensify it to the highest degree.
Bible; see also his Light from the First Days: fihort Studies in 1 Thess).
With confidence we may name Corinth as the
place of writing. St. Paul was at the time in some "city" (16 2.3). He was staying with
4. Place of one Gains, or Caius (ib), and we find
Writing in 1 Cor 1 14 a Gaius, closely connected with St. Paul, and a Corinthian. He commends to the Romans the deaconess Phoebe,
(3) The form of the Ep. may throw further light on the occasion. The document falls, on the whole, into three parts. First we liave chs 1-8 inclusive, a prolonged
attached to "the church at Cenchreae" (16 1), presumably a place near that from which he was
Romans, Epistle to THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2616
exposition of tlie contrasted and related plienomena of sin and salvation, with special initial references to the cases of Jew and non-Jew respectively. Then come chs 9-11, which deal with the Jewish rejection of the Jewish Messiah, developing into a prophetic revelation of the future of Israel in the grace of God. Lastly we have chs 12-16. Some account of the writer's plans, and his salutations to friends, requests for prayer, etc, form the close of this section. But it is mainly a statement of Cliristian duty in common hfe, personal, civil, rehgious. Under the latter head we have a noble treatment of problems raised by varying opinions, particularly on reUgious observances, among the converts, Jew and Gentile.
experience of conviction and conversion, to Ihe
sinful man's relation to eternal law, to redeeming
grace, and to a coming glory? It is the question of personal salvation which with St. Paul seems to us to live and move always in the depth of his argument, even when Christian poUty and policy is the immediate theme.
Excepting only Eph (the problem of the authorship of which is insoluble, and we put that great document here aside), Rom is, of all
8. Some St. Paul has written, least a letter and Charactermost a treatise. He is seen, as we read,
Such phenomena oast a possible hght on the occasion of writing. The Rom mission was on one side, by its locality and surroundings, eminently gentile. On the other, there was, as we have seen, a strong Judaic element in Rom life, particularly in its lower strata, and no doubt around the Jewish community proper there had grown up a large community of "worshippers" {<Tef36fxevoi, sebomenoi)
istics to approach religious problems of the highest order in a free but reasoned succession; problems of the darkness and of the light, of sin and grace, fall and restoration, doom and remission, faith and obedience, suffering and glory, transcendent hope and humblest duty, now in their relation to the soul, now so as to develop the holy collectivity of the common life. The Rom converts are always first in view, but such is the writer, such his handUng, that the results are for the universal church and for every behever of all time. Yet all the while (and it is in this a splendid example of that epistolary method of revelation which is one of the glories of the NT) it is never for a moment the mere treatise, however great. The writer is always vividly personal, and conscious of persons. The Ep. is indeed a masterpiece of doctrine, but also always "the unforced, unartificial utterance of a friend to friends."
or, as we commonly call them, "proselytes" ("adherents," in the language of modern missionary enterprise), people who, without receiving circumcision, attended Jewish worship and shared largely in Jewish beliefs and ideals. Among these proselytes, we may believe, the earliest evangeUsts at Rome found a favorable field, and the mission church as St. Paul knew of it contained accordingly not only two definite classes, converts from paganism, converts from native Judaism, but very many in whose minds both traditions were working at once. To such converts the problems raised by Judaism, both without and within the church, would come home with a constant intimacy and force, and their case may well have been present in a special degree in the apostle's mind alike in the early passages (chs 1-3) of the Ep. and in such later parts as chs 2-11, 14, 15. On the one hand they would greatly need guidance on the significance of the past of Israel and on the destiny of the chosen race in the future. Moreover, discussions in such circles over the way of salvation would suggest to the great missionary his exposition of man's reconciUation with a holy God and of His secrets for purity and obedience in an unholy world. And meanwhile the ever-recurring problems raised by ceremonial rules in common daily life—problems of days and seasons, and of forbidden food—would, for such disciples, need wise and equitable treatment.
Approaching the Ep. as a treatise rather than a letter (with the considerable reserves just stated), we indicate briefly some of its main
9. Main doctrinal deliverances. Obviously, in Teachings limine, it is not set before us as a comof the plete system either of theology or of Epistle morals; to obtain a full view of a Pauline dogma and ethics we must certainly place Eph and Col, not to speak of passages from Thess, beside Rom. But it makes by far the nearest approach to doctrinal completeness among the Epp.
(1) The doctrine of man.—In great measure this resolves itself into the doctrine of man as a sinner, as being guilty in face of an absolutely holy and absolutely imperative law, whether announced by abnormal revelation, as to the Jew, or through nature and conscience only, as to the Gentile. At the back of this presentation lies the full recognition that man is cognizant, as a spiritual being, of the eternal difference of right and wrong, and of the witness of creation to personal "eternal power and Godhead" as its cause, and that he is responsible in an awe-inspiring way for his unfaithfulness to such cognitions. He is a being great enough to be in personal moral relation with God, and able to realize his ideal only in true relation with Him; therefore a being whose sin and guilt have an unfathomable evil in them. So is he bound by his own failure that he cannot restore himself; God alone, in sovereign mercy, provides for his pardon by the propitiation of Christ, and for his restoration by union with Christ in the life given by the Holy Spirit. Such is man, once restored, once become "a saint" (a being hallowed), a "son of God" by adoption and gi-ace, that his final glorification will be the signal (in some sense the cause?) of a transfiguration of the whole finite universe. Meanwhile, man is a being actually in the midst of a life of duty and trial, a member of civil society, with obligations to its order. He lives not in a Godforsaken world, belonging only to another and evil power. His new life, the "mind of the Spii-it" in him, is to show itself in a conduct and character good for the state and for society at large, as well as for the "brotherhood."
(4) Was it not with this position before him, known to him through the many means of communication between Rome and Corinth, that St. Paul cast his letter into this form? And did not the realization of the central greatness of Rome suggest its ample scale? The result was a writing which shows everywhere his sense of the presence of the Judaic problem. Here he meets it by a statement, massive and tender, of "heaven's easy, artless, unencumbered plan" of redemption, grace, and glory, a plan which on its other side is the very mystery of the love of God, which statement is now and forever a primary treasure of the Christian faith. And then again he lays down for the too eager champions of the new "liberty" a law of loving tolerance toward slower and narrower views which is equally our permanent spiritual possession, bearing a significance far-reaching and benign.
