APOSTLE THOMAS IN A NEW LIGHT
Abraham
Yeshuratnam
I would like to give the back story in this study before
proceeding to analyze the details of the controversy over the arrival of Apostle
Thomas in Kerala in South India. This background information indicates the
extent to which previous studies have not impartially investigated his alleged
arrival and this paper, therefore, attempts to address the gaps in the existing
historiography.
The Book of Acts tells the story
of the Early Christian church in the First Century AD, with particular focus on
the ministry of the apostles Peter and Paul. A major theme of the Book
of Acts is the growth and expansion of the Christian Church from
the Jews in Jerusalem to the Gentiles throughout the Roman Empire. Bruce
points out that, “The first Jerusalem church lasted for some forty years. It
left the city and went into dispersion not long before A.D.70, and although
even in dispersion it continued for long to call itself the church of
Jerusalem, it had no more any direct association with the city. When Jerusalem
was refounded as a Gentile city in A.D. 135 a new church of Jerusalem came into
being, but this was a completely Gentile Christian church and had no continuity
with the church of Jerusalem of apostolic days.”[1] Jerusalem
was the capital and the center of the Christian world. The Church father
Clement of Alexandria (150-215) writes in his work Hypotyposes
(Outlines): “After the Saviour’s ascension, neither Peter nor James
(the son of Zebedee) nor John claimed primacy (although they were especially
recognised by the Saviour), since they elected James the Just to be bishop of
Jerusalem.”
During the apostolic
period, a nationwide Christian underground network was functioning in
Palestine. Early Christian gathering
places were difficult to identify because at first Christians met
together mostly in private homes. Even as Christian populations grew,
opposition by the Jews and persecution
by Roman rulers forced the
early church to function underground. But the apostles boldly went to
neighborhood countries to preach the Gospel as commanded by Jesus. According to tradition and some available
records Andrew
died a martyr in Achaia, Greece in the town of Patra, Bartholomew Nathanael is
said to have preached with Philip in Phrygia and Hierapolis and Armenia. The
Armenian Church claims him as its founder and martyr. James, the Elder
preached in Jerusalem and Judea and was beheaded by Herod, AD 44 (Acts 12:1,2).
James, the Lesser or
Younger, preached in Palestine and Egypt and was crucified in Egypt. John Boanerges, son of Zebedee and Salome, was
banished to the isle of Patmos, he was later freed and died a natural death.
Jude, Thaddeus, preached in Assyria and Persia and died a martyr in Persia.
Matthew, or Levi, son of Alpheus, died a martyr in Ethiopia. Simon Peter was
crucified, head downward, in Rome. Philip preached in Phrygia and died a martyr
at Hierapolis. Simon, the Zealot was crucified. Church historian Eusebius says: “Meanwhile the holy apostles
and disciples of our Saviour were dispersed throughout
the world. Parthia, according to tradition, was allotted to Thomas as
his field of labor, Scythia to Andrew and Asia to John,
who, after he had lived some time there, died at Ephesus.” These countries
witnessed the spread of Christianity in the apostolic period.
India’s
claim for Thomas
Early Christianity refers to the period when
the religion spread in the Greco-Roman world and beyond, from its beginnings as
a first century Jewish sect,[2] to
the end of the imperial persecution of Christians after the ascension of Constantine
the Great in 313 C.E., to the First
Council of Nicaea in 325. It may be divided
into two distinct phases: the apostolic period, when the first apostles were
alive and organizing the Church, and the post-apostolic period, when an early
Episcopal structure developed, whereby bishoprics were governed by bishops
(overseers) via apostolic succession.
Most of the disciples of Jesus worked as missionaries in and around the nearby
countries during the apostolic period. At the time of the Book of Acts,
Parthia, Media and Elam were parts of the Parthian Empire. Mesopotamia is modern day Iraq, Kuwait and
Western Syria around the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The
churches of Rome, Ephesus, and Antioch were the centers of the first century
network. Antioch, Alexandria and
Carthage became the strategic focal points of the Early Church, with Ephesus
and Rome playing a key role. The intermediaries were the apostles and other
prominent church leaders clustered around these centers of activity. Edessa
dominated a location where noteworthy trade routes intersected, and Antioch on
the Mediterranean was the most dominant metropolis of the Roman province of
Syria. The gospel traveled a route from
Jerusalem through Antioch and Edessa to Mesopotamia. Edessa by the end of the
second century was the first state to make Christianity a state religion. Dietmar Winkler says, “Already
in the first century there were Christian communities in Mesopotamia, which was
part of the empire of the Parthians, superseded by the Persian Sassanians in
the third century. As early as the fifth century the Oxus had been crossed, and
Sogdians and Turks, as well as the South Indian Malabar coast, had been
reached. East Syriac Christianity gained a foothold on the Arabian Peninsula
and, in the seventh century, reached the Chinese imperial court of the Tang
Dynasty.” (Winkler 2003: 1)[3]
The Christianity that spread to these Eastern
regions was assigned various names like the Syrian Church, or the Nestorian
Church, or the Church of the East (Owens 2006:134) [4]
In early Chinese text, Christianity is referred to as the 'Persian religion'
(Baum & Winkler 2000:47). [5] At the time of the Parthians, the silk trade
with
China was under Jewish control. The first to bring Christianity to the East
were Christian activists (nameless missionaries) who traveled the trade routes
from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf and across Central Asia to China.
Edessa’s significance for Syriac Christianity extends finally to the fact that
the Aramaic dialect of this city became the definitive biblical and liturgical
language of this branch of Christianity (Winkler, 8).[6] Sebastian Brock points out that the Syriac Churches
constitute ‘a third lung’ for early Christianity, in addition to its more
familiar Greek and Latin traditions.[7]:
During the fifth and sixth centuries, Syriac Christians split into three
different groups: East Syrian (formerly ‘Nestorians’), West Syrian
(‘Monophysites’) and Chalcedonian (‘Melkites’).[8] Eastern Christianity
continued to spread through the Persian Empire and beyond, moving along the
trade routes by land and sea until it made its presence known in India, Sri
Lanka, and China. The division between
the Persian and Mesopotamian Church appears
to have appeared relatively early. In the fifth century the Church of
Persia adopted St Thomas as their saint and evangelist, in contrast to
the Mesopotamians claimed to have been evangelized by Mari, their patron saint.
I have given a concise account of the
events that happened after the Pentecost in the development of eastern
Christianity. Apostles and disciples of
Jesus were actively involved in the extension of Christianity via evangelism
and church planting. Now we have to
focus on the period of Apostolic or Post-Apostolic Fathers (CE 35-150) to
explore the alleged arrival of Apostle Thomas in Kerala in 52 C.E. The itinerating examples
left by Paul and the other apostles encouraged the succeeding Christians to be
as courageous in taking the gospel to the peoples of the world. Eusebius described their mission as:
"The holy apostles and disciples of our Saviour, being scattered over the
whole world, Thomas, according to tradition, received Parthia as his allotted
region; Andrew received Scythia, and John, Asia, where he died at Ephesus.
