(nicknamed Caligula [q.v.]) (A.D. 37-41), Tiberius
Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus (see CLAUD-
IUS), Imperator Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus
Germanicus (see NERO), Imperator Servius Sul-
picius Galba Caesar Augustus (9 June 68-15 Jan.
69) (see GALBA), Imperator Marcus Otho Caesar
Augustus (15 Jan. -25 Apr. 69) (see OTHO), Impera-
tor Aulus Vitellius Caesar or Aulus Vitellius
Imperator Germanicus (2 Jan. 69-20[?] Dec. 70)
(see VITELLIUS), Imperator Vespasianus Caesar
Augustus (69-79) (see VESPASIAN), Imperator Titus
Vespasianus Caesar Augustus (71-81) (see TITUS),
Imperator Domitianus Caesar Augustus (81-96)
(see DOMITIAN), Imperator Nerva Augustus Caesar
(96-98) (see NERVA), Imperator Caesar Nerva
Traianus Augustus (97-117) (see TRAJAN). This
enumeration shows how fixed the name Caesar had
become as part of the Emperor's name, quite irre-
spective of relationship. It will also explain how
in all the places of tne NT but two the name
' Csesar ' alone (with or without the article) is
familiarly used, as equivalent simply to ' the
Emperor.' In the Gospels the reference is to Tib-
erius (cf. Mk 12 14 " 17 and parallels), in Acts and
Philippians (4 s22 ) to Nero. Where the historian
seeks to date an event, he is naturally more precise
(Ctesar Augustus, Lk 2 1 , Tiberius Caesar, Lk 3 1 ).
There are two aspects in which the Caesar
appears in the Gospels. In the section Mk 12 1S ~ 17
it is the question of giving tribute to Caesar that
comes up. The inhabitants of Judaea, a Roman
Imperial province, governed by one of the Emperor's
agents, called & procurator, were by law bound to
pay tax to the Emperor. The term used, JCT^CTOS, is
the Latin word census, which means ' census ' in our
sense, but much more. The census paper was in
the Roman Empire also an income- and property-
tax return, on the basis of which the assessment
of tax was made by the Imperial officials. Hence
the word in the Gospels might almost be translated
'income-tax.' Luke alters his original to the
good Greek word <6pos (Lat. trihutum, war-tax ; cf.
Lk 23 2 ). The second aspect in which the Caesar
appears in the Gospels is that of the Messiah's
rival to lordship over the chosen people. Jesus is
charged with ' saying that he is an anointed king '
(Lk 23 8 ; cf. Jn 19 U - 1B , Ac IT 7 ), for so we ought to
translate it. When Pilate asks Him if He is the
King of the Jews, He casts the word back to him,
' You say it, the word is yours' (Burkitt, Evan-
gelion da-MepharresM, 1904, ii. 58). Throughout
the Apostolic Age and later, the Christians con-
tinue to use of their King in the spiritual sense
the very same epithets as the pagans use of the
Emperor. This fact must have accentuated the
hostility of the Empire to the Church.
In Ac 25 and following, the Caesar is appealed to
by St. Paul, after his unjust arrest at Jerusalem.
The right of appeal (provocatio) was one of the
bulwarks of the original republican constitution.