(5) It has been held by some great students, notably Lightfoot and Hort, that the main, purpose of Rom was to reconcile the opposing "schools" in the church, and that its e.xposition of the salvation of the individual is secondary only. The present writer cannot take this view. Read the Ep. from its spiritual center, so to speak, and is not the perspective very different? The apostle is always conscious of the coUeotive aspect of the Christian life, an aspect vital to its full health. But is he not giving his deepest thought, animated by his own
2617 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Romans, Epistle to
(2) The doctrine of God.—True to the revelation of the OT, St. Paul presents God as absolute in will and power, so that He is not only the sole author of nature but the eternal and ultimately sole cause of goodness in man. To Him in the last resort all
locus classicus in the Epp. for the work of the Holy Ghost in the believer. By implication it reveals personality as well as power (see esp. ver26). Note particularly the place of this great passage, in which revelation and profoundest conditions run continually into each other. It foUows ch 7, in which the apostle depicts, in terms of his own profound and typical experience, the struggles of conscience and will over the awful problem of the "bondage" of indwelling sin. If we interpret the passage aright, the case supposed is that of a regenerate man, who, however, attempts the struggle against inward evil armed, as to consciousness, with his own facul-
is due, not only the provision of atonement but the power and will to embrace it. The great passages which set before us a "fore-defining" (jpobpi.<ni, proorisis, "predestination") and election of the saints are all evidently inspired by this motive, the jealous resolve to trace to the one true Cause all motions and actions of good. The apostle seems e.g. almost to risk affirming a sovereign causation of the opposite, of unbelief and its sequel. But patient study will find that it is not so. God is not said to "fit for ruin" the "vessels of wrath." Their woeful end is overruled to His glory, but nowhere is
ties merely, and finds the struggle insupportable. Then comes in the Divine solution, the promised Spirit of life and liberty, welcomed and put into use by the man who has found his own resources vain. "In Christ Jesus," in union with Him, he "by the Spirit does to death the practices of the body," and rises through conscious liberty into an exulting hope of "the liberty of the glory of the sons of God"—not so, however, as to know nothing of
it taken to be caused by Him. All along the writer's intense purpose is to constrain the actual believer to see the whole causation of his salvation in the will and power of Him whose inmost character is revealed in the supreme fact that, "for us all," "he spared not his Son."
"groaning within himself,' while yet in the body; but it is a groan which leaves intact the sense of sonship and Divine love, and the expectation of a final completeness of redemption.
(.3) The doctrine of the Son of God.—The Ep. affords materials for a magnificently large Christology. The relation of the Son to creation is indeed not expounded in terms (as in Col), but it
(5) The doctrine of duty.—While the Ep. is eminently a message of salvation, it is also, in vital connection with this, a treasury of principle and precept for the fife of duty. It does indeed lay down the sovereign freedom of our acceptance for Christ's sake alone, and so absolutely that (6 1.2.15) the writer anticipates the inference (by foes, or by mistaken friends), "Let us continue in sin." But the answer comes instantly, and mainly through the doctrine of union. Our pardon is not an isolated
is implied in the language of ch 8, where the interrelation of our redemption and the transfiguration of Nature is dealt with. We have the Lord's manhood fully recognized, while His Godhead (as we read in 9 5; so too Robertson, ut supra) is stated in terms, and it is most certainly implied in the language and tone of e.g. the close of ch 8. Who but a bearer of the Supreme Nature could satisfy the conception indicated in such words as those of 8 32.35-39, coming as they do from a Heb monotheist of intense convictions'? Meantime this transcendent Person has so put Himself in relation with us, as the willing worker of the Father's purpose of
fact. Secured only by Christ's sacrifice, received only by the faith which receives Him as our all, it
is ipso facto never received alone but with all His other gifts, for it becomes ours as we receive, not merely one truth about Him, but Him. Therefore, we receive His Life as our true life; and it is morally unthinkable that we can receive this and express
love, that He is the sacrifice of peace for us (ch 3), our "propitiatory" One (IXaffT-Ziptov, hilasltrion,
is now known to be an adj .), such that (whateverthe mystery, which leaves the fact no less certain) the man who believes on Him, i.e. (as ch 4 fully demon-
it in sin. This assumed, the Ep. (ch 12 and onward) lays down with much detail and in admirable appKcation large ranges of the law of duty, civil, social, personal, embracing duties to the state, loyalty to its laws, payment of its taxes, recognition of the sacredness of political order, even ministered by pagans; and also duties to society and the church, including a large and loving tolerance even in rehgious matters, and a response to every call of the law of unselfish love. However we can or cannot adjust mentally the two sides, that of a supremely free salvation and that of an inexorable responsibility, there the two sides are, in the Pauline message. And reason and faith combine to assure us that both sides are eternally true, "antinomies" whose harmony will be explained hereafter in a higher life, but which are to be lived out here concurrently by the true disciple, assured of their ultimate oneness of source in the eternal love.
strates) relies on Him, gives himself over to His mercy, is not only forgiven but "justified," "justi-
' Aid
' j ustification' ' is more than for-
fied by faith
. '
giveness; it is not merely the remission of a penalty but a welcome to the offender, pronounced to be lawfully at peace with the eternal holiness and love. See Justification; Propitiation.
In closest connection with this message of justi-
fication is the teaching regarding union with the Christ who has procured the justification. This is
rather assumed than expounded in Rom (we have
the exposition more expUcitly in Eph, Col, and
Gal), but the assumption is present wherever the pregnant phrase "in Christ" is used. Union is, for
St. Paul, the central doctrine of all, giving life and
relation to the whole range. As Lightfoot has well
said {Sermons in St. Paul's, no. 16), he is the apostle
(6) The doctrine of Israel.—Very briefly we touch on this department of the message of Rom, mainly to point out that the problem of Israel's unbelief nowhere else in St. Paul appears as so heavy a load on his heart, and that on the other hand we nowhere else have anything like the light he claims to throw (ch 11) on Israel's future. Here, if anywhere, he appears as the predictive prophet, charged with the statement of a "mystery," and with the announcement of its issues. The promises to Israel have never failed, nor are they canceled. At the worst, they have always been inherited by a chosen remnant, Israel within Israel. And a time is com-
not primarily of justification, or of liberty, great
as these truths are with him, but of union with
Christ. It is through union that justification is
ours; the merits of the Head are for the member.
It is through union that spiritual liberty and power
are ours; the Spirit of life is from the Head to the
member. Held by grace in this profound and multi-
plex connection, where life, love and law are inter-
laced, the Christian is entitled to an assurance full
of joy that nothing shall separate him, soul and
(ultimately) body, from his once sacrificed and now
risen and triumphant Lord. . .
(4) The doctrine of the Spirit of God.—No writing
ing when, in a profound connection with Messianic
of the NT but St. John's Gospel is so full upon this
blessing on the Gentiles, "all Israel shall be saved,"
great theme as Rom. Ch 8 may be said to be the
Rome THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2618
consider the relations of the Rom government and society with the Jews and Christians, and, in addition, to present a rapid sur^'ey of the earUer development of Rom institutions and power, so as to provide the necessary historical setting for the appreciation of the more essential subjects.
with a salvation which shall in turn be new life to the world outside Israel. Throughout the passage
St. Paul speaks, not as one who "will not give up a hope," but as having had revealed to him a vast and definite prospect, in the Divine purpose.
It is not possible in our present space to work out other Mnes of the message of Rom. Perhaps enough has been done to stimulate the reader's own inquiries.
