History of Kerala and India - a collection of scholarly articles by Dr. A. Yeshuratnam: 04/05/19

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 1^st 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 18^th 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 28^th 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 1^st 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 1^st 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 1^st 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 18^th 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 18^th 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.

1 F.F. Bruce, “The Church of Jerusalem,” Christian Brethren Research Fellowship Journal 4 (April 1964): 5-14

2Mortimer Chambers, et al. The Western Experience Volume II. chapter 5 (McGraw-Hill, 2006)

[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

[15] Medlycott, 20th Century Discussions :, pp, 42,43; Perumalil pp. 43,44

[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

[40] Kathleen McVey, Ephrem the Syrian, Paulist Press, 1989, p. 25

[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

[44] Mosul Eye, https://mosul-eye.org/2019/01/09/the-oldest-church-of-saint-thomas-in-old-mosul-

[45] https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/relics-of-the-apostle-st-thomas

[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

History of Kerala and India - a collection of scholarly articles by Dr. A. Yeshuratnam

Friday, 5 April 2019

History of Kerala and India - a collection of scholarly articles by Dr. A. Yeshuratnam: APOSTLE THOMAS IN A NEW LIGHT ...