By it a citizen could appeal to his fellow-citizens
in assembly against any injustice on the part of a
magistrate. The plebeians were later also protected
by their special officials, the tribuni plebis. By the
Imperial constitution the Emperor possessed. tri~
bunicia potestas (see AUGUSTUS). Any aggrieved
citizen could thus appeal to him, and the Emperor
could quash the verdict of a lower court, and sub-
stitute his own verdict. Tho Emperor had also
the ius gladii, the right of life and death, and this
he could delegate to subordinates. St. Paul's ex-
periences before purely Roman tribunals had been
on the whole so satisfactory that he decided to
risk appeal to the highest tribunal of all, knowing
how valuable for the success of his mission a fav-
ourable verdict would be. His appeal was received
by Festus, and he proceeded to Rome. Hartmann
(see below under Literature) does not consider that
St. Paul's appeal was an appeal in the proper sense
of the term, but it seems better to follow Ramsay,
especially as Luke's language is quite plain. In
the silence of history, scholars are divided as to
the result of the Apostle's appeal. Some consider
that the conclusion of Acts (q.v.) means that it was
unsuccessful, and that he was condemned and
beheaded. Those who accept the genuineness of
the Pastoral Epistles believe that he was acquitted
Caesar's household. St. Paul, writing from
Rome to the Philippian Church in A.D. 60 or 61,
sends greetings from all the Christians in Rome,
but ' especially ' from ' them that are of Caesar's
household' (Ph 4 22 ). The date shows that the
' Caesar ' is Nero, and the word okfa, translated
' household,' is doubtless a translation of the Latin
familia. The vrordfamilia is the later form of the
older famulia, derived from famulus, a household-
slave, and in Latin carries with it the idea especi-
ally of the collection of slaves and freedmen in a
house. The relations between slaves and masters in
the Roman world were generally good, the slave being
regarded more as an integral part of the family than
hired servants are in modern times. In the Imper-
ial palace at Rome they can hardly have numbered
fewer than 2000, and an idea of the variety of their
occupations can be got from a study of the list of
nouns joined to a, ab in J. C. Rolre's art. in the
Archivfur lateinische Lexikographie, vol. x. 
p. 481 fl'. or the Thesaurus Linguce Latince, vol. L
 cols. 22 and 23. It is remarkable that the
list of names in Ro 16 coincides almost exactly
with names of members of the Imperial household
recovered in Roman inscriptions, as Lightfoot first
showed at length. The number of examples has
since increased. No epigraphist could doubt that
ch. 16 is an integral part of the Epistle to the
Romans, and that most of the persons there named
were 'of Caesar's household.' Our knowledge of
the life of such persons is mainly derived from
Statins (e.g. Siluce v. 1) and Martial.
For Caesar-worship, see EMPEROR- WORSHIP and
LITERATURE. Official names of Roman Emperors in R.
Cagnat, Cours d'epigraphie latine*, Paris, 1898, p. 177 S. ; on
the tributum see A. H. J. Greenidge, Roman Public Life,
London, 1901, p. 429 S, ; on Caesar and the Messiah as rivals cf.
theartt. of P. Wendland in ZNTW v.  335-353 and H.
A. A. Kennedy in Expositor, 7th ser. vii.  289-307 ; onr
the appeal (provocatio, appellatio) see T. Mommsen, Horn,
Strafrrcht, 1899, 8r Abschnitt, p. 468 ff., Gesammelte Schriften,
iii.  431-446, reprinted from ZSTW ii.  81 ff. ; art.
' Appellatio ' by Hartmann in Pauly-Wissowa ; J. S. Reid in
Journal of Roman Studies, i. [1911-12] 68 ff. ; W. M. Ramsay,
St. Paul the Traveller, 1895, p. 311 ff. On Caesar's Household
see the excursus in Lightfoot, Epistle to the Philippians*, 1878,
p. 171, and E. Riggenbach, in Neue Jahrbucher fur deutsche
Theologie, i. [1S92J 498 ff.; best collection of inscriptions in
H. Dessau, Inzer. Lat. Selectee, L [Berlin, 1892] ch. vi.
CJESAREA (Kaurdpeia or Kat<rdpa 2ej3curr>},
named in honour of Augustus ; known also as
Ccesarea Palcestince, and in modern Arabic as el-
Kaiiiarlyeh ; to be distinguished clearly from
Ccesarea Philippi). Caesarea was situated on
the Mediterranean coast, 32 miles N. of Joppa,
25 S. of Carmel, and 75 N.W. of Jerusalem. It
was once the chief port of Palestine. It was re-
built by Herod the Great on the site of ' Straton's
Tower' (Jos. Ant. XV. ix. 6). The city is closely
associated with the history of the Apostolic Church,
being especially notable as the place where the
Holy Spirit was poured out upon the Gentiles (Ac
10 45 ). The name occurs in Acts only. Philip the
deacon seems to have resided at Caesarea (8 40 21 8 - 16 ).