Peter appears to have preached through Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia,
and Asia, to the Jews ... finally coming to Rome" (Eusebius, 1984, p. 82).[9]
By the end of the first century there
were perhaps “no more than 100 congregations; mainly urban, and primarily Greek
speaking” (Terry, 1998, p. 167)[10].
From its origin in Persia the Nestorian Church spread to Baghdad, into Central
Asia. As Don Fanning says: “Everywhere
they went they established mission communities with local nationals. In the 7th
century Nestorian missionary monks won converts from the Persian state
religion, Zoroastrianism, from Mongol and Korean shamanism, from Buddhist,
Islam and Hinduism, despite the fact that in many instances it was a capital
crime to convert. The Nestorian Church would survive 700 years in China where
foreign missionaries and Chinese converts translated portions of the
Scriptures.”[11]
It is against this backdrop that we have to investigate whether it was possible
for Thomas to come to India in 52 C.E. Christianity was introduced in Persia in
the Parthian period, and several bishoprics were established there (Latourette,
II, pp. 263ff.).[12]
The Parthian period is a special part of the
Persian history when the Parthians after conquering the Seleucid Empire (3rd
cent. B.C. E) inherited and preserved a vast empire, both in extension,
institutions and customs. The sources for the spreading of Christianity in
Persia in the first century are rare. Although Christian missionaries were active in Mesopotamia in the
Parthian period, no centers, such as the one established later at Nisibis, have
been reported, and it may be supposed that their activity at first was mainly
confined to Jewish communities. Pre-Nicaean authors Clement of
Alexandria and Origen link the apostolate of Thomas with Parthia. . Origen
relates: 'When the holy apostles and disciples of our Savior were scattered
over the world, Thomas, so the tradition has it, obtained as his portion Parthia. (Eusebius, HE 3.1.1) 'Thomas obtained Parthia by lot. According to the 4th-century Ecclesiastical History of Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea, Thomas
evangelized Parthia (modern
Khorāsān). (Eusebius, 1984, p. 82).[13] In spite of the reliable statements of
pre-Nicaean authors, there are some writers who are persistent in broaching
the totally unconvincing view that Thomas came to India and died in India. The
doggedness in the face of conflicting evidence is a part of a set of behaviors
known in the psychology literature as “motivated reasoning.” Motivated
reasoning is how people convince themselves or remain convinced of what they
want to believe—they seek out agreeable information from fake legends and
invented tradition; and they avoid, ignore, devalue, forget, or argue against
information that contradicts their beliefs. Motivated reasoning makes some
ethnic theologians and believers remain stubborn in not accepting historical
evidences that Thomas never came to India.
As Frykenberg says, “Thomas
Christians believe that the Apostle Thomas came to India in 52 A.D./C.E., and
that he left seven congregations to carry on the Mission of bringing the Gospel
to India.”[14]
In this study I want to establish the fact
that the views propounded by some church historians that Thomas went to India
to preach the gospel is a deliberate and willful act to debunk the original
evidences and the findings of pre-Nicean authors Clement of Alexandria and
Origen.
To buttress their belief that Thomas came to Kerala, the proponents
and believers give the views of later church historians, legends, manuscripts,
family stories and crosses found in some places. Ephrem is cited to support their belief. He
wrote in the forty-second of his "Carmina
Nisibina" that the Apostle was put to death in India, and that his
remains were subsequently buried in Edessa, brought there by an unnamed
merchant. Another tradition cited by
exponents to claim Thomas ‘work in
India were the hymns attributed to
Ephrem which allege that Thomas' bones were brought from India to Edessa by a
merchant, and that his relics worked miracles both in India and Edessa. Gregory
of Nazianzus is another theologian whose statement about Thomas confirms that
Thomas came to India. He has exclaimed, "What? Were not the Apostles
strangers amidst the many nations and countries over which they spread
themselves? … Peter indeed may have belonged to Judea; but what had Paul in
common with the gentiles, Luke with Achaia, Andrew with Epirus, John with
Ephesus, Thomas with India, Mark with Italy?"[15]
Another classical scholar, Ambrose of Milan has also expressed the view that
Thomas was in India. He has observed, "This admitted of the Apostles being
sent without delay according to the saying of our Lord Jesus… Even those
Kingdoms which were shut out by rugged mountains became accessible to them, as
India to Thomas, Persia to Matthew..."[16] Gregory of Tours also says “Thomas the
Apostle, according to the narrative of his martyrdom is stated to have suffered
in India. His holy remains (corpus), after a long interval of time, were
removed to the city of Edessa in Syria and there interred. He further says that one Theodore who had
been to India told him, “In that part of India where they first rested, stand a
monastery and a church of striking dimensions, elaborately adorned and
designed.”[17] Advocates
who argue for Thomas’ work in India cite a reference to Thomas in the Anglo Saxon chronicle. It is mentioned
in the chronicle that King Alfred
agreed to send alms to Rome and India “and that same year (883) Sighelm and
Athelstan carried to Rome the alms which the king had vowed to send thither,
and also to Lidia, to St. Thomas and to St. Bartholomew, when they sat down
against the army at London; and there, thanks be to God, they largely obtained
the object of their prayer after the vow”.[18]
The Chronicle
does not say that Thomas and Bartholomew were in India, but simply “to St.
Thomas and to St. Bartholomew.” Godfrey
writes: “The exact meaning of this information, even if accepted as authentic,
is uncertain, and it may be that ‘India’ is meant Syria and Palestine.”[19].
Although the Anglo-Saxon chronicle was believed to have been commissioned by
King Alfred,
there is no positive evidence to substantiate this claim. The original Chronicle was later edited with
additions, omissions, and continuations by monks in various monasteries. Kerala
writers like Mundadan are firm in their belief that Alfred sent alms to India. Probably they would have falsified the original version. The Original internet text shows the place as Lidia and not India. A
photocopy of the text is shown here:
83. A. 883. This year the army went up the Scheldt to Conde, and sat
there one year. And Marinus the pope then sent 'lignum Domini' to king Alfred;
and that same year Sighelm and Athelstan carried to Rome the alms which the
king had vowed to send thither, and also to Lidia, to St. Thomas and to St.
Bartholomew, when they sat down against the army at London; and there, thanks
be to God, they largely obtained the object of their prayer after the vow. [20]
In my
in-depth study of the country mentioned in the Chronicles, and after analyzing the religious history, topography
and political situation in that region, my finding is that it was Lydia and not
India. Luke,
the author of Acts, records that Paul’s first ministry encounter in Philippi
was not with a Macedonian man, but with a group of women, a group which
included Lydia, a woman originally from Thyatira. Richard Ascough writes: “Some
scholars suggest that the name “Lydia” may be an ethnic appellation that
designates her place of origin, as Luke indicates she was originally from
Thyatira, a city in a place called Lydia.”[21]
Probably King Alfred would have thought that Thomas would have also worked
among the Christians converted by Paul in Lydia. It may be positively stated
that King Alfred in all probability, from the available topographic knowledge
of that time, would have sent alms to
Lydia and not to India to honour Thomas and Bartholomew. [22]Traditionally, Bartholomew served as a
missionary to Ethiopia, Mesopotamia, Parthia (in modern Iran), Lycaonia (in modern Turkey), and Armenia. Monks
who wrote the Chronicles knew Lydia
was a Christian town and recorded that King Alfred sent alms to Lydia to respect
the apostles.
