AND HISTORICAL RESEARCH UPON THE NEW TESTAMENT. 167 



Thus, more and more, research has revealed the verity of the 

 things " believed among us," by showing the absolute truth- 

 fulness of the many allusions, incidentally made, to laws, 

 customs, officers of government, phases of governmental 

 administration of great variety and unusual complexity, to a 

 vast variety of characters of individuals acting under varied 

 conditions, and with various ends in view, characteristics of 

 various races in different countries, and other particulars. 



In excavations made some years ago on the Acropolis of 

 Atliens there was found, built into a long-buried wall, a 

 fragment of stone which proved to have on one of its sides in 

 bas-relief a female head, with the fingers of a hand, from which 

 they had evidently been broken, holding a twist of hair on the 

 back of the head. M. Kavadias, the archaeologist in charge, 

 pronounced it a fragment of the frieze of Phidias on the 

 Parthenon near by. Other archaeologists expressed doubt. 

 After a good deal of discussion, it was recollected that among 

 parts of the Parthenon frieze among the Elgin marbles in the 

 British Museum there was a figure of Iris, the goddess of the 

 rainbow, lacking the head. A cast was taken of the head 

 discovered on the Acropolis, and sent to England. This was 

 placed on the part of the frieze from which a head had been 

 broken away. It fitted in the cavity, the figure was 

 symmetrical, and a lifted arm and hand on the frieze just met 

 the fingers on the back of the head. No argument was needed. 

 The demonsLration was perfect that it was the head of Iris. 



The priceless jewel, the New Testament, has been shown by 

 history and archaeology to fit its setting as perfectly as the head 

 of Iris its place on the frieze. 



We have seen that archaeology and history combine to show 

 us, through documents brought to light, the text of the New 

 Testament fully certified, and through discoveries of other 

 kinds, together with historical statements, its agreement with 

 the conditions of the period to which it belongs. 



But, here, an objector may say, " Well, what does all this 

 amount to ? These archaeological discoveries, and all these 

 historical references which are so correct, do not, after all, tend 

 to prove the truth of the main claims and doctrines of the 

 Christian religion." 



It may be replied that, if not directly, yet indirectly, 

 they do indicate the truth of the claims and doctrines, 

 which are founded on the facts narrated. We all know 

 that indirect evidence is often the most convincing, since to it 

 there does not attach the suspicion of deception which we may 