St. Paul was sent hence to Tarsus (9 30 ). Cornelius,
a Roman centurion, influenced by a vision to
send to Joppa for St. Peter, here became the first
convert of the Gentiles (10 1 - 24 II 11 ). Here Herod
Agrippa I. died (12 19 ). Here St. Paul landed on
his way from Ephesus (18 22 ), being later escorted
hither on his return from Jerusalem (2S 23 - *), and
here he was imprisoned for two years, and tried
before Festus (25 1 - * u ).
In apostolic times Caesarea was politically the
capital of the province of Judaea, and the residence
of the Roman procurators. Tacitus describes it
as 'the head of Judaea' (Hist. ii. 78). Among its
inhabitants there were both Jews and Greeks.
The city was elaborately beautified with temples,
theatres, palaces, arches, and altars. It was es-
pecially famous for its harbour (Jos. Ant. XV.
ix. 6). Aqueducts supplied the inhabitants with
water from Carmel and the Crocodile River. In
the 3rd cent. A.D., it became the seat of a famous
school of theology, in which Origen taught ; also
of the bishopric of Syria, Eusebius being the most
"celebrated of those occupying the office. Under
the Arabs it unfortunately lost its former prestige
and rapidly degenerated. At the time of the
Crusades it was rebuilt by Baldwin II. Saladin
took it in 1187. In 1251 it was re-fortified by St.
Louis. Finally, in 1265, it was completely de-
stroyed by the Sultan Bibars, since whose time it
has remained in ruins.
Little is now left to mark the ancient city.
Porter, writing in 1865, says : ' I saw no man.
The Arab and the shepherd avoid the spot'
(Giant Cities, 235). Thomson also (Land and
Book, i. 72) speaks of it as ' absolutely forsaken.'
Since 1889, however, a few Bosnians have settled
among the ruins and carried on a small trade in
brick. Most of the stones of the ancient city were
used by Ibrahim Pasha in constructing the new
fortifications at Acre. To the missionary, Caesarea
is one of the most interesting spots on earth, hav-
ing been the cradle of the Gentile Church.
LITERATURE. Josephus, Ant. xiv. iv. 4, xvii. xi. 4, BJi. xxi.
5, ii. ix. 1; G. A. Smith, HGHL 138 ff., art. 'Caesarea' in
EBi, i. 617 ; C. R. Conder, art. ' Caesarea ' in HDB, i. 337, Tent
Work in Palestine, new ed., 1887, pp. 107-110 ; Schiirer, HJP,
index, .t>. ; SWP ii. , sheet x. ; Baedeker, Palestine
and Syria*, 1912, p. 237 ff. ; A. Neubauer, Geog. du Talmud,
1868 ; G. Le Strange, Palestine under the Moslem*, 1890, p.
474 ; H. B. Tristram, Bible Places, 1897, p. 75 ; J. L. Porter,
The Giant Cities of Bashan, 1873, p. 233 ff. ; W. M. Thomson,
The Land and the Book, 1881, i. 69 ff. ; W. Smith, D&, art.
'Caesarea.' GEORGE L. ROBINSON.
CAIAPHAS (Kcud0as). Caiaphas, or Joseph
Caiaphas, was appointed high priest in A.D. 18 by
Valerius Gratus, and held office till A.D. 36, when
he was removed by Vitellius (Jos. Ant. XVIII. ii.
2, iv. 3). He was son-in-law of Annas (cf. art.
ANNAS). Like most of the priests at this period,
Caiaphas was a Sadducee in religion. By his
masterly policy of conciliating his Roman masters
he was able to retain his office for an unusually
long period. His craft and subtle diplomacy as
well as his supreme disregard for justice ana re-
ligion are revealed in the advice he gave to the
assembled Sanhedrin after Jesus had won the
people by the raising of Lazarus ' It is expedient
that one die for the people' (Jn II 80 ). Caiaphas
saw clearly that if a popular movement in favour
of Jesus were aroused, his power and position
under Rome would be at an end, and he sought at
once to give effect to his own advice. The trial of
Jesus in his presence was a travesty of all legal
procedure. Failing to obtain evidence from wit-
nesses, he adjured the prisoner to declare whether
or not He was the Messiah ; and on Jesus declar-
ing He was, the pious hypocrite rent his clothes,
shocked at the blasphemy of the answer. Caiaphas
is a type of the wily ecclesiastical opportunist,
who places the success of himself and the institu-
tion he represents before all claims of truth or
justice. Such a character is always ready to
persecute, and in the Apostolic Church Caiaphas
appears as a bitter persecutor of the apostles (Ac 4 6 ).