Protagonists who
insist that St. Thomas came to Kerala refer to the visit of Marco Polo, the
Venetian traveler, and his testimony about the tomb of Thomas. He was supposed
to be the author of Il Milione
(Description of the World). He is alleged to have visited Southern India in 1288
and 1292. The first date is not authentic as he was in China at the time, but
the second date is generally accepted. It is further claimed by him that he
also stopped at Quilon (Kollam) on the western Malabar Coast of India, where he came to know about the tomb of
Thomas on the eastern Coromandel Coast
of the country. Wrote Marco Polo: “It is in
this province, which is styled the Greater India, at the gulf between Ceylon
and the mainland that the body of Messer St. Thomas lies, at a certain town
having no great population.” A
closer investigation of Marco Polo's description of India shows that facts and
fictions are often mixed up and that his story about Thomas is from hearsay,
probably from local residents. Il Milione, the book he dictated on his return to Europe, was on
its publication condemned by the Church as a collection of impious and
improbable traveler’s tales. Another
historical proof shown by advocates of Thomas’ work in Malabar and the
existence of Christians in the first century is the statement of the famous
historian Vincent Smith: “It
must be admitted that a personal visit of the Apostle Thomas to South India was
easily feasible in the traditional belief that he came by way of Socotra, where
an ancient Christian settlement undoubtedly existed. I am now satisfied that
the Christian church of South India is extremely ancient…” But Vincent
Smith failed to check the date of the arrival of Christianity in the island of
Socotra. Socotra is
also mentioned in The Travels of
Marco Polo; Marco Polo
did not pass anywhere near the island but recorded a report that "the
inhabitants are baptized Christians and have an 'archbishop'" who, it is
further explained, "has nothing to do with the Pope in Rome, but is
subject to an archbishop who lives at Baghdad." They were Nestorians but also
practiced ancient magic rituals despite the warnings of their archbishop.[23]
Like all other areas in and around Persia of that period Nestorianism was the
dominant belief and there was no possibility of either Thomas’ arrival or the
prevalence of Apostolic Christianity in Socotra. As Gilman says: “A further example of Nestorian expansion is provided by the church
on the island of Socotra, which dates from the 6th century and was to continue
its life down until destruction by the Muslims…”[24] Vincent Smith would have known about the presence of Christians
in Socotra but he failed to check the date of the appearance of Christianity in
that island.
It is quite
puzzling why the arrival of Thomas is claimed by Christians in multiple
countries - India, Sri Lanka, Socotra, Paraguay, Indonesia and in some other
countries. The clue for this is given by the Portuguese, Nicolau de Orta Rebelo, who noted that all the Socotran men
were named Thomas and all of the women were named Mary. [25]
It can be inferred from this averment that the Persian missionaries who came to
Kerala had either Thomas as their names or they were known to the locals as
Thomas. Probably the converts would not have bothered to know the names of the
Persian missionaries because of the difficulty in communicating with them in a
foreign language. In
this study my primary objective is to investigate why writers and church
fathers such as Ephraim, Gregory, Vincent Smith, Marco Polo, Portuguese and others stressed that Thomas came to India
in the first century. They did not make any individual research, there were no
documentary or archaeological evidences, and yet they believed that Thomas was
in India in the first century. My
finding is that they were all misled by the apocryphal Acta Thoma. That was the only book available at that time about
Thomas’ work in India. They cited out of ignorance apocryphal writings as Scripture.
The word apocryphal (“secret”) is
applied to Gnostic traditions and writings both by Gnostics and by their
critics in the 2nd century. In the 4th
century apocryphal
referred to books not publicly read in churches. As Grant says, “It
meant apocryphal in the modern sense (i.e., fictitious) only
by implication, as when
the church historian Eusebius speaks of some of “the so-called
secret books” as forgeries composed by heretics.”[26]
No general church council in the
first four centuries of Christian history endorsed apocryphal books. While some
early Christians thought highly of these books, others, such as Athanasius,
Cyril of Jerusalem, Origen and Jerome opposed them. Epiphanus of
Salamis (370AD) testified that Acts of Thomas were
used by the “heretic Encratites”. After
protestant reformation, the Catholics began a Counter Reformation movement and
embraced stricter orthodoxy. The Acts was
condemned in the Catholic Council of Trent (1548 AD). Although
not translations, the medieval works on saints were still based on Acts.
Hence, even these works were considered “unorthodox”. With the spread of Christianity and
establishment of churches, the New Testament canon came to be formulated, and
the apocryphal books were rejected, first from public reading in churches, then
from private reading as well. Here in this paper I
want to highlight how this spurious and imaginary Acta Thoma has misled church historians in the past and is still
misleading believers in India. Even the Portuguese who came to India were
searching for the tomb of Thomas mentioned in the Acta Thoma. As for the
date and provenance of the text, most writers proceed from the hypotheses that
the work originated before 240 in a bilingual (Greek and Syriac) environment.
Translated Greek version was known to the Portuguese.
Certain hymns appear in the Acta Thoma and the notable ‘Hymn of the
Soul’ has been ascribed to Bardaisan, the famous Syrian heretic. We can assume
that the Acta Thoma was also written
by Bardaisan (Bardesancs). Discarding fanciful stories woven by Bardaisan such
as the selection of Thomas by casting lot, the appearance of Jesus to encourage
Thomas to go to India, Thomas’ arrival in India in the company of Habban and
the palace to be constructed to Gundaphorus, I want to focus on the historical
feature of the period to show the fallacy of the claim about the arrival of
Thomas. First of all, the overall political environment was not conducive for
Thomas to enter the Afghanistan region. The years 200 BCE to 100 CE was
a conflict zone in Afghanistan violently divided with internal conflict and
exposed to waves of outside invasion from Central Asian nomads and the Parthian
warriors. The Arsacid kings, however, succeeded in maintaining direct control
over the homeland and the main trade routes that linked East and West. To
protect the kingdom, the Arsacids formed sub-kingdoms, ruled by their own
native dynasties. The largest of these sub-kingdoms was the Indo-Parthian
kingdom, founded in the late 1st century BCE by the first of several kings
named Gondophares, who
was a Scythian (Saka) king and member of the Suren family, one of the seven
major noble houses of the Parthians. Indo-Parthians suffered major defeats at
the hands of the Kushans in the late first century CE, and eventually was reduced
to the area of Sakastan and Arachosia until their conquest by the Sassanians
during the 3rd century CE. Viewed against this backdrop of widespread violence
and unrest in the Indo-Parthian region in 52 CE the alleged arrival of Thomas
to the court of Gondaphares appears to be a figment of imagination. But this
argument is challenged by ethnic writers by pointing out the discovery of coins
issued by Gondaphares. As Marylin Keyes Roper
points out: “In 1834
there was a discovery of ancient coins bearing the inscription of a King
Gundapher dating to the 1st Century AD. Thirty-three are now in the
British Museum and twenty-four in a museum in Calcutta. Then a stone tablet was unearthed near
Peshawar, Pakistan which dated King Gundapher’s reign from 19-46 AD, making him
a contemporary of the Apostle Thomas.”[27]
Discovery of coins tells about the year of Gondaphares’ rule and there is no
numismatist image of the presence of Thomas at Gondaphares’ court. Coins tell about the year of Gondaphares' rule and not about the arrival of Thomas. Bivar
says, “It is difficult to relate
the Indo-Parthian names known from coins and history to those of the epic,
which are possibly honorific titles, since a recently reported silver coin
describes Gondophares (spelt in Greek script Hyndopharres) as “surnamed” Sām. A
single ruler may of course have received more than one such title, and the
historical names may be repeated in succeeding generations.”[28] I find Bivar’s statement quite acceptable
because in Egypt the ruler was called Pharaoh, and in Malabar the honorific title
for the king was Zamorin. Meanwhile, MacDowell makes a puzzling statement that
there were several kings called
Gondophares named on different coin issues.[29] If
Thomas’ work as a missionary in Gondophares’ palace comes under a scanner,
it is quite puzzling that there is no record that he could convert Gondaphares.
