It is worthy of note that St. Luke places the
parable of the Pounds in close connexion with the Zacch;eus incident, as if to teach us that lessons of eternal value can be learned in business. The slaves are rewarded with ten or five cities, accord- ing to the capacity which each had shown in trading with his pound.
This brings us to the centre of the whole matter : the life of business is a legitimate one for followers of Christ so far as it can be lived ' in the things of the Father ' ; then it is a means of imparting training and of teaching lessons which can be used now and hereafter in the service of God. 'God has set you,' writes the Rev. Wilfrid Richmond {Christian Economics, 1888, p. 159), 'in the world with other men to learn, by mutual interchange of the means of life, the laws of love. Your wealth, whatever it may be, little or great,— the wealth you make, the wealth you spend, — is treasure, corruptible or incorruptible, treasure on earth or treasure in heaven, according as it is or is not, in the making and in the spending, the instrument of love.'
Character of Jesus Christ i Diaconate of Jesus, 19; S. Gregory, Among the Roses,' 191; H. Bushnell, Sermons cm Living Subjects, 243 ; Expos, 2nd ser. viii. [18841 p. 17. P. M. BARNARD.
BUYING.— See Trade and Commerce.
CSSAR (Korcrop). — In the Go.spel record this name occurs 18 times, in 16 of which it answers to 'reigning emperor,' who in each case was Tiberius Caesar ; in the remaining two the more individual name is found,— in the one case Augustus (Lk 2'), and in the other Tiberius (3').
The name ' Csesar ' was assumed by Augustus in 44 B.C., immediately after the tragic death of his grand-uncle, Julius Ccesar, being considered by him part of the inheritance left to him. We have Cicero's authority (ad Aft. xiv. 5, 10, 11, 12) for saying that the friends of Octavius began to address him as ' Csesar ' within a week or two of the Dictator's assassination. Augustus himself soon gave evidence that he meant to gather up and concentrate on himself all the fame that was associated with 'Casar.' Not many years passed till he came to exercise a world-wide sway, such as the great Julius had never known. He handed on the title to his successors very much as we find it used by the writers of the NT, in the sense of the great ruler or Kaiser. His own name (Gr. Sc^ao-rds, Lat. Augustus) was quite familiar to them as applied to the reigning emperor (Ac 25=i- =^ Nero). Tlie fame of the first Cajsar had come to be overshadowed by the remarkable career of the founder of the Empire. The way was thus pre- pared for the still later development, when the title of ' Csesar' was given to the junior partner of the two joint-emperors, and ' Augustus ' remained tlie distinguishing name of the supreme ruler. In the Gospel record there is clear confirmation of the first part of this historical development, and there i.s at the same time no contradiction of the second. In the majority of the cases of the use of the title 'Ciesar' in the Gospel writings, tlie question of paying the tribute has come up. This reveals the great change that had taken place from the tune of the ' census ' under Augustus, when ' every-
one went to enrol himself in his own city ' (Lk 2'), to that of the trial before Pilate, when the chief charge against Jesus was said to be ' the forbidding to give tribute to Csesar ' (23-). In those thirty- three years of interval the relation between the Roman power, as represented by ' Cajsar,' and the Jewish people, had undergone a radical change. Judaea had become a Roman province, and was under obligation to ' pay tribute as well as submit to an enrolment of its heads of households. In perfect accord with this historical fact, St. Luke wrote (3'): 'Pontius Pilate being governor of Judwa,' with the tetrarchs for Galilee, Ituroea, and Abilene, desiring to mark the period in the reign of Tiberius Csesar when ' the word of God came to John in the wilderness.' The change came with the death of Herod the Great in 4 B.C. While Varus, the governor of Syria, was engaged in quelling serious outbreaks of rebellion in Jer- usalem, the sons of Herod were in Rome waiting the decision of Augustus as to their conflicting claims. At length all parties were heard by the emperor in an assembly tliat met in the celebrated temple of Apollo, behind his own house on 'the Palatine. The imperial verdict, announced after a few days, upheld substantially the will of Herod. To Archelaus were assigned Juda;a, Samaria, and Idumsea— not as king, but as ethnarch ; to Antipas, Galilee and Pera?a as tetrarch ; Batansea, Trach- onitis, Auranitis, Gaulanitis, and Paneas to Philip, also as tetrarch (Jos. Ant. xvil. viii. 1, xi. 4). The kingdom of Herod Avas thus divided into three separate territories after his death. As it was in Jerusalem tkat the question as to the tribute money was raised, our subject in this article has to do only with Archelaus. After some nine years of rule over Judjea, Archelaus was summoned to Rome to answer charges brought against him by a deputation of leading men from Judwa and