He is probably the high priest referred to in Ac
517-21. af 71 91 wno imprisoned Peter and John,
presided at the trial of Stephen, caused the perse-
cution recorded in Ac 8, and gave Saul of Tarsus
letters to Damascus to apprehend the Christians
LITERATTJBH. Josephns, pastim; Schiirer, GJV* ii.  256,
271; art. 'Caiaphas' in HDB (M'Clymont) and DCG (C. A.
Scott); E. Nestle, 'The Name "Caiaphas,"' in ExpT x.
[1898-99] 185 ; W. M. Clow, In the Day of the Cross, 1898, p.
9 ff. ; J. B. Lightfoot, Sermons in St. Paul's Cathedral, 1891,
p. 75 ; A. Maclaren, Christ in the Heart, 1886, p. 255.
W. F. BOYD.
CAIN. See ABEL.
CAINITES. According to the scanty informa-
tion we possess about the Cainites, they seem to
have formed one of the Gnostic sects which are
classed together under the somewhat inadequate
and perhaps misleading name ' Ophites,' though
the serpent, from which the name ' Ophite ' is de-
rived, seems to have played no part in their system.
Our oldest source is to be found in Irenaeus, adv.
Hcer. i. 31. He tells us that the Cainites regarded
Cain as derived from the higher principle. They
claimed fellowship with Esau, Korah, the men of
Sodom, and all such people, and regarded them-
selves as on that account persecuted by the Creator.
But they escaped injury from Him, for Sophia used
to carry away from them to herself that which
belonged to her. They regarded Judas the traitor
as having full cognizance of the truth. He
therefore, rather than the other disciples, was able
to accomplish the mystery of the betrayal, and so
bring about the dissolution of all things both
celestial and terrestrial. The Cainites possessed a
fictitious work entitled ' The Gospel of Judas,' and
Irenseus says that he had himself collected writ-
ings of theirs, where they advocated that the work
of Hystera should be dissolved. By Hystera they
meant the Maker of Heaven and Earth. They
taught, as did Carpocrates, that salvation could
be attained only by passing through all experience.
Whenever any sin or vile action was performed by
them, they asserted that an angel was present
whom they invoked, claiming that they were ful-
filling his operation. Perfect knowledge consisted
in going without a tremor into such actions as it is
not lawful even to name. Epiphanius (Hcer. 38)
characteristically gives a much longer account, in
substantial harmony with what Irenaeus says. He
appears to have had some source of information
independent of Irenaeus. He speaks of Abel as de
rived from the weaker principle a statement which
bears the marks of authenticity. He also says that
Judas forced the Archons, or rulers, against their
will to slay Christ, and thus assisted us to the
salvation- of the Cross. Philaster, on the other
hand, assigns the action of Judas to his knowledge
that Christ intended to destroy the truth a pur-
pose which he frustrated by the betrayal.
The account given by Irenaeus is unduly curt and
the text not quite secure, but it is not difficult to
form a general estimate of the sect from it, especi-
ally with the assistance of our other sources. Like
other Gnostics, the Cainites drew a distinction
between the Creator and the Supreme God. Pre-
sumably they identified the Creator with the God
of the Jews. They viewed Him and those whom
He favoured with undisguised hostility ; redemp-
tion had for its end the dissolution 01 His work.
They claimed kinship with those to whom He
showed antagonism in His book, the Old Testa-
ment, and shared themselves in the same hostility.