Indo-Parthian history does not show
Gondaphares as a Christian. No crosses were found in Drangiana as in
other areas where Persian missionaries had worked. The fact of the matter is Bardaisan wrote Acta Thoma around 240 CE and Gondaphares
rule in the Afghanistan region (Drangiana, Arachosia) was 20 – 46 C.E.,
according to Encyclopedia Iranica. The
author of Acta Thoma knew from history the name Gondaphares and the year of his
rule. Syriac-speaking communities
living in Mesopotomia had a good knowledge of Persian history and also about
Gondaphares. Bardaisan cleverly invented the story of Thomas meeting with
Gondaphares and along with it other fables like building a palace for the king
from his knowledge of Indo-Parthian history. As
George Huxley (1983: 75) correctly points out, “... not that Thomas went to
India in the second quarter of the first century A.D., but that the author
of the Acts knew the date of Gondophernes”[30]
And Butler has cleverly analyzed, “the Syrian Greek who
was probably the fabricator of the story would have been able to
learn from traders and travelers such details as the name Gondophorus with
tropical details,”[31] and this fabricated story has been
accepted as gospel truth by millions of believers. My finding is that Thomas
had never gone to Gondaphares’ kingdom. As Eusebius wrote about this
heretical work: “the character of the style also is far removed from apostolic
usage, and the thought and purport of their contents are completely out of
harmony with true orthodoxy and clearly show themselves that they are the
forgeries of heretics. For this reason they ought not to be reckoned among the
spurious books, but are to be cast aside as altogether absurd and impious.”[32]
This Paper now attempts to spotlight the assumed arrival of Thomas in South India,
specifically at Mylapore and Kodungalloor. Act
of Thoma describes St. Thomas traveling to India aboard a boat around 50
CE. His expenses were covered because he had been commissioned to build a
castle for the Indian King Gundaphernes. It was a mere imaginary statement of
the author of the Acts that Thomas traveled by boat. From time immemorial,
overland route was used by traders and travelers to reach Taxila from Palestine
or Persia. Even invaders such as Alexander and Nadir Shah used overland route
since it presented the only quick and reasonable alternative to the all
sea-route via Red Sea or Cape of Good Hope. Although the Red Sea route was
there, the author’s imaginary story has only a vague idea of destination. This
imaginary boat story was twisted in another folk song of Kerala Christians. A local folk song, Ramban Pattu, composed several centuries after the alleged year of
the arrival of Thomas shown in the Acts (52 CE) gives another invented destination-- Kodungalloor. Now the
fabricated story moves from Taxila to Cranganore (Kodungalloor). Research shows
that Ramban Pattu was composed in the
18th century after the arrival of the Portuguese and the British. It
becomes quite transparent that the arrival of Thomas to Godapharnes court as
shown in Acta Thoma and his later
arrival at Kodungalloor as related in Ramban
Pattu are all whimsical, fabricated and invented. Traditions touted by
Kerala Christians are artificially invented and unreliable from a historical
point of view.
Cultural Appropriation
Kerala Christians had never known
about the existence of St. Thomas tomb at Mylapore till the arrival of the
Portuguese. The Portuguese were keen on discovering Thomas’ tomb about which they
had learnt from Acta Thoma and Marco
Polo’s travels. When some Portuguese soldiers reached Madras, Armenians living
there told them about a tomb and took them to Mylapore. Klaus Koschorke writes “ The first report of
the existence of the house of St. Thomas was given by Pedro Alvares Cabral, and
king Manuel immediately broadcast in his letter of 28th August in
that same year. Cameos included St. Thomas in the national epic. Most viceroys
and captains were given royal instructions to obtain more information about the
tomb. Official enquiries were made in 1530, 1543 and 1589 -1600. Inside the
tomb a skeleton, a clay pot and spear were found. Only the testimony of Mar
Jacob Abuna refers to the body of the Saint in Edessa as not having decayed.
All others followed the Malabar tradition.”[33]
L.F. Thomaz quotes Sanjay Subrahmanyan, “The description of moving along the
path of St. Thomas was popular among the Portuguese as justification of their
colonial expansion. St. Thomas was soon declared a patron of the Portuguese
East, and its gold currency came to be known as Santomes.”[34] The Portuguese believed it was St. Thomas
tomb and gave wide publicity in Europe that they had succeeded in discovering
the tomb. Although the Portuguese were on the wrong side of chronological
evidence to claim it was Thomas’, it is indeed a matter of gratification that,
like ‘The Unknown Warrior’ who
is buried in Westminster Abbey as a memorial to the dead of World War One,[35] the tomb at Mylapore stands as a memorial
for the Persian missionaries who came to India and sacrificed their lives in
the service of Jesus. The
more you investigate the evidence, the more irresistible is the conclusion that
whether or not St Thomas himself came to India, he certainly could not have.