/. Development of the Republican Constitution. —The traditional chronology for the earhest period
of Rom history is altogether unreli-
LiTEHATUBE.—Of the Fathers, Chrysostom and Augustine are preeminent as interpreters of Rom: Chrysostom in his e-xpository Homilies, models of eloquent and illuminating discourse, full of "sanctified conunon sense," while not perfectly appreciative of the inmost doctrinal characteristics; Augustine, not in any continuous comm., but in his anti-Pelagian writings, which show the sympathetic intensitj^ of his study of the doctrine of the Ep., not so much on justification as on grace and the will. Of the Reformers, Calvin is eminently the great commentator, almost modern in his constant aim to ascertain the sacred writer's meaning by open-eyed inference direct from the words. On Rom he is at his best; and it is remarkable that on certain leading passages where grace is the theme he is much less rigidly " Calvinistic " than some of his followers. In modern times, the not learned but masterly exposition of Robert Haldane (c 1830) claims mention, and the eloquent and highly suggestive expository lectures (about the same date) of Thomas Chalmers. "H. A. W. Meyer {.5th ed, 1872, ET 1873-74) among the Germans is exceUent for carefulness and insight: Godet (1879, ET 1881) equally so among French-writing divines: of late English interpreters I. A. Beet (1877, many revisions), Sanday and Headlam (1895, in the "International" series) and E. H. Gifford (admirable for scholarship and exposition; his work was printed first in the Speaker's [Bible] Comm., ISSl, now separately) claim particular mention. J. Denney "writes on Rom in The Expositor's Gr Test. (1900).
1. Original able, partly because the Gauls, in Roman ravaging the city in 390 BC, deState stroyed the monuments which might have offered faithful testimony of the earlier period (Li'^^y vi.l). It is known that there was a settlement on the site of Rome before the traditional date of the founding (753 BC). The original Rom state was the product of the coalition of a number of adjacent clan-communities, whose names were perpetuated in the Rom gentes, or groups of imaginary kindred, a historical survival which had lost aU significance in the period of authentic history. The chieftains of the associated clans composed the primitive senate or council of elders, which exercised sovereign authority. But as is customary in the development of human society a mihtary or monarchical regime succeeded the looser patriarchal or sacerdotal organs of authority. This second stage may be identified with the legendary rule of the Tarquins, which -tvas probably a period of Etruscan domination. The confederacy of clans was welded into a homogeneous poUtical entity, and society was organized for civic ends, upon a timocratic basis. The forum was drained and became a social, industrial and political center, and the CapitoUne temple of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva (Etruscan pseudo-Hellenic deities) was erected as a common shrine for aU the people. But above aU the Romans are indebted to these foreign kings for a training in disciphne and obedience which w^as exempUfied in the later conception of magisterial authority signified by the term imperium.
Luther's Iccttu'es on Rom, delivered in 1516-17 and long supposed lost, have been recovered and were published by J. Ficker in 1908. Among modern German commentators, the most important is B. "U^iss in the later revisions of the I^Ieyer series (9th ed, 1899), while a very elaborate comm. has been produced by Zahn in his own series (1910). Briefer are the works of Lipsius (Haud-Kommentar, 2d ed, 1892, very scholarly and suggestive) ; Lietzmann (Handbuch zumNT, interest chiefly linguistic), and Jiilicher (in J. Weiss, Schriften des 2\[Ts, 2d ed, 1908, an intensely able piece of popular exposition).
A. E. Garvie has written a brilliant little comm. in the "[New] Century" series (no date) ; that of R. St. John Parry in the Cambridge Gr Test,, 1913, is more popular, despite its use of the Gr text. P. B. Westcott's St. Paul and Justification, 1913, Contains a close grammatical study with an excellent paraphrase.
The prerogatives of the kings passed over to the consuls. The reduction of the tenure of power to a single year and the institution of the principle of coUeagueship were the earhest checks to the abuse of unlimited authority. But the true cornerstone of Rom Kberty was thought to be the lex Valeria, which provided that no citizen should be put to death by a magistrate without being allowed the right of appeal to the decision of the assembly of the people.
The writer may be allowed to name his short comm. (1879) in the Cambridge Bible for Schools and a fuller one, in a more homiletic style, in the Expositor's Bible, 1894, Handley Dunelm ROME, rom:
I. Development of the Republic.\n Coxstitution 1. Original Roman State 2. Struggle between Patricians and Plebeians 3. The Senate and JNIagistrates 4. Underlying Principles II. Extension of Rom.\n Sovereignty III. The I.mperial Government
A period of more than 150 years after the establishment of the repubhc was consumed chiefly by the
struggle between the two classes or 2. Struggle orders, the patricians and plebeians, between The former were the descendants of Patricians the original clans and constituted the and
1. Imperial Authority 2. Three Classes of Citizens IV. R0.MAN Religion 1. Deities 2. Religious Decay V. Rome and the .Jews 1. .Tudaeaunder Roman Procurators and Governors 2. Jewish Proselytism VI. Rome and the Christians
^ populus, or body-politic, in a more Plebeians particular sense. The plebeians were descendants of former slaves and dependents, or of strangers who had been attracted to Rome by the obvious advantages for industry and trade. They enjoyed the franchise as members of the mihtary assembly (comitia centuriata), but had no share in the magistracies or other civic honors and emoluments, and were excluded from the knowledge of the civil law which was handed down in the patrician families as an oral tradition. The first step in the progress of the plebeians toward political equality was taken when they wrested from the patricians the privilege of choosing representatives from among themselves, the tribunes, whose function of bearing aid to oppressed plebeians was rendered effective by the right of veto (inlerccssio) , by virtue of which any act of a magistrate could be arrested. The codification of
1. Introduction 2. Tolerance and Proscription 3. Persecution Literature
Rome (Lat and Ital. Roma; 'Puj|jlt], Rhome) : The capital of the Rom republic and empire, later the center of Lat Christendom, and since 1871 capital of the kingdom of Italy, is situated mainly on the left bank of the Tiber about 1.5 miles from the Mediterranean Sea in 41° .5.3' 54" N, lat. and 12° 0' 12" long. E. of Greenwich.
It wcjuld be impo,ssible in the limited space a.ssigned to this article to give even a comprehensive outline of the ancient history of the Eternal City. It win suit the general purpose of the work to
2619 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Rome
organ. Rome was never a true democracy except
the law in the Twelve Tables was a distinct advantage to the lower classes, because the evils which they had suffered were largely due to a harsh and abusive interpretation of legal institutions, the nature of which had been obscure (see Roman Law). The abrogation, directly thereafter, of the prohibition of intermarriage between the classes resulted in their gradual intermingling.
in theory. During the whole period embraced between the final levelhng of the old distinctions based upon blood (287 BC) and the beginning of the period of revolution (1.33 BC), the magistracies were occupied almost exclusively by the representatives of the comparatively limited number of families which constituted the aristocracy. These alone entered the senate through the doorway of the magistracies, and the data would almost justify U3 in asserting that the repubhcan and senatorial government were substantially and chronologically identical.
