[423] The Rev. Dr. Thorburn (Mythical Interpretation, p. 21) cites from the Encyc. Bib. as "the words of Dr. Cheyne" words which are not Cheyne's at all, but those of Robertson Smith. Smith, so scientific in his anthropology, is always irrationalist in his theology. [424] R.V. "enrolment." Dr. Thorburn appears to argue (p. 39) that the "taxing" story in the Krishna-myth is derived from "ignorant copying" of the English Authorized Version! The "to be taxed" of the A.V. of course represents the traditional interpretation--that taxing was the object of the enrolment. [425] C.M. 189-90. [426] C.M. 273. [427] I have been represented, by scholars who will not take the trouble to read the books they attack, as deriving the Christ-myth in general from the Krishna-myth. This folly belongs solely to their own imagination. Dr. Conybeare's assertion (Histor. Christ, p. 69) that in my theory the Proto-Christian Joshua-God was a composite myth "made up of memories of Krishna ... and a hundred other fiends," is of the same order. In his case, of course, I do not charge omission to read the statement he falsifies: it is simply a matter of his normal inability to understand any position he attacks. As regards the Krishna-myth I suggest only in the detail of the "taxing" the possibility of Christian borrowing through an intermediate source: in another, that of "the bag" which is carried by a hostile demon-follower of Krishna (C.M. 241-3), I suggest the possibility of Indian borrowing from the fourth gospel, where "the bag" is presumptively derived from a stage accessory in the mystery-drama, Judas carrying a bag to receive his reward. [428] C.M. 205 sq. [429] C.M. 207. [430] Id. 347 sq.; Drews, Die Petrus Legende (pamphlet), 1910. [431] Dr. Conybeare, undeviating in error, represents me (Histor. Christ, p. 73) as suggesting that the epithet bifrons led to the invention of the story of Peter's Denial. I had expressly pointed out that the epithet bifrons did not carry an aspersive sense, and suggested that the figure of Janus, with its Petrine characteristics, might have inspired the story of the Denial (C.M. 350-1). The subject of iconographic myth is evidently unknown matter to Dr. Conybeare. [432] C.M. 318 sq. [433] Die Versuchung Jesu (in Zur Gesch. und Litt. des Urchristentums, III, ii, 1907, pp. 53, 65.) [434] The simple principle of holding Mark for primary wherever it is brief has meant many such assumptions, in which many of us once uncritically acquiesced. [435] As cited, p. 85. [436] Id. pp. 92-93. [437] Test. Naphtali, viii, 4. [438] This is ably argued by Prof. Smith. [439] C.M. 329 sq. [440] Id. 335 sq. [441] Cp. Soltau, Das Fortleben des Heidentums in d. altchr. Kirche, 1906; S.H.C. 67 sq., 101 sq.; J. A. Farrer, Paganism and Christianity, R.P.A. rep. passim. [442] C.M. 220 and note 2. Cp. W. J. Wilkins, Paganism in the Papal Church, 1901.