And if he didn't make the journey, it seems certain that some other very early
Christian missionary did, for there is certainly evidence for a substantial
Christian population in Kerala by at least the third century. Prima facie both Acta Thoma and Ramban Pattu
were not valid history, but really
fables and the products of men's imagination. Historically there is nothing on
record to prove that Christianity came
to Kerala in the first century C.E., and, at the same time, it is a chronologically
established fact that Christianity spread in the Persian Empire only during the
second and third centuries, when it
became a major force, especially in western regions. Only
at the beginning of the fourth century, with Bishop Qune, did Christianity
become orthodox in the normative sense known to church history. Since early
Christianity in Edessa presented itself as extremely diverse, only conjectures
can be put forth regarding the first Christians in Persia. Persian missionaries came to
Kerala from third or fourth century onwards and introduced Nestorian faith and
Syriac liturgy. Missionary work of Persians in Kerala is falsely interpreted as
the work of Thomas. Kerala Christians evade historical accuracy and depend
heavily on oral tradition to boost their belief. Susan Visvanathan writes,
“There is no literary evidence that St. Thomas did come to Kerala, but scholars
have agreed substantially on the prevalence and strength of oral traditions.[36]” A
17th-century work called Thomma Parvam (Songs of Thomas) says that
Thomas converted 40 Jews upon his arrival, along with 3,000 Hindus of Brahmin
origin. But a close look at the oral tradition and
the folklore reveal their shaky foundation because there is a glaring
discrepancy between oral tradition and chronology. They claim that oral traditions are based on a kernel of truth but folklores
and legends like Ramban Pattu were written many centuries after the alleged arrival
of St. Thomas (52 C.E.) and therefore the records they preserve are grossly
exaggerated and unreliable. The
value of a society’s absolute tradition must ultimately depend on its ability
to integrate with all known data
from other regions as well. It would be useless to establish a complete system of tradition that
can exist only in isolation. As for instance, Susan Visvanathan says,
“According to legend, the majority of the conversions made by the Apostle were
those of Brahmins.”[37]
It becomes transparent from this statement that legends were written not only
to distort chronology but to make spurious claims of superior caste status in a
caste oriented Kerala society. The modus
operandi is to invent a false story, then the story is touted as tradition
and then the tradition is used to appropriate the status of another superior
caste. The tradition artificially created exists in isolation because it is inconsistent
with chronology. Kerala historians such
as Elamkulam Kunjan Pillai and M.G.S. Narayanan have proved that there were no
Nambudhiri Brahmins in first century C.E. in Kerala and therefore the claim
that Thomas converted Nambudhiris in 52 C.E.is obliterated. Thomas’ arrival is
also being used to claim Jewish pedigree. Christian writers, in their attempt to appropriate Jewish
bloodline to local converts, have extensively manipulated, distorted and
fabricated, both domestically and internationally, their vast literature –
journals, church history books, encyclopedias and articles – by appropriating
to themselves Jewish ethnicity on the basis of the presumed conversion of Jews
by Thomas in Kerala in 52 C.E. It is a premeditated attempt to bend or break
the whole truth. Thomas’ name is being used for the appropriation of the culture
and race of the Jews by exaggerating, distorting and at times, flat-out lying
by locals converted by Persian missionaries who came to Kerala in the first
part of the fourth century.
Nestorianism
and not Apostolic Christianity
The earliest indisputable
evidence for Nestorians in India, however,
belongs to the mid-sixth century, when an Alexandrian spice merchant known from
the manuscript tradition as Cosmas
Indicopleustes (“the one who sailed to India) became a pupil of
the future East-Syrian patriarch Mār Abā. In his magnum opus on Christian topography, Cosmas preserves unique information about the East-Syrian bishoprics of the
Indian Ocean. As part of his account of the spread of the gospel through the
East, Cosmas observes, “Even in Taprobane [Sri Lanka] … there is a
Christian church with clergy and laity ( pistol ).” Elsewhere, he specifies that the island’s
priest was “appointed by Persia,” as were also the clergy on the
island of Socotra (at the mouth of the Gulf of Aden) and the bishop t
“Calliana”(modern Kollam) in “Male, where pepper grows” (i.e., the Malabar
Coast of southwestern India, modern Kerala). Syriac documents also indicate
that towards the middle of the third century Persian missionaries went to India
and Sri Lanka. Alfred
Mingana, an erudite theologian of Syriac Christianity, is of the view:
“It is likely enough that the Malabar Coast was evangelized from Edessa
at a later date, and in the course of time a confused tradition connected this
with Apostle Thomas himself.”
The legends and songs further project a phony
claim that the early converts of Thomas were Jews. This fabricated story is popularized
by Kerala Christians by citing the Malabar teak used in Solomon’s temple and
also the use of Malabar cinnamon and cassia during worship in Jerusalem temple.
Logan casually wrote: “Perhaps as early as the time of Moses, the great Jewish
law-giver, this commerce existed, for cinnamon and cassia played a part in the
temple services of the Jews.”[38] But
archaeological and documentary pieces of evidence show that cinnamon and cassia were
used by the Egyptian Pharaohs from ancient times and that Egypt supplied these
ingredients to Israel since Jews
lived in harmony with the Egyptians during the time of the pharaohs. This is all the more remarkable since
the Israelites must from early times have been acquainted with the ingredients
themselves, the fragrant gums, etc. The Bible says: “The caravans that carried
the spices of Syria to the Egyptian markets went by way of Palestine (Gen. 37.
25); and the spices of southern Arabia were brought by Solomon to Jerusalem (I
Kings x. 10 et seq.)”. Solomon did not plant any Jewish colony
in Malabar or in the Middle East, although his ships along with the Phoenicians
went to many countries for commercial purposes. It is also claimed that Solomon
allowed Jews to settle in Malabar when his ships came to buy teak for his
temple and that the descendants of those Jews were converted by Thomas. Malabar
teak was not used in Solomon’s temple. The Bible says that Solomon got cedar
and cypress from King Hiram of Tyre. Hiram wrote to Solomon: “I can supply both
cedar and cypress. My men will bring the logs from the Lebanon Mountains to the
Mediterranean Sea … “[39] These
historical evidences invalidate the fake claim that Thomas converted Jews
living in Kodungalloor in 1st century C.E. Jews did not seek refuge in Kerala during the
Babylonian Captivity as revealed by prophet Jeremiah. When Romans destroyed Jerusalem, Jews did not
seek asylum in Kerala. In
his book The Jewish War, Josephus has
given a first-hand account of the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE. and there is
absolutely no indication of Jews fleeing to Cochin. The earliest document showing the existence of the Jewish community in Kerala
is the pair of copper plates which record a grant of rights and privileges
given to the leader of the Jews,
Joseph Rabban, by Bhaskara Ravi Varma
and Govardhana Martanda, one of the witnesses. This grant is the only
strong evidence of the presence of Jews in Kerala in the last quarter of
the 10th century. Viewed from historical sequence and context the claim that
Thomas converted Jews in Kerala in the 1st century is invented
and fallacious.
Dilemma Over Thomas
Relics There
are multiple versions about the mortal remains of St.Thomas. Gregory of Tours
(583-594) evoked the Syrian tradition in shifting St.Thomas’s burial from India
to Edessa. Ephrem alludes in his Carmina Nisibena that the relics were
transferred to Edessa.[40] Both Gregory and
Ephrem relied on Acta Thoma to make the statement that the body of Thomas was
transferred to Edessa from India. There
is no record to show the name of the ruler who allowed the body to be removed
from the tomb at Mylapore and the persons who received it at Edessa. From the second century BCE to the third century CE, Edessa remained an independent city-state ruled
primarily by the Abgarid dynasty. Only in
213 CE did it come under direct Roman rule, having been made a colony by
Septimius Severus. Coincident with becoming a Roman colony, Edessa was also
Christianized. There is also a
reference to the visit of the nun Egeria who went on a pilgrimage to Edessa. But it happened only towards the fourth
century. She tells only about the church and “memorial of St. Thomas,” and not
about the tomb containing the relics of the apostle. But it is claimed by
sectarians that in 232 AD, a “greater
portion of relics of the Apostle Thomas were sent by an Indian king to Edessa from
Mylapore .The Indian king is named as "Mazdai" in Syriac sources,
"Misdeos" and "Misdeus" in Greek and Latin sources
respectively, which has been connected to the "Bazdeo" on the Kushan
coinage of Vasudeva I,
the transition between "M" and "B" being a current one in
Classical sources for Indian names.”[41]. This claim is made without any idea of
location, place recognition, distance evaluation in the regional context
between Taxila and Mylapore. Taxila ruler Vasudaeva’s name probably would have
been taken from Indian history text book to give a parallel date for the
alleged transfer of the relics of Thomas, but the tomb was in Mylapore in South
India. Probably the author, while inventing the fable of transferring the
relics to Edessa, would have thought Mylapore was in the Indo-Parthian kingdom.
