It has been recognized for some time that nationalism is a factor to be reckoned with in the ecclesiastical history of the later Roman Empire. Certainly the history of the Monophysites after Chalcedon is largely the story of the struggle of Egyptian and Syrian national feeling against the Empire. In all probability the bishops of Alexandria who in the two generations before Chalcedon combatted the rise of the imperial church at Constantinople— Theophilus, Cyril, and Dioscorus—were supported by the patriotism of the Egyptian nation as well as by the pride of the Alexandrian see. But there has not yet been any answer to the question, when did this union of Christianity and nationalism in Egypt begin?

The discussion of this problem involves interrogating our sources on a subject they do not consciously treat and must be a matter of interpretation rather than merely of quotation of evidence. The problem could be stated in two ways; the church historian asks, when did Egyptian Christianity become nationalist? while for Egyptian history the problem is, when did Egyptian nationalism become Christian? The Egyptian nation, with its language, its religion, and some remnants of its literature and culture, had continued to exist through the whole period of Greco-Roman dominance. In the Coptic church it was to find once more the means to vigorous self-expression.

Professor Becker has said “The migrations of the Teutonic tribes and the expansion of the Saracens together form the basis of the history of the Middle Ages.” The Muslim conquests of Persia, Egypt, North Africa and Spain from 634 to 713 wiped out the ancient sees of Ephesus, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria. Only Rome remained. The Saracens continued their advance over the Pyrenees and did not receive their first severe check until Charles Martel met and defeated them at Tours in 732. It was several more years however before Charles was able to regain Provence and secure Aquitaine against invasion.

The impression which is likely to be derived from the reading of a history of biblical interpretation is that modern criticism is a goal which has been attained by an evolution in which the curve of progress is fairly steady and constant. There seems to be a tacit assumption that such adjectives as “modern,” “critical,” and “scientific” as applied to biblical studies are synonymous and equally deserved. The occasional appearance of a critical judgment in the work of ancient worthies is regarded as an “anticipation” of modern views. In most histories of interpretation the beginnings of modern criticism are found in the Renaissance and the Reformation, so that Luther and Calvin are regarded as biblical scholars; the importance of New Testament studies in the work of Erasmus is exaggerated, and processes of scientific criticism are pictured as in effect before the impact of discovery brought a new world-view into being.

On a little hillside that rises abruptly from the Baltimore Pike, an old highway from Philadelphia to Baltimore, some fifty miles south of Philadelphia, stands a little old meeting-house a-round which gather many interesting historical incidents. It is the home of the Brandywine Baptist Church, on the edge of the famous Brandywine battle field where Washington, joined for the first time by Lafayette, met defeat by the British under Howe and Cornwallis and was forced to abandon Philadelphia, September 11, 1777. Giant oak trees tower high on the hillside to-day and members of the church will point out the one against which, according to tradition, the young French general leaned, severely wounded.