The kings had reduced the senate to the position of a mere advising body. But under the republican regime it recovered in fact the 3. Senate authority of which it was deprived in and Magistheory. The controlling power of the trates senate is the most significant feature of the republican government, although
The seeds of the political and social revolution were sown during the Second Punic War and the period which followed it. The prorogation of military authority established a dangerous precedent in violation of the spirit of the repubhc, so that Pub. Cornelius Scipio was really the forerunner of Marius, Julius Caesar, and Augustus. The stream of gold which found its way from the provinces to Rome was a bait to attract the cupidity of the less scrupulous senators, and led to the growth of the worst kind of professionalism in politics. The middle class of small farmers decayed for various reasons; the allurement of service in the rich but effete countries of the Orient attracted many. The cheapness of slaves made independent farming unprofitable and led to the increase in large estates; the cultivation of grain was partly displaced by that of the vine and oUve, which were less suited to the habits and ability of the older class of farmers.
it was recognized by no statute or other constitutional document. It was due in part to the diminution of the power of the magistrates, and in part to the manner in which the senators were chosen. The lessening of the authority of the magistrates was the result of the increase in their number, which led not only to the curtailment of the actual prerogative of each, but also to the contraction of their aggregate independent influence. The augmentation of the number of magistrates was made necessary by the territorial expansion of the state and the elaboration of administration. But it was partly the result of plebeian agitation. The events of 367 BC may serve as a suitable example to illustrate the action of these influences. For when the plebeians carried by storm the citadel of patrician exclusiveness in gaining admission to the consulship, the highest regular magistracy, the necessity for another magistrate with general competency afforded an opportunity for making a compensating concession to the patricians, and the praetorship was created, to which at first members of the old aristocracy were alone eligible. Under the fully developed constitution the regular magistracies were five in number, consulship, praetorship, aedileship, tribunate, and quaestorship, aU of which were filled by annual elections.
The more immediate cause of the revolution was the inabihty of the senate as a whole to control the conduct of its more radical or violent members. For as poUtical ambition became more ardent with the increase in the material prizes to be gained, aspiring leaders turned their attention to the people, and sought to attain the fulfilment of their purposes by popular legislation setting at nought the concurrence of the senate, which custom had consecrated as a requisite preliminary for popular action. The loss of initiative by the senate meant the subversion of senatorial government. The senate possessed in the veto power of the tribunes a weapon for coercing unruly magistrates, for one of the ten tribunes could always be induced to interpose his veto to prohibit the passage of popular legislation. But this weapon was broken when Tib. Gracchus declared in 133 BC that a tribune who opposed the wishes of the people was no longer thenrepresentative, and sustained this assertion.
Mention has been made of the manner of choosing the members of the senate as a factor in the development of the authority of the supreme council. At first the highest executive officers of the state exercised the right of selecting new members to maintain the senators at the normal number of
three hundred. Later this fimction was transferred
to the censors who were elected at intervals of five
years. But custom and later statute ordained that the most distinguished citizens should be chosen, and in the Rom community the highest standard of
It would be foreign to the purpose of the present article to trace the vicissitudes of the civil strife of the last century of the republic. A
distinction was service to the state, in other words, the holding of public magistracies. It followed,
4. Underfew words will suffice to suggest the lying general principles which lay beneath Principles the surface of political and social phenomena. Attention has been called to the ominous development of the influence of military commanders and the increasing empha-
therefore, that the senate was in reality an assem-
bly of aU living ex-magistrates. The senate in-
cluded, moreover, all the poUtical wisdom and
experience of the community, and so great was its
prestige for these reasons, that, although the ex-
pression of its opinion (senatus consuUum) was endowed by law with no compelUng force, it inevi-
sis of popular favor. These were the most important tendencies throughout this period, and the coahtion of the two was fatal to the supremacy of the senatorial government. Marius after winning unparalleled military glory formed a political alliance with Glaucia and Satuminus, the leaders of the popular faction in the city in 100 BC. This was a turning-point in the course of the revolution. But the importance of the sword soon outweighed that of the populace in the combination which was thus constituted. In the civil wars of Marius and Sulla constitutional questions were decided for the
tably guided the conduct of the consulting magis-
trate, who was practically its minister, rather than
When the plebeians gained admission to the mag-
istracies, the patriciate lost its political significance. But only the wealthier plebeian famihes were able
to profit by this extension of privilege, inasniuch
as a poHtical career required freedom from gainful
pursuits and also personal influence. These ple-
beian families readily coalesced with the patricians and formed a new aristocracy, which is called the
first time by superiority of military strength exclu-
nobilitas for the sake of distinction. It rested ulti-
mately upon the foundation of wealth. The dig-
sively. Repeated appeals to brute force dulled the perception for constitutional restraints and the rights of minorities. The senate had already dis-
nity conferred by the holding of pubUc magistra-
cies was its title to distinction. The senate was its
Rome THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2620
whom the emperors conferred the lalus clavus, or
jilayed signs of partial paralysis at the time of the Gracchi. How rapidly its debility must have increased as the sword cut off its most stalwart members! Its power expired in the proscriptions, or organized murder of poUtical opponents. The popular party was nominally triumphant, but in theory the Rom state was still an urban commonwealth with a single poUtical center. The franchise could be exercised only at Rome. It followed from this that the actual political assemblies were made up largely of the worthless element which was so numerous in the city, whose irrational instincts were guided and controlled by shrewd political leaders, particularly those who united in themselves military ability and the wiles of the demagogue. Sulla, Crassus, JuUus Caesar, Antony, and lastly Octavian were in effect the ancient counterpart of the modern pohtical "boss." When such men realized their ultimate power and inevitable rivalry, the ensuing struggle for supremacy and for the survival of the fittest formed the necessary process of elimination leading naturally to the establishment of the monarchy, which was in this case the rule of the last survivor. When Octavian received the title Augustus and the proconsular power (27 BC), the transformation was accomplished.
privilege of wearing the tunic with broad purple border, the sign of membership in this
2. Three order. The quaestorship was stiU the Classes of door of admission to the senate._ The Citizens qualifications for membership in the senate were the possession of senatorial rank and property of the value of not less than 1,000,000 sesterces ($45,000; £9,000). Tiberius transferred the election of magistrates from the people to the senate, which was already practically a closed body. Under the empire senatus consulla received the force of law. Likewise the senate acquired judicial functions, sitting as a court of
justice for trying important criminal cases and hearing appeals in civil cases from the senatorial provinces. The equestrian class was made up of those who possessed property of the value of 400,000 sesterces or more, and the privilege of wearing the narrow purple band on the tunic. With the knights the emperors filled many important financial and administrative positions in Italy and the provinces which were under their control.
IV. Roman Religion.— (1) The Rom religion was originally more consistent than the Gr, because
the deities as conceived by the un-
1. Deities imaginative Lat genius were entirely without human character. They were the influences or forces which directed the visible phenomena of the physical world, whose favor was necessary to the material prosperity of mankind.
Literature.—The standard work on Rom political institutions is Mommsen and Marquardt, Handbuch der klassischen AUertilmer. Abbott, Rom Political Institutions, Boston and London, 1901, offers a useful summary treatment of the subject.
//, Extension of Roman Sovereignty.—See Roman Empire and Christianity, I. Literature.—Only the most important general works on Rom history can be mentioned: Ihne, Rijmische Geschichte (2d ed), Leipzig, 1893-96, ET, Longmans, London, 1871-82: Mommsen, History of Rome, ET by Dickson, New York, 1874: Niebuhr, History of Rome, ET by Hare and Thirlwall, Cambridge, 18.31-32: Pais, Storia di Roma, Turin, 1898-99; Ferrero, Greatness and Decline of Rome, ET by Zimmem, New York, 1909.