These were the rulers in South India
during the analogous period - Pandya king Varguna flourished around 201- 225
CE, Prantaka, the Chola king ,210 – 245 CE and during the 1st century
CE Kerala had two sovereign kingdoms, Kolathunadu and Travancore. Kolathunadu
was under the control of Kolathiri (Mushika) kings and Travancore was under the
Kulasekhara dynasty. None of these southern rulers were either aware of or
involved in the alleged transfer of the relics of Thomas to Edessa.
A close study will reveal that those authors have taken stray
historical events to create artificial links to present their distorted
version of history as “real history.” It will be shown later in this paper that
the mortal remains of Thomas were found in the Greek island of Chios. So their
original version that the relics were shifted from Mylapore to Edessa has been
further twisted later to extend it to Chios. Doctored narratives, lies and misinformation are being
unabashedly published in encyclopedias, magazines, journals and books about the
transfer to Chios.
There is also no reference to the name
of the church at Edessa at that time where the relics were allegedly kept. Early Christians in Edessa met together
mostly incognito in private homes because of persecution by the Romans and
hostility by the Jews. Only at the beginning of the fourth century, with Bishop
Qune, did Christianity become orthodox in the normative sense known to church
history.
Some sectarian writers of Kerala
have taken advantage of the absence of any evidence- literary, numismatic and
archaeological – to invent stories using some historical events to boost their
caste status. (See footnote).[42]
Apostle Thomas in Mosul
Anne-Benedicte Hoffner says: “Iraqi Syrian Christians
attribute the start of the evangelization of Mesopotamia to the apostles Thomas
and Jude — known as Thaddeus (Thaddai or Addai in Syriac) in the Gospel of
Matthew — and to the latter's pupil, Mari. The missionaries set out from Edessa
(Urfa), now in Turkey, and were said to have reached the city of
Seleucid-Ctesiphon, capital of the Parthian Empire located near Bagdad. One of
the first Christian communities in the region was formed in Atur, a small town
situated in the middle of the ruins of Nineveh. The first proof of the
existence of a church in Mosul dates from 570 A.D. It stood on the site of the
current church of Mar Isha'ya.”[43] It is further substantiated by Mosul Eye: “The
church is dedicated to Saint Thomas the Apostle and
is believed to have been constructed on the site of the house that the saint
resided in during his stay in Mosul. The church is first mentioned in 770 as
part of a grievance to Caliph Al-Mahdi.
The current structure suggests it was built in the 13th century. During
restoration work in 1964, the finger bones of Saint Thomas were discovered in
the church. On 23 December 2009, a bomb damaged the church, killed two men and
injured five people”[44] We learn from the Bible that after the murder of Stephen,
persecution caused many of Jesus’ followers to flee from Jerusalem to outlying
areas in Judea and Samaria—some even going up the coast to Phoenicia, to
Antioch in Northern Syria, and to Cyprus (Acts 8:4, 11:19–22). It
is quite probable that Thomas would have gone to the nearby Mosul and not to a
distant country India, as falsely narrated in Acta Thoma.
Greece
a Fertile Field
Cyprus is also mentioned in the Bible and it
brings Greece also as a missionary field.
The
book of Acts indicates that Paul was brought to Athens by sea by some of the
people of Berea who had become believers (Acts 17:14–15). Once there, he called
for his colleagues Silas and Timothy to join him. This gives us a clue that Thomas
probably would have gone to the Greek island of Chios. There was no real break in Chian history when
the eastern parts of the Roman Empire transformed into the Byzantine Empire. Chios became a Christian
pilgrimage center because Thomas’ relics were preserved in a church. Atlas Obscura gives this account, “In 1258 when Ortona’s
General Leone Acciaiuoli visited the Greek island (Chios) with three
galleys and had a spiritual experience. After successfully looting the place,
the general went into the local church to pray. According to a legend, a light
hand waved twice at him, beckoning him to come closer, and he felt a
sweetness and peace as never before. Acciaiuoli then reached into the tomb and
took a bone. A halo surrounding the bones was proof to him that, indeed, he had
found the relics of the Apostle St. Thomas. The next night he came back and
stole the rest of the relics and the tomb. In 1358 the relics were brought
to the local church in Ortona, which was elevated to a minor basilica by Pope
Pius IX in 1859. There the relics of the Apostle St. Thomas, along with the
looted tombstone, were displayed in a crypt and remain to this day.”[45] After examining the events from a variety of angles, ranging
from the missionary activities of Paul and other apostles after Pentecost, my
finding is that Thomas would have first worked in Mosul (Oldest church exists
now on the place he had stayed in Mosul) and in the subsequent missionary
journeys he would have gone to Greece and finally landed in the Greek island of
Chios. Although it is claimed that in the earliest testimony Parthia was
allotted to Thomas, there is no documentary evidence for this allotment. The
names of Silas, Barnabas, Timothy and other missionaries were not shown in the
allotment list. Paul and Barnabas first went to Cyprus and later John Mark also
joined them (Acts 13:5). In the same manner, without any central agency to give
direction or allotment, Thomas would have gone to Chios probably guided by the
spirit. Chios was incorporated into the Roman Empire in 70 CE. There is no
record about the nature of his death. It was a period of persecution and Thomas
would have died a martyr. His body
(corpus) preserved and venerated in a church in Chios makes it credible to affirm
that Thomas worked in Chios. Persecution continued for several years and it is
on record that Isidore, another missionary, who worked in Chios was also murdered
in 250 CE during the period of Decius. As has been pointed out earlier, the
relics of Thomas were brought from Chios to Ortona to be later consecrated by
Pope Pius XI. The cathedral website
says: “The Basilica Cathedral dedicated to St.
Thomas the Apostle was built on the site of an ancient Roman
temple. Destroyed by the Normans in 1060, it was rebuilt and dedicated to
Santa Maria degli Angeli in 1127, as shown by the epigraph preserved in the
adjoining diocesan museum. From 6 September 1258 it holds the Bones of St.
Thomas the Apostle.” The Vatican also acknowledged these relics of “Thomas” with
“deed of verification” meaning that the Christendom considers it
to be the ‘real skeleton ‘of St. Thomas. So only in Ortona the
skeleton brought from Chios, unlike the alleged sites Mylapore and Edessa, was exhibited for the
public to see and later officially preserved, venerated and consecrated by the
Pope. But the discovery of the presumed tomb of Thomas by the Portuguese in
Mylapore in 1517 became a flashpoint to give multiple renditions to the
original relics discovered in Chios. The long gap 1258 at Ortona and 1517 at
Mylapore is a clear evidence of manipulation. Fictitious links were invented by
connecting Mylapore to Edessa and Edessa to Chios. The most perplexing is the
problem of transferring the relics from Mylapore to Edessa which was a hazardous
long route and from Edessa to Chios which could not be done by overland route.
