Gergesenes Gerasenes
Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament [1]
Gerasenes, Gergesenes. —The ‘country of the Gerasenes’ (Γερασηνῶν) or ‘Gergesenes’ (Γεργεσηνῶν) is mentioned in Scripture only in connexion with the healing of the demoniac. The Authorized Version reads ‘Gergesenes’ in Matthew 8:28, and ‘Gadarenes’ in Mark 5:1 and Luke 8:26, while the Revised Version Nt 1881, Ot 1885 reads ‘Gadarenes’ in Mt. and ‘Gerasenes’ in Mk. and Luke. There is preponderating evidence in favour of the changes (the reading Γαζαρηνῶν in א in Mt. is undoubtedly for Γαδαρηνῶν. Many natives in the district surrounding the Sea of Galilee pronounce the Arabic د d and ذ dh like z —thus ‘Ga d arenes’ they would pronounce ‘Gazarenes’). The neighbourhood of the town of Gadara must be pronounced absolutely impossible for the miracle (see Gadara). How then account for the reading ‘Gadarenes’? Perhaps, as Thomson suggests, the place where the miracle took place, ‘over against Galilee,’ was included within the district of Gadara. But as this would not be officially correct, Gadara having been the capital of the country to the south of the town, it might be better to say that popular usage gave to the whole district on the eastern shore of the Lake the name of the principal town. In the same way the reading Γερασηνῶν might be explained—being derived from the large and important city of the Decapolis, Gerasa—the modern Jerash . (It need scarcely be said that this latter town is out of the question as the scene of the miracle, being some 30 miles from the Lake). The derivation of the reading from the Decapolitan city, while not perhaps impossible, is very improbable. A more likely explanation is at hand. According to Origen, the majority of the Mss [Note: Ss Manuscripts.] he had access to had the reading ‘Gerasenes.’ But this reading he objected to, inasmuch as he knew of only one Gerasa , the town of the Decapolis, which he rightly conceived could not have been the scene of the miracle. He suggested that ‘Gergesenes’ must be the true reading, as he knew of a town on the eastern shore of the Lake bearing the name Gergesa . Hence, on his authority, the reading ‘Gergesenes’ may have originated. But how then account for the, presumably, true reading which Origen found in the Mss [Note: Ss Manuscripts.] ? There can be here no certainty, but the probability is that Origen was right, and that the true name of the village or town where the miracle occurred, ‘over against Galilee,’ was Gergesa. It is extremely rare to find a soft changing into a harsh sound, such as Gerasa into Gergesa . But any one who has lived long in Palestine knows how common it is, among the uneducated natives, to find a hard sound like the second g in ‘Gergesa’ not only changing into a softer sound, but dropping out altogether. The pronunciation of ‘Gergesa’ among the common people would almost certainly be ‘Ger‘sa’ ( Gerasa ). Hence from the common speech it would find its way into the text. The modern name of the village which has been identified as the scene of the miracle is Khersa or Chersa , which is nearer to ‘Gerasa’ than to ‘Gergesa.’
The identification of the ruins of Khersa with the Gerasa of the Synoptists is due to Thomson, ( L B [Note: The Land and the Book.] ii. 355). The identification might have been made much earlier had not men’s minds been set on selecting some place near Gadara . Had the eastern shore of the Lake been carefully scrutinized in the light of the three passages, Matthew 8:32, Mark 5:13, Luke 8:33, the identification of Khersa with the place described must have taken place. There is one spot only on the eastern shore which answers completely to the description of the Synoptists. On the eastern side ‘over against Galilee’ Jesus landed from the boat, and ‘straightway there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit.’ The encounter, then, must have been close to the shore. Were that all we had to guide us, identification of the spot would be impossible, for there are caves, which may have been used as tombs, all along the mountain side. But it would appear from all three Synoptists that the place where the swine were destroyed ran down somewhat steeply to the water’s edge. Now, as we have said, there is only one place on the eastern side where the mountain comes at all near to the beach, and just there the incline is such that one rushing down would be precipitated at once by the impetus into the water. Everywhere else along the coast there is a broad belt—half a mile or more at most parts—between the foot of the hills and the Lake. This spot is at Khersa just below Wâdy es-Semak . Sailing up the Lake from Wâdy Fîk , which is almost exactly opposite Tiberias, the next valley, about a mile north, is Wâdy es-Semak . Close to the seashore directly below the Wâdy are the ruins of Khersa, the walls of which can yet be distinctly traced. Directly below Khersa the hills approach close to the Lake, leaving only a narrow pebbly strand, and here the slope of the mountain side is so steep and near to the water that a herd of animals would be likely in a headlong rush to be precipitated into the sea. In the mountains above, where in all probability the swine were feeding, there are numbers of caves and also rock-cut tombs where the demoniacs may have lived. See art. Demon.
Literature.—Thomson, L B [Note: The Land and the Book.] ii. ch. 10; Wilson, Recovery of Jerus . p. 368 f.; Schumacher, Jaulan , 179; Macgregor, The Rob Roy on the Jordan , p. 422 ff.; artt. ‘Gadara’ and ‘Gerasenes’ in Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible and in Encyc. Biblica .
J. Soutar.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible [2]
Gerasenes, Gergesenes . See Gadara and Gerasa.
Morrish Bible Dictionary [3]
See Gadarenes.