It would be incongruous to assume the existence of a system of theological doctrines in the primitive period. Ethical considerations entered to only a limited extent into the attitude of the Romans toward their gods. Religion partook of the nature of a contract by which men pledged themselves to the scrupulous observance of certain sacrifices and other ceremonies, and in return deemed themselves entitled to expect the active support of the gods in bringing their projects to a fortunate conclusion. The Romans were naturally polytheists as a result of their conception of divinity. Since before the dawn of science there was no semblance of unity
///. The Imperial Government.—Augustus displayed considerable tact in blending his own mastery
in the state with the old institutions
1. Imperial of the republican constitution. His Authority authority, legally, rested mainly upon the tribunician power, which he had probably received as early as 36 BC, but which was established on a better basis in 23 BC, and the proconsular prerogative (imperium proconsulare), conferred in 27 BC. By virtue of the first he was empowered to summon the senate or assemblies and could veto the action of almost any magistrate. The second title of authority conferred upon him the command of the military forces of the state and consequently the administration of the provinces where troops were stationed, besides a general supervision over the government of the other provinces. It follows that a distinction was made (27 BC) between the imperial provinces which were administered by the emperor's representatives
in the natural world, there could be no unity in heaven. There must be a controlhng spirit over every important object or class of objects, every person, and every process of nature. The gods, therefore, were more numerous than mankind itself.
(2) At an early period the government became distinctly secular. The priests were the servants of the community for preserving the venerable aggregation of formulae and ceremonies, many of which lost at an early period such spirit as they once possessed. The magistrates were the true representatives of the community in its relationship with the deities both in seeking the divine will in the auspices and in performing the more important sacrifices.
(3) The Romans at first did not make statues of their gods. This was partly due to lack of skill, but mainly to the vagueness of their conceptions of the higher beings. Symbols sufficed to signify their existence, a spear, tor instance, standing for Mars. The process of reducing the gods to human form was inaugurated when they came into contact with the Etruscans and Greeks. The Tarquins summoned Etruscan artisans and artists to Rome, who made from terra cotta cultus statues and a pediment group for the CapitoUne temple.
(legati Augusti pro praelore) and the senatorial provinces where the republican machinery of administration was retained. The governors of the latter were called generally proconsuls (see Province). Mention is made of two proconsuls in the NT, Galho in Achaia (Acts 18 12} and Sergius Paulus in Cyprus (13 7). It is instructive to compare the lenient and common-sense attitude of these trained Rom aristocrats with that of the turbulent local mobs who dealt with St. Paul in Asia Minor, Judaea, or Greece (Tucker, Life in the Rom World
of Nero and St. Paul, New York, 1910, 9.5). Rom citizens were still divided into three classes socially, senatorial, equestrian, and plebeian, and the whole system of government harmonized with this triple division. The senatorial class was composed of descendants of senators and those upon
The types of the Gr deities had already been definitely established when the Hellenic influence in molding Rom culture became predominant. When the form of the Gr gods became familiar to the Romans in works of sculpture, they gradually supplanted those Rom deities with which they were nominally identifled as a result of a real or fancied resemblance. See Greece, Religion in.
(4) The importation of new gods was a comparatively
2621 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Rome
easy matter. Polytheism is by its natm-e tolerant because of its indeflniteness. The Romans could no more presume to have exhaustive knowledge ol the gods than they could pretend to possess a comprehensive acquaintance with the universe. The nimiber of their gods increased of necessity as human consciousness of natural phenomena expanded. Besides, it was customary to invite the gods of conquered cities to transfer their abode
Rome Rosh THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2622
offered 100 oxen in the temple when visiting Herod
was permitted to preach freely while nominally in custody (Phil 1 13), and that as early as 64 AD the Christians were very numerous (Tacitus Ann. xv.44: multitudo ingens).
(Jos, Ant, XVI, ii, 1), and Augustus established a daily offering of a bull and two lambs. Upon the whole the Rom government displayed noticeable consideration for the rehgious scruples of the Jews. They were exempted from miUtary service and the duty of appearing in court on the Sabbath. Yet Tiberius repressed Jewish rites in Rome in 19 AD (Suetonius Tiberius 36) and Claudius expelled the Jews from the city in 49 AD (Suetonius Claudius 25) ; but in both instances repression was not of long duration.
At first the Christians were not distinguished from the Jews, but shared in the toleration, or even pro-
tection, which was usually conceded
2. Tolerto Judaism as the national rehgion of ance and one of the peoples embraced within Proscription the empire. Christianity was not legally proscribed untU after its distinction from Judaism was clearly perceived. Two questions demand our attention: (1) When was Christianity recognized as distinct from Judaism?
The Jews made themselves notorious in Rome in propagating their religion by means of prosely-
(2) When was the profession of Christianity declared a crime? These problems are of fundamental importance in the history of the church under the Rom empire.
tizing (Horace Satires i.4, 142; i.9, 2. Jewish 69; Juvenal xiv.96; Tacitus Hist. Proselytism v. 5) , and the hterature of the Augustan age contains several references to the observation of the Sabbath (TibuUus i.3; Ovid Ars amatoria i.67, 415; Remedium amoris 219). Proselytes from among the Gentiles were not always required to observe all the prescriptions of the Law. The proselytes of the Gate {sebomenoi), as they were called, renounced idolatry and serious moral abuses and abstained from the blood and meat of suffocated animals. Among such proselytes may be included the centurion of Capernaum (Lk 7 5), the centurion ComeKus (Acts 10 1), and the empress Poppaea (Jos, Ant, XX, vui, 11; Tacitus Ann. xvi.6).
(1) If we may accept the passage in Suetonius cited above {Claudius 2.5) as testimony on the vicissitudes of Christianity, we infer that at that time the Christians were confused with the Jews. The account of Pomponia Graecina, who was committed to the jurisdiction of her husband (Tacitus Ann. xiii.32) tor adherence to a foreign belief (superstitionis externae rea). is frequently cited as proof that as early as 57 AD Christianity had secured a convert in the aristocracy. The characterization of the evidence in this case by the contemporary authority from whom Tacitus has gleaned this incident would apply appropriately to the adherence to Judaism or several oriental religions from the point of view of Romans of that time; for Pomponia had hved in a very austere manner since 44 AD. Since there is some other evidence that Pomponia was a Christian, the indefinite account of the accusation against her as mentioned by Tacitus is partial proof that Christianity had not as yet been commonly recognized as a distinct religion (Marucchi, Itlements d'archeologie chretienne I, 13). At the time of the great conflagration in 64 AD the populace knew of the Christians, and Nero charged them collectively mth a plot to destroy the city (Tacitus Ann. xv.44). The recognition of the distinctive character of Christianity had already taken place at this time. This was probably due in large measure to the circimastances of St. Paul's sojourn and trial in Rome and to the unprecedented number of converts made at that time. The empress Poppaea, who was probably an adherent of Judaism (Jos. .-Int. XX, viii), may have enlightened the imperial court regarding the heresy of the Chiistians and their separation from the parent stock.
