The Acts of the Apostles

MIRACLES AND WORKS OF THE SPIRIT 157
ances of the Crucified in Jerusalem. They took form
in the second generation, perhaps not in Jerusalem,
yet with the view to the glorification of that city,
and then were further developed within the Church
of Jerusalem when it had again gathered together in
its old home.
But if St. Luke had once heard the more trustworthy
story, how could he possibly have bartered
his better knowledge for a later and inferior tradition ?
That he could do so is already shown in the two parts
of his own work when we compare the conclusion of
the first with the beginning of the second ; for here
he has exchanged a secondary for a tertiary tradition.
Why may he not previously have given up a primary
in exchange for a secondary tradition ? In his gospel
he indeed knows of an Ascension—in Acts i. 1 ff. he
says in plain words that in his former work he had
carried his narrative down to the point where our
Lord was taken up into Heaven (see also St. Luke
ix. 51)—but he only mentions the fact, he does not
picture it as a visible ascension, he does not localise
it on the Mount of Olives, and he does not fix its
occurrence at the end of forty days, but on the day
of the Resurrection. These are all points wherein
this story is superior to the narrative of the Acts,
though it is already legendary in character, and pre-
supposes a development of tradition which must have
occupied some considerable period of time. Now,
however, St. Luke has met with what he thinks still
better information, though it is really inferior : now
the Ascension is visible like the ascension of Elijah,
now it takes place on the Mount of Olives, and that