Nevertheless He was the weaker power, who could
do them no permanent harm, for Sophia, the
Heavenly Wisdom, drew back to herself those
elements in their nature which they had derived
from her. Presumably, then, they thought of a
division of mankind into two classes the spiritual
and the material, the latter belonging to the realm
of the Creator and deriving their being from Him,
but doomed to dissolution, while the former class
contained the spiritual men, imprisoned, it is true,
in bodies of flesh, but yet deriving their essential
being from the highest Power, opposed by the
Creator and His minions, but winning the victory
over them as Cain did over Abel. Unfortunately
we cannot be sure what view they took of redemp-
tion. There is no doubt that they applauded the
action of Judas in the betrayal, but our authorities
differ as to the motive which prompted him. The
view that Judas through his more perfect yvCxni
penetrated the wish of Jesus more successfully
than the others, and iiccomplished it by bringing
Him to the Cross through which He effected
redemption, is intrinsically the more probable.
So far as the moral character and conduct of the
Cainites is concerned, there is no doubt that
Irenaeus intended to represent them as shrinking
from no vileness, but rather as deliberately practis-
ing it. Carpocrates, we are told, defended this
practice by a theory of transmigration. It was
necessary to pass through all experiences, and hence
the soul had to pass from body to body till the
whole range of experience had been traversed. If,
however, this could all be crowded into a single
lifetime, then the transmigration became unneces-
sary. We have no ground to suppose that the
Cainites held such a view, but they seem to have
professed the belief that this fullness of experience
was essential to salvation. We have no substantial
justification for doubting the truth of Irenaeus'
account, though accusations of immorality urged
against heretics should always be received with
caution. G. K. S. Mead (Fragments of a Faith
Forgotten, 1900, p. 229) thinks that originally they
were ascetics, while N. Lardner (History of Heretics,
bk. ii. ch. xiv. [= Works, 1829, viii. 560]) questions
whether a sect guilty of such enormities ever ex-
isted. But there is no valid reason to deny the
generally accepted view that the Gnostic attitude
to matter did lead to quite opposite results. To
some it would seem a duty to crush the flesh be-
neath the spirit by the severest austerity, but the
premiss might lead to a libertine as well as to an
ascetic conclusion : if the spirit alone was import-
ant, the flesh but contemptible and perishable,
what happened to the latter might seem a matter
of complete indifference, inasmuch as its degrada-
tion could not stain the white purity of the spirit.
The principle that the jewel is undimmed though
its casket lie in the mire, or that the Gnostic may
do what he will for he is saved by grace, probably
found quite faithful expression in the attitude of
such Gnostics as Carpocrates and the Cainites.
It is held by several scholars that some of the
Ophite sects date back into the pre-Christian era,
and, if this view is correct, Pfleiderer (Das Urchris-
tentum?, Berlin, 1902, vol. ii. pp. 52-54, 82, 97 f. =
Primitive Christianity, London, 1910, vol. iii. pp.
72-74, 114, 136 f.) may be right in thinking that
the Cainites whom we know from Irenaeus were
the successors of the people who were attacked by
Philo in his de Posteritate Caini. Whether the
reference in Jude 11 is to the Cainites must be
regarded as very doubtful (see JUDE).
LITERATURE. In addition to the Literature named in the
article, the following may be consulted : H. L. Mansel, Gfnostie
Heresies, London, 1875 ; A. Hilgenfeld, Die Ketzergeschichte
des Urchristenthums, Leipzig, 1884 ; A. Harnack, Geschichte
der altchristlichen Litteratur, L [Leipzig, 1893] p. 163 ff., ii.
 p. 538 ff. The subject receives some discussion in
Church Histories and Histories of Doctrine. Of articles in
Dictionaries special mention may be made of that in DCB by
G. Salmon. ARTHUR S. PEAKE.
CALF. 'Calf (Ac 7 41 , He 9 12 - , Rev 4?) should
be rendered 'ox' or 'steer.' 1. The expiatory
virtue of sacrifices of blood formed part of the
Semitic belief from earliest times. In Lv 17 11 the
reason given is that the life or soul of the animal
is in the blood (cf. Gn 9 4 , Dt 12' 23 ), which gives
piacular efficacy to the sacrifice (see art. ' Sacrifice '
in the Bible Dictionaries). 2. The second of the
four living creatures in the Apocalypse had the
likeness of an ox, presumably as the symbol of
strength. It was certainly for this reason that
the bull was chosen as the symbol of Jahweh by
Aaron (Ac 7 41 ) and Jeroboam (B. Duhm, TheoL
der Propheten, Bonn, 1875, p. 47 ; A. Dillmann,
Exodus, Berlin, 1880, p. 337 ; J. Robertson, Early
Religion of Israel, Edinburgh, 1892, pp. 215-220 ;
similarly Kuenen and Vatke). The four living
creatures remind us of certain of the signs of the
zodiac (bull, angel, lion, eagle), and possibly they
have some connexion with that source (so Moffatt
and Gunkel). Irenaeus (HI. xi. 8) associates the
living creatures with the four evangelists, and
holds that the 'calf,' signifying the priestly and
sacrificial character of Jesus, is the symbol of St.