On "proselj'tes of the Gate," GJV, III. 177, very properly corrects the error in HJP. These "Gate" people were not proselytes at all ; they refused to take the final step that carried them into Judaism—viz. circumcision
(Ramsay. Expos, 1896. p. 200; Hamack, Expansion of Cliristianity, 1, 11; see Devout; Proselytes).
Notwithstanding the diffusion of Judaism by means of proselytism, the Jews themselves Uved for the most part in isolation in the poorest parts of the city or suburbs, across the Tiber, near the Circus Maximus, or outside the Porta Capena. Inscriptions show that there were seven communities, each with its synagogue and councU of elders presided over by a gerusiarch. Five cemeteries have been discovered with many Gr, a few Lat, but no Heb inscriptions.
(2) In attempting to determine approximately the time at which Christianity was placed under the official ban of the imperial government, it will be convenient to adopt as starting-points certain incontestable dates between which the act of prosecution must have been issued. It is clear that at the time of the great conflagration (64 AD), the profession of Christianity was not a ground for criminal action. St. Paul had just been set at liberty by decree of the imperial court (cf 2 Tim 4 17). Moreover, the charge against the Christians was a plot to burn the city, not adherence to a proscribed religion, and they were condenmed, as it appears, for an attitude of hostility toward the human race (Tacitus Ann. xv. 44). While governor of Bithynia (c 112 AD), Phny the younger addressed Trajan in a celebrated letter (x.96) asking advice to guide his conduct in the trial of many persons who were accused as Christians, and inquiring particularly whether Cliristianity in itself w^as culpable, or only the faults which xisually accompanied adherence to the new faith. The reply of the emperor makes quite plain the fundamental guilt at that time of adherence to Christianity, and it supposes a law already existing against it (x.97). It follows, therefore, that the law against Christianity wliich w^as the legal basis for persecution must have i)een issued between the conflagration in 64 AD and Phny's administration of Bithynia. We cannot define the time of this important act of legislation more closely with absolute certainty, although evidence is not wanting for the support of theories of more or less apparent probability. Tradition ascribes a general persecution to the reign of Domitian, which would imply that Christianity was already a forbidden religion at that time. AUusions in Rev (as 6 9), the references to recent calamities in Rome by St. Clement in his letter to the Corinthians (1 Ad Cor.)', the condemnation of Acilius Glabrio (Dio Cassius lxvii.13). a man of consular rank, together with the emperor's cousin Flavins Clemens (Dio Cassius, xiii) and Flavia Domitilla and many others on the charge of atheism and Jewish customs (95 AD), are cited as evidence for this I^ersecution. The fact that a number of persons in Bithynia abandoned Christianity 20 years before the judicial investigation of Pliny (Pliny x. 96) is of some importance as coiToborative evidence.
Literature.—Ewald, The Hist of LsraeLTLT hy Smith, London, 188.5; Renan. Hist of the People of Israel. ET. Boston, 1896; Schiirer, The Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ. ET by MacPherson, New York.
VI. Rome and the Christians.—The date of the introduction of Christianity into Rome cannot be
determined. A Christian community
1. Introexisted at the time of the arrival of St. duction of Paul (Acts 28 15), to which he had Christianity addressed his Ep. a few years before (58 AD). It is commonly thought that the statement regarding the expulsion of the Jews from Rome under Claudius on account of the commotion excited among them by the agitation of Chrestus (Suetonius Claudius 25: ludaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantis Roma expulit), probably in 49 AD, is proof of the diffusion of Christian teaching in Rome, on the ground that Chrestus
is a colloquial, or mistaken, form of Christus. It has been suggested that the Christian faith was brought to the capital of the empire by some of the Romans who were converted at the time of Penfeco.st (Acts 2 10.41). It would be out of place to discuss here the grounds for the traditional behef that St. Peter was twice in Rome, once before 50 AD and again subsequent to the arrival of St. Paul, and that together the two apostles established the church there. Our present concern is with the attitude of the government and society toward Christianity, when once estabhshed. It may suf-
fice, therefore, to remind the reader that St. Paul
2623 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Rome Rosh
But there are grounds worthy of consideration for carrying the point of departure baclj oi Domitian. The letter of St. Peter from Babylon (Rome ?) to the Christians in Asia Minor implies an impending persecution (1 Pet 4 12-16). This was probably in the closing years of the reign of Nero. Allard cleverly observes {flistoire dcs pcrsGcutions, 61) that the mention of the Neronian persecution of the Christians apart from the description of the great Are in the work of Suetonius (Ner. 16), amid a number of acts of legislation, is evidence of a general enactment, which must have been adopted at the time of, or soon after, the proceedings which were instituted on the basis of the charge of arson. Upon the whole the theory that the policy of the imperial government was definitely estabhshed under Nero carries with it considerable probabihty (cf Sulpitius Severus, Chron., ii.41).
(Dt 29 18); "Their root shall be as rottenness"
(Lsa 5 24); "root of bitterness" (He 12 15). Also of peoples: "they whose root is in Amalek" (Jgs 6 14); of A.ssyria (Ezk 31 7); "Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up" (Hos 9 16); ",Judah shall again take root downward" (2 K 19 30; of Isa 27 6; 37 31); the root of Je,sse (Isa 11 10; Rom 15 12); root of David (Rev 5 5; 22 16).
ROOT OF DAVID. See David, Root of.
ROOT OF JESSE ("iffl"! ffihilj , shmeah yishay [Isa 11 10]; pC^a Tov Ttcro-at, rhiza lou lessai [Rom 15 12]) : The Heb and Gr words are practically the same in meaning. "Root" means descendant, branch of the family or stock. The Messianic king was to be of the family of Jesse the father of David. In Rom 15 12 Paul quotes the LXX of Isa 11 10. Jesus is a branch or descendant of the family of
Although the original enactment has been lost the correspondence of Pliny and Trajan enables us to formu-
late the imperial policy in dealing with the
3. PerseCUChristians during the 2d cent. Adherence
.." to Christianity was in itself culpable. But "O'^ proceedings were not to be undertaken by magistrates on their own initiative: they were to proceed only from charges brought by voluntary accusers legally responsible tor estabUshing the proof of their assertions. Informal and anonymous information must be rejected. Penitence shown in abjuring Christianity absolved the accused from the legal penalty of former guilt. The act of adoring the gods and the living emperor before their statues was sufficient proof of non-adherence to Christianity or of repentance.
Je.sse, as well as of David. See also David, Root OP.
ROPE, rop: Used in the OT for 5Dn , hebhel,
The attitude of the imperial authorities in the 3d cent, was less coherent. The problem became more complicated as Christianity grew. Persecution was directed more esp. against the church as an organization, since it was believed to exert a dangerous power. About 202 AD, Septimius Severus issued a decree forbidding specifically conversion to Judaism or Christianity (Spartianus, Severus, 17) , in which he departed from the method of procedure prescribed by Trajan (conquirendi non sunt), and commissioned the magistrates to proceed directly against suspected converts. At this time the Christians organized funerary associations for the possession of their cemeteries, substituting corporative for individual ownership, and it would appear that under Alexander Severus they openly held places of worship in Rome (Lampridius. AlexandeT Severus, 22, 49). The emperor Philip (244^-49) is thought to have been a Christian at heart (Eusebius, HE, VI, 34). A period of comparative calm was interrupted by the persecution under Decius (250-51 AD), when the act of sacrifice was required as proof of non-adherence to Christianity. Several certificates testifying to the due performance of this rite have been preserved.
