DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4680#0010
vni PREFACE.
and afterwards abandoned owing to the progress of knowledge.
(3) Sometimes my views are combated and rejected for reasons which
are entirely or partially erroneous, springing from insufficient know-
ledge of the country and the obscurity of this whole subject1. Yet,
when I point out the erroneousness of such statements, some of my
foreign critics inveigh in no measured terms against my malignity in
trying to belittle others, who write on the same subject. (3) After
I have examined minutely almost every village and corner of a
district, and concluded that the only ancient sites were at certain
places, critics, who have seen the district either not at all or insuf-
ficiently, suggest in a casual way that the sites are at villages which
I have rejected as purely modern. (4) The subject is in process of
growth, and many of my views have rested on mere balancing of
probabilities. In such cases the subjective element is marked by
the use of the first person ; but this personal form of expression,
which is really a danger flag warning the reader not to take subjective
estimate for objective scientific certainty, is blamed by many English
critics as an egotistic piece of self-assertion. The present part con-
tains less of this element, because certainty is oftener reached ; and
there would be still less of it, were it not that M. Radet's ingenious
study En Phrygie warns me that some opinions, which I was inclined
to treat as certain, were not so esteemed by all.
If the views stated in Ch. XII, XVII, are even approximately cor-
rect, the Christian Antiquities of Phrygia will no longer be a field
for vague guessing: especially the 'North-Galatian Theory' of St. Paul's
travels will be banished from scientific works, and the Christian
origin of the ' Grabschrift des Aberkios' will cease to be a matter of
controversy. Two additional notes, pp. 788, 790, mention newer dis-
coveries in confirmation of the views in these two chapters.
In the chapters on Christian Antiquities my obligation to M. Le
Blant is, I hope, clearly marked : I have often quoted from him
opinions which I might have founded on the original documents
published by De Rossi; but here and always I have preferred to
quote, wherever possible, in proof that my opinions are not a priori
theories, but the natural inferences which the facts demand. Caesar's
1 An example from a review, other- real additions to my lists of bishops,
wise well-informed and judicious, occurs which are far from complete,
on p. 787. I should be grateful for any
and afterwards abandoned owing to the progress of knowledge.
(3) Sometimes my views are combated and rejected for reasons which
are entirely or partially erroneous, springing from insufficient know-
ledge of the country and the obscurity of this whole subject1. Yet,
when I point out the erroneousness of such statements, some of my
foreign critics inveigh in no measured terms against my malignity in
trying to belittle others, who write on the same subject. (3) After
I have examined minutely almost every village and corner of a
district, and concluded that the only ancient sites were at certain
places, critics, who have seen the district either not at all or insuf-
ficiently, suggest in a casual way that the sites are at villages which
I have rejected as purely modern. (4) The subject is in process of
growth, and many of my views have rested on mere balancing of
probabilities. In such cases the subjective element is marked by
the use of the first person ; but this personal form of expression,
which is really a danger flag warning the reader not to take subjective
estimate for objective scientific certainty, is blamed by many English
critics as an egotistic piece of self-assertion. The present part con-
tains less of this element, because certainty is oftener reached ; and
there would be still less of it, were it not that M. Radet's ingenious
study En Phrygie warns me that some opinions, which I was inclined
to treat as certain, were not so esteemed by all.
If the views stated in Ch. XII, XVII, are even approximately cor-
rect, the Christian Antiquities of Phrygia will no longer be a field
for vague guessing: especially the 'North-Galatian Theory' of St. Paul's
travels will be banished from scientific works, and the Christian
origin of the ' Grabschrift des Aberkios' will cease to be a matter of
controversy. Two additional notes, pp. 788, 790, mention newer dis-
coveries in confirmation of the views in these two chapters.
In the chapters on Christian Antiquities my obligation to M. Le
Blant is, I hope, clearly marked : I have often quoted from him
opinions which I might have founded on the original documents
published by De Rossi; but here and always I have preferred to
quote, wherever possible, in proof that my opinions are not a priori
theories, but the natural inferences which the facts demand. Caesar's
1 An example from a review, other- real additions to my lists of bishops,
wise well-informed and judicious, occurs which are far from complete,
on p. 787. I should be grateful for any