Luke. These traditions continued after his time,
but there was considerable variety in the applica-
tion of the symbols (see Zahn, Forschungen, Erlan-
gen, 1881-1903, ii. 257 ff. ; Swete, Gospel according
to St. Mark*, London, 1902, p. xxxviff.).
F. W. WORSLEY.
CALIGULA. Caligula ('little boots') was a pet
name given by the soldiers in his father's army to
the boy who was afterwards known officially as
Gaius Caesar Germanicus. In a similar way the
name ' Caracalla ' or ' Caracallus ' was applied popu-
larly to Imperator Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoni-
CALL, CALLED, CALLING 167
nus (A.D. 198-217), and ' Elagabalus' to Imperator
Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Augustus (A.D.
218-222). These sobriquets had no official currency,
but were useful as brief ways of referring to the
names of Emperors, whose ancestors by nature or
adoption had names so like their own, that con-
fusion was certain to occur in conversation or writ-
ing about them. Caligula, who was named at
birth Gaius lulius Caesar, was the third son of the
distinguished general Germanicus, and Agrippina
(the elder). As Germanicus was a son of Drusus,
the adopted son of Augustus, and as Agrippina was
a daughter of (Agrippa and) lulia, the daughter of
Augustus, Caligula was thus both by nature and
by adoption a great-grandson of the Emperor
Augustus. He is commonly said to have been born
in the camp of his father (Tac. Ann. i. 41); but
Suetonius (Gaius, 8) points out that the boy was
born before his father left for his province. The
date of his birth was 3 1 Aug. , A. D. 12. From a very-
early time he displayed signs of the insanity which
was to break out in the most signal manner when
he attained to manhood. His mania took three
forms inordinate lust, inordinate vanity, and a
homicidal tendency. No doubt, as in the case of
other Emperors, we must allow for the influence of
evil-minded gossip on our historical records, but
there remains ample evidence to justify this state-
ment. He was proclaimed Emperor on the death
of his grand-uncle Tiberius on 18 March, A.D. 37.
He was offered the honorary title of pater patrice
in the early days of 38, and died on 24 Jan. 41 at
the hands of an assassin, C. Cassius Chaerea, in one
of the vaults of the palace on the Palatine Hill.
He was thrice married, first to lunia Claudilla,
daughter of a patrician, M. Silanus.* She died in
childbirth, ana he afterwards married Lollia Paul-
ina, daughter of M. Lollius, whom he had robbed
from her husband Memmius. He soon afterwards
divorced her. His third wife was Milonia Csesonia.
Caligula left no descendants.
Caligula's reign was as uneventful as it was short.
The machine of government had been left in such
perfect condition by Augustus and Tiberius that
the recklessness of a Caligula could not in such a
short time do serious harm. But one thing he
could and did do : he wasted the savings of his prede-
cessors. He succeeded to the Empire because he
was the personal heir of Tiberius, not because he
had been in any sense his partner in the Empire.
It was the theory of the pnncipate that it came to
an end on the death of each Emperor, and that
power returned to the Senate and people as in the
days of the Republic ; but in practice it was diffi-
cult, if not impossible, to pass over the Emperor's
heir, and Gaius was thus proclaimed Emperor. His
reign began with a relaxation of many of the restric-
tions of Tiberius' rule, but his only aim throughout
was the pursuit of excitement and pleasure. There
is no need to detail the countless variety of his in-
sane actions. Towards the end of his principate
he revived the reign of terror, which was such a
feature of Tiberius time.
Certain changes were made in the Eastern pro-