"that which binds" (2 S 17 13, etc), and for Diy,
'abholh, "that which is woven" (.Igs 15 13, etc). In neither word is any specified thickness or strength connoted, and hebhel is tr"* equally well by "line"
(2 S 8 2, etc)' 01- "cord" (Josh 2 15, etc), and 'abhoih by "cord" (Ps 118 27, etc), as best suits the context. Similarly in the NT the word a-xoivlov, schoinion, lit. "made of rushes," can mean the rope by which a boat is fastened (Acts 27 32) or small cords suitable for a whip (Jn 2 15). The usual material for ropes was certainly flax (hemp), but the Egyptians, and so possibly the Hebrews, at times made ropes of leathern thongs. See Cokd; Line; Ships ajstd Boats, III, 2.
Burton Scott Easton ROSE, roz: (1) (rtsan, MbhafQeleih; &veo$,
dnthos, "a flower" [Cant 2 1], Kplvov, krinon, "a
lily" [Isa 35 1]): By general consent EV is wrong: in Cant 2 1m reads "Heb hahazzeleth, the autumn crocus," and in Isa 35 1, m reads "or autumn crocus." This is the Colchicum autumnale (N.O. Lilia-
Under Valerian (257 AD) the Christian organizations were declared illegal and the cemeteries were sequestrated. But an edict in 260 AD restored this property (Eusebius, VII, 13). A short persecution under AureUan (274 AD) broke the long period of cahn which extended to the first
edict of persecution of Diocletian (February 24, 303). The Christians seem to have gained a sort of prescriptive claim to exist, for Diocletian did not at first consider them guilty of a capital crime. He sought to crush their organization by ordering the cessation of assembhes, the destruction of churches and sacred books, and abjuration under pain of pohtical and social degradation.
ceae). A Tg on Cant 2 1 explains the Heb word as "narcissus," a very common plant in the plains and mountains of Pal and a great favorite with the natives. Two species, A'^. iazella and A'', serolinus (N.O. Amaryllideae) , occur, the latter being the finer; they are autumn plants. AU authorities agree that the so-called "rose" was some kind of bulbed plant.
(Lactantius, £»e Morte Persecutorum, x.ll, 12, 13; Euse-
bius VIII, 2 ; IX, 10). Later he ordered the arrest of all
the clergy who were to be put to death unless they renounced the faith (Eusebius, VIII, 6). Finally the requirement of an act of conformity in sacrificing to the gods was made general. This final persecution, con-
(2) (jihSov, rh6don, "the rose," mentioned in Ecclus 24 14; 39 13; 50 8; Wisd 2 8; 2 Esd 2 19): There is no reason why the rose, of which several varieties are common in Pal, should not be meant. Tristram favors the rhododendron. The expression, "rose plants in Jericho," in Ecclus 24 14 has nothing whatever to do with what is now sold there as a "rose of Jericho," a dwarf annual plant, Anastatica hierochuntina (N.O. Cruciferae), which dries up and can be made to reexpand by placing the root in water. E. W. G. Mastekman
tinuing in an irregular way with varying degrees of se-
verity terminated with the defeat of Maxentms by Constantino (October 29, 312). The Edict of Milan issued by Constantino and Liclnius the following year estab-
lished toleration, the restoration of ecclesiastical property and the peace of the church. See Roman Empibe and Christianity, III, IV, V.
< , -n • LiTEKATUHE.—Allard, Hisloire des persecutions, i'aris,
1903: he christianisme el I'empire romain. Paris, 1903: Duchesne, Hisloire ancienne de I'ei/lise, Paris, 1907 (lil);
Marucchi, Elements d'archeologie chretienne, Paris, 18991902Hardy, Christianity and the Rom Government, London, 1894: Renan, L'eglise chretienne. Pans, 1879: Ramsay, The Church in the Rom Empire, London, ISOc!.
ROSH, rosh, rosh (ffiSI , ro'sh): A son or grandson of Benjamin (Gen 46 21).
George H. Allen ROOF, roof. See House.
ROSH (fflSI, ro'sh; 'Pus, Bho.?, var. [Q-""] kc-
^a\i\s, kephales; Yulg capitis): This name occurs
ROOF-CHAMBER. See House.
in the prophecies against Gog in Ezk
1. Rosh 38 2.3 and 39 1, where AV has "Gog, and Its the land of IMagog, the chief prince of Renderings IVIeshech and Tubal." This tr is due
ROOM, room. See House.
ROOT, root (iSnilJ , shoresh; pila, rlAza) : Fre-
to ro'sh being the common Heb word
quently mentioned 'in the OT and NT, but almost
for "head" or "chief" (cf the Gr variant and the
always in a figurative sense, e.g. "root of the right-
Vulg), and is regarded as incorrect, that of the RV,
eous" (Prov 12 3.12); "root that beareth gall"
Rot, Rottenness Ruler THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2624
majesty of kinghood (1 Ch 29 25); quite frequently m the Book of Est; royal wine (1 7); crown (1 11; cf2 17; 6 8); commandment (1 19); "her royal estate," ht. her kinghood (1 19); house
"Gog, of the land of Magog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal," being preferred.
The identification of Rosh is not without its diffi-
culties. Gesenius regarded it as indicating the Russians, who are mentioned in Byzan-
royal (2 16; cf 5 1); royal apparel (5 1; cf 6 8.
15); throne (5 1); (4) m'lUkhah, "kingdom,"
2. Identitine writers of the 10th cent, under ficationwith the name of 'Pws, Rhos. He adds that Russia they are also noticed by Ibn Fosslan (same period), under the name of Rus, as a people dwelling on the river Rha (Volga). Apart from the improbabiUty that the dominion
"kingly power and dignity": "royal city," lit. the
city of the kingdom, meaning here that part of the
city (Rabbah) in which the royal palace was situated
(2 S 12 26); "royal diadem," lit. turban of kinghood (Isa 62 3) ; (5) in Jer 43 10 we find the word
of Gog extended t« this district, it would be needful
shaphrvr; its meaning is uncertain: "royal pavilion" (RV and AV), "ghttering" (RVm), "scepter," "a carpet covering a throne."
to know at what date the Rtis of the Volga arrived
there.
