Milman relates a legend of this time which was current in the sixth century; though it is in an exaggerated form, yet on the whole it is quite credible. "While Menas was Bishop of Constantinople, the child of a Jewish glassblower went to church with the rest and partook of the sacred elements. The father inquiring the cause of his delay, discovered what he had done. In his fury he seized him and shut him up in the blazing furnace. The mother went wandering about the city, wailing and seeking her lost offspring. The third day she sat down by the door of the workshop, still weeping, and calling on the name of the child. The child answered from the furnace. The doors were forced open, and the child was discovered sitting unhurt amid the red-hot ashes. Subsequently the mother and child were baptized." (Milman's "History of the Jews," vol. iii. p. 230.) For several centuries we do not hear of many distinguished Jews embracing Christianity, and though it is asserted that whole congregations in Candia did so in the seventh century, it is not our object to investigate this. Undoubtedly, after the rise of Mohammedanism, the Church had enough to do to stand on her defence against the new and even more fanatical antagonist, and the Jews were on the whole neglected. Besides, there were scarcely any Christian teachers who understood Hebrew, and the N. T. was not yet translated into the sacred tongue. Yet we find one very distinguished Jewish convert in the seventh century. This was Julian of Toledo, Primate of Spain, called by one of his successors, "A rose among thorns." He was baptized in the cathedral of his native place, became archdeacon in 656, Bishop in 680, and died in 690. He was President of the Twelfth Council of Toledo when he urged King Erwig to pass some severe laws against his former co-religionists, prohibiting them to blaspheme the Trinity and to possess Christian slaves. Nevertheless, the writer in the "Jewish Encyclopædia" speaks of him "as a man of great sagacity and discretion, prudent in judgment, very charitable, and tempering severity with mildness," and further informs us that he used to associate with the Jews. Consequently, he could not have been so very hostile against them. But on this point it is necessary once for all to remark that the severe opinion that used to be held by the Jews in general about Hebrew Christians was, to a great extent, owing to the unfair judgment passed upon them indiscriminately by Jewish historians. It is now acknowledged that even the modern Gräetz was unfair in this respect. We by no means want to exonerate the few bigots and fanatics like Nunes Henrique who acted as spy of the Maranos, or others who agitated for the burning of the Talmud, and strongly condemn men like Dr. Briman, so-called Justus, the associate and abettor of the Roman Catholic Theologian Rohling at Prague, in recent times, but it must be remembered that there is a great