Mark Guscin, after a deep study, says: “Even though there was a king of
Edessa called Abgar at the time when Christ lived, general opinion seems to
equate the official adoption of Christianity in the city during the reign of a
different Abgar, namely Abgar VIII the Great (177-212)[46] . Tixeront estimates that Christianity
was first preached in Edessa in the decade from AD 160 to 1706[47]
In these
circumstances the story of transferring the relics from Mylapore to Edessa is a mere figment of imagination. But for
story tellers the difficulty or even the impossibility of a route was not a
matter of apprehension. Spinning
the truth, presenting opinion as fact, and using revisionist thinking or
euphemisms to masquerade the truth are all forms of misrepresentation. This fictitious history, which ignores all historical
documentation and established historical methods, is based on systematic
distortions of both ancient and modern history with the aim of creating a
fictional route to the relics of Thomas from Mylapore to Edessa and from Edessa
to Chios.
After most of the data
has been collected and analyzed, my findings in this study are: (1) Apostle
Thomas could not go to the palace of Godaphares, as claimed in the apocryphal
Acta Thoma because of the volatile landscape and instability. Archaeological excavations in the region have
not shown crosses or ruins of any church.
.(2)
Chronological analysis shows the impossibility of Thomas coming to Kodungalloor
(Malabar) in 52 C.E. Without performing missionary work in the nearby Persia,
missionaries from Palestine could not leap into Kerala. The
most obvious use for the timeline layout is portraying historical facts in
chronological order. Around 300 AD, attempts were begun
to establish the Church in the Persian Empire in an organised form. In Persia,
till then, there was no particular or specific bishop, who was deemed the head.
It was Papa Bar Aggai, the bishop of the Persian royal capital at
Seleucia-Ctesiphon, who for the first time, tried to bring about the consolidation
of the Church. In fact, from around 315 AD, he had been using the title
‘CATHOLICOS’ in his communications. But this title, with its full
jurisdictional implications, gained legal recognition only by 410 CE, at the
Synod of the Persian Bishops held at Seleucia. So only from fourth century
Persian church could send missionaries to Kerala. It was only during the
post-apostolic age, Nestorian missionaries came to Kerala, established churches
and introduced Syriac liturgy. (3). Kerala folk lore and fictional tales say that
St Thomas arrived at Kodungalloor by boat/ship. These tales appeared in the 18th
century when local Christians had become economically affluent and literate
after the coming of the Portuguese and the British and they were quite proficient
to weave stories to exalt their status in society. While making situation
analysis, my finding is that the first Persian missionary who came to Kerala
landed not in Kodungalloor but at a port on the east coast, Mylapore.
Encyclopedia Britannica says that the Pandya rulers “in the extreme south of India of
unknown antiquity are mentioned by Greek authors in the 4th century BCE. The Roman
emperor Julian received an embassy from a Pandya about 361 CE.” Strabo and Pliny mention these ports. Excavations conducted at
Arikamedu by Sir Mortimer Wheeler revealed that Arikamedu was a trading post
during the reign of Augustus. Mylapore was
a prominent seaport during the Pallavas. Michael Wood says: “The Greek
envoy, Megasthenes, mentions Madurai in his account of India in around 300 BC.
It was in the period of the Roman Empire, under the Pandya dynasty, that the
city assumed its great importance, even sending embassies to Rome.” [48] Sangham literature also says that Greek and
Roman ships were engaged in commercial activities in these east coast ports.
Roman coins in large quantities were found in several places on the east coast.
On the contrary, excavations at Pattanom, Kodungalloor (Muziris?) on the West
Coast, did not show gold coins but only ceramics. The reason is Muziris
(claimed as Kodungalloor) was a collection center for pepper and spices.
Bullock cart caravans were used by traders to transport pepper to the East Coast
ports where ships were docked. The first
Persian missionary would have used the sea route to reach Mylapore and not to
Kodungalloor. In all probability it was not at Kodungalloor but at Mylapore
that the Persian missionaries first converted the locals. The existence of a tomb of an unknown
missionary (claimed to be Thomas’) at Mylapore is a strong evidence for this
contention. The tomb is also a perceptible reminder of the persecution of
Christians. Persecuted Christians would have fled to the Chera kingdom. Early
settlements and construction of churches of Christians in forest areas in the
Chera territory (Travancore and Kochi) could be traced to this migration. It is
further authenticated by the persecution of Christians at a later stage by one
Monickavasagar. Monickavasager went with an army to the Chera kingdom to ferret
out Christians and to kill them. Their flight deep into forest areas led to
the further escalation of Christian
settlements and to the emergence of churches at a later period in forest regions such as Kuravilangadu, Pallipuram, Angamali, Kaduthuruthy, Mylakombu, Puthenchira, Pala, Mulanthuruthy,
Kothamangalam etc., These two events in history – the tomb of a Persian
Christian missionary at Mylapore and the raid by Monickavasagar into the Chera
territory – are fact-based solid evidences that Christians went from Mylapore
to Kerala and not the other way round, as depicted in folklore and fables based
on conspiracy theories, rumors and disinformation.
(4) We get a glimpse of the apostolic ministry from
the Acts of the Apostles. But it is not a record of the missionary activities
of all the apostles. Starting with the first followers of Jesus
Christ, Christianity spread out into the Middle East and along the
Mediterranean Sea to other parts of the Roman Empire. The narrative in the Book of Acts is
evidently built upon the plan of recording the progress of the gospel from
Jerusalem to Rome. Paul’s missionary journeys to Greece led to the spread of
Christianity to Cyprus, Greece and Italy. Paul and Titus visited Crete, the largest and most populous Greek island. Greece became a fertile field for missionary
activity. In all probability Apostle Thomas, after ministering at Mosul, would
have gone to the Greek island of Chios. The very fact that Thomas was venerated
in the distant island of Chios is a solid proof that he had ministered in the
island. To invalidate the real event, sectarian writers and fake theologians
have invented the story that Thomas’ relics were brought from Edessa to Chios
by crusaders. Crusades are well documented and there is nothing on record to
show that the crusaders crossed the sea carrying Thomas’ relics from Edessa to
Chios. In 1144, the Seljuk general Zangi,
governor of Mosul, captured Edessa, leading to the loss of the northernmost
Crusader state. The Second Crusade began in 1147 led by King Louis VII of
France and King Conrad III of Germany. The Turks annihilated Conrad’s forces at
Dorylaeum, the site of Christian victory during the First Crusade. In light of
these historical events, the claim that Thomas ‘relics were transferred from
Edessa to Chios by the crusaders is totally mendacious. The very existence of
Thomas relics at Edessa is not based on fact but dubious and imaginary. Facts
have always been a fungible thing to sectarian writers. These writers do not
have the conscience to realize that to write something that is factually wrong
is disconcerting and embarrassing. They bend historical facts to fit the
manipulated story invented by them.
Breakthrough findings
in this paper are:
(1)Thomas did not meet
Gondaphares. It was a legendary story taken from the apocryphal Acta Thoma. Moreover, Gondaphares' Taxila was a kaleidoscope of factions, sects and groups jostling for power and control. The political atmosphere was not conducive for Thomas to enter Taxila region and to to do missionary work.
