[288] Frazer, "Adonis, Attis, Osiris," 174 sq., 276 sqq. [289] Cf. on the whole subject Hochart, op. cit., 359 sqq.; P. Schmidt, "Gesch. Jesu," 386-394. In spite of all his efforts Zöckler has not succeeded in proving that Jesus was nailed to a piece of wood having the form of a four-armed cross. The assertion that this form of gibbet was borrowed by the Romans from the Carthaginians, and was the usual one in late pre-Christian days, is simply a figment of the imagination. All passages usually brought forward in support of this traditional view either prove nothing, as the appeal to Luke xxiv. 39, John xx. 20 and 25, or they refer to the symbol, not to the gibbet of the cross, and consequently cannot serve to support the usual view of the matter (Zöckler, op. cit., especially 78; 431 sqq.). [290] "Geschichte der christlichen Kunst," 174. [291] Cf. Detzel, "Christl. Ikonographie," 1894, 392 sqq.; Hochart, op. cit., 378 sqq. [292] Moreover, the so-called Flabellum, the fan, which in the early Christian pictures of the birth of Christ a servant holds before the child, shows the connection of the Christ Cult and that of Agni. This fan, which was in use in divine service of the Western Church as late as the fourteenth century, cannot be for the driving away of insects or for cooling purposes, as is usually considered, for this would obviously be in contradiction to the "winter" birth of the Saviour. It refers to the fanning of the divine spark in the ancient Indian fire-worship. In this sense it has been retained until the present day in the Greek and Armenian rites, in which during the Mass the fan is waved to and fro over the altar. A synopsis of all the facts and illustrations bearing on the matter are to be found in A. Malvert's "Wissenschaft und Religion," 1904. [293] Of course the "Acts of the Apostles" is, and remains in spite of all modern attempts at vindication (Harnack), a very untrustworthy historical document, and the information it gives as to Paul's life is for the most part mere fiction. We need not go so far as Jensen, who disputes the existence at any time of an historical Paul ("Moses, Jesus, Paulus. Drei Sagenvarianten des babylonischen Gottmenschen Gilgamesch," 2 Aufl., 1909), but will nevertheless not be able to avoid the view that the description of Paul, as Bruno Bauer has already shown, represents an original, in any case very much worked over, and in the opinion of many only a copy of the original, which preceded it in the portrayal of the "chief of the apostles," Peter (cf., on the historical value of the Acts, also E. Zeller, "Die Apg. nach ihrem Inhalt und Ursprung kritisch untersucht," 1854). [294] Cf. H. Jordan, "Jesus und die modernen Jesusbilder. Bibl. Zeit- u. Streitfragen," 1909, 36.