16., 876—7, 1049—50). The etymology is doubtful; pro- bably the name is like many others in the same part of Egypt of Semitic origin, as another land of Goshen, with a capital city of the same name, is mentioned in southern Palestine. It is therefore certain that the land of Goshen was around the town of Phacusa. The site of this town lies within the easternmost part of Lower Egypt, under 20 miles in a direct line south of San, the site of Tanis. These conditions suit those of the Biblical narrative. It is obvious that Goshen was a pastoral country, that it was suited for a Shemite settlement, and was in the Shemite part of Lower Egypt, its north-eastern portion. It was near the seat of government in that part of the country, which at this time was Tanis—Rameses, which town, or another of the same name, was the starting-point at the Exodus. In one place (Gen. xlvii. 11) the “land of Rameses” occurs where we should expect “the land of Goshen.” We are not sufficiently acquainted with the administrative divisions at this early time to be able to explain this. It may, how- ever, be conjectured that if the Rameses of the Exodus journey was the same as Tanis-Rameses, the archaic Tanite
nome may have included the land of Goshen.GOSLAR, a town in the district of Hildesheim, Prussia, province of Hanover, is situated on the Gose, an affluent of the Ocker, at the foot of the Harz, 24 miles SE. of Hildes— heim. It is surrounded by walls, and has a very antique appearance. Among the noteworthy buildings are the market church, in the Romantic style, restored since its partial destruction by fire in 1844, and containing the town archives, and a library in which are some of Luther’s manu- scripts; the old town-house, possessing many interesting antiquities ; the Kaiserworth, with the statues of the German emperors; the Kaiserhaus, founded by Henry III. in 1050, and along with the adjoining Ulrich’s chapel re- stored in 1873 at the cost of the Prussian Government ; the small chapel, which is all that remains since 1820 of the old cathedral founded by Henry III. in 1040, containing among other antiquarian relics of the cathedral an old altar supposed 'to be that of the idol Krodo which formerly stood on the top of the Burgberg near Neustadt-Harzburg; the church of the monastery of N euwerk, in the Roman style, with wall paintings of considerable merit ; and the house of the bakers’ guild, the birthplace of Marshal Maurice of Saxony. There are four Evangelical churches, one Catholic church, a synagogue, a real school of the first order, a higher girls’ school, and a number of small foundations. The population are chiefly occupied in connexion with the sul- phur, copper, silver, and other mines in the neighbourhood. The town has also been long noted for its beer, and pos- sesses some small manufactures, and a considerable trade in fruit. The population in 1875 was 9838.
Goslar was founded by Henry the Fowler about 920, and when in the time of Otto the Great the mineral treasures in the neighbourhood were discovered it increased rapidly in prosperity. It was frequently the seat of German diets, and the residence of the emperor. About 1350 it joined the Hanseatic League. It was unsuccessfully besieged in 1625, during the Thirty Years' “far, but was taken by the Swedes in 1632, and nearly destroyed by fire. Additional conflagrations in 1728 and 1780 gave a severe blow to its ancient prosperity. It was a free town till 1802, when it came into possession of Prussia. In 1807 it was joined to Westphalia, in 1816 to Hanover, and in 1866 it was, along with Hanover, reunited to Prussia.
GOSLICKI, Wawrzyniec (1533–1607), a learned Pole, better known under his Latinized name of Laurentius Grimalius Goslicius, was born about 1533. After having studied first at Cracow and afterwards at Padua, he entered the church, and was successively appointed bishop of Kaminietz and of Posen. Goslicki, although an ecclesiastic, was an active man of business, was held in high estimation by his contemporaries, and was frequently engaged in politi- cal affairs. It was chiefly through his influence, and through the letter he wrote to the pope against the Jesuits, that they were prevented from establishing their schools at Cracow. He was also a strenuous advocate of religious toleration in Poland. He died October 31, 1607.
His principal work is De qm'mo senatore, &c. (Venice, 1568). There are two English translations published respectively under the titles A commonwealth of good comisaz'le, &c. (1607), and The Accomplished Senator, done into English by 1117‘ Oldt'swwth (1733).
GOSPELS
Synoptical Gospels.
OF the four canonical Gospels[1] (god, God or good ; spell, discourse or tidings, cf. etayyémov) the first three
(differing from the fourth) agree in narrating nearly the
same events in somewhat similar language, and are hence
called synoptical (015v, together; 5505, view). It will be
advantageous to begin with the treatment of these, as to
their origin, date, and objects, so far as can be determined
from (1) internal evidence and (2) external evidence.
Internal Evidence.
In discussing the internal evidence, it will be convenient to speak, first, of those portions of the synoptic narrative which are found in three Gospels; then of those which are found in only two 3 and, lastly, of those which are found in only one.
The Triple Tradition.—Few are aware of the very small extent to which independent narrators of the same events use the same words. A comparison of a few specimens of independent narratives (of such events, for example, as the attempt to assassinate King Humbert, or the recent death of the Prince Imperial) would show that the narra- tives often contain scarcely two or three consecutive words in common, and rarely or never a whole clause of five or six words. The same statement applies to narratives of discourses of any length reported from memory, and not from notes taken at the moment. Now it is well known that in many parts of the first three Gospels the same words and phrases are curiously interlaced, in such a way as to suggest that the writers have borrowed either from each other or from some common source. For example, in describing the healing of the sick (Mat. viii. 16,- Mk. i. 32 ; Lu. iv. 40), Matthew begins thus : 6506a; 3E yevope’mys; Mark, (ill/{a9 3E yevolte’mys 37-6 €3vo-ev 6 1")AL09 ; Luke, 3151/01/70; 8% To?) 1))u’ov. From- this and many similar passages it might seem natural to infer that Mark borrowed one of these expressions from Matthew and the other from Luke, and that the narrative of Mark is little more than a com- bination of passages from Matthew and Luke. This is an inference which has actually been drawn by many crities both before and since De Wette; but at present it finds comparatively little support among competent investigators. However, the oscillations of New Testament criticism have been so numerous that it may be of use to indicate a method by which the originality of Mark may be estab- lished on an immovable basis. That Mark (at all events in many parts) contains the original document or tradition from which Matthew and Luke have borrowed can be proved to demonstration by a necessary inference from the following specimen of narrative common to the three writers.[2]