The NT uses the word for basilikos, "belonging to a king": "royal apparel" (Acts 12 21); "the royal law," something like "the golden rule," being foremost because including all others (Jas 2 8), and
Notwithstanding objections on account of its eastern position, in all probability Fried. Delitzsch's
identification of Rosh with the mdt
3. Probably Rdsi, "land of Rash" of the Assyr the Assyrinscriptions, is the best. Sargon of ian Rasu Assyria (c 710 BC) conquered the countries "from the land of Rasu on the border of Elam as far as the river of Egypt," and this country is further described in his Khorsabad Inscription, 18, as "the land of Rdsu,
for baMleios (being vested with kingly power and
honor), "royal priesthood," the Heb rendering would be mamlekheth kohanlm, "a kingdom of priests," i.e. a kingdom whose citizens are priests, emphasizing
the two facts that the true Christians have free
access to the grace of God and that they enjoy
of the boundary of Elam, which is beside the Tigris."
the liberties and privileges of His kingdom (1 Pet
Assj'ria having disappeared from among the nations when Ezekiel WTote his prophecies. Babylonia was probably the only power with which "Gog of the land of Magog" would have had to reckon, but it may well be doubted whether the Bab king would have allowed him to exercise power in the district of Rasu, except as a very faithful vassal. It may here be noted that the Heb spelling of Rosh presupposes an earUer pronunciation as Rdsh, a form agreeing
2 9). William Baub
ROYAL CITY. See Royal, (2), (4).
RUBY, roo'bi. See Stones, Precious.
RUDDER, rud'er, RUDDER-BANDS. Ships and Boats, III, 2, (3).
See
closely with that used by the Assyrians. See Fried. Dehtzsch, Wo lag das Parodies? 325.
RUDDY, rud'i CIlTanX , 'adhmoni [1 S 16 12;
17 42; Gen 25 25 RVm],bnS , 'adhom [Cant 5 10];
T. G. Pinches ROT, rot, ROTTENNESS, rot"n-nes (vb. 2p,-\ , rakebh, noun rakahh [rikkabhon, Job 41 27], with p«, mak, "decay" [Isa 5 24], and TBa?, 'ahhash,
vbs. DIX , 'adiiam [Lam 4 7], and tpuBpiaa), eru-
thrido, "to blush" [Ad Est 15 5]): "Ruddy" is the form taken by the adj. "red" when tised as a term
of praise of the human skin, and this is its use in the Bible (the Heb and Gr words are all usual words for "red" or "to be red"). The dark-skinned Hebrews found great beauty in a clear complexion.
"shrivel" [so Joel 1 17 RVm]): "Rottenness of the bones" (Prov 12 4; 14 30; Hab 3 16) is ulceration {caries) of the bones, used as an example of an intensely painful disease. AV, in addition, has "rot" in Nu 6 21.22.27, where RV has "fall away"
RUDE, rood: Not "impoKte" in EV (except perhaps 2 Mace 12 14), but "untrained," "ignorant";
(5SD , naphol), but a euphemistic paraphrase is in point (see the comms.). In Jer 38 11.12 AV has
cf the modern phrase, "a rude drawing." So Sir 8 4 (awalSiVTos, apaideutos) and 2 Cor 11 6 (/5i(iT7;s,
"old rotten rags" for nbu , melah, "rag" (RV "wornout garments," a tr that specializes too far).
idiotes, 'though I lack technical training in rhetoric');
cf AV and RVm Sir 21 24.
ROTE, rot: RVm gives "learned by rote" in Isa 29 13 for AV "taught," which indicates that the service of Jeh was merely formal.
RUDIMENTS, roo'di-ments (o-roixeia, stoicheia,
pi. of o-Toixeiov, sloicheion [Gal 4 3.9; Col 2 8.20; He 5 12; 2 Pet 3 10.12]): This word occurs 7 t
in the NT, and AV translates it in three different ways. In the two passages in Gal, and in the two
ROWER, ro'er, ROWING, ro'ing. AND BOAT.S, III, 1. See Ships
in 2 Pet, it is rendered "elements." In the two passages in Col, it is tr"* "rudiments." In He it
ROYAL, roi'al: Either belonging to a king (kingdom) or having kingly power, dignity, authority,
is rendered "first principles."
The etymological meaning of the word is, that which belongs to a row or rank, hence any first thing, an element, first principle. It
etc. In Heb, the word is expressed by using different nouns in the gen. case (the "construct state"). They are: (1) melekh, "king": "Asher .... shall yield royal dainties," lit. choice morsels of the king, meaning fit for a king (Gen 49 20); "besides that which Solomon gave her of his royal bounty," lit. which he gave her according to the hand (the wealth) of King Solomon (1 K 10 13; cf RVm); "a royal statute," lit. statute of a malka', which is the emphatic Aram, term for melekh, "king" (Dnl 6 7);
1. Etymodenotes, specially (1) the letters of the logical alphabet, the spoken sounds, as the Meaning elements of speech; (2) the material elements of the universe, the physical atoms of which the world is composed; (3) the heavenly bodies; (4) the elements, rudiments, fundamental principles of any art, science or discipUne; cf the phrase, "the a, b, c."
(2) mamldkhah, "the power and dignity of a king," "Gibeon .... one of the royal cities," i.e. a capital city with a king of her own (Josh 10 2; cf
(1) The NT use of the word, where it always occurs in the pi., is as follows: In 2 Pet 3 10.12, "The elements shall be dissolved with fervent heat," that
1 S 27 5); "all the seed royal," Ut. the seed of the kingdom (2 K 11 1; cf2 Ch 22 10); (3) inalkhnth, "kinghood," "kingdom": "royal majesty," lit.
is, the physical elements of the world and of the heavens are to be consumed, or subjected to change.
2625 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Rot, Rottenness Ruler
by means of fire. In He 5 12, AV "Ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God." This
2. Use of means that the Heb Christians had Term in not made the advance expected, in the NT grace and in the knowledge of God, but were in need of instruction in the elementary truths of the Christian faith.
(2) The Pauline use of the term is in Gal and Col; see references as above. InGal4 3.9AV Paul writes, "When we were children, [we] were in bondage under the elements of the world'
; "How turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?" The apostle here means the ceremonial precepts of the worship of the Jews. These requirements involved much and protracted difficulty in their observance; they were "a yoke .... which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear" (Acts 15 10). Yet the Galatian converts were turning back again to these legal ordinances, and desired to be in bondage to them. These elements were "of the world," they had reference to material and not to spiritual things, they were formal and sensuous. They were "weak," for they had no power to rescue man from condemnation, and they could not save him from sin. They were "beggarly," for they brought no endowment of the heavenly riches. By these epithets Paul signifies that rites, ordinances, sacrifices, observance of days and seasons belonged to the elementary stages of the Jewish religion, which had now attained its end and purpose in the coming of Christ and His work. These things were necessary at the time they were Divinely instituted, but the time had come when they were no longer required. They contained and conveyed an elementary knowledge, and were intended, from the first, to lead to an advance
ip the moral and spiritual hfe, which is now revealed
in Christ.
It has been thought by some that what is meant by "elements" or "rudiments" in Gal and Col is the physical elements, presided over by angels, and that this is in some way connected with the worship of angels, to which Paul refers in Col 2 18. The Jews beUeved that there were angels of fire and of the wind, and of the other physical elements. The apostle therefore wished to show the foohshness of the worship of angels and of the heavenly bodies which they were supposed to control. . .,.,. .1 i This latter meaning of the term is a possible, but not a probable one. The interpretation, already first given, which understands "elements" to mean the ordinances
of Jewish legahsm, is most in harmony with the gospel and with the teaching of Paul. "This is probably the correct interpretation, both as simpler m itself and as