(2) Thomas did not come
to Cranganore (Kerala/Malabar).It is a claim found in fictional folk songs like
Ramban Pattu that appeared only in the
18th century.
(3) First conversion
was in Mylapore and Mylapore Christians migrated to Chera kingdom due to
persecution. The tomb of an unknown Persian missionary at Mylapore and not at Kodungalloor is a solid proof for the pioneering missionary work of Persian missionaries in South India.
(4)Thomas ministered in the Greek island of Chios since his relics were
officially approved by the Vatican when they were brought to Ortona.
[3] Baum,
W. & Winkler, D., 2000, The church of the east: A concise
history, Routledge Curzon, London. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203423097 m www.sytiacstudies.com/
[4]
K. S. Latourette, A History of the Expansion of Christianity,
7 vols, pp. 263ff. New York, 1937-45.
[5] Op.cit.,
[6]
ibid
[7] Sebastian Brock, P., ‘The Syriac Orient: A Third “Lung” for the Church?’,Orientalia Christiana Periodica 71 (2005),
[8] Brock, Sebastian P., ‘The Christology of the Church of the East in
the Synods of the Fifth to Early Seventh Centuries: Preliminary Considerations
and Materials’, in idem, Fire from Heaven: Studies in Syriac Theology and Liturgy (Aldershot, 2006), 125–42
[9] Eusebius, P. (1984). Ecclesiastical History
(Trans. by C. F. Cruse, Trans.). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House
[10]
Terry, J. M., Smith. (1998). Missiology:An Introduction to the Foundations,
History and Strategies of World Missions, TN, Broadman & Holmann
Publishers.
[11]
Don Fanning, Missions History of the Early Church, Liberty University, 2009,
dfanning@liberty.edu
[12]
K. S. Latourette, A History of the Expansion of Christianity,
7 vols., New York, 1937-45.
[13]
Eusebius, P. (1984). Ecclesiastical
History (Trans. by C. F. Cruse, Trans.). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House
[14]
Robert
Eric Frykenberg, OUP
Oxford, 28-Jan-2010 - Religion
[16] Ibid., 43, 44
[17]
Medleycott, A. E. India and the Apostle Thomas: An Inquiry, with
a Critical Analysis of the Acta Thomae, Gorgias Press LLC, 2005, p. 71. ISBN 1593331800
[18]Giles,A.,G.BellandSons,London,1914,
(
https://archive.org/stream/anglosaxonchroni00gile/anglosaxonchroni00gile_djvu.txt
[19]
Godfrey, C.J., The Church in Anglo Saxon
England, Cambridge University Press, 1962, p. 291
[20] https://archive.org/stream/anglosaxonchroni00gile/anglosaxonchroni00gile_djvu.txt
[21]
.Richard S. Ascough, Lydia, Paul’s Cosmopolitan Hostess ,Paul’s Social
Network: Brothers and Sisters in the Faith ,Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press,
2009.
[22]
Alfred was the
king of the southern Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Wessex and one of the outstanding
figures of English history, as much for his social and educational reforms as
for his military successes against the Danes. He is the only English monarch
known as 'the Great'.
[23]Polo,
Marco (1958). The Travels of Marco Polo. Translated and introduction by
Ronald Latham. Penguin
Books. pp. 296–297. ISBN 0-14-044057-7)
[24] Ian
Gillman and Hans-Joachim Klimkeit Christians in Asia before 1500 ,University of
Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan1999, p.81
[25]Vialy V. Naumkin, ,Island
of the Pheonix: An Ethnographic Study of the People of Socotra, Ithaca
Press 1993, p.43-
[26] Grant , Robert Mhttps://www.britannica.com/topic/biblical-literature/New-Testament-Apocrypha#ref598216
[27]
Roper, Marilyn Keyes, The Church
of the East: Parallel
Development of Christianity, https://www.academia.edu/28094671/THE_CHURCH_OF_THE_EAST_PARALLEL_DEVELOPMENT_OF_CHRISTIANITY.
[28] Bivar, A.D.H.,“Gondophares and the Shāhnāma,” Iranica
Antiqua 16: In Memoriam Roman Ghirshman II, 1981,
pp. 141-50.
[29]
MacDowall, D.W.,
“The Dynasty of the Later Indo-Parthians,” Numismatic Chronicle,
7th series, 5, 1965, pp. 137-48
[30]
Huxley, G.
(1983), Geography in the Acts of Thomas.
Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies,
1983, 24, 71-80.
[31]
Butler, Alban, Butler’s Lives of Saints,
Burn Oates & Wash Bourne Ltd, pp.213-18
[32] The
Development of the Canon of the New Testament, http://www.ntcanon.org/Eusebius.shtml
[33]
Koschorke, Klaus, Christen und Gewurze, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht in
Gottingen, 1998, pp.37-38
[34]
Subrahmanyan, Sanjay, Profit at the Apostle’s feet; The Portuguese Settlement
in Mylapur in the Sixteenth Century, Improvising Empire, Oxford, 1990, pp.47-67
[35] In
1920, as part of ceremonies in Britain to commemorate the dead of World War
One, there was a proposal that the body of an Unknown Soldier, sailor or airman
lying in an unmarked grave abroad be returned to England for burial in
Westminster Abbey. This was to symbolise all those who had died for their
country, but whose place of death was not known, or whose body remained
unidentified.
[36]
Visvanathan, Susan, The Legends of St.
Thomas in Kerala, India International Centre Quarterly, vol.22- No.2/3
(Summer-Monsoon 1995), p.28
[37]
Ibid., p.29
[38]
Logan, Malabar Manual, Government
Press, Madras, 1951, p.245
[39][39]
1 Kings 4: 9
[41] Hunter, William
Wilson,. The Indian
empire : its peoples, history, and products Morrison & Gibb, 1886
[42]
Ethnic writers in Kerala distort history to usurp the caste of
others. As for instance, until recently Edessa was shown as the final
destination for the relics of Thomas in all their writings. Now with the
knowledge that Thomas’ body was found in the Greek island of Chios, these
writers have invented another story by claiming that when the Turks attacked
Edessa, Thomas’ body was carried by the crusaders and Christians to Chios. This
fantastic claim does not fit into the historical events of the period. The Turks slaughtered all the Christian male citizens of the city and women and
children were sold into slavery. To ensure Edessa could not be used again by
the enemy, its fortifications were systematically destroyed. Crusaders took a
land route. Chios is a distant island and it is only a fable by ethnic writers
that the relics were carried to Chios. Even the claim that Thomas relics were
kept in Edessa is bizarre.
[43]
Benedictine Hoffner, Anne, When Mosul was Christian, La Croix International, Iraq, April 14,
2015
[46]
Guscin, Mark, The Tradition of the Image
of Edessa, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle, 2016, p.9
[47] Ibid.,
[48] Wood.Michael. The Story of India:
South India, BBC History, 2011-02-1http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/india/gal_india_south_02.shtml
Much thanks for the sharing! COOL.. Gorgias of Epirus
ReplyDelete